Let's all blame the animals!

30 January 2004 ~ 22:37

Welcome back. When Nightdragon first told me about the anti-pet entry, I was as enraged as he was. And as the pallbearer for animal rights that I am, I cannot let it go without adding my own thoughts. Surely one would expect no less of me!

First of all, I don�t believe in dictatorships, so no government is going to tell me what to spend my money on. This is a democracy. If I want to keep pets, I am damn well going to. I really don�t care who disapproves. I chose to give animals a home and spend part of my income on caregiving. If that makes me a selfish person, so be it.

We�ve all heard of old people whose only source of companionship are pet cats or dogs. Perhaps they should adopt an AIDS-afflicted African instead?

Animals are not evil. Animals are not greedy. They do not lust after big houses or five cars. They have sex only when in heat, to reproduce the species. They do not start wars or drop atomic bombs.

The anti-pet diarist seems obsessed with the bowel movements of animals. So they go to the bathroom? Big deal! Don�t we? The end products of human digestion are the most disgusting. How much sewage gets pumped into the seas every year, along with all the spilled oil?

Humans have ruined the ozone layer, chopped down the rainforests, spread AIDS amongst themselves through their inability to control their hedonistic sexual urges�and yet, the animals are to blame?! We are an elitist species to blame animals, who are only trying to survive, sharing the world with a hostile, dominant race of being as they do. And yet, we club seals, whales and dolphins because they are a drain on the fishing industry? News flash: The fishing industry itself is responsible for declining numbers of fish in the oceans. If you are an intelligent person, I would assume you already sussed that one out for yourselves. Yet that won�t stop the Canadians, Japanese, Norwegians and Icelandic from wanton killing of innocent animals though, because that would involve them accepting blame for their own actions, wouldn�t it?

And why should I pay for refugees? I did nothing to cause them to be in danger. Their own government is responsible for their plight. They did that to their own people, so what sense does it make to bring animals into the equation?

Hell, why stop with pets? Let�s ban anything else that is not necessary that people choose to spend their money on, and give it all to the poor and refugees! We in the West already pay subsidies to these governments, which comes from the tax you and I pay, but heck, that�s not enough. No-one should have a TV. It�s simply not needed. No-one should have a VCR, DVD or cable television. Nor should anyone be spending money going to college when these people do not even have a basic education. There should be no private healthcare for everyone (public healthcare is free here in the U.K. anyway).

There should be no drinking of any liquid other than tap water. That means no alcohol. Smoking should be banned and smokers made to pay what they normally spend on cigarettes to the poor. No family should have more than two children. Every Western family should give the money to Africans so that they can have ten children each, never mind the fact that they have no means with which to bring up that many offspring. No-one should have a car. Use public transport instead�we already do.

And as for all these holidays that the anti-pet/anti-animal diarist in question spends his money on? Why, if I have to give up what I choose to spend my money on, i.e. my pets, then he can damn well give up his holidays and give his money to the poor instead. Or else, he can be the hypocritical elitist he sounds like. What is he doing travelling across the United States�the most irresponsible country on the planet according to people of his ilk and ideology�when he could go volunteer to take care of sick Africans in their homeland. Let�s see him put his money where his mouth is�or shut up.


Stored nuts | Future acorns