Animal Rights Groups

Help Support CattleToday:


Well-known member
Feb 28, 2008
Reaction score
The animal rights activists never seem to be satisfied. Breeders and pet owners who do not understand the true agenda of the animal rights movement, often tell me that these people will be satisfied with them, because they treat their animals well. For example, a (horse) racing commissioner in Ohio once told me the animal rights people were satisfied with guidelines that were established concerning when a horse could or could not be whipped, and he was sure they would leave him alone. (Obviously, he did not know about agenda # 11 below.)

A few years ago, a 12 step animal rights agenda was published. The agenda is taken from "The Politics of Animal Liberation", written by Kim Barlett, Editor of the Animals' Agenda, Nov. 1987. A minimally modified version was part of the Green Party Platform for 2000.

What are the 12 steps of the the animal rights agenda?

1. Abolish by law all animal research. (There would be no cures for AIDS, cancer, heart disease, etc., and testing of new drugs would be done on humans, or not at all.)

2. Outlaw the use of animals for cosmetic and product testing, and classroom demonstration (physicians would perform their first surgeries and procedures on humans without any previous experience).

3. Vegetarian meals should be at all public institutions, including schools.

4. Eliminate all animal agriculture (resulting in no milk, eggs, chicken, fish, or meat for food, no leather for shoes or clothing). (How many foods do you eat that contain eggs or dairy products, or a derivative of the same? Did you know your keyboard and mouse may have been made with animal products?)

5. Eliminate all herbicides, pesticides or other agricultural chemicals. Outlaw predator control.(Farmers would not be able to produce as much food as they do now, driving the cost of living up, and eliminating the export of food to hungry nations. Animals such as coyotes are already a problem in some areas, coming into yards to eat garbage and prey upon outdoor pets.)

6. Transfer enforcement of animal welfare legislation away from the Department of Agriculture. (Animal issues would be controlled by people with little or no experience in customary animal husbandry.

7. Eliminate fur ranching and the use of furs.

8. Prohibit hunting, trapping and fishing.

9. End the international trade in wildlife goods.

10. Stop any further breeding of companion animals, including purebred dogs and cats. Spaying and neutering should be subsidized by state and municipal governments until all companion animals are extinct. Abolish commerce in animals for the pet trade. Eliminate pet ownership.

11. End the use of animals in entertainment and sports (resulting in no horse shows, cat or dog shows, animal actors, rodeos, animal movie stars).

12. Prohibit the genetic manipulation of the species (resulting in the elimination of critical medical research relating to Cancer, AIDS and other life threatening diseases, as well as crop production improvements such as the difference between the Holstein and the Angus, and eliminate all pedigreed animals, etc... ).

You may sympathize with one of the points above... however, do you agree with all of them? If you disagree with only some, you cannot, in good conscience, continue to support the animal rights agenda with donations or support of their legislation. For example, I happen to agree with item 9, above, but if I send money to the animal rights groups, it may be used to support items with which I disagree.

Breeders and pet owners who cooperate with the animal rights activist's requests for change, always discover that they are not satisfied with those changes after they are made. A few months, or a few years later, the animal rights activists ask for yet another change. This is a method that is used to erode away at the current rights we enjoy. As each request for change is met, the animal rights activist gets closer to one of the goals in the agenda above.

This method is called "incrementalism", and it leaves the cooperative person confounded, because they have believed the animal rightist's contention that the concern of those groups is humane treatment. Obviously, communication between people who are ethical hobby breeders of various species of animals is tantamount to our continuation.

The public is being deliberately hoodwinked by the animal rights movement's leaders. They receive donation envelopes in the mail, with a picture of a sad puppy or kitten, or some abused or starving dog or cat. The donations received by one group amount to over 40 million dollars annually. However, very little of this money goes to projects that will affect the future of abused, neglected, or abandoned and surrendered animals. Instead, this money is used to approach legislators, and ask for carefully worded legislation. Legislators need to pay close attention to the comments and letters they receive from the few members of the public who are aware of the true agenda of the AR. Otherwise, the pet-owning public will be the ones to suffer, and finally wake up and vote accordingly. This will happen when the public finally discovers that the right of pet ownership is being systematically chipped away to meet the goal of eliminating that right altogether.

When animal rightists decide to propose legislation, the legislator is approached with a problem that must be solved. The need for this solution is proven using documentation provided by other animal rights groups, some more militant, and some less militant, but all with an apparent overlap in membership. This legislation is deliberately and covertly intended to damage or thwart the activities of the breeders of show animals, the trainers of animal actors, farmers, etc. When Animal Welfare Activists (the people who truly want humane treatment for animals) investigate the documentation and propaganda that the Animal Rights Community puts out, they discover that the statistics quoted are carefully manipulated or stilted, to reflect what is wanted for the political agenda of the movement.

The animal rights movement presents simplistic solutions to complicated problems. They would have you believe that all deliberately bred animals languish un-loved in cages, and that their offspring populate shelters and rescues across this country. When un-biased investigation takes place, these simplistic accusations and solutions give way to a far more complex and varied truth. The fact is, solutions that will solve problems for dogs will overlap in some areas, but will not duplicate solutions that will work for cats. The fact is that the shelter population is not the result of breeding by ethical hobby breeders, and this can be demonstrated with un-biased statistics, collected with attention to some detail that has not been previously recorded.

Therefore, if you love animals, it is important that you understand the aims and goals of the animal rights activist. If you want to retain the right to own animals, it is important that you do not cooperate with these groups. Investigate the activities and budget of charitable donations, before sending them. If you are a legislator who cares about the public, it is important that you decide to resist the lure of the easy statistics fed to you, and the easy contributions that are offered in exchange for robbing the public of their rights.

Actually, make that, me-OW!

The next time you hook into a lunker, and the rod tip bends as line spools out, the folks at PETA want you to look that fishy face square in the eye and think of it not as dinner, but rather as a “sea kitten.”

In fact, the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals want Whitefish High School to rename itself Sea Kitten High School, encouraging everyone to refer to fish and other marine animals as sea kittens.

“We're hoping that by calling fish ‘sea kittens,' compassionate people who would never hurt a dog or a cat will realize that fish feel pain and fear, just like furry and winged animals do,” the group wrote in a letter to Whitefish principal Kent Paulson. “In fact, neurobiologists tell us that fish have complex nervous systems that comprehend and respond to pain. Fish communicate and develop relationships with one another, show affection by gently rubbing against other fish, and even grieve when their companions die.”

The name-change request - which is admittedly tongue-in cheek - is part of a national initiative on behalf of all fish species, which PETA says suffer unduly because they are not “cute and cuddly.”

“Schools strive for achievements in academics and sports,” said PETA campaign coordinator Ashley Byrne, “so why not add compassion to the list?”

Most parents, the letter concludes, “would never dream of spending a family weekend torturing kittens, but hooking fish through their mouths and pulling them through the water is just as painful as hooking a cat's mouth and dragging him or her behind a car.”

Paulson wasn't available to discuss a possible name change on Wednesday, but Superintendent Jerry House said he'd been giving it some serious thought.

“By all means,” he said, “we try each and every day to teach respect for the feelings of others.”

Usually, he said, that lesson does not explicitly extend to fish, but “hey, why not?”

In fact, House thinks all of Whitefish should consider the new name.

But he, for one, suggests White Kitten, rather than Sea Kitten, as Whitefish is so far from the coast.

“White Kitten High School, the White Kitten City Council, the White Kitten Fire Department - it has a certain ring to it, don't you think?”

Break the politically correct law, House said, “and you'll be arrested by the White Kitten Police Department, and taken to the White Kitten Jail, where you'll be treated with soft, furry paws and a purr of compassion.”

Other towns, such as Spearfish, S.D., also received the PETA letter, and reportedly were taking the request under advisement.

“Of course they are,” House said. “After all, who wants to be on the hook for being insensitive to kittens?”

Last summer, Whitefish High played host to a conference of the National Federation of Fly-Fishers, who presumably take a very different position on all matters fishy. In a town so reliant upon tourism and conventions, House suggests that the new name could bring in similar new business.

“Next year, maybe we'll get the National Federation of Sea Kittens,” he said. “The fur will be flying, and they'll have scratching post exhibits.

“But,” he warned, “we're going to have to bring in lots and lots of litter boxes."

I heard on the radio today where a PETA spokesperson was saying that Obama was appointing PETA members in at least 3 positions and that it was soon to be announced. They were happy about some landing in the USFWS and BLM or Department of the Interior. Obama is paying PETA back for their political support. The spokesperson was upset however at the fact the pheasant was being served at the innaugural dinner.
Oh for Pete's sake!

The people I know who are into AR are really into their pets. My step daughter is in law school and she has one prof who wants a "dog friendly" environment and actually encourages students who bring them to class.

Sea Kittens... :oops: I plan on having sea kitten for dinner this week.

Latest posts