A defender of park deer steps forward

called the Bite Me Club.

these animal rights people are so delusional, they have no knowledge beyond watching "Bambi" of what happens in the woods.
So they are going to the next park board meeting? Let's see, that takes fuel, a vehicle, a bike, something. To get the oil there is environmental degredation of some kind, so some animals die. To harvest the timber to make lumber, some animals die. Therefore, these people are contributing to the deaths of some animals. Morons.

Give the deer a big hug, and come let them browse your back yard to nothing but dirt.

Then you can let them slowly starve to death and die of disease because of their weakened condition.

But hey, at least the humans would let them suffer and die "naturally" rather than hunting them and eating the meat.

What a bunch of morons.

Again PETA: "People Eating Tasty Animals."

Oh my goodness would that be a great White House beer party.

and take them home to live in their back yards.

Although I suppose these idiots would change their tune after Bambi trashed their expensive landscaping.

I wonder if these are the same ninnies who were whining about coyotes chomping their poodles in Leawood.

Jason Miller, KCLaw & Owen Thursday are the next Picnic Table summit.

Be nice boys and KCLaw you can't pack heat at the White house. It's the Federal District, not Washington.

Someone offers to buy me a beer, I'm interested. Though I have grown picky in my old age as to those I will drink with.

After all, beer has yeast in it, which is or was a living organism, I guess.

Maybe we can get drunked up and target practice in the Rose Garden.

That's nuts, IMO.

1. I'm a grass roots activist. I'm not affiliated with PETA. The only large entity with which I'm affiliated is the North American Animal Liberation Press Office.

2. I'm an ardent believer in 2nd Amendment rights and I exercise mine.

3. I love hunting accidents and I'm in favor of arming the deer.

4. I'm vegan straight edge, which means I don't consume nonhuman animal "products" and I don't do recreational drugs, smoke or drink, so if we meet, it'll have to be over coffee and not beers. I quit drinking in 92.

5. I own a home in Lenexa and I'd be more than happy to allow the deer to eat every leaf, flower, and blade of vegetation in my yard if it meant saving their lives.

6. The assertion that the deer will die of starvation if "superior, compassionate humans don't rush into action and blow their brains out" is an utter fabrication. There is no evidence of over-grazing or malnourished deer. I've walked the park many times and seen for myself.

7. There is not a deer problem; there is a people problem. And it's morally incumbent on us to coexist with the deer, whose habitat we've gobbled up and trashed so that we can buy and own more "stuff." For more on non-lethal ways to coexist with the deer, click here:

http://biteclubkc.wordpress.com/2009/08/01/cash-to-the-parks-board-we-wish-to-voice-our-concerns-regarding-deer-hunting-in-shawnee-mission-park/

8. I look forward to Bite Me's counter-campaign against Bite Club's.

Jason Miller

Senior Editor and Founder of Thomas Paine's Corner
http://thomaspainescorner.wordpress.com/

http://www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

NAALPO Press Officer
http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

Founder of Bite Club of KC
htt

Look what corpse-munchers do to loving cows, chickens, pigs, and other partners on this planet we all have the privilege of sharing.

Corpse-munchers do not know how to conduct themselves in the Universe. We search in outerspace for other life forms; yet, most apathetic pus-chuggers ignore the many amazing beings right here on Earth.

All corpse-munchers really care about is how that one will taste.

“The important point is that I am very mindful of the fact that sportsmen in America may have gone hunting with their fathers, their grandfathers, their mothers, their grandmothers, and that this is part of a tradition and a way of life that has to be preserved. And there’s nothing that I will do as president of the United States that will in any way encroach on the ability of sportsmen to continue that tradition” Barack Obama

“The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don’t do anything about it” Albert Einstein

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common good, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain veganism for the United Staes of America

This is the second time in the past couple of hours that I've seen this argument: let's murder the deer/animals so they don't suffer! ... honestly, someone presented this precise argument to somehow justify the nonhuman holocaust.

Aside from the shared brain cell the insipid speciesists seem to pass around, why do you all assume that anyone with an ounce of empathy or compassion for the nonhuman victims are associated with PeTA? It's called evolution; it didn't bypass all of us.

It's inspiring to know that there are people like Jason Miller who are unafraid to step forward and speak out for the voiceless.

If we could arm the nonhuman individuals, there would be no need for protests and demonstrations. All of you redneck speciesists would be dead and buried...

a damn good reason for a vegan celebration!

____________________________
http://negotiationisover.com/

susancarol225
We owe Mr. Miller a debt of gratitude for speaking up and getting the facts straight. We read Parks has decided to destroy 75% of the deer in SM Park. Why? They don't provide factual answers. I am not satisfied Parks has demonstrated they have done the job they are paid to do. They are paid a salary to care for the deer, not destroy 75% of the population. There are people so quick to state their opinion, based on what? Their opinion and false statements and assumptions. People who like to see their name in print.

Who ever said anything about PETA? This isn't about PETA. I have some valid concerns how this whole bloody mess has been grossly mishandled by Johnson County government. There are legal issues, health and safety concerns, not to mention the immorality of hunters who have been salivating at the gate since this proposal was first introduced.

I have current factual records to dispute every claim certain individuals have made who were favorable to this deer cull. Parks has acted too quickly, and I believe it was solely to stop the bad publicity spread by a few foul-mouthed individuals, and by special interest groups who stand to gain financially. There are too many points to cover in a single comment here, but taking even one, the possibility the deer will starve or develop chronic waste disease and die. A very big "IF". I've talked with residents who have told me they offered to feed the deer and others who suggested a fund for food in winter, and were refused by Parks officials. They wouldn't even discuss it. Other states, Colorado is one, feed their deer in winter months and never have had a problem as we claim exists here.

There are potentially serious consequencs following a deer cull, for both people and the environment.

Thank you for allowing us to voice our comments here, and to those who have posted the offensive and crude ones before me, thank you also, because you demonstrate so well the mentality and concern I have about those who favor this deer cull. And the government allows people such as you who have made foolish comments here to own, carry and use weapons. Anyone undecided on this issue, please at least take that under advisement.

Jason Miller is correct here and I am very glad he has spoken up for the deer who are to be slaughtered and punished only for doing what is natural to them.

I'm sure Michael Meadors means well but he is quite simply wrong and dangerously so.

Every time humans interfere with native animal populations the a balance is upset.

You may argue that the balance has already been upset by the people who have stupidly killed all the natural predators in the area and you would have a point...

Well, at least you would have a point if your solution to this supposed problem was not doing the exact same thing that caused this "problem" in the first place: Human culling of native wildlife.

If any species is overpopulated in the area it is humans and I've not seen anyone suggest culling the humans to cut down on "overpopulation"

People need to learn to live with nature, not destroy it by senseless culling.

Seriously, sharp shooters against innocent deer? How immoral can people get?

I get really irritated when I am asked if I would rather starve or be shot; how *I* would wish to die is completely irrelevant considering I will NEVER be faced with a similar situation. I don't have to make that decision, so the convenience of choosing is completely baseless. I never hear about people proposing to engage in a field mouse season, yet thousands of them die yearly due to the cold and lack of food. I have yet to hear about open season on dogs, and they are considered overpopulated.

These excuses are merely that: excuses. They are meant to inspire compassion and caring, yet the bottom line, the cold truth, is that people like to kill. I am really tired of the "points to consider" hunters always like to present; in my opinion, if hunters were truly comfortable with their position, they would find no need to attempt to justify their kills, yet every time you read or hear about hunting, you hear the same lame excuses. Hunters will always interfere with nature ensuring that the balance is always upset in their favor. When you "thin" a herd or diminish numbers, the result is greater food sources for the other "lucky" ones, which in turn entails a greater reproductive season. These people tinker with populations; they cause and they define these situations as problematic, and when situations become a tad too inconvenient, or if hunters decide that too many prey are attacking their hunted-animal-of-choice, they kill them. What is interesting is that deer tend to starve in mid-late winter months due to diminished food sources and weather conditions. How come hunting is not performed during this period? Furthermore, how many hunters target the weak, malnourished deer? It's alwayts the largest, healthiest looking runners who are sought. And, if hunting is so effective, why are there weak and starving deer in the first place?

And whoever said that about an expensive landscape being the object to justify killing? Are you serious? Allow me to state how your selfishness and self-centeredness commands an epic description. Really, congratulations on being the most self-centered person here taking the point that your "expensive" landscape is more important than the lives of animals, animals who are sentient as we are and want to live!

PETA: people eating tasty animals. Wow, that is so original; I've never heard that before. Congrats on being so witty and unique.

One of the best ways to reduce the deer population is to stop breeding them. There are over 1500 deer farms in the US. They are bred through artificial insemination. Buck semen is sold on the internet... fawns are removed from mothers and fed "milk replacers". These deer exist ONLY for hunters enjoyment. Tax payers are supporting this... communities suffer the danger of too many deer & the state collects money from licenses. STOP BREEDING DEER! so we can stop killing them!
http://www.nadefa.org/

There are so many myths surrounding alleged deer overpopulation and the collisions they allegedly cause.

Has anyone considered that the deer have been forced out of the protection of the woods to avoid being killed?

I am opposed to this irresponsible decision to have guns and bow/arrow in an area even remotely close to humans.

I have spent thousands of dollars on my yard, and I couldn't care less that deer choose my yard to survive.

I enjoy their presence.

And Liberals think something's wrong birthers? Hold it, what am I thinking. These are liberals. (smile) Yowsa!

"I've talked with residents who have told me they offered to feed the deer and others who suggested a fund for food in winter, and were refused by Parks officials. They wouldn't even discuss it. Other states, Colorado is one, feed their deer in winter months and never have had a problem as we claim exists here.
Both of these offers were turned down"

As far as starvation goes I don`t see what the problem is. The residents are willing to take on the responsibility of feeding the deer in the winter months, and disease is only specilation.
I see this as nothing more than an excuse to practice thier "sharp shooting" and keeping thier pockets full by clearing out the area & building up the residence.
This is the home of these deer & they should be entitled to remain there safely
No one shoud have the right to take the life of another.
This is just another form of capitalism speciesism.
Culling Is wrong no matter what you call it or what any human poses as a reason

First off, let's correct some specious information posted by numbnut 'liberal socialist' that PETA opposes spaying and neutering; read their fact sheet, titled "Spaying and Neutering: A Solution for Suffering" here:
http://tinyurl.com/kvd6qd
Regarding the wholly overzelous culling of deer in the park: Deer culling as a means of deer population management does not work. This is due primarily to the Compensatory Rebound Effect (CRE), where a sudden increase in per capita food supply to a level of abundance will max out the reproduction potential of the deer, which can cause the deer population to rebound to the pre-cull level or even higher within as little as one year. The problem of deer overpopulation should be humane and sophisticated, with an eye towards eventually reducing deer populations through permanent and long-term cost effective measures. The board needs to go back to the drawing board and do its homework with due diligence, and learn how many, many municipalities have successfully managed deer without resorting to killing. The board owes that much to its citizens and to the deer. "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated." Ghandi

With medical science as it is today, I certainly don't have any reason to doubt it.

The park board does not allow a concerned group to speak at a meeting, a unanimous vote goes through to cull 75% of the deer in Shawnee Mission Park and residents who offered to feed the deer during the winter months (as one commenter mentions here) were turned down? It's obvious, Johnson County, what is going on. Your little bureaucrats have a lot of bow-hunting friends and friends who have spent a lot of money on their latest firearm acquisition. These are the "people" that have stepped up to the plate to take pot-shots at the deer in the park.

It looks like you have a real lowbrow overpopulation down there. Fortunately there are humane ways of dealing with them, such as education, fines and electronic ankle bracelets.

Johnson County, do not allow the lowbrows to look after this deer "problem". Humane solutions are readily available and Jason Miller is ready, willing and able to help you with that.

Is it the plan JOCO has come up with that you are opposed to, or do you oppose deer hunting in any form?

How about quail, pheasant and other upland game?

How about sport fishing?

How about non-vegan diets that involve consumption of meat, referred to by one of the more strident posters as "corpse munching." Hey, I like zombie movies too.

The reason I ask is I am curious as to the motivation. There are degrees of animal protection advocacy, so I would think there could be solutions that do not involve absolutist positions on either side of the debate.

Meat eater, but curious.

The silence on my questions is deafening.

Just as I suspected.

Save the Deer, all deer, any deer. They were here before the people and their landscapes. We are the intruders, so we must adapt to them.

Hunting is cannibalism of co-existant life forms. Hunting is a symbolic rape of mother earth and her children, as is residential development.

We can adopt the deer and let them live in our backyards. Or maybe everyone should just move the heck out qand leave the brother and sister wildlife alone.

Where can I buy one of those "Humane" flytraps? But should I not let the flies live peacefully in my kitchen where they can crawl over my corpse meat dinner?

We humans are just another species, with no superior rights to any other animal life form, I suppose. We must adapt to them, quit eating them, and co-exist with them in peace and harmony.

Niiiiiiice!

I can't believe these people get lumped in with liberals. Apparently the wingnuts don't have a monopoly on crazy.

But I'm willing to bet most of these fruitcakes don't live in KC or JoCo.

Buck semen? Massive "deer farms" for the sole purpose of producing cannon fodder? Have you nuts been out in the woods at anytime in your pampered suburban lives? WTF are you talking about?

Sterilization? How does that solve the immediate threat of disease and starvation?

I agree with the assertion humans have thrown the natural balance out of whack. But that's because there are no natural predators to deer in JoCo. If someone with a .30-06 has to step into the void at the top of the food chain, so be it.

I also agree with the "corpse-munching" twit. Meat is murder. Tasty, tasty murder.

I find the parallels with the anti-abortion movement to be compelling.

Both are good and decent groups of people with extremists in their movements. Both are asserting earnestly held personal moral beliefs which they wish to impose on the population at large.

Both are absolutist in their convictions: "In for a penny, in for a pound." If you believe that fetus' and wildlife are protected by a higher power, than there is no negotiation. Both abortion and hunting are "murder."

I guess the democratic process must intervene in situations like this of no compromise. What does the majority of the citizens want? What is protected by the Constitution, and regarded as a legitimate activity in our present society?

I personally do not believe in abortion. I think it is killing. however, I recognize that my moral belief is not shared by everyone, and I am uncomfortable imposing my beliefs on others. Maybe that is a cop out, but it is the best I can do with a very difficult issue.

I eat meat, and I hunt and fish. No cave girls from LA will change my mind on that one. I believe that hunting restores an alpha predator to control the populations of wildlife from overpopulation and exhaustion of the food supplies.

I prefer natural meat like venison, upland birds and water fowl, and the steers and chickens we raise ourselves, to the mass produced steroid and antibiotic filled swill foisted on the population at large by the industrial producers such as Cargill and Tyson.

Regarding the PETA folks argument that deer are not overpopulating the habitat, I just hope that one of them does not hit a 220 lb buck with their Prius.

I thought it would be fun to excerpt some of the more interesting gems from the posers who have leaped in in defense of the helpless little woodland creatures. guess there isn't a whole bunch of room for compromise with these misguided veggie munching dips.

I'm a grass roots activist. I'm not affiliated with PETA. The only large entity with which I'm affiliated is the North American Animal Liberation Press Office.
I love hunting accidents and I'm in favor of arming the deer.

-Jason Miller

Look what corpse-munchers do to loving cows, chickens, pigs, and other partners on this planet we all have the privilege of sharing.
Corpse-munchers do not know how to conduct themselves in the Universe. We search in outerspace for other life forms; yet, most apathetic pus-chuggers ignore the many amazing beings right here on Earth.
-veganschool101dotcom

If we could arm the nonhuman individuals, there would be no need for protests and demonstrations. All of you redneck speciesists would be dead and buried...

a damn good reason for a vegan celebration!
-CamilleMarino

There are legal issues, health and safety concerns, not to mention the immorality of hunters who have been salivating at the gate since this proposal was first introduced.
-susancarol225

People need to learn to live with nature, not destroy it by senseless culling.

Seriously, sharp shooters against innocent deer? How immoral can people get?
- uviteru

I never hear about people proposing to engage in a field mouse season, yet thousands of them die yearly due to the cold and lack of food. I have yet to hear about open season on dogs, and they are considered overpopulated.
...the cold truth, is that people like to kill. I am really tired of the "points to consider" hunters always like to present; in my opinion, if hunters were truly comfortable with their position, they would find no need to attempt to justify their kills
-Stacey Rakic

There are over 1500 deer farms in the US. They are bred through artificial insemination. Buck semen is sold on the internet... fawns are removed from mothers and fed "milk replacers". These deer exist ONLY for hunters enjoyment.
-Bea Elliott

Has anyone considered that the deer have been forced out of the protection of the woods to avoid being killed?
-EVAPETOLICCHIO

This is the home of these deer & they should be entitled to remain there safely
No one shoud have the right to take the life of another.
This is just another form of capitalism speciesism.
- gina maltese

"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated." Ghandi

It's obvious, Johnson County, what is going on. Your little bureaucrats have a lot of bow-hunting friends and friends who have spent a lot of money on their latest firearm acquisition. These are the "people" that have stepped up to the plate to take pot-shots at the deer in the park.
-Kelly Carson

Sentient Like Me: Ape Rights and the Myth of Intelligence amongst Speciesists Sentient Like Me: Ape Rights and the Myth of Intelligence amongst Speciesists

By Jason Miller

7/6/08

Blatant speciesist and self-described "liberal Republican" William Saletan recently penned a predictably narrow-minded and weakly argued anti-animal rights editorial for Slate Magazine.

Originally bowing to the will of Microsoft, Slate is now economically beholden to the Washington Post. Billed as "liberal" (which simply means they're sycophants to the filthy status quo as they call for "reform" to a hopelessly degenerate system), naturally Slate was more than happy to provide Saletan a forum for his unbridled arrogance and bigotry.

(Saletan's inane musings, Animal-Rights Farm: Ape Rights and the Myth of Animal Equality, can be found here:

http://www.slate.com/id/2194568/

It is readily apparent that both Saletan and Wesley Smith, his "favorite anti-animal rights blogger," are deeply insecure individuals who maintain their illusion of power by fighting tooth and nail to sustain the anachronistic and morally reprehensible notion that that it is "man's" birthright to subjugate, exploit, and commodify our non-human animal brethren.

Let's examine Saletan and Smith's arguments to perpetuate barbarism:

Saletan began by baiting the reader with a straw-man argument.
[Should apes be treated like people?]

Animal liberationists have never suggested that we human animals treat non-human animals like people. Such a notion is riddled with idiocies. For instance, as Peter Singer pointed out in his seminal work, Animal Liberation, animals obviously lack the capacity to engage in an activity such as voting, so agitating for a porcine suffrage would be nonsense.

Animal liberationists are seeking an end to the abject torture the human species inflicts on billions upon billions of non-human animals simply to achieve goals and to satisfy needs that could be attained and reached by other means. There is no push for "equality" in the sense that fear-driven speciesists like Saletan and Smith assert. Animal liberation seeks to assign basic, reasonable rights to sentient non-human animals to prevent them from enduring the horrifying unnecessary suffering we humans inflict upon them for our personal gain, amusement and satisfaction.

In his editorial, Saletan wrote:

[The resolution, approved last week by a parliamentary committee with broad support, urges the government to implement the agenda of the Great Ape Project, an organization whose founding declaration says apes "may not be killed" or "arbitrarily deprived of their liberty." No more routine confinement. According to Reuters, the proposal would commit the government to ending involuntary use of apes in circuses, TV ads, and dangerous experiments.]

Treating apes like people? Here is the "burdensome and expansive ape bill of rights" (from the Great Ape Project’s website) that has Saletan in a froth:

1. The Right to Life

The lives of members of the community of equals are to be protected. Members of the community of equals may not be killed except in very strictly defined circumstances, for example, self-defense.

2. The Protection of Individual Liberty

Members of the community of equals are not to be arbitrarily deprived of their liberty; if they should be imprisoned without due legal process, they have the right to immediate release. The detention of those who have not been convicted of any crime, or of those who are not criminally liable, should be allowed only where it can be shown to be for their own good, or necessary to protect the public from a member of the community who would clearly be a danger to others if at liberty. In such cases, members of the community of equals must have the right to appeal, either directly or, if they lack the relevant capacity, through an advocate, to a judicial tribunal.

3. The Prohibition of Torture

The deliberate infliction of severe pain on a member of the community of equals, either wantonly or for an alleged benefit to others, is regarded as torture, and is wrong.

Let’s see. Saletan has a problem with apes having a legally enforceable right to life, freedom, and protection from torture? That does sound threatening to humanity. Imagine if we lost OUR "inalienable right" to act with virtual impunity as we kill, enslave, and torture gorillas, chimps, and the like. Horror of horrors! What will be next, prison time for roasting kittens alive or breaking puppies’ necks?

Saletan did get at least one thing right, though:

[Proponents hail the resolution as the first crack in the "species barrier." Peter Singer, the philosopher who co-founded GAP, puts it this way: "There is no sound moral reason why possession of basic rights should be limited to members of a particular species."]

Like the Abolition Movement, Animal Liberation has met with great resistance from the myriad people and business entities benefiting richly from the status quo. But this landmark precedent will create a significant chink in their armor.

But Saletan wasn’t done sounding alarms. He’s frantically determined to protect "humanity’s special status:"

[If the idea of treating chimps like people freaks you out, join the club. Creationists have been fighting this battle for a long time. They realized long ago that evolution threatened humanity's special status. Maybe you thought all this evolution stuff was just about the past. Surprise! Once you've admitted chimps are your relatives, you have to think about treating them that way. That's why, when the Spanish proposal won approval last week, GAP's leader in Spain called it a victory for "our evolutionary comrades."]

More red meat for the mean-spirited mob, a mob comprised of people who have been conditioned from birth to be obscenely human-centric and terrified that they might stop "being special." No one is suggesting that we begin treating chimpanzees exactly the same as we do humans. Animal liberationists are simply calling for humanity to enlighten itself and draw our non-human animals into the moral community, thereby extending sentient, intelligent beings protection from murder, subjugation and torture. Consequences for cruelty to other living creatures…..what a heinous concept!

Further, GAP’s victory nothing to do with supplanting Creationism with Evolution. Ultimately, who gives a damn about that silly argument? Whether an anthropomorphic God created us or we evolved from a primordial soup, the issue here is that we human animals are inflicting unimaginable pain on countless non-human animals every day, and it is a moral abomination!
Wesley Smith chimed in to stoke the ire of the pitch-fork toting villagers:

[Given that animal rights activists believe a rat, is a pig, is a dog, is a boy, one would think the GAP would be denigrated by them as speciesist because it values apes higher than other sentient or "painient" animals. But of course, they understand the game that is afoot. They know that the GAP is a spear between the ribs of the old order because it explicitly supplants human beings as the premier species. This is a disaster for universal human rights and human exceptionalism.]

Why are these very small men so terrified that they might lose their "special status" and "exceptionalism?" Let’s hope that GAP’s spear pierces the ribs and plunges deep into speciesism’s heart of darkness.

[Animals can't comprehend the concept of rights, so why grant them such entitlements?]
Human infants and toddlers can’t comprehend the concept of rights either, so we better get busy rescinding their rights. And since when is it an "entitlement" to grant a living, sentient being life, freedom and protection from torture?

[Take, as just one example, the purported right against torture. This seems reasonable until one reads the project's definition of torture as "the deliberate infliction of severe pain on a member of the community of equals, either wantonly or for an alleged benefit to others." Clearly, the primary aim here isn't to stop beatings or punish neglect, but when combined with the putative right to personal liberty, is clearly intended to prevent apes from being used in medical research.]

Ah, medical research. The sacrosanct justification for our sadistic treatment of non-human animals. As David Irving illustrates in The Day of the Bullies, medical research involving animals is a nightmare. The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine makes a convincing case that many viable alternatives to animal research exist, and that it is ethically imperative that we continue to develop and implement them.

[The loss of chimps as crucial medical research aids would be sufficient cause to reject the project. But there is an even more important, if esoteric, reason for refusing to grant rights to apes. The fundamental purpose of the project is to undermine our belief in human exceptionalism -- the principle that human life has unique moral value simply because it is human. Animal liberationists abhor human exceptionalism as bigotry against animals. Thus, by persuading us to include apes in the so-called community of equals, supporters hope to slowly erode society's belief in the unique importance of human life.]

At one time–and to this day in some cultures–male life was "uniquely important" and valued over that of women and children. Similar examples abound throughout history, including Caucasians over Blacks and Native Americans, adults over children, Israelis over Palestinians, Germans over Jews, Turks over Armenians, Hutus over Tutsis, and on and on….

Placing "unique importance" on one group of sentient beings over another has repeatedly resulted in drastically tragic consequences. Why, then, would we cling so tenaciously to such a malignant way of thinking?

[These misguided efforts overlook a crucial point: The way we act is based substantially on the nature of beings we perceive ourselves to be. In this regard, our self-concept as the world's most important species is extremely beneficial, because it is both the stimulus for promoting universal human rights as well as the grounding for our distinctly human duty to treat animals humanely.]
What a telling paragraph from Wesley Smith. His conclusion is that we humans have to believe we are the master species in order to embrace and implement the concept of universal human rights. And apparently his self-image is so fragile that he needs to feel superior to non-human animals to feel good enough about himself to perform his "distinctly human duty to treat animals humanely."
Incidentally, Wesley Smith is a senior fellow for the Discovery Institute, a "think tank" that works strenuously to maintain and advance the money worshipping, war-mongering brand of Calvinistic Christianity and the reactionary socioeconomic values that riddle our Right Wing nation and culture of death. For more on Discovery, click here.

[But the arguments GAP has deployed in Spain don't advance the idea of equality among animals. They destroy it.]

[GAP is scientifically honest. And science doesn't show mental parity between great apes and human adults. What it shows, as the group's president acknowledges, is that great apes "experience an emotional and intellectual conscience similar to that of human children." Accordingly, the Spanish proposal doesn't treat apes like you or me. It treats them like "humans of limited capacity, such as children or those who are mentally incompetent and are afforded guardians or caretakers to represent their interests."]

[And that's just the top rung of the inequality ladder. GAP's mission statement says great apes are entitled to rights based on their "morally significant characteristics." It says they enjoy a rich emotional and cultural existence in which they experience emotions such as fear, anxiety and happiness. They share the intellectual capacity to create and use tools, learn and teach other languages. They remember their past and plan for their future. It is in recognition of these and other morally significant qualities that the Great Ape Project was founded.]

[Morally significant qualities. Morally significant characteristics. These are appeals to discrimination, not universal equality. Most animals don't have a rich cultural life. They can't make tools. They don't teach languages. Singer even points out that "chimpanzees, bonobos and gorillas have long-term relationships, not only between mothers and children, but also between unrelated apes." Special rights for animals in committed relationships! It sounds like a Moral Majority for vegans.]

[Opening your mind to science-based animal rights doesn't eliminate inequality. It just makes the inequality more scientific. A rat can't match a pig, much less a boy. In fact, as a GAP board member points out, "We are closer genetically to a chimp than a mouse is to a rat."]

[George Orwell wrote the cruel finale to this tale 63 years ago in Animal Farm: "All animals are equal. But some animals are more equal than others." That wasn't how the egalitarian uprising in the book was supposed to turn out. It wasn't how the animal rights movement was supposed to turn out, either.]

How tremendous was that leap? Suddenly Saletan, who previously expressed his emphatic opposition to GAP’s significant blow for animal liberation, started citing the reasons why this step forward for animal rights will result in a "Four legs good, two legs better" scenario for the "lesser" species. If this legal precedent is such an abysmal failure for the animal rights movement and for the voiceless victims they defend (both of which Saletan obviously fears and despises), why isn’t he celebrating?

If this is the best Saletan and Smith can muster in support of their morally primitive position, they need to head home and get back to their drawing boards. And they’d better move quickly, because if their panic is justified, those "damn dirty apes" might just acquire property rights and displace Saletan and Smith from their precious abodes!

Jason Miller is Cyrano’s Journal’s associate editor.

Seeing certain 18 year-olds walk down the aisle during a high school commencement and receive a diploma does make me thing that we should at least consider the creation of teen farms, too.

When I read the inane rhetorical question as to why we don't hunt and cull field mice because they starve in the winter, too, my reaction was: "We don't hunt them because we don't eat them-Moron."

I stand corrected, and point out a new cruelty perpetrated by man , starving man, over poor defenseless field mice.

"Making a meal out of mice in Malawi

TSVANGIRAYI MUKWAZHI (Associated Press Writer)
From Associated Press
August 08, 2009 11:57 AM EDT

LILONGWE, Malawi - Cooked, salted or dried, field mice strung on sticks are sold as a popular delicacy in Malawi markets and roadside stalls.

The mice are hunted in corn fields after the harvest when they have grown plump on a diet of grains, fruits, grass and the odd insect. The most widely eaten species is known locally as Kapuku, gray in color and with a shorter tail than the more common rat.

Young boys have to be quick as they chase the mice through the fields and catch them. But local villagers have also come up with an innovative trap.

One method involves digging holes and putting clay pots filled with water into them. The mouth of the pot is smeared with fried corn husks. As some of the mice fight for the husks, they fall into the pot and drown.

Malawi, with a population of 12 million, is among the poorest countries in the world, with rampant disease and hunger, aggravated by periodic droughts and crop failure."

We should jerk the Venison harvested from SM Park and send it over. We ethical and law-abiding hunters are a compassionate group of people.

I have been going to several "deer management" website even one called "Quality Deer Management" (QMD) and they always speak about "producing" deer to the "maximum carrying capacity". Same with other "deer management" websites talk about "fawn crops" "fawn recruits", "killing predators", supplement feeding (for large antler growth and herd size), food plots etc etc etc. Even with the DVA's and and other Deer Human Conflicts the DNR are producing deer to the MAXIMUM CARRYING CAPACITY so what gives? All this slaughter of innocent life benefits is the kiling industry and the killers themselves and because of CRE the deer will continue to produce in abundance (with the extra help of the food plots, killing of pedators, and supplement feeding) . I put many of the quote I found from "deer management" website into a video please watch from beginning to end.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-c-Hp6Pc_Zo

Plus this is the kind of pain and suffering our wildlife endure from these wildlife terrorists

Doe suffocating in her own blood (very common way that bowhunted deer dies)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-gYbyY-fxU

Buck shot and wailing in pain
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3XYGT2BLGA

doe shot to suffer from "rage" broadheads
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCamL2fA8Rk

The origional owner of the video titled it "rage will damage Alabama whitetails"

Overall, hunting is legalized animal cruelty and its cruelty that is beyond horrific.

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=3D7EFD6D45F88AEB

On behalf of our deer and everyone of us who love and cherish our wildlife!

I think a venison-banana sandwich would be just as good as a bacon-banana sandwich any day. Wash it all down with an RC Cola.

Thank you. Thank you very much.