A n i m a l
W r i t e s © sm
The
official ANIMAL RIGHTS ONLINE newsletter
Publisher ~ EnglandGal@aol.com
Issue #
06/03/01
Editor
~ JJswans@aol.com
Journalists ~ Park StRanger@aol.com
~ MichelleRivera1@aol.com
~ sbest1@elp.rr.com
THE EIGHT ARTICLES IN THIS ISSUE ARE:
1 ~ P & G Cruel to Dogs & Cats
2 ~ Common Misconceptions About Animal Rights Activists
3 ~ Animal Altruism
4 ~ Tips For "Packaging" Rescue Animals
5 ~ ARO's Answer to Circus Query
6 ~ A Message From Robert Redford
7 ~ The Discarded by WantNoMeat@aol.com
8 ~ Memorable Quote
*´`³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´³¤³´`*:»³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`´`*:»«:*³¤³´`³¤³´`³¤³´`*:»³¤³´`
P & G Cruel to Dogs & Cats
from hamlet@net.ntl.com
On
the 27th May 2001, an exclusive front page article in the major national
British newspaper, the Sunday Express, entitled, "Pet Food Cruelty
Exposed, Cats And Dogs Suffered In Experiments For Top Brand", by Lucy
Johnston the Health Editor, reveals that during Proctor and Gambles development
of the cat and dog food Iams the paper "uncovered damning evidence of
gruesome tests performed on dogs and cats during the development of the
product".
The article alleges that "hundreds of animals suffered incredible agony in
a series of tests designed to perfect Iams. A huge dossier of research
papers exposes how scientists deliberately induced kidney failure and other
conditions in dogs and cats." Details of the experiments uncovered
by the Sunday Express and Uncaged Campaigns show:
* "24 young dogs had their right kidneys removed and the left partly
damaged to investigate how protein affects dogs with kidney failure.
* Eight dogs were killed to analyze the kidney tissue. Dogs which became
sick were not treated because it would have undermined the test results"
* "In another test, the stomachs of 28 cats were exposed so scientists
could analyze the effects of feeding them fibre. The animals were
operated on for at least two hours and then killed"
* "The research team sterilized 24 female cats, which were overfed until
they became obese. They were then starved on a crash diet and when they
had lost at least 30 per cent of their weight their livers were examined to
investigate the link between weight loss and liver disease"
* "The company also sponsored research in which 14 husky puppies were
repeatedly injected with live virus vaccines and allergy causing proteins for
the first 12 weeks of their lives. They developed permanent illnesses in
the test, which was designed to see how severely allergic they could
become"
* "Twelve huskies, 12 poodles and 12 Labradors were regularly given chest
wounds to see if diet could affect fur regrowth. This was justified in the
study on the grounds that 'dogs are enjoyable to look at. Dogs with coat
problems are simply not handled as much'".
The article says that Dr Dan Cary of Iams justified the studies saying they
would save pets from illnesses, and that their mission is to enhance the health
of dogs and cats. Also that the RSPCA (Royal Society for the Prevention
of Cruelty to Animals), which is the leading recognized animal charity in
Britain, has vowed to sever all ties. And the article quotes one Member
of Parliament Norman Baker as saying "Perhaps they should list their
experiments on their labels and then see how much they sell."
The full article can be found at the following website:
IAMS and animal testing
http://www.uncaged.co.uk/iamsexpress.htm
*´`³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`³¤³´`*:»³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`´`*:»«:*³¤³´`³¤³´`
Common Misconceptions
About Animal Rights Activists
Copyright 1999 by Michael Cerkowski
INTRODUCTION:
Just as some ethical vegetarians have misconceptions about people who farm,
hunt, slaughter and use animals in research, some of the opponents (often known
as "Antis") of the animal rights movement also have mistaken ideas
about AR activists (ARAs) and their goals and organizations. This document is
intended to address those misapprehensions as fairly as possible.
THE "CULT" OF ANIMAL RIGHTS:
Many Antis view ARAs as near-mindless followers of a few charismatic leaders
and/or texts. They believe that AR dogma is delivered to activists who then
accept and follow it blindly. While there may be a grain of truth behind this
idea, it is on the whole mistaken for two reasons. First, the AR movement has
*no* leaders who command the obedience, or even the complete agreement, of most
ARAs. Even small AR groups are rife with conflicting opinions and dissent; ask
a group of twenty ARAs a question about a basic tenet of their beliefs and you
will get at least five (and sometimes twenty) different answers.
The same kinds of factionalism and disagreement on theory and policy that
plague grassroots movements in general can be found throughout the animal
rights community. Every movement has people who lead, people who follow, and
people who prefer to think and act as individuals. ARAs are no
exception.
ANIMAL RIGHTS AS IRRATIONAL RELIGION:
It is tempting to believe that people who think differently are irrational;
that they blindly follow dogma without a moment's thought to the logical issues
raised by their beliefs and actions. The philosophy of animal rights is based
on rational consideration of the world as humans perceive it, just like many
other schools of thought. While there are some ARAs who prefer to think in
slogans and who never doubt themselves, many of us spend vast amounts of time
considering and reconsidering our positions and the
reasons that underlie them. While some sleep the Sleep Of The Just, many others
lie awake, thinking and worrying. From Peter Singer and Tom Regan to
anonymous student activists, the animal rights movement is as much a rational
undertaking as most other human endeavors. Our conclusions may be different
from the mainstream, but our basic perceptions and analytical processes are
essentially the same.
THE ARA AS LUDDITE:
The opposition of ARAs to the use of animals in medical and other research is
often taken by Antis to be symptomatic of a general "science phobia."
This, along with the frequently expressed desire for a simpler, more natural
lifestyle, leads many Antis to believe that the animal rights movement rejects
science and technology, and if allowed to implement its goals, will plunge the
world back into disease-ridden squalor. This is not the case. While some
ARAs may be Luddites to some degree, most aren't.
It must also be noted that many true Luddites fully support the exploitation of
animals, albeit in a more traditional manner. There is no direct link between
the two philosophies, any more than there is a direct link between political
Conservatism and anti-government militias.
THE ARA AS CLUELESS URBANITE:
Another common myth about animal rights activists (that conflicts somewhat with
the previously mentioned one) is that we are all city dwellers, with no real
experience of the natural world, and possessing opinions that are shaped more
by the movie "Bambi" than by reality. Every person, and every movement,
has a unique mythology. For every ARA who believes that hunters are all
cruel, mindless brutes, there is probably a hunter who thinks that (s)he is a
carnivore, complete with fangs for killing.
Both groups need to examine our mythologies.
Many ARAs live in rural areas, and many have direct experience with wildlife
and with nature. Some of us have formal training in fields like biology and
wildlife rehabilitation, and some of us are even former hunters. The
'city dweller' tag is a double-edged weapon, as many hunters also live in urban
and suburban areas. If a hunter who drives to a wild area to hunt can be
considered a repository of knowledge about nature, then an ARA who drives to
wild areas to hike and camp deserves the same consideration.
ANIMAL RIGHTS ADVOCACY AS A LUCRATIVE BUSINESS:
Most of the larger AR organizations use direct mailings, both to raise funds
and to get their message out to the largest possible number of people. Antis often look at the gross income
generated by these mailings and proclaim that organizations like PETA and HSUS
are 'in it for the money.' This view
ignores the fact that most of the gross income from bulk mailings goes to pay
for *more* bulk mailings, and that the actual funds raised are fairly modest. A
few million dollars may seem like a lot, but it is a pittance when compared
with the tens to hundreds of millions of dollars available to groups that are
funded by industries that use animals or manufacture the tools and weapons
used in animal research and hunting. Salaries in AR organizations are
typically quite modest, and most activists are either
completely unpaid, or make poverty-level wages. This is definitely not a
wealthy movement.
A related criticism is that groups that advocate animal rights spend only a
small portion of their available funds to help animals in shelters or on the
streets. This tactic is effective -- until one realizes that if money is spent
on 'band-aid' approaches that don't attempt to change the status quo, then the
status quo will continue, and more animals will suffer in the long run. Animal
welfare groups do a good job of trying to help animals that are currently
suffering. The mission of animal rights groups is to change society's attitudes
about using animals, in the hope that future suffering will be greatly
reduced. The two approaches are complementary, and AW and AR groups and
activists each benefit from the presence of the other, despite our
disagreements.
THE ARA AS TERRORIST:
Everyone involved in the debate about animal rights is aware of the existence
of the Animal Liberation Front, and of similar organizations that use
destruction of property, and sometimes threats of violence against people who
exploit animals, to achieve their ends. The media has also widely publicized
the tactic, sometimes used by anti-fur activists, of splashing red paint on fur
coats while people are wearing them. This has led to a general perception of
the animal rights activist as someone who practices, or at
least supports, violence. In fact, the typical ARA does nothing more
menacing than write letters, debate online, or stand in a picket line holding a
placard. Many animal rights activists are also *human* rights activists who
abhor violence against any conscious being. The typical ARA is more likely to
financially support human charities than the ALF. Even the Animal Liberation
Front, while using extreme and controversial tactics, has expressed a
commitment to avoid direct harm to human beings. ARAs as
a group do not hate children, or people in general, and do not wish to grant
animals more (or even comparable) rights than humans. We simply believe that
animals have the right to be considered as more than a means to human
ends.
ARAs AS ELITISTS:
Animal rights activists are sometimes portrayed as well-off Weekend Warriors,
with no concern for humanity's economic well-being, and no willingness to
endure bodily discomfort or financial hardship for their cause. There are also regular accusations of
intellectual elitism and disconnection from everyday concerns. Actually, the
typical ARA works full time at a low or mid-level job, is involved with
hands-on animal rescue work or care, and, as previously mentioned, is deeply
concerned with matters of human rights and economic justice in addition to the
issue of animal rights. ARAs are much more likely to be found in college towns
and low-rent districts than in Hollywood or in expensive suburbs. AR activism
as a career does not pay well for the vast majority of those who work at it
professionally, and people who are activists in addition to holding
"real" jobs are the rule, not the exception.
CONCLUSION:
One of the basic tenets of conflict is "Know thy opponent." While it
may be in the short-term interests of "Antis" to misrepresent animal
rights activists, in the long term they would do well to learn more about how
we really are, as opposed to how we are sometimes portrayed. Both sides in this
debate need to engage in more genuine dialog, and less
demonization.
*** Reproduce freely, but do not modify
*´`³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`³¤³´`*:»³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`´`*:»«:*³¤³´`³¤³´`
Animal Altruism
from Andrew Gach - UncleWolf@worldnet.att.net
Everyone
has heard stories of how a dog or cat comforted its sad or frightened owner.
But what about a Labrador retriever that barked for an hour in the snow to
summon help for a stranger who had fallen into a river? Or the cat in Hawaii who led a woman to some
puppies that had fallen into a 12-foot-deep crack in the earth?
Or Beauty, a horse that -- while swimming in a rushing river to try to save her
colt -- nudged a stranger toward the safety of the shore before rescuing her
foal? (The man had jumped in to try, unsuccessfully, to help the horses.)
Stories like these seem to show that animals are capable of being virtuous,
says Kristin von Kreisler.
She has compiled hundreds of similar stories and put them in a book
("Beauty in the Beasts: True Stories of Animals Who Choose to Do Good,"
published by Tarcher/Putnam). Von Kreisler says the stories prove that
animals aren't always motivated by instinct or self-preservation. This is a
controversial view among scientists.
Full review
http://nandotimes.com/healthscience/v-text/story/17407p-313709c.html
*´`³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`³¤³´`*:»³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`´`*:»«:*³¤³´`³¤³´`
Tips For "Packaging"
Rescue Animals
by Jim Willis & Nicole Valenin-Willis -
jwillis@bellatlantic.net
Tiergarten Sanctuary Trust
The
supply of rescue animals greatly exceeds the demand & our placement efforts
can be more effective if we model our packaging after Madison Ave. A
picture is still worth a thousand words: "Prison mug shots" of
shelter animals rarely show the animal in a good light. A professional
photographer has helped increase adoptions at local shelters with her beautiful
portraits of available animals & she's prepared a list of photo tips for
photographing animals: www.joycefay.com/phototips/index.html
Be creative & thorough: As every journalist knows, no text is complete
unless it answers the "who, what, where, how, when & why" and the
most important info (such as a kill date) needs to go at the beginning, not
buried in the text. Your description & posts about an animal should
give the exact location, all contact info, why the animal was given up, how
long s/he is available & list any special circumstances or conditions. Help
raise public consciousness -- refer to animals as
"he"/"she" not "it." Be thorough, but
be brief. Don't gloss over deficiencies -- everyone appreciates honesty &
many are prepared to deal with medical & behavior problems. Try to come up
with a "hook" that's going to make the particular animal stand out
from the crowd -- does he do tricks?, is she a cat who adores dogs?, does he
love to go for car rides or like to swim? You might identify the one character
trait that someone is looking for in a pet. Be professional: don't type in all
caps, keep !!! to a minimum, write out abbreviations the public may not know
("M GSP-X w/ CGC & HW-" may mean nothing to the unenlightened),
check your spelling & for typos, double-check your contact info, state if
you want your message cross-posted, make sure the contact person listed is
going to reply promptly to messages & returns phone calls & try to give
follow-ups when the animal is safe or placed.
*´`³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`³¤³´`*:»³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`´`*:»«:*³¤³´`³¤³´`
ARO's Answer to Circus Query
by EnglandGal@aol.com
Q:
Let me start by saying, I am NOT an opposer to groups such as yours. I am
very sympathetic to the rights of animals; HOWEVER, I attended the Ringling
Bros circus with my 2 yr old daughter this past weekend. When we came
out, a CLOWN was handing out COLORING BOOKS to CHILDREN. Luckily, I
looked at the book after I snatched it from my daughter. Appauled is not
strong enough a word for what I saw. Like I said, I appreciate the
opinions of those opposing the circus, etc. This coloring book,
geared towards children, was very graphic in showing the elephant being
tortured.
Giving these books out to children is HIGHLY inappropriate. Perhaps these
groups should rethink their strategies. You are talking about 2 & 3
yr old kids seeing these violent portrayals. That is ridiculous!
A: Dear _______,
The images in those coloring books pale in comparison to what REALLY goes on
behind the scenes at the circus, and we believe in telling children the truth
about animals for whom they have a natural affinity. Lying to them about
"happy elephants" and other performing animals only perpetuates the
abuse by denying that it exists. Give them the real story and let them decide
if they want to be part of the "cruelest show on earth."
As responsible parents, we have an obligation towards our children to teach
them the truth. If we fail to do this, a responsible society is forced to take
on this obligation. It is best done by a Mom or Dad though. It seems obvious
that you have failed in this obligation because you say on the one hand that
you are sympathetic towards the rights of animals yet on the other hand, buy
tickets to an animal circus! Next, this coloring book is not very graphic
at all. To the contrary, it is a very toned-down representation of the actual
horrors that go on behind the closed doors at the Ringling training facilities
(as testified to by employees of Ringling itself). We could not present a more
non-graphic depiction of the abuse that these animals suffer at the hands of
many of the trainers and handlers without portraying
an inaccurate representation of the cruelties. What are we supposed to put in
this coloring book -- mountain streams and butterflies? Also, projecting
one's own emotions or ignorant beliefs upon a child as you have done is unfair,
at best, to the child. Furthermore, at these educational demonstrations,
I have personally witnessed very young children who have watched the actual
real graphic footage of the beatings, open wounds, and bodies of animals in
Ringling and circuses like Ringling on our FaunaVision
kiosk without signs of trauma. Not only did these children watch with complete
attention and curiosity, but the ones who were a bit older (5 or 6) often asked
questions. All this, while their parents were with them. In some of these engagements, it was the
child who stopped to see the footage and the parent then stopped and watched
also, but in other engagements, it was the parent (with child in arms on
occasion) who stopped and then approving of the truth, watched with their child
(not projecting their own emotions or ignorant beliefs upon their child, but
allowing the child to see what the child would have seen if Ringling didn't
hide the ugliness from them). Ringling has specifically targeted our
children with their lies -- why would you not find this shameful and dispiteous
or despicable -- you didn't mention anything about this? Finally, if a
child suddenly becomes saddened or upset after looking through the coloring
book (which has never happened from my experience all these years), I must contend
that a little shock or hurt is not always a bad thing. You can't own a
child's mind and continually force a child to see a view that only you want to
see. Preventing a more serious trauma to the child later on when they
find out that their own parent has been lying to him/her or has been
disingenuous with him/her by presenting a less serious trauma to them now, is
called being a good parent. Here in the 21st century, we, as Moms and
Dads of children growing up in this new era, have a further duty towards our
children; that is to teach them that their entertainment should never come at
the expense of violence and that this should never be tolerated and that
compassion is the way to go.
I
hope this helps you. The tendency is that, no matter how non-graphic the
coloring book is (or whatever literature or message), as long as there is a
message that the parent doesn't want to accept, the coloring book will become
the thing that is 'bad' as opposed to the thing that is actually 'bad' -- in
this case, the abuse of animals.
*´`³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`³¤³´`*:»³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`´`*:»«:*³¤³´`³¤³´`
A Message From Robert Redford
submitted by catlynco@swbell.net
Dear
Friend,
I've never circulated this kind of email before. But I am so appalled by President
Bush's plan to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to massive oil
development that I feel I must do whatever I can to help stop it.
To me, the Arctic Refuge represents everything spectacular and everything
endangered about America's natural heritage: a million years of
ecological serenity . . . vast expanses of untouched wilderness . . . an
irreplaceable sanctuary for polar bears, white wolves and 130,000 caribou that
return
here each year to give birth and rear their young. For 20,000 years --
literally hundreds of generations -- the native Gwich'in people have inhabited
this sacred place, following the caribou herd and leaving the awe-inspiring
landscape just as they found it. Our own presidents going back to Eisenhower
have kept a bipartisan promise to safeguard this world-class natural treasure.
But not THIS president. It is a sad day indeed when our president and
congressional leaders would sacrifice America's largest wildlife refuge for the
sake of a possible six-month supply of national energy. A six-month supply! We
could save that little oil by improving the fuel efficiency of cars and light
trucks by a mere one mile per gallon.
Only one group of Americans will benefit from the destruction of the Arctic
Wildlife Refuge: the oil giants. Everyone else loses. Arctic wildlife
populations will decline, the Gwich'in people will see their land marred by
pipelines and poisoned by oil spills, you and I will become even more dependent
on
oil, and the planet will suffer catastrophic global warming from the burning of
even more fossil fuel.
Unless we get millions of Americans to lodge a protest right now, this
nightmarish scenario may well come to pass in the next two months. The
Republican energy bill, which would fulfill the president's promise to drill
the Arctic Refuge, is moving through Congress today. House and Senate leaders
may also try to sneak through the Arctic drilling provision by attaching it to
a "must-pass" appropriations bill. These votes will be decided by the
moderates in both parties. We must reach those moderates and hold them
accountable.
Here's what you can do: go to http://www.savebiogems.org/arctic
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) has set up this new website to
make it extremely easy for you to send messages of protest to your senators and
representative. It will take you only a minute.
I've been on NRDC's board for 25 years, so I know how effective they are at
waging and winning environmental campaigns. Last year, NRDC used web activism
to help generate a million messages of protest to Mitsubishi and stopped the
company from destroying the last unspoiled birthing ground of the Pacific gray
whale.
We'll win this time too if each of us does our part for the Arctic Refuge. Please visit http://www.savebiogems.org/arctic
right now. And forward my message to your family, friends and colleagues.
Congress cannot ignore millions of us.
If we let them plunder our greatest wildlife refuge for the sake of oil company
profits, then no piece of our natural heritage is safe from destruction. Please go to
http://www.savebiogems.org/arctic and help keep the Arctic wild and free.
Sincerely yours,
Robert Redford
*´`³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`³¤³´`*:»³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`´`*:»«:*³¤³´`³¤³´`
The Discarded
by WantNoMeat@aol.com
She was born to be injected
then killed and dissected
Breeders sold her away
death began that day
Procedures have come and past
though the agony will last
But her pain brings us no concern
she lies and wait another turn
She is held firmly in place
the anguish obvious in her face
Restrained by a man in white
She won't live through the night
Release comes in a convulse
finally she lost her faint pulse
Her body tossed in a pile
this murder gets no trial
With indifference we betrayed
her suffering was all man-made
The game of life she painfully lost
worth only what her body cost
This discarded life was a rat
but what if she were a cat
The perfect being for an awful fate
a suffering creature we love to hate
*´`³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`*´`³¤³´`*:»«:*´`³¤³´`*:»³¤³´`*:»§«:*´`´`*:»«:*³¤³´`³¤³´`
Memorable Quote
"I am conscious that meat eating is not in accordance with the finer
feelings, and I abstain from it whenever I can."
~ Albert Schweitzer,
M.D.
1952 Nobel Peace Prize
recipient
«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»
Susan Roghair - EnglandGal@aol.com
Animal Rights Online
P O Box 7053
Tampa, Fl 33673-7053
http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/1395/
-=Animal Rights Online=-
&
Advisory Board Member, Animal Rights Network Inc.,
not-for-profit publisher of The Animals' Agenda Magazine
http://www.animalsagenda.org/
The Animals' Agenda Magazine: WebEdition
«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»
(Permission Granted To Quote/Forward/Reprint/Repost This
Newsletter In
Whole Or In Part with credit given to EnglandGal@aol.com)
* Please forward this to a friend who
you think
might be interested in subscribing to our newsletter.
* ARO gratefully accepts and
considers articles for publication
from subscribers on veg*anism and animal issues.
Send submissions to JJswans@aol.com