Saturday, May 05, 2007

Guardian vs Owner... The Animal Rights Agenda

I have explained this before, but some don't believe me. Well, here is the proof. Animal rights wackos are trying to rename dog "owner" to "guardian". Why? Take a look at this story...

In a case that could set a global legal precedent for granting basic rights to apes, animal rights advocates are seeking to get the 26- year-old male chimpanzee legally declared a "person." Hiasl's supporters argue he needs that status to become a legal entity that can receive donations and get a guardian to look out for his interests. "Our main argument is that Hiasl is a person and has basic legal rights," said Eberhart Theuer, a lawyer leading the challenge on behalf of the Association Against Animal Factories, a Vienna animal rights group. "We mean the right to life, the right to not be tortured, the right to freedom under certain conditions," Theuer said. "We're not talking about the right to vote here."

In other words, if they can change the definition, then they can convey onto animals the same rights as minor children. This would change normal relationship we have with animals and make us relate to them as people.

You can't eat children, put them in crates, feed them dog food, euthanize them without a court order, or put them on a leash. You have to keep them in a bedroom in your home, take them to school, etc. To these wackos, putting a dog on a leash would be considered torture. Dog training would be torture. Using crates or kennels would be considered torture. And probably many veterinary procedures and businesses would be considered a violation of freedom, torture or their right to life. They would be entitled to free health care.

Do you want this? I sure don't.

No comments: