For the last time...

Might doesn't make right. I am not sure how else I can say this.

Maybe: "With power comes responsibility"? But that sounds so fucking trite. But it's true.

Even if you believe that humans are the superior species based on language, reason, laws, whatever you believe, that doesn't give us the right to abuse other species. What if we followed that same logic for humans. The smarter, stronger, richer ones call the shots and abuse the uneducated, weaker, and poorer...wait. Never mind. We do follow that logic.

So essentially we are all fucked. The Animal Liberation Movement is crucial at this point. Until we recognize that might doesn't make right, we are going to continue to exploit the poor. We will continue massacre countries disagreeing with America because "we can". The military will continue to recruit the poorest boys and girls, so they have a shot at college too.

Many people think that voting helps. It's a nice thought, but lets be honest here. Who controls Congress? People with money. Lobbyists. Huge corporations. You know the drill, this shouldn't be news to you. Vote with your pocket books. Go vegan. If you don't like a stores policies (for me, Wal Mart) don't shop there. Stop buying everything new, there are second hand stores. Even high class "Consignment Shops" if you are too good for Goodwill or St. Vinny's. Use FreeCycle, Craigslist. It saves money and resources.

Just fucking think. That's all I am saying.

Here comes Peter Cottonta....RUN PETER RUN!

The past week in my household has been the week of the rabbit.

On Wednesday night I had to transport a dog from Seymour to Rosendale. (It's about an hour and a half drive, one way). Dog was very sweet and the transport went off with out a hitch. But by the time I got home it was around 10:45 and I was exhausted. (And special thanks to K for coming with me! I know you were tired too)

So I get home and the herd is quite happy to see me. I let every one out. I notice that Cosmo and Razz are standing at the top of the hill dead silent, each with one end of something in their mouth. This is not good. What is it? Is it a toy? A sock? Hmm. I call Cosmo and for once, the fact that he is a mommas boy comes in handy. He comes running down the hill and I put him in the house. Spot's in the house. Now for Razz.

I still don't know what she has in her mouth, so I put on a big pair of boots and go tromping through the snow. As the title suggests, it was a rabbit. And it was dead. Peter didn't quite make it. I can't get any where near Razz and she is circling the perimeter of our yard with her prize.

I also need to point out, that this is the third animal she has murdered in our back yard. She's good. And why does this happen to the vegan? What the fuck am I going to do with it?

I go in the house, get two garbage bags, put my boots back on (in reality, they are hubby's boots so they are way too big) and go back outside. I grab a pooper scooper. I am not touching a dead rabbit. I still can't get any where near her. I try, I fall down the hill, I slip all over and generally get pissed.

By now it is around 11:30 and I WANT TO SLEEP. And it's cold. I called a friend of mine that does rescue with me because I knew she would be awake. She laughed heartily at my expense and said "Just go in the house and get a hot dog".

...

I let that sit in the air. She realized I didn't have hot dogs. I had canned food so I got that. In the meantime, Razz has begun to bury the rabbit. Dig dig dig. Fuck. I take my canned food over by her and she comes back to the house. She is free of blood and fur so I took that as a good sign. I clomp over to where she was burying the rabbit, and of course I can't find it. It's dark, cold, and I am pissed. I go to bed. I will get the rabbit tomorrow and this ordeal will be over.

The next morning when I let the dogs out, Razz came out on leash to avoid incidence before I went to work. I fed everyone and went outside to proceed with the unearthing of the rabbit. And fuck if I can't find it. I am looking everywhere in the vicinity of where she buried it. I blindly assume that another predator has taken her prize and I won't have to worry about it.

Until 10:30 on Thursday night. Apparently hunted prey tastes better in the dark. I was chatting with some freaks that evening and I tend to be a little bit of a drama queen. So I thank the freaks for their humor and support. I went outside with my tools (boots, garbage bags, and pooper scooper) to attempt the seizure one more time. Finally, I have her cornered. She went in between the garage and the fence, and if I stand at the gate, she has no way out. Then I heard a...

CRUNCH.

It was decided then and there that Razz earned her spoils and she could just eat the fucking rabbit. It was bad enough that I possibly had to throw away a dead rabbit, I was not throwing away a dead half eaten one.

I tried to talk to Razz about veganism and animal rights, but I think it was falling on deaf ears. She gets her de-wormer on Monday. From now on, I let Spot out first as a "warning dog" so the rabbits can get a head start.

The end.

Things I am Thankful For

I think I just ended that sentence with a preposition (Alabaster Mom or Margin Walker, can you help me out?). Any way, on this day instead of celebrating genocide, I prefer to think of the things that I am thankful for. So here goes:

1. That I am alive and well.

2. My family. They put up with me, what could be more rewarding? My dogs are my family as well and deserve a huge shout out.

3. My friends. Real life and online. I cherish all of you and wish you nothing but happiness.

4. My enemies. You give me something to work towards.

5. All those who work towards ending the slavery of animals. Those involved in animal rescue, veg*ns, and any one who has adopted a shelter animal.

I know I complain and rant a lot in this blog, but for today I leave you with my gratitude.

Dog Fighting in Green Bay

Well actually in Allouez. Which is the village where I live.

http://www.wbay.com/Global/story.asp?S=7127683

I know I have ranted about this in the past, but there was a woman on the news tonight discussing the case. She said something like: 'It is a horrible thing to do to those dogs and it's a sin'. Do not quote me on this because, I am not sure exactly what she said, but I know the word sin was lodged in there.

Any one know where I am going with this? Any one? Bueller?

I know I did it for years and years and years. I compartmentalized animals. There were animals I ate and animals that were companions (although, I called them pets back then). I don't know when it became so clear to me, but now I am almost unable to understand how a person can eat one animal and love another.

I honestly have no idea where this post is going. On one hand, I think it is great that people are starting to see that animal abuse is real. I am impressed that the stories are starting to get some coverage locally. Micheal Vick isn't an aberration. Dog fighting is real and is probably happening some where in your community.

On the other hand, well, see above. Compartmentalizing, eat one-love the other. I think you get it.

Maybe I am looking for progress too fast. Maybe it has to start some where and dog fighting is where it will start for some. I ask that when you look into the eyes of your dog, cat, bird, ferret, or what ever companion you have, imagine them all alone in a veal crate with no room to move. Imagine them in line watching others like them being slaughtered. Imagine them being bred over and over again and just used as commodity.

The envelope please...

So do you think you have them right? Are they correct?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
These animals generally live five to eleven years depending on the breed. These are gregarious animals and live together in small groups. They have a communal approach to the child bearing and raising of young. Individuals in the group will dominate others, establishing a hierarchy. The dominant individuals having priority for access to food and other resources. Removing individuals from the group causes temporary disruption to this social order. This species makes a good companion animal but can become territorial and violent.

Chickens. That's right, the above describes chickens. Both the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and Wikipedia gave similar definitions. Where did you think the phrase "pecking order" came from?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

These animals are omnivores, consuming both plants and small animals. In the wild, they are foraging animals, primarily eating leaves and grasses, roots, fruits and flowers. Because of their foraging abilities and excellent sense of smell, they are used to find truffles in many European countries. These animals are known to be intelligent animals and have been found to be more trainable than dogs or cats. In nature, these animals live in social groups. Individual animals who know each other engage in certain behaviors, much like humans shake hands or hug. They may greet a friend by making nose-to-nose contact or by grooming the other. It has been suggested that this animal can recognize and remember up to 30 other of it's kind. . They establish a stable social group by evaluating each other's behavior and understanding which companions are more aggressive and dominant. These animals are so communal that they even sleep together, huddled in a nest.

Pigs. Anyone who has read anything about pigs or watched any Animal Planet shows featuring these animals, should not be surprised. There are many stories of people who have pigs as pets and heartbreaking stories of then having to slaughter those animals. Again, the HSUS and Wikipedia gave similar definitions.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This is a small carnivorous species of mammal . It has been associated with humans for at least 9,500 years. It is intelligent and can be trained to obey simple commands. Individuals have also been known to learn to manipulate simple mechanisms. These animals use a variety of vocalizations and types of body language for communication, growling, squeaking, chirping, clicking, and grunting. These are popular pets and are also bred and shown as registered pedigree pets.

Cats. I was hoping small and carnivorous in the beginning didn't give the whole secret away. Wikipedia is where I found this information.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

These animals are mostly color blind and use their tail to display their moods. These animals have a sharp sense of hearing and panoramic vision. These animals communicate with each other in a number of ways. Vocalizations or "calls" can indicate excitement, frustration, interest, pleasure or stress. They may also use a call to regain contact with a companion after they've been separated; as a prime example, when newborns are removed from their mothers, the mother will call to her child for days. Odors are also important to their communication and behavior, and these animals can detect smells up to five miles away. These live in hierarchically ranked groups and begin to order themselves within the group at a young age. Physical communication and grooming help to establish this social ranking. What may appear to be a game, such as head-butting or shoving, is actually a method of determining which animals within the group are dominant.

Cow. Or more correctly, cattle or bovine. Cow's really only refer to female cattle over thirty months or that have delivered a calf. What I find the most disturbing about the above description is the following: "when newborns are removed from their mothers, the mother will call to her child for days". This happens to every single dairy cow (free range, local, or factory farmed) at least once a year. Once a year the cow is forced to give birth and the calf is taken away so that humans can consume the milk. (HSUS and Wikipedia)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Modern breeds show more variation in size, appearance, and behavior than any other domestic animal. Within the range of extremes, these animals generally share attributes with their wild ancestors. These are very social animals, but their personality and behavior vary with breed as well as how they are treated by their owners and others who come in contact with them. Physical abuse and starvation can produce very neurotic, dangerous animals, and even simply failing to socialize them properly may entail maladaptive behaviors. It is not uncommon for these animals to attack humans and other animals; however, this is usually because of lack of care or improper upbringing by its owner.

Dog. Last but not least our beloved canine companions. Again Wikipedia helped out with this description.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I hope that those reading this see the point in my post. And for those of you who don't, I'll help you out. Before the answers were listed, these descriptions were very similar on a lot of accounts. If this is the case, why is it okay to eat and exploit certain animals, but not others? This has begun to frustrate me more and more since the Michael Vick case has come forward. Yes, it's appalling. Yes, I am outraged. Yes, I hope the courts make an example out of him. But I am also appalled by factory farming. I am outraged by dairy production.

Although the topic saddens me, I do hope that I have given you something to think about.

Name that Animal

I am trying something new here. Below, I am going to list characteristics of an animal. You try and guess what animal I am describing.

Your options are:
Pig
Dog
Chicken
Cow
Cat

These animals generally live five to eleven years depending on the breed. These are gregarious animals and live together in small groups. They have a communal approach to the child bearing and raising of young. Individuals in the group will dominate others, establishing a hierarchy. The dominant individuals having priority for access to food and other resources. Removing individuals from the group causes temporary disruption to this social order. This species makes a good companion animal but can become territorial and violent.

***************************************************************************

These animals are omnivores, consuming both plants and small animals. In the wild, they are foraging animals, primarily eating leaves and grasses, roots, fruits and flowers. Because of their foraging abilities and excellent sense of smell, they are used to find truffles in many European countries. These animals are known to be intelligent animals and have been found to be more trainable than dogs or cats. In nature, these animals live in social groups. Individual animals who know each other engage in certain behaviors, much like humans shake hands or hug. They may greet a friend by making nose-to-nose contact or by grooming the other. It has been suggested that this animal can recognize and remember up to 30 other of it's kind. . They establish a stable social group by evaluating each other's behavior and understanding which companions are more aggressive and dominant. These animals are so communal that they even sleep together, huddled in a nest.

***************************************************************************

This is a small carnivorous species of mammal . It has been associated with humans for at least 9,500 years. It is intelligent and can be trained to obey simple commands. Individuals have also been known to learn to manipulate simple mechanisms. These animals use a variety of vocalizations and types of body language for communication, growling, squeaking, chirping, clicking, and grunting. These are popular pets and are also bred and shown as registered pedigree pets.

****************************************************************************

These animals are mostly color blind and use their tail to display their moods. These animals have a sharp sense of hearing and panoramic vision. These animals communicate with each other in a number of ways. Vocalizations or "calls" can indicate excitement, frustration, interest, pleasure or stress. They may also use a call to regain contact with a companion after they've been separated; as a prime example, when newborns are removed from their mothers, the mother will call to her child for days. Odors are also important to their communication and behavior, and these animals can detect smells up to five miles away. These live in hierarchically ranked groups and begin to order themselves within the group at a young age. Physical communication and grooming help to establish this social ranking. What may appear to be a game, such as head-butting or shoving, is actually a method of determining which animals within the group are dominant.

***************************************************************************

Modern breeds show more variation in size, appearance, and behavior than any
other domestic animal. Within the range of extremes, these animals generally share attributes with their wild ancestors. These are very social animals, but their personality and behavior vary with breed as well as how they are treated by their owners and others who come in contact with them. Physical abuse and starvation can produce very neurotic, dangerous animals, and even simply failing to socialize them properly may entail maladaptive behaviors. It is not uncommon for these animals to attack humans and other animals; however, this is usually because of lack of care or improper upbringing by its owner.

***************************************************************************

What I would really like you to think about based on the descriptions above is:

1. Which one of the animals would you eat?
2. Which one would you keep as a pet?
3. Which one would you remove their newborn and take the milk meant for that newborn?
4. Which one would you shove into cages so small they have no room to move?
5. Which ones would you provide proper medical care for and which ones would you hope just make it to slaughter?

In a couple of days, I will come back, cite my sources and let you know which animal you decided to eat!

Hmmm

So my posts have been kind of heavy in the past couple of weeks. I know this isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I feel like my sense of humor is not as easily accessible as it used to be.

I have some ideas for new posts in the works. I am really reading up on First Amendment Rights and how it relates to ideas like direct action and property destruction. I am deeply engrossed in Terrorists or Freedom Fighters ( by Steven Best and Anthony J. Nocella). It is a great read.

I have also been looking and and reading a lot of the documentation from the SHAC7 case as well as other "eco-terrorist" cases. It is so funny to me (and Bob and Jenna point this out nicely in Vegan Freak) how on one hand vegans are painted as free loving hippies. In fact a good friend of ours just called me a hippy on the Fourth of July. I almost took him out. Any way, on the other hand we are radical terrorists. I guess people just need to use the label that works for them at that moment.

Speaking of stereotypes of vegans, I just ordered this shirt:

Euthanasia vs Execution of Companion Animals

This post has stemmed from a discussion on a forum which I am very active. It got me thinking and we all know how dangerous that is.

The discussion sort of centered around the difference between euthanizing an animal and executing an animal. In other words, helping an animal to die when it is sick or putting an animal to sleep because it has bit or is deemed aggressive. It is also important to note that we also execute animals simply because we don't have enough people to take care of the animals that exist now. Please think about this the next time you think about buying a puppy.

I have mentioned before that I am against the death penalty. I do recognize that people who are in prison and have broken the law have given up many of their rights. Most especially the right to freedom. (I don't want this to turn into a discussion on prisoners rights, so roll with me here). As citizens, regardless of political beliefs, we expect people to behave in a certain manner. Or maybe it would be more correct to say, we expect people to not do certain things. For instance, we expect people not to murder people. We expect people not to rape people. When you perform these acts, you have lost the right to be integrated with society.

What if it is a companion animal? What if s/he has bitten or killed some one? Would it be safe to say that animal no longer has the right to be integrated in our society? I have discussed in the past that I have seen dogs that were aggressive that were simply born that way. (A video of an eight week old puppy that bit a human on the face comes to mind). These dogs are not wired correctly and will not get better with time. A dog that shows that much aggression at such a young age is going to get worse and more dominant as s/he gets older. The question then arises, what do we do with these dogs? There isn't a doggie prison (as far as I know, feel free to correct me if I am wrong) where delinquent dogs can be sent for a life sentence. Because of the overpopulation problem that humans have created with companion animals there aren't even enough homes for all the sweet dogs in the world. What have we done?

The other interesting point that this brings me to comes back to prisoners. If dogs can be "not wired right" isn't it possible that humans could be "born that way" as well? If so, is there a solution for imprisonment of these types of criminals? I don't know if it would have been possible to reform a killer like Jeffrey Dahmer.

The whole topic gets even more frightening from this point on. If we can say that humans are born with an urge to kill (or what ever we want to call it), I am sure some one will try and find that gene, isolate it, and some how abuse power and kill all people with said gene.

I am kind of all over the place tonight. Again, this post puts a bunch of questions out there and not a lot of answers. I am interested to hear every ones views on this.

A much ado about Amazon.com

As many already know, since February of this past year, the Humane Society of the United States has been "demanding" that Amazon.com remove books relating to dog and cock (roosters you pervert) fighting. A simple web search yields many results.

Various Links

Seattlepi.com (Feb 2007)
HSUS (Feb 2007)
Petitions Online (this is a site enabling folks to sign petitions online)
The Inquirer.net (not like the tabloid) (July 2006)

Assuming that by reading this you know that I am a vegan, it seems pretty obvious that I am going to talk all of you into boycotting amazon.com, signing a petition and bad mouthing them all over town.

Right?

Nope, its not that simple.

**I need again to make something very clear. I do not advocate dog or cock fighting**

----------------------------------------

This scenario may seem pretty cut and dry, but it isn't. There are a number of problems with this.

-

First off, Amazon.com is a private business. No one has to buy books from Amazon. No one has to buy anything from Amazon. If you don't like what they are selling, the answer is simple. Don't shop there. There are a number of books that many people would probably find offensive.

• I could purchase The Anarchists Cookbook. If I am not mistaken, this teaches you how to get high and make bombs out of house hold items.
• There is a wide selection of books on the KKK.
• This book talks about 9/11 and gives alternate theories on what really happened.
• A number of fiction and non-fiction books cover abortion.
• And finally, there are plenty on homosexuality.

Now, I have not read all of the books or suggestions above. Some of them I have no desire to read. I don't give a shit about the history of the KKK. Point is, Amazon.com has the right to sell what ever they want as along as it is not breaking the law. So they can't sell drugs (damn, I was looking for a good hook-up). I am pretty sure they couldn't ship weapons. I think you get the picture.

If Amazon was hosting dog fighting or cock fighting. That would be a whole different story. They are distributing information. Shit, if laws like this went so far, they could take away my blog.

The other big problem that I have with the argument that the HSUS is making, is that it is covering up a much bigger issue. If the HSUS is really an animal rights organization (which it's not), it would not only be after dog fighting, cock fighting and animal abuse, but it would be asking people to go vegan and explaining the effects of factory farming. It would take a stance against things like free-range and cage free. In short, it would grow some big, hairy balls (or ovaries for that matter).

HSUS will state that Amazon is not a proponent for free speech. They have pulled books of their shelves numerous times in the past. Again, that is their choice.

I believe that this case is completely out of line. Again, no one has to shop at Amazon.com. You have a choice. If you don't like what they stand for then don't shop there. Think about it before you jump on the "Down With Amazon" wagon. What if they took all blogs away? What if we weren't allowed to peacefully protest? What if I wasn't able to hand out vegan literature?

Use your brains. If you believe in free speech, you believe in it. That's the way it works. You can't decide who has freedom of speech and who doesn't. We all do.

Beautiful, isn't it?

My friends crack me up....

So I have some pretty fucked up friends. I think I have made it very clear that I do not have one close vegan friend irl (that's in real life, TISNF). I do luckily have a couple of friends that are extremely supportive and very funny. And remember, I do have a pretty fucked up sense of humor.

Here is how it breaks down.

I receive an email from DF today with the subject line "I should apply for this job". I thought maybe it was an internal job and I open it. Hmmm. It is a job for a beef processing company here in Green Bay. I thought she was just being an asshole, but I learned it was much more thought out then this.

*I think it is important to note that DF is one of very few people (omni's) I will let get away with poking fun at me. I know she understands the cause, and is intelligent. I hate it when arse-tarts poke fun*

So, I give DF a call and say "Um, you're kidding right?" And she proceeds to let me know it is all part of her new undercover operation. See, if DF worked in a facility like that, the first thing she would make new employees do is eat a steak. That way, she would know that it wasn't an animal rights person coming in. She stated that if we (the AR people) sent in a meat eater to film and such, they would never be suspect.

I am not sure why, but this made me laugh very hard. It is fucked up logic, and maybe that is why I laughed.

*I am going to point this out one more time. DF is one of 3, yes I counted, 3 people who could get away with this. I share her sense of humor and I know she supports and defends me.

Rock on DF - You rule!

What I Have Learned as a Vegan - Chapter Two

Companion Animals

_________________________________________________

Companion Animals and Breed Selection

Well, first I have learned it is not really nice to call them pets. They are companion animals, which I am cool with. But this whole veganism thing really makes me think about a lot of shit which was second nature before.

I have been thinking a lot about different dog breeds and how they relate to a selection of a dog. I do purebred rescue (Boxers) and I will always have a boxer. I recently said that I don’t have much of a problem with some one stating they would like a specific color or gender of a dog. (For example, if you already have a female boxer, it is with in your best interest to get a male). Would I prefer that people just meet the dogs and work from their personality? Yes. But a person that prefers a fawn boxer to a brindle on is just like some one who liked to date people with blue eyes. We all have a preference and a type.

Where the problem starts coming in is when you start to read the AKC Breed Standards. (http://www.akc.org/). If we used this type of language to describe people, I can’t imagine what would happen. For example here is the breed description of a Chow Chow:

Temperament: Keen intelligence, an independent spirit and innate dignity give the Chow an aura of aloofness. It is a Chow’s nature to be reserved and discerning with strangers. Displays of aggression or timidity are unacceptable. Because of its deep set eyes the Chow has limited peripheral vision and is best approached from the front.

Would we ever use this type of language to describe a human? It is the very basis for racism. Temperament: A general feeling of superiority gives white people a rather aloof nature. What The Fuck. (In case any one was wondering, I used white as an example because I am white.) I have read numerous times that there is a parallel between racism and speciesism, but for some odd reason this screams at me loud and clear.

The problem is, I don’t know that these descriptions of dogs are wrong. I do know from a lot of my dog education (har) that each dog has to be treated as an individual. For example, not all Boarder Collies are natural herders. Or not all American Pit Bull Terriers are dog aggressive. Forget that, bad example. There may be Golden Retrievers that are not good with kids. So each dog has to be viewed as an individual. But, because these dogs have been bred with specific traits in mind, you can generalize. Or can you? Is it fair for us as humans to generalize on dog breeds? This is obviously just a step away from us generalizing about people and races and religions.

Companion Animals and Euthanasia

Here is where things get really icky (which is a very technical term). Before I get into the war that goes on in my head, I should give you just a little back ground on where I stand on certain issues. First, I am anti-death penalty. Next, I am pro-choice. Many people don’t understand how I can believe in two things that seemingly look like they should match (In other words, I should either be pro-death penalty or pro-life). Let me be clear on something here, I am not pro-abortion. In fact, I doubt it is something that I could ever do. But, I have never stood in any one else’s shoes and I am not going to pretend to know every situation that every woman has gone through. I can’t pretend that all unplanned pregnancies can be solved with adoption. I will always be anti-death penalty, because it doesn’t make sense to me. We are saying that murder is wrong, but yet that is how we punish the murderer?

So, this is what got me thinking. I have had to euthanize dogs in the past. One for aggression and one for quality of life (she had horrible cancer). I am wondering how I can justify euthanizing an aggressive dog, but can be against the death penalty. Let me be very clear, the dog I euthanized for aggression was dangerous; he tried to bite me in the stomach (this is an extremely aggressive move). It was fucking scary. This is the only dog I have had in my house that I was actually scared of. Could I very well place that dog in the general public? I think most peoples answer to this would be no, I couldn’t. Something deep inside this dog was broken and would never be fixed.

The thing is, it wasn’t the dogs fault (or imo any aggressive dogs) that he was this way. He was either raised improperly or was the product of poor breeding. More than likely, it was a combination of these two issues. So humans made him this way. It is unfortunate that the only way we have to “solve” this is euthanasia. In a perfect world (one I am still not sure I can grasp) the dogs wouldn’t have been bred in the first place, so the aggression wouldn’t have existed.

A while back An Animal Friendly Life (http://www.ananimalfriendlylife.com/) posted a story about California’s new spay and neuter law. (You can read about it here http://ananimalfriendlylife.com/2007/04/committee-passes-mandatory-spayneuter.html). I had posted that I thought this could be drastic. Eric (the owner of this fabulous blog) let me know that what really is drastic is the fact that we have to put half a million (or more) to death every year. If mandatory spay an neuter laws were in place, I would hope that more owners would make responsible choices. I would hope that they would take better care of their animals. I would hope that a law like this would take the responsibility and burden off of rescues and shelters to have to make these decisions.

I am not sure where any of this leads, and I obviously don’t have any answers, just more questions.

What I Have Learned as a Vegan - Chapter One

So what I am finding is that this whole veganism thing makes me think about much, much more then just animal rights. It is a huge political movement on so many levels and addresses so many more things than just what you eat.

Rights vs. Welfare
It wasn’t until I became a vegan that I even knew that there was a difference between animal “rights” and animal “welfare”. These concepts are still very new to me. (Therefore, if I have misstated something, please feel free to correct me. Please be gentle as I still have a lot to learn) I have to thank the Torres’s (I don’t even know if that is a word) and Vegan Freak Forums for beginning to open my eyes regarding these issues. Here are the basic differences, for those reading who don’t know. Animal Rights: Is against all animal use. I mean all. There are the obvious things, such as food, animal testing, and clothing. Then there are the things that aren’t so obvious. Rights (in the end) believe that dogs, cats, and other companion animals should not be kept as companions. Essentially, it boils down to this: We need to stop bringing animals into the world for our use. Period. Animal Welfare: Essentially what animal welfare-ists believe is that we can use animals for what ever we want, as long as we treat them well. Examples include: free range (happy) meat, cage free eggs, and “humane” slaughter. (Side note- even before I knew the difference between rights and welfare, the term “humane slaughter” drove me up a wall. What a fucking oxymoron). If you would really like some confusion, check out http://www.templegrandin.com/ .

So here is where the divide lies. Animal welfare is essentially admitting that animal liberation is not possible (I also need to add a clarification here. Animal rights and/or liberation is not freeing animals so that they wander around the earth homeless and taking it over). It is essentially a tool to remove the guilt from consuming animal products. Animal Right-ists hate this, as they should. What is even more confusing is that an organization like PeTA (which touts itself as an animal rights organization and that does a lot right for the cause of animal rights) often supports groups/people that are welfare-ist. Examples include:

1. Burger King has recently stated that they plan to procure at least 10% of the pork flesh sold will be “gestation crate free”, and that 2% of the eggs will come from cage free eggs, and other things. http://www.goveg.com/corp_murderk-victory.asp. Seriously, 2%? You can’t do any better than that? The BK Veggie isn’t even vegan. Fuck off.
2. They endorse Temple Grandin (see above). This woman scares me more then meat eating people I am surrounded by. Check out her sight, but beware, if you are a vegan, it will piss you off.
3. The have also endorsed Whole Foods in the past. (Whole Foods is another huge disparity between rights and welfare. They do have a huge vegan/vegetarian selection, but they also sell free range meat, and LOTS of it. They also have live lobsters)
   
   This is why the line between rights and welfare becomes blurry.
   

I have to admit, I am still learning about animal rights. This is a topic which I am not very well read. I plan on learning more. I will also admit, that when I first heard animal liberation I did envision cats, dogs, and more running wild with rabies, distemper and a host of other diseases. This isn’t the case (obviously). I think that many people (including myself for a while) forget that the whole reason that farm animals, well all animals, are here is because WE brought them into the world. This goes for everything, dogs, cats, cows, chickens, and the whole shebang. This is where I run into trouble. I am a dog lover. (Well obviously, I am an animal lover, but I share my life with dogs). I cannot imagine never having a dog as a companion. I know that in my lifetime, this probably won’t be an issue. If people can’t make the connection between what they eat and the fact that it is killing animals…understanding the forced breeding of dogs will take a long time. This is my personal struggle with animal rights. I also think it is important to point out that my dogs (the dogs I live with, I feel like they are mine, but I know that is not vegan) both came from rescue and I am an active volunteer for Green Acres Boxer Rescue (http://www.gabr-wi.com/). I know that there are entirely too many dogs in shelters, etc. But I still can’t imagine not having a dog.

Now I know a lot of people may say that God put animals on the earth for us to use and eat. The thing is…God doesn’t have His hand in it any more. The same people who give this fucking argument are the same people who are against things such as cloning, stem cell research, birth control and a whole host of right wing Christian crap. I will use the example of birth control. It’s not okay to use science to prevent pregnancy, but it is okay to use science to artificially inseminate cows and other factory farmed animals? Is it okay because we are creating life instead of preventing it? And how Christian is it for us to create an animal so we can kill and then eat it? Not to mention that we are creating a lifetime of horrible treatment. Why would we bring an animal into the world that is going to be forced to live with seven others in insanely cramped quarters (such as layer chickens)? Why would we bring a calf into the world only to take it from it's mother minutes after it is born, put it in a dark stall, and take the milk intended for it? As a Christian, these seems very un-Christian to me. Think about this one more time…

We are bringing animals into the world specifically to make them suffer.

I certainly don’t want to walk around with that on my conscience. What floors me is that people don’t even think about this. People think that by only consuming dairy and eggs they aren't taking part in the cruelty. Not so. If you use animal products you are part of the machine. Even if they know, they claim it doesn’t bother them. How can you know and not care? And if you are reading this you can’t say you don’t know. There are enough links here on my blog that you can check out. Compassion Over Killing has great video. PeTA’s Meet your Meat will certainly make you think. Or maybe it won’t. Who fucking knows?