Animal Writings

"Fire happens in nature. Does that morally justify arson?" Very good point, Gary. Unfortunately, there are some in the AR movement that don't seem to get it. Take one Rodney Coronado for example. Mr. Coronado is a convicted ALF arsonist who did four and half years in the slammer for torching a laboratory at Michigan State University. He has demonstrated techniques for building incendiary devices at AR conferences. Being the habitual criminal that he is, the heroic Mr. Coronado is now staring down a possible 7 more years in the big house for vandalism and interfering with state and federal wildlife management officials when he allegedly disrupted a mountain lion control project in Arizona. Being that this guy is a known arsonist, a habitual criminal, and has fanatical devotion to an extreme ideology, I think this individual is an ever-increasing menace to society. I would like to see him go up the river permanately before he gets somebody killed, such as the fire fighters and police officers that have to respond to the mayhem he causes. Interestingly, the last time old Rodney ran afoul of the law, PETA chipped in a whopping $70,000 to his defense. Any ideas on how much of their supporters hard earned donations they'll float to this convicted felon this time?
 

Thank you for your comments, and if you're "anon" with the parrots, hello to your birds! And where's my picture?? I woud have answered you sooner but was at a wedding; seems everyone we know who's unmarried is getting married this summer

When I wrote the post, I figured someone might bring up your argument, which I believe to be fair and valid.

The amount of violence done to animals across the country in one day - probably in one hour - dwarfs the amount of violence done by animal rights activists since the movement started. The real crime is that, through money and influence, the mass cruelties of the animal exploitation and killing industries are outside the law. "Illegal" becomes meaningless when unethical acts that cause intense and preventable suffering are legal. Especially considering that now, thanks in large part to animal rights activists, those acts are becoming illegal one by one in country after country, town after town; the law is slowly catching up to our evolving sense of ethics.

Throw the book at Mr. Coronado as long as you are consistent. Research animal sanctuaries should not be able to get off with a "we were practicing veterinary medicine" excuse when they kill animals through gross negligence (delegating the care of critically ill chimps to untrained night watchmen). Tyson should not get off scot-free when its employees crush chickens with their boots, rip their heads off, and slam them against walls. Violent companion animal abusers should not get off with a slap on the wrist. Fur farms where they rip the skin off struggling animals and hit them on the head with the blunt end of a knife - why are these even legal? Why is mass animal torture legal in a civilized society? Let's put the animal liberation movement's crimes in context by examining the violence and terrorism against animals that provokes them. One cannot talk about slavery by focusing solely on objectionable actions by abolitionists; one cannot talk about civil rights by focusing solely on criminal activity during riots.

To the extent that motivations should be taken into account when looking at unlawful acts....You may not believe me, but every animal rights activist I've talked to over the last several years is deeply disturbed by the amount of cruelty done to animals, the denials and excuses of the offenders, and the shifty maneuverings to avoid penalties for the cruelty. They desperately want to free animals from torture and misery. Their crimes are done while in pursuit of these objectives.

By contrast, Smithfield, Tyson, Perdue, Covance, and Huntington kill animals for money. Their slaughter and infliction of suffering on animals is deliberate and constant. If Mr. Coronado is extreme then so are the severely unnatural and unlivable conditions of ten billion animals.

Now as it turns out, most animal rights advocates agree more than disagree with your points. They condemn violence in the name of ending violence, even as they agree that the atrocities committed against animals are horrific and should be illegal. You should hear the lively debates at animal rights conferences! On the other hand, it is rare for agribusiness, Ringling, or animal labs to ever admit any wrongdoing, even when convicted. In fact, they spend considerable effort (and some of our money) trying to gain even more impunity: fighting increased AWA protections and supporting vague new legislation that could be used to stifle non-violent protests against animal labs and corporate polluters.

To be fair, there are small but hopeful signs that mainstream organizations and companies are sliding toward positions that have been long advocated by "extreme" animal rights organizations. The United Egg Producers will stipulate that "animal Care Certified" hens cannot be starved. Governor Shwartznegger is outlawing force-feeding of animals, and some well-known chefs are renouncing foie gras on ethical grounds. McDonald's is considering gas stunning of chickens instead of administering paralytic shocks. (It would still be nice if birds, which make up nine out of ten farm animals, were protected under the Humane Slaughter Act.)

Again, I ask you to consider "shoe on the other foot" scenarios. If you saw lab workers repeatedly punching a beagle - a beleagured dog whose life consisted of animal experiments and a barren cage - might you intervene, even if it meant violating a law? If you saw a dog suffering in a steel-jaw leghold trap, bleeding, whimpering, struggling until it ran out of strength, would you break the trap to free the animal? Technically you'd be a criminal.

How much of PETA's members' money has beedn used in defense of Mr. Corondao? A tiny fraction of that used to expose horrible cruelties at Iams testing labs (e.g., removing dogs' vocal chords and subjecting them to small metal cages for years), Tyson chicken processing plants (where workers take out their frustration on live chickens), fur farms (where animals go insane from the confiment and boredom before having their skulls crushed), animal "entertainment" venues (where trainers beat, kick, punch, whip, pull the tails of, and shock animals), and hundreds of othe places. How much of my tax money is going toward funding experiments that force rodents into plastic tubes where they inhale tobacco smoke? Or shock kittens trying to bond with their mother? Or strap monkeys into restraining devices and make them perform tasks for food? How much donaters' money did the American Cancer society spend on sponsoring the Cattlemens' Ball, despite recent peer-reviewed studies linking meat to cancer? I could give a hundred more examples, but you get the point. From my perspective, I'll totally give you the Ron Coronado argument. You win, hands down. Just help end the too-many-to-enumerate atrocities against animals.

If I were to argue the nuances of Mr. Coronado's crimes, trial, and conviction, and the horrible suffering he was trying to stop, we might agree on a lot. Even Mr. Coronado agrees with you on some points. He freely admits that he broke the law and is serving his time, although he would assert that his actions will be seen by history as justified civil disobedence to liberate animals from human-induced misery of which they have a right to be free. When you get into the details of these cases, they get more complicated. I'll just say that if you show one tenth the indignation toward corporate animal abuse as you do toward Mr. Coronado and ALF, you'll be an animal rights advocate.

How dangerous is Mr. Coronado to society? Probably not much. Less than the danger of wiping out virgin forests to graze cattle so the meat can be exported to Europe. Less than the massive amount of water pollution caused by factory farms. Less than new strains of E Coli growing in the modified stomach environments of cows. How much threat is it to society when we allow ourselves to
be entertained by the vicious cruelty of bullfights, bear-bating, hog-dog fights, and steer busting?

In any event, it seems like we agree on the main point: "it happens in nature" is a lame - if not frightening - excuse for violence committed against others.

BTW, in several upcoming posts, I will highlight how powerful corporate interests and their political allies have abused their privileged positions to persecute principled, determined, and totally legal animal activists.

Thanks again for your excellent points and making me think about things. Hope I've done the same. Have you tried the GardenBurger Riblet yet?

If you get a minute, you may want to call McDonalds at 1-800-244-6227 and urge them to switch to argon/nitro gassed stunning technology, which will significantly reduce the suffering or billions of animals. This one change may improve animal welfare more than anything else in history. To find out more, visit http://www.upc-online.org/nr/10605drraj.htm, http://www.kentuckyfriedcruelty.com/macvskfc.asp, and http://www.kentuckyfriedcruelty.com/pdfs/kfc14.pdf.