Posted on 11/04/2004 8:47:53 AM PST by MikeEdwards
. . . . . Recently, the State’s largest circulation newspaper, the Star-Ledger, got its hands on the nearly 200 pages of draft recommendations that are under review by the 30-member task force. One, I might add, a task force whose members largely represent the animal rights movement. In short, the task force, like just about every other government entity in the Garden State, is rigged.
Among the recommendations under consideration is the inclusion of animal abuse laws under the State’s criminal code, increasing penalties, and creating new prosecution units. This, by the way, would put animals on a par with humans, a status they do not enjoy anywhere else. Pained as they were, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, just tossed out a case representing the world’s whales, porpoises, and dolphins, saying they had no standing to sue the President over the U.S. Navy’s use of sonar equipment. Congress still shows no intention of granting animals the same status before the bar of justice as humans. This is a good thing. . . . .
To read the full Canada Free Press newspapers column, click on Animal Lovers and Others
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
As long as animals are being killed for food and science animal rights as a concept makes no sense at all. Animals have no rights. Kind people do not want to cause anything undue pain, but come on, they are not people. let's help other people first, before wasting our time on slugs and rats.
Movement to give rights to apes link This one made me cry when I read it.
NJ Ping. This needs a little more coverage.
Animals are great, if properly cooked.
I'm reading the Animals and the Criminal Code for Canada. The documents the task force in NJ is reviewing now is suppose to be based on this 'success story'.
The lanuage for hunting and meat livestock is open to interpretation. Our Canadian neighbors seem to have given themselves the opportunity to go Vegan.
Now they are trying to slip this into NJ.
I am a proud MEAT EATER.
>>>>
It is a defence to any of the offences against animals that the accused acted with legal justification or excuse or with "colour of right." What constitutes a sufficient excuse or justification has to be decided on the facts of each case, and "colour of right" means an honest belief in a state of facts which, if true, would be a legal justification of excuse. For example, it has been held to be justified to kill an animal that is attacking or threatening to attack another animal (R. v. Fusell, 1920), but the tracking and killing of a dog that had frightened the accused's sheep without attacking and then left and ceased to pose any danger was not justifiable (R. v. Etherington, 1963). Statutory authorization also constitutes legal justification, so it is not an offence for example to kill an animal in accordance with provincial hunting regulations. <<<<<
BTTT!!!!!!
First,human rights for unborn humans. Then we can talk about animal rights.
>>> Then we can talk about animal rights.
I will not part with bacon, sirloin, turkey, BBQs....Yum
I love my pets. But I love my protein :)
LOL! Yum! is the word alright.
With the exception of our pets, we don't love animals with good taste-we love animals that taste good.
I don't suppose it will hurt us though if we, love them tender-love them true, til our dinner date is due.
That is the irony of the tree hugger train of thought. We don't eat the animals we keep as workers or friends. We are civilized and breed our food.
These nuts actually think a farm raised turkey could survive on it's own.
Not hunting wild animals hurts them, not helps them. Everything has a predator for population control. Well, except PETA :)
Back to my Sirloin :D
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.