www.adaptt.org

Show post

Gary Yourofsky #moonbat #crackpot adaptt.org

Sadly, the only glaring difference between the non-herbivore brain and the herbivore counterpart is that the former is incapable of understanding the value of compassionate living. And, YES, I am condemning carnivore/omnivore animals with the aforesaid statement. Herbivores are the ONLY evolved species on the planet. And they suffer more than anyone else because even animal rights activists support the bullying, bloody habits of carnivores and omnivores! If you’re thinking, “But what about the poor lion babies? What would happen if the momma didn’t kill zebras for them?” My response is quite simple: What about the zebra babies? Don’t they have a right to live long lives, and have their mommas alive when they grow up? Wouldn’t it be logical for everyone to get their nutrients directly from plant sources rather than consuming creatures who consumed them first? The Nyanyana crocodile farm in Zimbabwe has proven the validity of the aforesaid claim by converting more than 150,000 crocs to veganism. (Unfortunately, these vile slave-owners aren’t utilizing the vegan diet for ethical reasons as they are murdering the crocs and stealing THEIR skin for the “clothing” industry. But having more than 150,000 stone cold carnivores thrive on a vegan diet proves that veganism is for everybody.)

For the record, I am NOT starting a campaign to stop lions from murdering zebras. I am simply pointing out the insanity of defending victimizers instead of victims, and the hypocrisy of claiming to care about a lion’s murderous choices. First, since herbivores are the victims in this situation, empathy should be reserved for them only. Second, claiming to support lion-on-zebra-killings is disingenuous anyway because if you were hanging out with your dog in the backyard, and he was attacked by a homicidal bear, you would do anything to PREVENT the bear from harming your dog, even if you had to kill the bear! I am kinda curious if people think this hippo was wrong for trying to save a baby impala from a crocodile. Was this zebra misguided for not wanting to be part of this lion’s Death Circle? Were these buffaloes wrong for saving one of their babies from a pride of bloodthirsty carnivores? Was this buffalo wrong for saving his friend from a lion? Should we condemn this bear for saving a drowning crow but then choosing to eat an apple instead? How about the world’s first vegan shark. Should we roll our eyes at her because she doesn’t want to kill anymore? Didn’t this leopard display pure altruism when she protected a baby baboon from a skulking hyena, yet exhibit pure psychosis for killing the momma baboon in the first place? The previous example illustrates how all beings can choose to be rational or irrational. Unfortunately, many beings become psychotic when it’s dinner time. But it is possible for carnivores/omnivores to consciously choose compassion over violence, and still be perfectly healthy. Check out this recent video of a lioness protecting, playing with and THEN DEFENDING a baby wildebeest from another lioness who wants to kill the baby! And check out this story about Little Tyke, a lion who vehemently refused to eat her meals if meat was a part of them, or kill her lamb, chicken, cat and many other animal friends at a sanctuary in Washington in the late 1940s and early '50s.

Show post

Gordon Brown #moonbat #crackpot adaptt.org

Animals were not put on this earth to be slaves for handicapped people. Dogs, monkeys, horses and ponies were not created to walk blind people to the local store, or fetch the remote control for paraplegics. Likewise, dogs did not evolve for the express purposes of sniffing out drugs, bombs, land mines, and dead or live bodies, nor did they evolve to intimidate suspected criminals and otherwise make life easier for human police officers. So-called “helper animals” are subjected to a form of involuntary and indentured servitude. Why? Because absent the costs of feeding, housing, and otherwise caring for them, these animals are not compensated for their labors. In a saner world, handicapped people would hire humans to perform this sort of work, and compensate them accordingly. There are plenty of people who need jobs, and plenty of people available for this type of work, including those with special caretaker skills. Using dogs, horses, ponies or monkeys is simply a way to obtain this assistance free of charge.

Animals no more “want” to perform so-called “helper” tasks than they could be witnessed performing them in their natural states! These animals are denied their inherent right to exhibit natural behaviors. All training sessions break the animals' natural instincts. While “breaking” a dog can be done without physical violence, it is unquestionably harmful psychologically. When it comes to monkeys, horses and ponies, the “breaking” is both physically and psychologically harmful.

Having shelter and being fed doesn't improve the lot of these animals, or otherwise justify their servitude. Human slaves were, and are, fed and housed also. Apart from performing backbreaking labor, these slaves experience lives of profound boredom that cuts across their instincts to cultivate their highest human inclinations and talents. Likewise, circuses, vivisection torture chambers, zoos and marine parks feed and house animals. There is no question that these animals' lives are also marked by profound boredom that undermines their instincts to roam, to forage and hunt, to socialize with other animals, and so on—that is, when they're not being tortured, or beaten, abused, and made to perform ridiculous “tricks” to amuse and entertain humans. Rational individuals rightly condemn the animal entertainment and vivisection industries because they are based on imprisonment, oppression and cruelty. It remains for these individuals to show how the keeping of “helper” animals is materially different—not merely as a matter of degree, but also as a matter of kind.

As much as handicapped persons might “love” the companion animals who care for them, this misguided love does not in any way negate the fact that these animals are employed as slaves. In ancient Greece it was fairly common for slaveholders to maintain convivial relations with, and express a certain affection for, the slaves employed in their households. If such conviviality and affection sufficed to morally justify their servitude, we'd probably see slaveholding practiced in modern Greece! (Similarly for slaveholding in pre-abolitionist America, albeit to a far lesser extent since black African slaves were more routinely demeaned and treated as if they were “animals.”)

As much as Gary Yourofsky and I empathize with disabled people, we don't think they're so special that their animal companions should be enslaved for their benefit. We understand fully the tragic implications of being blind, or being confined to a wheelchair; we understand that no one would ask to be born with severe disability, or fall victim to a terrible disabling accident or illness in the course of their lives. But all the sorrows of disability quickly succumb to selfishness once handicapped people think the whole world should grind to a halt just for them. Accordingly, the notion that handicapped persons want to secure some measure of “independence from other humans” simply will not do in this situation. Granted, it isn't ideal to have a person hanging around you all the time. But when we take the larger moral picture into consideration, we see that this is just one more setback that a handicapped person will have to deal with.

[No, not Gordon Brown the Prime Minister]

Show post

Gary Yourofsky #moonbat #psycho adaptt.org

Many people have been asking me to comment on the Cincinnati Animal Prison's psychotic, knee-jerk decision to murder Harambe, the gorilla, after a child snuck into the primate enclosure.

First, they should've thrown the parents into the enclosure ALIVE. This would've intrigued and distracted Harambe, and in all likelihood he would've grabbed the parents and let the kid go.

Then, maybe one of those heartless gawkers could've rescued the boy even though NONE of those 'humans-are-great, animals-don't-count-so-we-put-them-on-display-in-cages-as-a-form-of-entertainment, humans-are-the-kings-of-the-world' hypocrites jumped in to rescue the kid in the first place! WTF?

Once the kid was safe, the parents should've been shot in their heads, without harming the gorillas in any way. In case any dipshit is gonna claim my comment is racist because the parents are black, screw you. But to appease any irrational folks who scream racism at every turn without realizing that black people AND white people AND all other humans suck equally, shooting Jack Hanna and Ted Nugent in their heads instead would've been fine with me, especially if I was flown in to pull the trigger!

Then, after the primates went to sleep for the night, the worthless human corpses should've been retrieved and served up to the lions for breakfast. Ya know, all that Circle of Life shit people love to espouse ad nauseum!

This plan of action would've SAVED Harambe and spared the lives of a few cows, pigs and chickens, too, who are always fed to the lions. Sounds like a win-win-win (kid, Harmabe, & hungry lions) for all involved!

Human lives are NOT more important than animal lives! Besides fleas and ticks, humans possess the dubious distinction of being the only expendable creatures on this planet. We bring nothing positive to the table as we are destroyers, attackers and takers. Our extinction would benefit the air, the water, the forests and the animals. But if bees or ants became extinct, the ecosystem would either collapse completely, or be devastated and altered dramatically. That's how important animals are to the planet, and how unimportant humans truly are!