WISH FOR 2007 BY ACTION AGAINST POISONING
01/2901/1007 0616:39 09.40
WISH FOR 2007 BY
A.A.P.
We are fed up by the fact that animal protection laws are not enforced, degraded or revoked.
The emergence of political parties for animals triggers violent reactions reflecting ignorance or disregard for incidental and structural animal abuse in hunting, animal research, live animal exports, intensive farming and how we look after pets.
It is extremely alarming that under the proposed bill Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA), legal activities such as peaceful protests, consumer boycotts, media campaigns, legislative proposals, or even telling the public what happens in puppy mills, factory farms, or canned hunting facilities, could be classified as acts of terrorism.
We get unwell by well informed people believing in “our unique humanity” or convinced of “a world without the exploitation of animals being unfit for human habitation”. This unfeeling humanity may be unique but we definitely do not share that kind of humanity or such a world.
In terms like: batty bunny-lovers, human-baiting time, political zoophilia, Disneyfication or terrorists we find neither a shred of animal abuse awareness, nor a base for argument against parties for animals.
Indeed we cannot let animals, called "ignorant as ever", vote. However, it is remarkable that we let plenty - ignorant as ever - people vote who can hardly count, write, read, reason, let alone care.
So what is so disturbing about observant people voting on behalf of the animals?
We cannot fathom how one can be so scared or offended by animal rights or "a voice for the animals".
However, as members of the Dutch "Party for the Animals" we are grateful for reactions that perfectly explain the need for our party or the "Animals Count" party. Their aim is durability of society, which is profitable for animals, nature and people alike.
Such animal parties are less prone to political compromises that move animal welfare issues to rock bottom priority.
Their members have succeeded in making contact with animals, understanding that chained and caged animals differ from animals living in harmony with their surroundings.
These members derive no pleasure from inflicting pain or killing but try to stop that. So far for these “terrorists”.
A few days after the election our new MP's got excellent news coverage for issues that were ignored before, returning animal welfare to the agenda. So the tide of animal welfare degradation is turning and I would not call that "barking mad politics".
We wish that more parties for animals emerge to counterbalance the political degradation of animal welfare and animal rights.
We are fed up by the fact that animal protection laws are not enforced, degraded or revoked.
The emergence of political parties for animals triggers violent reactions reflecting ignorance or disregard for incidental and structural animal abuse in hunting, animal research, live animal exports, intensive farming and how we look after pets.
It is extremely alarming that under the proposed bill Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA), legal activities such as peaceful protests, consumer boycotts, media campaigns, legislative proposals, or even telling the public what happens in puppy mills, factory farms, or canned hunting facilities, could be classified as acts of terrorism.
We get unwell by well informed people believing in “our unique humanity” or convinced of “a world without the exploitation of animals being unfit for human habitation”. This unfeeling humanity may be unique but we definitely do not share that kind of humanity or such a world.
In terms like: batty bunny-lovers, human-baiting time, political zoophilia, Disneyfication or terrorists we find neither a shred of animal abuse awareness, nor a base for argument against parties for animals.
Indeed we cannot let animals, called "ignorant as ever", vote. However, it is remarkable that we let plenty - ignorant as ever - people vote who can hardly count, write, read, reason, let alone care.
So what is so disturbing about observant people voting on behalf of the animals?
We cannot fathom how one can be so scared or offended by animal rights or "a voice for the animals".
However, as members of the Dutch "Party for the Animals" we are grateful for reactions that perfectly explain the need for our party or the "Animals Count" party. Their aim is durability of society, which is profitable for animals, nature and people alike.
Such animal parties are less prone to political compromises that move animal welfare issues to rock bottom priority.
Their members have succeeded in making contact with animals, understanding that chained and caged animals differ from animals living in harmony with their surroundings.
These members derive no pleasure from inflicting pain or killing but try to stop that. So far for these “terrorists”.
A few days after the election our new MP's got excellent news coverage for issues that were ignored before, returning animal welfare to the agenda. So the tide of animal welfare degradation is turning and I would not call that "barking mad politics".
We wish that more parties for animals emerge to counterbalance the political degradation of animal welfare and animal rights.