Double Scoop Videos - Crippled Dairy Cows - Starved Calves

Here's two videos regarding the wretched treatment of dairy cows and calves: The first comes from New Zealand - And the moderator is very concerned because this might hinder the opinion of NZ: "How can New Zealand continue to advertise itself as 100% pure after the dairying boom has created so many factory farms that poison the land and harm animals?" My first instinct is to chuckle at his choice of wording: "pure". Really? Artificial insemination... raping an animal and keeping it as your "slave" - "Pure"? Not hardly. And the other point about the "harm" to animals. Before New Zealand's "factory dairies" --- Didn't they send the unwanted calves and "spent" cows to slaughter? I say being butchered is causing "harm". What about you? The second video was filmed in a Pennsylvania dairy: But animal agriculture will always want to say that these are "isolated" instances... That (most) farmers "love" their animals and always provide the best of "care" to them. Typical representation and denial - here's what Troy Hadrick over at Advocates for Agriculture had to say: "As with most of the videos that are released from animal rights groups, we only see an edited version of the entire story. The only thing we know for sure is that there were some crippled cows at this dairy. How they got they way and how they were handled afterwards is unknown. Hopefully the entire story is available in the near future. What we do know for sure is that the vast overwhelming majority of livestock producers care for their animals. Never before in the history of animal agriculture have we had the tools to provide so much care for our livestock. If the dairy cattle in the video were receiving an inadequate level of care then that situation needs to be resolved immediately." "Edited video"? Sure... and maybe a little cgi? R-ight. This stuff is raw in every sense of the word. "Some crippled cows" - How they got that way is obvious, there whole lives were spent in constant gestation... Their bones and bodies were depleted of every bit of calcium... Their udders were infected from the constant milking machines... Literally sucked dry for human adults to nurse themselves on... "How they were handled afterward?"... I'd bet my house and contents they weren't "cared" for by a vet but rather by a bolt gun. And finally... "If" - "If" the cows were neglected/abused? From the time each was born, has been an eternal condemnation of use and "abuse", made possible by the loving "care" via the common practices of animal industries. I say that even under the *best* of circumstances, the dairy industry stinks... Stealing babies from their mothers just so humans can steal the cow's milk is not anything remotely resembling "care" or "love". Or anything that any "decent" person would wish to contribute to - once the facts are known... You know them know... Please... Go vegan - It's the right thing to do.

Dirty Dairy - Stolen Milk - Calf Slaughter - Ugly Cheese - Go Vegan

Her Heaven

Let her wake to a rough tongue cherishing the length of her; to cloud-warmth of milk and fur, no memory of metal or blood. Two bodies, one dream. Little star-breath drifting through night.

Written by Francine Marie Tolf and is one of the poems in her book Like Saul (©.

But the dairy industry is far from this picturesque scene of mother and child...

It is a nasty, deceitful business which has no respect for the living aside from what money the flesh and stolen secretions will bring. Even "the product" is linked to cancers and other human ills. And the "waste" contaminates rivers and drinking water...

Oh yeah... And often the dairy industry will kill mother and child together. Not quite "poetry". But if you drink milk, eat cheese and consume dairy - You should have the stomach to see what you are supporting:

If this sickens you. If you want a cleaner environment and a healthier body - Please... Go Vegan

RIGHTS TO ANIMALS ~ GIVES PROGRESS TO MAN

Religious attitudes to Copernican heliocentrism: The King James Bible states that "the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved." Psalm says, "[the Lord] Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever." Ecclesiastes states that "The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose."

And after many centuries the theories of astronomers, scientists and stargazers all came to be accepted by the church, educators and the culture. Indeed acknowledging that Earth was not the center of the universe allowed other concepts such as gravity and lightspeed to be discovered.

And so too consider this:

"For four thousand years, a thick and impenetrable legal wall has separated all human from all nonhuman animals. On one side, even the most trivial interests of a single species — ours — are jealously guarded. We have assigned ourselves, alone among the million animal species, the status of "legal persons." On the other side of that wall lies the legal refuse of an entire kingdom, not just chimpanzees and bonobos but also gorillas, orangutans, and monkeys, dogs, elephants, and dolphins. They are "legal things." Their most basic and fundamental interests — their pains, their lives, their freedoms — are intentionally ignored, often maliciously trampled, and routinely abused. Ancient philosophers claimed that all nonhuman animals had been designed and placed on this earth just for human beings. Ancient jurists declared that law had been created just for human beings. Although philosophy and science have long since recanted, the law has not."

Rattling the Cage "The Problem with Being a Thing" by Steven Wise

To those who refuse to relinquish their priviledge of might over reason I implore you... Allow us to advance as a species. Discard this abusive and archaic notion that we are "better" or "best" than Others simply because we deny to acknowledge that other species have a right to their own purpose.

I realize contemporary thought wants to claim that all we have we owe to the use of animals as resources. That the taking of them and their slavery and flesh has meant our very survival. But I present this view that no one has any idea how much better off we would be as a civilization had we chosen different means. No one can say for certain that our present existence is the apex of what might have been had we shifted our technology and abandoned the primitive use of nonhumans.

And I don't know... Is the world in such fine shape? On a grand scale there's global warming, droughts, depleted oceans, species extinctions, melting polar ice caps, deforestation, and many other plantetary issues. And within our own species we have pandemics, famine, obesity, antibiotic resistance, wars, corruption, violence and crime... Can anyone really say that another path might not have been better?

Likewise, not one can say for certain how much more advanced we would be if human slavery had not anchored our progress. Or wars. And if man is indeed "the best" and "superior" don't we owe it to ourselves to find a better way beyond the violence and the killing?

I leave the last words on that subject to David Brion Davis: Considering that slavery had been globally accepted for millennia, it is encouraging that people were able to make such a major shift in their moral view, especially when a cause like abolition conflicted with strong economic interests. We can still learn from history the invaluable lesson that an enormously powerful and profitable evil can be overcome.

AN ARGUMENT FOR THE BASIC LEGAL RIGHTS OF FARMED ANIMAL Steven M. Wise

TOWARD A NON-PROPERTY STATUS FOR ANIMALS Thomas G. Kelch

We don't need to keep the animals any longer... They have "served" us enough -

Please Go Vegan

Animal Rights - THEN & NOW - The Snakeoil is Still the Same

From the 1989 Agricultural Law newsletter An overview of the animal rights movement:

And here we are 20 years later with this, this, this, this, this and this. And well, I could go on and on because it's obvious there's constant disagreement now as there was in 1989. The latest debate is each "fringe" claiming the other is "extreme" and ineffectual.
But why must we always see things in such extremes? We are attempting to "normalize" veganism, yet any deviation in theory or strategy has to be labeled either or "good or bad", "right or wrong". I believe everything, every act, every position should be judged to the degree of its effectiveness. Not ALL activities are the SAME. There are differences and degrees. The variations between the two are immense. Not everything is divided neatly down a faultless line of "peaceful" activism vs "pipebombs". And not all "good" activism is "productive" all the time: Cookies are a wonderful way to introduce people to veganism. But if the cookies taste awful - even that excellent "peaceful" activism might do more harm than good. Similarly, one of the most "extreme" and "forceful" efforts, like those carried out by Sea Shepherd, have incredible positive results, and a substantial impact in "mainstream" acceptance as well. So there is something in between the two that does have cultural significance. And to judge what will be effective or not, requires one remain objective - and evaluate each on it's own merit... Not on "party line".

It's a lazy way to member oneself with one side or the other exclusively... Finding the commonality and blending, in all the ways that really matter, seems to be what's required for much needed solidarity. Bickering has gotten out of hand and is entirely counterproductive. It's as meaningful as peta or hsus bashing. BTW not EVERYTHING they focus on is entirely wrong, ALL THE TIME either. This "single approach" reads like a snake oil label: "Educate and change the demand". But the fine print says "only".

If we look at the animal industries as a cancer which has infected the body, would we settle for a limited "magic" prescription as the cure? No, we would aggressively attack in all directions that would have "some" reasonable value and contribute to the remedy... A holistic approach to an illness is what is needed. A person with a common cold might fortify their body with vitamins, drink more fluids, take medication, rest, etc. Likewise, there is no "one plan" for Animal Rights. We need a holistic approach. And for the sake of brevity I'm omitting *my* definition of violence in this "holistic approach", but suffice it to say that I try to distinguish "illegal" acts such as open rescue, to those acts which clearly put life at risk. I do believe there is an important difference that should not be overlooked for the sake of finger-pointing or "othering" one's validity. Not all "illegal" acts should be seen as "terrorism" - Unless you also support the oppressive and arbitrary AETA. (?)

 I'm also not disqualifying "education" as it effects "demand". However, you can't disregard the economic system which holds animal use in it's grip. And it does so not entirely through individual purchases but more so by an enormous institutionalized "welfare" program to the animal and "meat" conglomerates. So just telling people to "go vegan" will make little change unless the financially run political systems are challenged and changed as well. Yes, that means voting honest people in office. That should be an easy one to tackle right? (sarcasm noted).

 And if one were to look at the strategies on polar ends... The pipebomb vs "non-violent" advocacy I could say the most peaceful thing I can do is sit in my yard, in the sunshine meditating on flowers. But that won't change a thing about what other humans think about or do to animals. Nor will blowing things up have any positive change either... So the ideal of being most "peaceful" in the movement has it's limits of effectiveness - As does the other destructive extreme. But does it always have to be viewed in "extremes"? All "sabotage" is not pipebombing... All peacefulness is not passivity. We often dislike the animal abusers because they lump all species into rigid "productive units". Forgetting that these are individual lives - each different than the other... It seems that this movement is determined to also categorize it's advocates into such restrictions as well.

I continually hear that we must change cultural beliefs - It's understood this will never happen overnight. Incremental change is inevitable with society's attitudes. Yet many (including myself) refuse to accept that incremental changes will occur in animal agriculture as well. It doesn't mean one must support "welfarism"; I don't. But are we really doing anything constructive when we invalidate those methods? Spending time disavowing what others do (or don't) is just a waste of energy that is desperately needed elsewhere. The more we banter about how much we all disagree with each other - the more the animals industries win! No wonder why so many are paranoid of "plants" because this infighting is creating a perfect storm for irreconcilable division between us all. And the most important cause, that of the animals is being forsaken in the process. It's a time worn phrase but true nonetheless... If we could all just agree to "disagree" - And move on to our own purpose, and do what we each know works best for us. We all stand a better chance at some future time, to meet in the middle on some common ground that will really reflect a tipping point within the movement. We can win this... But not if we keep fighting with each other.

If we can accept that we all might not be on "same page" but that we are all reading the same book - the story will unfold as we progress into it... And hopefully it will have a happy end.
Taking the Fight to Them
One Track Animal Rights Advocacy - Bus-ted!

ANIMAL RIGHTS - TAKING THE FIGHT TO THEM

I posted this the other day - Just the photo, no text; no title. I had my reasons but an anon comment got me to think about what a "white flag" might be. I didn't mean for the white flag to symbolize "surrender" but rather "victory"... Or at least the way to it. If I were to look at the bus full of people - Each representing peers, friends and neighbors, each doing (in their own way), what they thought was ethical in their treatment to animals. I'd like to think that they are all "non-violent" abolitionists... And I'd hope they are all peaceful vegans... But neither is the case.

Some boarded the Animal Rights bus because it connects with the Earth Rights bus, and some boarded because they love dolphins... but they still eat cows. Some because they hate factory farms and still believe in "humane" meat. There's the woman who just took a seat... She's a vegetarian, and has never heard of a factory farm at all! There's also the few that got on the Animal Rights bus out of curiosity. Some are lost and they don't know the planned destination... And some board this bus with ill intent, or with baggage that takes up "extra" seats... What I'm illustrating is that I don't want to kick any passenger off this bus. If the meat eating dolphin lover is traveling "somewhere" in the direction I'm going, I want him along too... The curious one might get off at the "I Still Eat Fish" stop, another curious one might stay on board to exit at the "Happy Meat" stop. But if our message is true enough people will peacefully travel the entire distance. If we don't alienate anyone, if we each stay focused on our own positive advocacy - we can make a change.

If we stay reasonable and consistent in our position of striving for a better and more just world, we can persuade the many to make it such. This is where education comes in... And we can never stop spreading the word about Animal Rights being the inevitable evolution of our own human progress. And yes, scheduled or not, there are "detours" along the journey - We may have wanted to stay on one road, but had to take another, still going in the same direction - just a different way... Sometimes a shortcut will cost more time than it's worth... Sometimes not - No one can really know how this journey to animal liberation and rights maps its self out. And like any long voyage - it won't happen over night... And it certainly will be met with incremental change. Reaching the destination of Animal Rights through welfare laws, and civil disobedience, through politics and social awareness, through science, the arts and literature and through talking to a neighbor about what's wrong with the circus. It will be on all levels. Each to the other may seem insignificant at the time... Or it may even be judged as "wrong" advocacy. The methods and issues of others may not be paramount ones - to everyone. But, like I said in an earlier post... it's not like the bus is overflowing yet to be so picky about each and every strategy.

I'm not going to "fight" or alienate fellow passengers. Further still, no matter how much we say we only want to cause "legal" financial damage - "illegal" financial harm will also take place. If not... it will be the first time in history that a social struggle did not have some amount of unlawful collateral damage. I'm certainly not involved in that kind of activity. However, nothing I say or do is going to influence what others see as their best tactical strategy. None of us can "police" what another does. I'm certainly not about to tell someone - NO! Don't do this activity because it "may" not work. I don't believe there is one single strategy which will work, exclusive of others. Spreading the message through potlucks or protests all have their place within this movement. Unfortunately I've seen arguing from all sides...

No, I'm not speaking of productive and informative debate and authentic questions and valid comments. I'm referring to slurs, defamatory criticisms, ugly name calling, abusive language, accusations and other useless bickering. If I've ever associated myself with pointless "tear the other" down nonsense I sincerely regret doing such. You see... I am not the driver of this Animal Rights bus - I am merely a passenger too. I don't know the "exact" way the destination will be reached... long after my bones have gone to dust. But, what I do know - is that energy spent warring amongst ourselves is less that goes to fighting "them". I know who my "them" is... Do you?

EGG INDUSTRY ~ CHICKS IN A BLENDER ~ Go Vegan

This is NOT an isolated occurance... It is standard industry practice in the egg business... I think the "standard consumer reaction" is in order:

Mercy for Animals: Consumers have a right to know the truth behind egg production.