Posts tagged ‘Legislation’
Hey, the mainstream media say animal rights are a good thing
Yes, it’s true. Time.com has publish a piece without any snarky digs aimed at activists and vegans ridiculing their extreme views.
Author, Adam Cohen, runs down a list of legislative measures, academic programs, and even gives a shout-out to Bob Barker‘s gracious activism.
But, don’t think I’m giving Cohen all accolades. He titled the piece, Can Animal Rights Go Too Far?, then gave us one example pertaining to this:
In a world full of woe, it is hard to get too worked up about the solitary goldfish.
I suppose I should be happy this was the solitary example of taking animal rights too far (referring to a Swiss law). But, I’m not. Every life counts. We have a world full of woe because humans ignore this fact.
Supreme Court to Legalize Hate Crimes
Ok, not true, but not totally inconceivable either, considering this:
The Supreme Court has ruled that a federal statute which convicted Robert Stevens, who produced videos of pit bull dogfights, is unconstitutional- a violation of First Amendment free speech rights.
The law was originally enacted to prosecute those who produce crush videos- fetish videos of women crushing small animals with their feet. But the text of the law states,
Whoever knowingly creates, sells, or possesses a depiction of animal cruelty with the intention of placing that depiction in interstate or foreign commerce for commercial gain, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both…any visual or auditory depiction, including any photograph, motion-picture film, video recording, electronic image, or sound recording of conduct in which a living animal is intentionally maimed, mutilated, tortured, wounded, or killed, if such conduct is illegal under Federal law or the law of the State in which the creation, sale, or possession takes place…
So, Robert Stevens ran a business that sold videos of pit bull fights, which were, and still are, illegal. He’s convicted- because dog fighting is illegal and because he produced and sold videos of the illegal act on the internet for commercial gain. Stevens claimed his free speech rights were violated.
According to the Washington Post, the government believes these videos are akin to child pornography, and therefore not entitled to constitutional protection. The First Amendment does not give carte blanche to all speech. Speech which incites crime or is deemed obscene is not protected from government prosecution.
Basically, it’s illegal to engage in the act of animal cruelty, as defined by law. But it’s now perfectly legal to make, sell, and/or distribute images and other media, depicting that act of animal cruelty.
Free speech?
Sounds like the implicit legal sanction of torture and murder to me.
via washingtonpost.com & vlex.com
Israel to Ban Fur. Except, not.
Israel is not a huge fur market, for apparently, two reasons- “Jewish faith forbids undue suffering for animals,” and it’s hot in Israel.
Banning fur has the support of the majority of Israelis, but a religious exemption was sought for ultra-orthodox Jews, who wear the shtreimel- a hat of sable fur. This is known as a cultural exemption. Where have I heard this one before…. oh right, everywhere.
The legislation did not pass in the Knesset, for a very logical reason.
Shas MP Chaim Amsellem said that as ultra-orthodox men accounted for 90 per cent of the Israeli fur trade, there was no point in having a ban with a cultural exemption. They want a law that will only affect 10 per cent of the fur trade. There’s no logic in legislating a bill that doesn’t do what it’s supposed to.
I like it. Eliminate the cultural exemption and send it back through. As stated, “Jewish faith forbids undue suffering for animals,” so what’s the hold up? Make the ugly hat out of something else, already.