# Animal Rights legislation and activism



## Guest (Jan 19, 2009)

FYI
We are in big trouble, folks.......

Exposed: The Secret Animal Rights Agenda Of America's Next Regulatory Czar

http://www.consumerfreedom.com/news_det ... dline/3807

Barack Obama's pick for "regulatory czar," Harvard Law School Professor Cass Sunstein, may be the incoming president's most popular appointment so far. Judging from his resume -- best-selling author, "pre-eminent legal scholar of our time," and an endorsement from The Wall Street Journal -- we can almost understand why. Almost. Because as we're telling the media today, there's one troubling portion of the new Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) Administrator's C.V. that has seems to have flown under everyone's radar: Cass Sunstein is a radical animal rights activist.

Don't believe us? Sunstein has made no secret of his devotion to the cause of establishing legal "rights" for livestock, wildlife, and pets. "[T]here should be extensive regulation of the use of animals in entertainment, scientific experiments, and agriculture," Sunstein wrote in a 2002 working paper while at the University of Chicago Law school.

"Extensive regulation of the use of animals." That's PETA-speak for using government to get everything PETA and the Humane Society of the United States can't get through gentle pressure or not-so-gentle coercion. Not exactly the kind of thing American ranchers, restaurateurs, hunters, and biomedical researchers (to say nothing of ordinary consumers) would like to hear from their next "regulatory czar."

A version of the same paper also appeared as the introduction to Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions, a 2004 book that Sunstein co-edited with then-girlfriend Martha Nussbaum. In that book, Sunstein set out an ambitious plan to give animals the legal "right" to file lawsuits. We're not joking:

"[A]nimals should be permitted to bring suit, with human beings as their representatives, to prevent violations of current law . 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."

It doesn't end there. Sunstein delivered a keynote speech at Harvard University's 2007 "Facing Animals" conference. (Click here to watch the video; his speech starts around 39:00.) Keep in mind that as OIRA Administrator, Sunstein will have the political authority to implement a massive federal government overhaul. Consider this tidbit:

"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 also argued in favor of "eliminating current practices such as greyhound racing, cosmetic testing, and meat eating, most controversially."

He concluded his Harvard speech by expressing his "more ambitious animating concern" that the current treatment of livestock and other animals should be considered "a form of unconscionable barbarity not the same as, but in many ways morally akin to, slavery and mass extermination of human beings." Sound familiar?

As the individual about to assume "the most important position that Americans know nothing about," Sunstein owes the public an honest appraisal of his animal rights goals before taking office. Will the next four years be a dream-come-true for anti-meat, anti-hunting, and anti-everything-else radicals? Time will tell. For now, meat lovers might want to stock their freezers. 
:x


----------



## Rex (Nov 30, 2008)

Thats some scary stuff. My hope is that it is so far out in left field that no one will be willing to stick their neck out to support him if he tries to push such radical ideas. Our state has been really struggling with the wolf re-introduction and I heard today that some local USFS employees believe that we will be forced to bow down to a grizzly re-introduction in the next few years as well. 

The amount of money that is spent to organize and manage a re-introduction, not to mention the resulting law suits is truly staggering.


----------



## cryptobrian (Apr 26, 2012)

Cass Sunstein is a thought provoker. Hardly a radical within the area of animal rights activism, his primary focal point is animal cruelty and the mechanisms we use to codify and prevent it. Most of his statements are not nearly as extreme as they would like you to believe when read in their original and appropriate context.

For example, it is stated that he has argued to "eliminate practices such as greyhound racing". From what I have read and can gather, this isn't a position he takes. He appears to mostly argue the point of suffering and the regulation of industries to ensure compliance. In other words, he argues that *if* the *practices* used within greyhound racing cause suffering, they should be eliminated. 

He doesn't argue against animal *use*, just takes a stance that we should define acceptable use with consideration towards animal welfare and not indifference. He allows that eating meat can fit within this paradigm, we must simply not act with cruelty. Similarly, hunting fits within this paradigm when it is not done purely for the joy of killing an animal. When some other purpose is attached, even just for animal control, he finds this acceptable. 

This guy is hardly the "PETA" radical he is being suggested to be ... he thinks critically about the treatment of life. I can't find fault in that.

Brian


----------



## Rex (Nov 30, 2008)

cryptobrian said:


> This guy is hardly the "PETA" radical he is being suggested to be ... he thinks critically about the treatment of life. I can't find fault in that.
> Brian


Brian, I sincerely hope you are right. Time will tell.


----------



## nrspence (Dec 10, 2008)

Well you know how it goes in Idaho when i comes to wolfs the three S's. Now they want to reintroduce grizzly's what a bunch of crap.


----------



## sweetgoatmama (Dec 10, 2008)

This is scary stuff and sure sounds like PETA or one of it's minions to me. People are so cut off from animals and how to live with them that they will swallow anything.

What you guys are saying is echoed by all the small animal rights activist also so it's pervasive.


----------



## Guest (Jan 22, 2009)

The implied problems I've derived from this discussion so far are A: Liberals will require thought police to monitor the politically correct premise for hunting and B: Since liberalism now rules the roost regarding law in this country Harvard educated law professors, many generations removed from the soil, from Northwestern University in Chicago no less, will be the defining authority regarding hunting and other animal oriented activities.


----------



## Guest (Jan 22, 2009)

Here it comes!
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/l ... ethru.html
:x


----------

