It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by readerone
the real world is brutal .
this is not a deisney movie , and your not living in a cartoon .
your wareing plant fiber , you live among people .
do you for one moment beleive that people are more brutal than other animals .
in point of debate , I submit , the greatest harm is being done by primitive cultures .
that ALL the animal rights organizations are nothing more that shake down artists , who will and do sell their beleifs to the highest bidder...
and they ALL use deisney land , as their point of refreance .
wake up and smell the coffee...
bambi is not real , domestic animals are un-natural , you are alive because of un-natural acts , and you could not live in the world you seek to create .
you have never thought this out .
you have never created a logical end to your thinking that includes the people who will pay your bills .
we have every right , when the animal rights people play their song , remember who is playing the music ...
the people who want money for their silance .
when you can feed the third world , get back to me on fair treatment of animals .
I actually looked at this thread to find out the "bizarre" beliefs of Obama's latest "czar", but predictably, the thread is not really about that, it seems.
Martosko told Beck, "When you embrace this whole utilitarian idea, guess what else comes in the back door? Some animals, according to Singer, are worth more than some humans. A smart border collie, he says, is worth more, inherently, than a retarded child. Cass Sunstein has embraced the whole enchilada. He believes that animals should have some of the same rights as humans, in fact, greater rights than some people including the right to follow lawsuits."
Sunstein has also supported outlawing sport hunting, giving animals the legal right to file lawsuits and using government regulations to phase out meat consumption.
I'd really like independent confirmation of this idea that animals can sue with human representatives, as it does seem like a dumb'un. But the sourcing so far doesn't give me confidence it's true.
In a 2007 speech at Harvard University, Sunstein argued in favor of entirely "eliminating current practices such as … meat eating." He also proposed: "We ought to ban hunting, I suggest, if there isn't a purpose other than sport and fun. That should be against the law. It's time now."
Sunstein wrote in his 2004 book "Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions" that "animals should be permitted to bring suit, with human beings as their representatives … Any animals that are entitled to bring suit would be represented by (human) counsel, who would owe guardian-like obligations and make decisions, subject to those obligations, on their clients' behalf."