Authoritative legal look at twisting words to destroy our Constitutional Rights under the guise of animal welfare…the political effect on all Americans.
ANIMAL RIGHTS OVER HUMAN RIGHTS
B.L. Cozad Jr., U.S. Army ret SFC, Rights Reporter
Yale Law professor Stephen Carter tells his class on the first day "Do not support any law unless you personally approve the killing of a person to support (enforce) that law."
To subjugate any group the government and/or organization must first promote propaganda to vilify and demonize that group. Most often it is spread using mainstream media through stories meant to solicit an emotionally based response from the targeted audience – as in animal “welfare” which has nothing to do with an animal’s rights.
Propaganda caused Americans to call Native Americans “savages”, Vietnamese “charlie”, Japanese “gooks”, Germans “krauts” and Middle Eastern people “towelheads” because it is much easier to marginalize people when you belittle and reduce them from the status of a human being to a moniker of distain.
In the case against America’s gamecock farmers, the animal rights organizations have spent many years attempting to slander and vilify our love of the more traditional rural lifestyle and our agriculture industry. For more than forty-five years the animal rights organizations have demonized “cock fighting” and the propaganda coming from these animal rights (Non-Government) organizations has reached a fevered pitch of desperation that seeks to supersede our legal rights and human rights.
In reality animal rights laws are an unconstitutional usurpation of the God given and unalienable human rights of the individual. Animals are used as an excuse to commit theft by the government and animal rights organizations under the color of unconstitutional animal rights laws which use clueless government officials as co-conspirators.
American gamecock farmers are fighting back against these animal rights Non-Government Organizations (NGO’s) and the communistic agenda meant to destroy America’s rural farmers and ranchers.
So who exactly are the American gamecock farmers that the animal rights Non-Government Organizations (NGO’s) try to demonize and vilify?
Clemson University sociology professor William C. Capel and Virginia Polytechnical University sociology professor Clifton Bryant co-authored “The Clemson Report” in 1974 and again in 1991. It is a sociological profile of cockfighters. They concluded that “Devotees of cockfighting show no psychological abnormalities. ... There are no serious psychological differences between those who engage in this behavior and those who do not. Certainly there are no signs of psychotic behavior.
“People engaged in this recreational form are basically conservative, highly concerned with health and outdoor life, strongly patriotic and strongly in favor of obeying laws and preservation of public order.”
Many cockfighters had jobs in government, education or the armed forces, and almost none were on welfare or unemployed. About 40% were “in the white-collar ranks of sales, administration or business positions.” The remaining (57%) were “skilled blue collar” and “semi-skilled blue collar.” In an interview by Harper’s magazine, Professor Bryant said: “They’re mostly middle-class, from small towns or the country, more likely to be married, more likely to stay married, more likely to go to church, to be veterans.”
I have been going to the cockfights for over 30 years and the professor’s description is the most honest and accurate that I have ever seen in print.
The animal rights organizations are using emotionally based propaganda to vilify and demonize American gamecock farmers to force the globalist policies of communism on the American people. Through emotionally driven propaganda, these animal rights people have spent more than forty-five years in their effort to convince our government officials that it’s acceptable to make raids against all kinds of hobby-animal breeders. Hiding behind “animal rights” these subversive political groups rip our families’ apart, point guns at us and authorize government agents to kill or seize livestock and family pets.
Many of our founding fathers were gamecock farmers and they refused to allow the government to have control over the farmers and ranchers. Hamilton, for instance, acknowledged that the Federal Government could not regulate agriculture and like concerns: "The administration of private justice between the citizens of the same State, the supervision of agriculture and of other concerns of a similar nature, all those things in short which are proper to be provided for by local legislation, can never be desirable cares of a general jurisdiction." The Federalist No. 17, at 106.
The comments of Hamilton and others about federal power reflected the well-known truth that the new Government would have only the limited and enumerated powers found in the Constitution. (Congressional Debates 267-268 - A. Hamilton at New York convention)
The honest truth is animals can never have rights in a Constitutional Republic because animals are the private property of the owner and the individual liberty guaranteed by the Constitution and afforded by property ownership must be respected and protected by the government.
Instant Information for ii YOUR Governor, Senators, and Congressional Representatives ~ Animal Rights vs. Animal Welfare
Copyright © TheDogPlace.org 1808 http://www.thedogplace.org/LEGISLATION/animal-rights-over-human-rights-bl18c08.asp