DOMINION TRUMPS OREO's LAW:
OREO's Law did not pass because the semitic religious tradition follows a
'higher' law, one where God has given man the right to pass a death sentence
on animals when it is deemed 'necessary' for a human endeavor.
In India it is against the law to kill a dog for any reason other than
extreme illness or trauma. In India the jain-hindu religious tradition
teaches that all life is equally sacred: human and animal. This model of
compassion is called ahimsa, literally: 'no-harm'. In the United States the
judeo.christian tradition the model of compassion is called dominion. It
states that human life is worth more than animal life and that animals may
be harmed and slaughtered to benefit man. HSUS, PETA, the ASPCA and
virtually all American animal organizations use the premise of dominion to
guide their actions towards animals. Until those who care profoundly for the
lives of animals and humans challenge, not apologize for, the premise of
dominion, animal organizations in the United States will raise funds, build
huge coffers, and continue to betray the animals they claim to protect. The
failure to pass Oreo's Law is not due to political infighting among animal
organizations, but rather that all these organizations subscribe to the same
flawed model of animal compassion: one which does not respect the intrinsic
worth of an animal's life as they are reduced to the status of human
property. In the case of homeless domestic animals this lack of respect is
played out with the killing of 5 million healthy, young animals yearly
because when compassion is based on human convenience, these animals are
viewed as an inconvenience and dealt with accordingly.
Every aspect of animal protection in the USA is permeated by dominion.
Until the the religious institutions and the bullies who call themselves
religious leaders are held accountable for their thoughts, words and deeds
endorsing violence to animals there will be no OREO's LAW, no laws to
protect homeless domestic animals from untimely deaths, no law to prevent
the slaughter of billions upon billions of animals annually designated as
food, no laws to free animals in laboratories from torture and death and no
laws which grant animals the same right to be free from harm that humans
enjoy. Oreo's Law will not pass until the Law of Dominion is overturned.
The following article was posted on NIO (Negotiation is Over). It is a
call to speak out against animal abuse as sanctified by the mainstream
American religions of judaism and christianity:
Say No to Sanctified Animal Abuse
April 27, 2010 - Negotiation Is Over
The concept of 'dominion' establishes the foundation for acceptable
nonhuman animal torture that is prevalent and deeply-ingrained in society.
Religious leaders who preach compassion need to reconsider the archaic
doctrines that allow and facilitate animal torture or their theologies must
be discredited as little more than hypocritical dogma.
Dear Religious leaders of the Judeo/Christian/Islamic Tradition:
I am writing to you with the hope that you will reconsider the morality
of religious views that sanction the harming/killing of animals to benefit
man, as such a view is inhumane. While the taking of human life is a sin in
these traditions, the harming or killing of an animal is not.
The Judeo/Christian/Islamic traditions value an animal's life in relation
to human need and grant permission, that is to say, sanctify the
harming/killing of animals in the name of NECESSITY. This is a self-serving,
semantic premise based on archaic perceptions, designed to violate animal
lives, while alleging compassion. Such reasoning has been used to exploit,
dominate and abuse animals for many millennia.
Fortunately for animals this is not the only religious model for teaching compassion.The following words are from the scriptures of the Jain religion of India.
These words reflect the belief that the lives of all beings are sacred and that an animal's life has intrinsic worth, measured by its value to the animal. It is called ahimsa (no-harm) and is the fundamental principle of the Jain religion of India. In this tradition harm to any living being is to be avoided, minimized whenever possible and is viewed as gratuitous, not necessary. Furthermore Jain scriptures specifically state that it is a serious impropriety to harm another living being:
For those of us who, after personally observing, as well as studying the
evidence in research studies, have concluded that animals are capable of
suffering, of experiencing pain the position that animals may be harmed or
even killed for human benefit is untenable. Many possess a full array of
emotions such as joy, pleasure, fear, anger, jealousy and even greed; they
teach, nurture and protect their young; some mate for life and mourn the
deaths of relatives, while innumerable others provide service and
companionship to mankind.
Many of us have left our birth religions, because we have found the
tolerance and teaching of acceptable harm to animals intolerable, We view
the preaching of compassion, mercy and forgiveness by our religious leaders
as disingenuous, since it does not include the suffering of all sentient
creatures. We observe that while they recite lovely words, they also
sanctify and endorse violence to animals in the name of 'Religion'.
Others have arrived at the conclusion that their religion is incompatible
with compassion for animals and therefore no longer feel comfortable
attending religious events. Still others leave all religion and embrace
secular humanism, or seek out religions which offer a more compassionate
view of animals, while some attempt to advocate for change from within.
The model of animal compassion, with human need at its core, is based on biblical interpretations of a hierarchical scheme which grants dominion over animals to man and therefore implies that the lives of humans are more valuable. While dominion ought to imply protection and caring, because of the provision that animals may indeed be harmed/killed to benefit man, as they are unable to defend themselves, the result has been untold suffering for untold numbers of living beings, especially those designated as 'food' animals.
Compassion should be measured, not by how we treat our equals, but how we treat the vulnerable and weak among us. Despite claims of compassion, allowing only necessary violence to animals has not resulted in less suffering during the 5000 years this model has been used. Instead it has been used to justify every manner of cruelty imaginable, from ghoulish experiments which torment, maim and kill them, to terrifying deaths in slaughter houses to the killing of homeless domestic animals in the name of convenience to humans.
And while the killing of animals has been justified on the grounds that meat consumption is necessary for survival, we are now learning that it is possible to be healthy and strong while following a meat-free diet. What was once deemed 'necessary' is not, and in fact, innumerable recent studies have shown that a meat-based diet is unhealthy as well as one of the primary causes of devastation to our planet.
When such religious views of animals become part of the mainstream culture, the result is every manner of exploitation and gratuitous violence. An epidemic of such acts indicates that the youth in such cultures are prone to seeking thrills from the gratuitous abuse of animals and random acts of violence to humans. In view of such spiritual poverty one has to wonder what has gone wrong.
What then are we teaching our children that allows them to harm and kill animals for sheer pleasure? The answer lies in religious models which sanctify, endorse, and facilitate violence to animals, couched in the language of compassion which does not ring true. What does it say to young people when the number of slaughtered animals escalates during the religious holidays of these faiths Teaching young people that it is permissible to kill animals to meet a human need, is often mistakenly interpreted as a free license to harm and kill.
If the Judeo/Christian/Islamic tradition is not able to extend its circle of compassion to include animals, it will continue to become more irrelevant. The conclusion is irrefutable, as compassion for animals begins to take hold in society, religions which endorse abuse will continue the trend of diminishing membership and decline in importance.