This is one of the most bizarre and creepy things I have seen in months. PETA is trumpeting the arrival of a new kind of cheese. It is a cheese that does not involve animal dairy products. It is breast milk cheese. Luckily, this is only being done in one restaurant in New York. However, it strikes me as degrading, in light of my unshakeable belief in human exceptionalism. Mother's milk is meant for the nourishment of human infants. Shouldn't that be intuitive enough for most people?
Also, as far as sheer social niceties are concerned, can you imagine the social awkwardness and relational complications of eating something made from an adult woman's breast milk? Sorry, Katie, your stuff is okay, but I prefer the Brie. It could get awkward.
I despise PETA, and always have. Their radicalism is frightening. I would be more amenable to hearing about why KFC is evil for abusing its chickens if the people telling me about the abuse weren't a bunch of bullying, psychotic, left-wing nutjobs.
It's no secret that this group has done unsavory things. They handed out comic books to kids that proclaim Your Mommy Kills Animals. How low is that? And for a group that promotes animal rights, they sure kill a lot of animals. PETA admits to putting down critters on this awesome website, aptly titled PETA Kills Animals.
Additionally, PETA's highly sexualized ad campaigns have done more to degrade gullible, attractive women than they have to win over people's minds to the animal rights cause. When I look at PETA's materials, all I see are naked girls in cages and on billboards. Forgive me for not getting past that imagery. One recent stunt, involving a naked pregnant girl in a cage on Mother's Day, ranks as one of the least tasteful things since dead-animal jewelry hit the market.
My take: animals are made out of meat. Meat has been incredibly useful to human society. How we treat animals does say something about our own humanity (those kids who post themselves burning bunny-rabbits on YouTube are worthless hoodlums). However, animals in and of themselves do not share in our humanity. We ought to treat other creatures well because of our own dignity, not theirs.
Showing posts with label social issues. Show all posts
Showing posts with label social issues. Show all posts
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Harry Reid Painting With Broad Strokes: "Unemployed Men Are Abusive"
That wondrous assclown Senator Harry Reid of Nevada has struck again.
"Women don't have jobs either, but women aren’t abusive, most of the time," he said. "Men, when they're out of work, tend to become abusive," the majority leader added. "Our domestic crisis shelters in Nevada are jammed.”
Allow me to dissect this. First, Reid is making a tremendously broad generalization. Second, he is weakening himself along moderate voters by sounding like a paranoid feminist. Third, his comments make the state of Nevada look like a miserable place to live. If you were a senator, would you loudly proclaim that your state's domestic crisis shelters are "full" and that its unemployed men are a pack of abusive bastards!?
Why do politicians say things that are patently untrue, and make up false premises in order to serve their agendas? It is supremely insulting to those of us who actually know what is going on. We have let far too many senators, congressmen, and executive officials get away with this nonsense.
(Digression: NARAL, Planned Parenthood, and other similar organizations are likely cheering all of this alleged abuse, as it gives them a fresh swath of moral high ground on which they can pontificate about the evils of masculinity. Nothing makes feminist, pro-choice Nazis happier than crimes against women. I am willing to bet that they start using Reid's false statements in their promotional/PR materials.)
"Women don't have jobs either, but women aren’t abusive, most of the time," he said. "Men, when they're out of work, tend to become abusive," the majority leader added. "Our domestic crisis shelters in Nevada are jammed.”
Allow me to dissect this. First, Reid is making a tremendously broad generalization. Second, he is weakening himself along moderate voters by sounding like a paranoid feminist. Third, his comments make the state of Nevada look like a miserable place to live. If you were a senator, would you loudly proclaim that your state's domestic crisis shelters are "full" and that its unemployed men are a pack of abusive bastards!?
Why do politicians say things that are patently untrue, and make up false premises in order to serve their agendas? It is supremely insulting to those of us who actually know what is going on. We have let far too many senators, congressmen, and executive officials get away with this nonsense.
(Digression: NARAL, Planned Parenthood, and other similar organizations are likely cheering all of this alleged abuse, as it gives them a fresh swath of moral high ground on which they can pontificate about the evils of masculinity. Nothing makes feminist, pro-choice Nazis happier than crimes against women. I am willing to bet that they start using Reid's false statements in their promotional/PR materials.)
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Prayers and Support for Haiti
Our thoughts and prayers are with those affected by the disastrous earthquake in Haiti, where unknown thousands of people are hurt or dead. This is truly a catastrophic event. As the world mobilizes to lend aid to the suffering, we should find reputable charities and venues through which we can donate relief funds.
We should remember that as much as we complain about recessions, stock market problems, and other fiscal woes, there are some who have it worse than we do. Haiti is a destitute country that has never had any real social or economic infrastructure, and the strife caused by this earthquake can be multiplied tenfold as a result. There were no building codes, no speedy 911 services, no reserves of supplies and money at hand just in case. We live like kings in comparison.
We should remember that as much as we complain about recessions, stock market problems, and other fiscal woes, there are some who have it worse than we do. Haiti is a destitute country that has never had any real social or economic infrastructure, and the strife caused by this earthquake can be multiplied tenfold as a result. There were no building codes, no speedy 911 services, no reserves of supplies and money at hand just in case. We live like kings in comparison.
Labels:
charity,
disaster relief,
economics,
Haiti,
Haiti Earthquake,
poverty,
social issues
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Coming Soon to the Western World: Chinese Reproductive Policy
According to the Canadian Financial Post's Diance Francis, the whole world ought to adopt China's one-child policy, due to our problems with overpopulation.
That anyone in the western world would seek to impose the Chinese government's brutal, totalitarian reproductive policy on anyone else is frightening. A couple's freedom to have more than one child is so basic and essentially sacred that only a complete left-wing fanatic could suggest this.
One imagines a white-washed office, staffed by people rehearsed in Pelosian talking points, with posters on the wall that boast sweet, politically-correct nothings like "Strength Through Selectivity", "Healthy Communities Now", and "Family Wellness Planning: Your Right". At bulletproof teller windows, smiling government bureaucrats will hand out reproductive licenses, process applications for babymaking, and so on. Behind the partition, a phone bank is set up, to which good citizens can call and report "unauthorized reproductive activity" to some DSS-style social workers who will promptly dispatch the offenders to punitive sterilization clinics (though these will be given some kind of nice, friendly-sounding name, like "Family Service Centers", or something). Illicit children? They can be retroactively aborted, of course.
Does this sound good to you, Ms. Francis?
Of course, if you call a communist a communist, outrage and whining ensue. Diane Francis, and those like her, are always the first to complain when their communist ideas earn them the accompanying monikers from all the mean, freedom-loving people who disagree with them. Yet what other adjectives can you ascribe to this stuff? It's the wishful thinking of the Obama age. The government should control everything, yes, even the number of children you have.
Sadly, I wouldn't put it past certain elements among the U.S. left to try to consolidate this kind of power with the federal government. They despise the family unit, and they value massive government intrusion on social matters, as the recent healthcare debacle shows.
I actually find it hard to muster much more of a rebuttal to the article in question, beyond my acute anger and disgust that such garbage is even published anywhere west of Beijing. Arguing with the devil is not difficult, but it is tiring. Francis' proposition is so blatantly opposed to the precepts of a free society, so brutish, so narrow-minded, so Orwellian, that picking it apart further would seem unneccesary.
If anyone does agree with this crap: please move to Canada. You will find plenty of other socialist morons that feel the same way, and you can set up whatever sort of reproductive police state you like. Hopefully, we'll still be here to laugh at you when your society has withered and failed.
That anyone in the western world would seek to impose the Chinese government's brutal, totalitarian reproductive policy on anyone else is frightening. A couple's freedom to have more than one child is so basic and essentially sacred that only a complete left-wing fanatic could suggest this.
One imagines a white-washed office, staffed by people rehearsed in Pelosian talking points, with posters on the wall that boast sweet, politically-correct nothings like "Strength Through Selectivity", "Healthy Communities Now", and "Family Wellness Planning: Your Right". At bulletproof teller windows, smiling government bureaucrats will hand out reproductive licenses, process applications for babymaking, and so on. Behind the partition, a phone bank is set up, to which good citizens can call and report "unauthorized reproductive activity" to some DSS-style social workers who will promptly dispatch the offenders to punitive sterilization clinics (though these will be given some kind of nice, friendly-sounding name, like "Family Service Centers", or something). Illicit children? They can be retroactively aborted, of course.
Does this sound good to you, Ms. Francis?
Of course, if you call a communist a communist, outrage and whining ensue. Diane Francis, and those like her, are always the first to complain when their communist ideas earn them the accompanying monikers from all the mean, freedom-loving people who disagree with them. Yet what other adjectives can you ascribe to this stuff? It's the wishful thinking of the Obama age. The government should control everything, yes, even the number of children you have.
Sadly, I wouldn't put it past certain elements among the U.S. left to try to consolidate this kind of power with the federal government. They despise the family unit, and they value massive government intrusion on social matters, as the recent healthcare debacle shows.
I actually find it hard to muster much more of a rebuttal to the article in question, beyond my acute anger and disgust that such garbage is even published anywhere west of Beijing. Arguing with the devil is not difficult, but it is tiring. Francis' proposition is so blatantly opposed to the precepts of a free society, so brutish, so narrow-minded, so Orwellian, that picking it apart further would seem unneccesary.
If anyone does agree with this crap: please move to Canada. You will find plenty of other socialist morons that feel the same way, and you can set up whatever sort of reproductive police state you like. Hopefully, we'll still be here to laugh at you when your society has withered and failed.
Labels:
abortion,
Canada,
China,
communism,
liberalism,
reproductive rights,
social issues,
totalitarianism
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)