[vladimir998]

Peter Singer.

He's the twisted nutcase who thinks parents should be able to kill their children AFTER birth if they're not working out too well.

No, I am not kidding.

[Steely Tom]

... by Princeton bioethicist Peter Singer, who is often called the godfather of animal rights because of the popularity of his 1975 book, Animal Liberation. A primary goal of animal-rights advocacy is to end all use of animals in medical experiments....

When Tipu Aziz, the researcher who experimented on the monkeys, told Singer, “To date 40,000 people have been made better with this [procedure], and…I would guess only 100 monkeys were used at a few laboratories,” the bioethicist replied, “Well, I think if you put a case like that, clearly I would have to agree that was a justifiable experiment.”

Well, it's obvious why this mental giant is warming a Professor's chair at Princeton.

[IronJack]

The moonbat faction takes on the loons, while the nutcase phalangists feud with the butterfly-chasers. Trying to bring reason are the flower children, earth mommas, and Woodstock refugees, but their influence has been undercut by the neo-Anarchists, vegans, and Breatharians. The New Age wiccans and Orthodox Druids cut out right after the last planetary alignment, but the satanists and Chthulu cultists are hanging on to the bitter end.

[Gay State Conservative]

One of my very favorite pastimes is to watch AIDS "advocates" and animal rights "advocates" fighting each other in dueling demonstrations.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

I wouldn't be so sure that he has changed. Since animals and humans are equal according to Singer; he would probably sacrfice the life of one human to save one hundred monkeys.

[girlangler]

THANKS for posting this.

Interesting. A lot of people think "animal rights" "animal welfare" and "animal liberation" organizations are two different animals, but they aren't. They ALL want to end animal research. This is what I try to tell well-meaning freepers who think the HSUS is about helping animals.

[Edgar3]

Here we come
Walkin' down the street
We get the funniest looks from
Every one we meet...

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

There are hidden contradictions in the minds of people who "love Nature" while deploring the "artificialities" with which "Man has spoiled 'Nature.' "
The obvious contradiction lies in their choice of words, which imply that Man and his artifacts are not part of "Nature", but beavers and their dams are.
But the contradictions go deeper than this prima-facie absurdity.
In declaring his love for a beaver dam (erected by beavers for beavers' purposes) and his hatred for dams erected by men (for the purposes of men) the "Naturist" reveals his hatred for his own race, i.e. his own self-hatred.
In the case,of "Naturists" such self-hatred is understandable; they are such a sorry lot.
But hatred is too strong an emotion to feel toward them; pity and contempt are the most they rate.
As for me, willy-nilly I am a man, not a beaver, and H. sapiens is the only race I have or can have.
Fortunately for me, I like being part of a race made up of men and women, it strikes me as a fine arrangement and perfectly "natural."

Robert Anson Heinlein

[Carry_Okie]

he is utterly committed to peaceful persuasion, and he believes in leadership by example, urging his supporters to lead fully vegan lifestyles as a way to convince the rest of us to accept the belief that “all sentient beings have a fundamental moral right not to be treated exclusively as a resource.”

IIRC tests using EEG equipment have shown that plants react to even the threat of harsh treatment, IOW they are sentient. I'd bet Professor Singer has no compunctions at all while he eats his salad... alive... heedless of the suffering he inflicts.

At least I have the decency to kill my food before I eat it.

Vegetable rights, an issue for our time. Do you realize that the bulk of human consumption consists of the unborn children or reproductive organs of poor and innocent plants?

It's just too much to bear (sob!).

[VOA]

"Singer unexpectedly endorsed the use of monkeys in a series of
brain surgery experiments that culminated in the development
of a promising treatment to alleviate the symptoms of Parkinson’s disease."

Only a suprise to those that have not read Peter Schweizer's great
book: "Do As I Say (Not As I Do); Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy".

Prof. Singer is ready to be a hypocrite (and good for him) on two accounts.
He hasn't followed his own advise and have his mother euthanized
due to her Alzheimers.
And he probably hopes new brain surgery techniques will help his mum.
Even if monkeys have to suffer and die.

Here a bit more on Peter Singer, The Hypocrite.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1508908/posts

"The mother of Princeton bioethics professor Peter Singer is lucky
that her son is an hypocrite. Her son is a leading proponent of
excising the undesirable — the imperfect via abortion, infanticide,
and euthanasia. The disabled would fall under there, also, sometimes, the elderly.

Peter Singer's mother has Alzheimer's."

[George W. Bush]

I think on Fox they mentioned that Congress just passed new federal legislation against the terrorism of medical researchers here or overseas that was aimed directly at the PETA people. Probably this is why Singer is backing away, for fear of being accused of being an animal rights terrorist ringleader.