A Harvard Professor,Cass Sunstein and Obama's candidate pick for Office of Information and Regulation believes that "animals should be permitted to bring suit, with human beings as their representatives, to prevent violations of current law.”
Sen. Chambliss (R.,Ga.)has opposed his candidacy believing that his far left views could lead to farmers needing to defend themselves in court against a suit filed on behalf of his chickens or pigs.
Now,I am all for cracking down on animal cruelty,however,I feel that "What's good for the Goose,is good for the Gander". In other words I am fine with us heading in this direction so long as the rules apply across the board; in other words,I would like to see fetuses have the right to sue on behalf of a human representative as well. (I know,I know...the sleeping Giant of Politics,the biggest taboo discussion of all right?) Well,the truth is I am not here to appease the masses,I am here to speak my solid,blunt opinion,albeit,I'll do my best to do it in a respectful manner.
So my question is,why do some seem to be so eager to support animal rights but not a fetuses...where they not a fetus once themselves? Is a fetus not alive?
This issue hits close to home with me for, I'll admit,some very personal reasons and experiences. But I would just like to open thought to why some murderers of human beings await their death on death row, while others run free? Is it because the life is smaller and therefore has less value?
I am positive I will get some very fired up comments on this one,but that's okay, we are awakening a sleeping giant. I believe everyone ought to have their right to express their point of view,so fire away... What do you think on this issue? Do you believe animals ought to have the right to sue or is it ridiculous? Do you think fetuses ought to have the right to sue as well?
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Who has the right to Sue? Warning: This blog is not for the controversially faint of heart!
Posted by Unknown at 5:48 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
That is a very good question. It is a funny thought that people care more about what their chicken thinks and feels, than what a developing baby inside the womb may think of feel, or even have the right to. The baby-in-process was created, and so why should the mother think she can get out of having a baby, when it was her fault for getting pregnant? I really have two separate opinions on the matter of abortion. On the one hand, if a woman becomes pregnant from getting raped, I support her having an abortion. The psychological problems of that mother are more devastating and unfair to her, than the potential baby. On the other hand, I think of teenagers who get pregnant, from stupidity. I don't think they, or anyone else, can use abortion for their contraception method. In this case I believe the baby has the right to be born, and should have a human defendant. Human life is more important than a chicken or pigs life. (I mean in general- I do not support animal cruelty, but I do support the fact that they are food.) If these people are so concerned about animals, why are we not concerned about a fetus, which is also an animal. Abortion is cruel to the baby, which is alive. Just because we are blinded from seeing the baby because it is inside another person, does not mean he or she does not exist. A Fetus should have more rights than animals, and should also have representation.
Animals have representation? What are the crazy extremists going to think of next!? While they are at it they might want to have someone represent the ozone too and sue the polluters. I think that this is completely ridiculous. I agree that animal cruelty is not right, and we can have laws against it and enforce them. Where is the money they win in a suit going to go? To the lawyer who decided it would be fun to draw a case? Or are we going to put that pig in a piggy mansion the rest of their life. I think that it is a stupid idea to do this. I too feel if anyone deserves protection, rights, and the ability to sue it is fetuses. They are living and growing and often killed right at/before birth. Contraception literal means to prevent the fertilization of ovum by sperm cells. Abortion is not a way of preventing conception; it is a way of preventing birth. Unfortunately, it is too late for controlling conception. People need to be more responsible for themselves and other human beings. Unfortunately as time goes on the world becomes more “fix the problem” instead of “prevent the problem.” Children should be taught in school to refrain from sex before marriage. Isn’t that the best birth control? Instead they are taught how to have “safe” sex. 100 years ago it was good practice and common for people to be virgins at marriage. Now if you are a virgin at marriage, people think there is something wrong with you. I think that abortion is completely the wrong way to keep from having children. We must learn to be responsible. The same problem with the economy: if people were more responsible the “credit crunch” wouldn’t be so bad. Granted, there are exceptions. Women who are raped may not be able to emotionally and mentally cope with having a baby. These situations require greater attention.
I think that Obama and many of his radical friends need to either get out of office or change their views before they ruin our society. These leaders are just that, leaders. Many people follow them and they need to be the example. Just like during Bill Clinton’s presidency, “Oral is Moral” became extremely popular. These types of things are harmful for society. Our leaders need to consider the effects they will have on society and not make bad decisions.
Post a Comment