HUMAN RIGHTS vs. ANIMAL RIGHTS

So far, Animal Rights Activists have defeated us,  subverting Human Rights and Freedom Of Choice.  Animal "Rights" groups have vowed to destroy hobby breeders but they ignore the atrocities committed by commercial breeders!  Explore this section and learn why.  Also how such non-taxable "charitable" groups lobby for laws that raise your taxes!

ANIMAL RIGHTS vs ANIMAL WELFARE

Most pet owners are not aware that “Animal Rights” (AR) and “Animal Welfare” organizations endorse opposing agendas.

Not only are the “Rights” and “Welfare” philosophies separated by irreconcilable differences, miss-information supplied by Animal Rights Organizations retards the advancement of animal welfare.  Animal Rights organizations change city codes to make us “animal guardians” instead of owners, thus removing property rights afforded under the Constitution.

E. Katie Gammill © TheDogPlace March 2010 - In order to better understand which organizations support your beliefs, please read and share this with your local and state representatives.

ANIMAL WELFARE:

ü     Supports humane use, treatment, and a responsibility to care for animals;

ü     Supports humane treatment and responsible care of animals used for service, research, food, and education;

ü     Supports zoos, sanctuaries, animal shelters, and animals kept by pet owners.

ANIMAL RIGHTS (AR):

ü     Organizations are based on “moral” and “ethical” philosophies;

ü     Espouse humane care but ONLY until animals can be removed from human use;

ü     Believe “A BOY is a CAT is a RAT is a DOG.”  Quote by PETA, People For The Ethical Treatment Of Animals.  PETA cares no more about people than it does for rats.

ü     Organizations say humans have NO RIGHT to use, breed, or eat any species.

PETA is just one “Animal Rights” organization that reacted with unfettered glee at the Fox Hunting Ban in England. They view it as an important achievement in the history of the animal rights movement.

Did you know arson, property destruction, burglary, and theft are “acceptable crimes” to animal rights advocates?

“Animal Rights” leaders and grassroots organizations are adept at blurring the lines between “Rights” and “Welfare”. They force legislation for mandatory spay/neutering, and laws that change the legal status of animals as no longer your property.

They demand premature spaying and neutering, which is linked to compromised immune systems and other health issues. Spaying and neutering should be done appropriately and hobby and show breeders should automatically be exempt from such forced laws. Our problem is not over-population. It is a pet distribution problem. Mandatory sterilization violates the responsible owner’s right to produce a litter while at the same time, many shelters import “street dogs” from foreign countries, introducing new diseases and social problems.

Many legislators and public officials pass restrictive laws because they don’t understand the difference between “Animal Rights” and “Animal Welfare”. When breeds, rather than individual dogs, are labeled as dangerous, families risk seizure of their pets due to unrealistic regulations or loss of homeowner’s insurance coverage.

Funding should go toward promoting responsible ownership, not elimination of animal ownership. Ethics and responsible ownership is achieved only through education.

http://www.thedogplace.org/LEGISLATION/AR-vs-AW_Gammill-10032.asp