Follow SiameseCatTwins4Ever on WordPress.com

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Follow on Twitter

Choice

YesBiscuit!

The killing of friendly, healthy/treatable pets in animal shelters is a matter of choice.  Every community’s shelter chooses whether to stick with last century’s “catch and kill” philosophy or embrace this century’s No Kill Equation.  By choosing to cling to outdated ideas and debunked myths such as “pet overpopulation” and “killing is a kindness”, shelters doom the pets in their care to needless death.

While the transition to no kill may be more challenging for some than for others, it is the only ethical choice.  Sheltering, by definition, requires that pets be protected from those who would harm them.  And killing is harm.

The long standing practice of excusing the killing of healthy/treatable shelter pets takes a few common forms.  Blaming the “irresponsible public” for “forcing” shelter workers to kill friendly pets is probably the most well known.  While I absolutely agree that there are some irresponsible pet owners…

View original post 371 more words

Advertisements

Are You Enabling the Needless Killing of Shelter Pets?

YesBiscuit!

Our battle for a No Kill nation is not against the public. It is against the cowards of our movement who refuse to stand up to their colleagues and friends running shelters that are mired in the failed and defunct philosophies that allow (indeed, cause) killing. Our battle is against those who claim to be part of our movement but fail to recognize the killing of millions of animals every year as an unnecessary and cruel slaughter and to call it what it is. It is against those who will not do for the animals that thing which is their solemn duty to do: to change themselves and to demand that their colleagues change, when that is what the situation calls for.Nathan Winograd

Rescuers who pull animals from a shelter in order to save them while remaining silent about the needless killing of healthy/treatable pets there are enabling…

View original post 518 more words


The Prevalence of Kill Shelter Speak in Media

YesBiscuit!

Both national and local media have historically done a poor job reporting on pet related stories.  While sensational stories about animal hoarding, puppy mills and cruelty frequently attract media attention, journalists working for national outlets often rely on soundbites from groups like HSUS, ASPCA, and PETA – all of whom have sketchy records when it comes to actually saving pets’ lives.  In the case of PETA for example, the group saves such a tiny percentage of the pets it records as being taken into its “shelter”, the state of VA reconsidered its shelter license in 2010.  The PETA “shelter” is little more than a pet slaughterhouse and the state of Virginia’s records prove it.  Members of the national media however are quick to ring PETA for comment when reporting on a pet related story, never apparently researching as to whether the group’s record actually reflects “ethical treatment” for pets.

View original post 853 more words


If You Care About Animals, You Won’t Support PeTA

Please Stop Funding PeTA's Mass murder Of Us!

Please Stop Funding PeTA’s Mass Murder Of Us!

When you read the following quote, keep in mind, that it was spoken by Ingrid Newkirk’s (Head of the pet murdering PeTA) Mentor.
When he says “we”, he means Himself and Ingrid Newkirk:

“We are not especially ‘interested in’ animals. Neither of us had ever been inordinately fond of dogs, cats, or horses in the way that many people are. We didn’t ‘love’ animals.” – Peter Singer, acknowledged founder of the animal rights movement.

Thus, the question, “Does PeTA love animals?” can be definitively answered with a resounding “No”.

This, taken with what Newkirk herself wrote (see below), really makes PeTA’s demented cult, a group who true animal lovers wont support, if these animal lovers are of sound mind and loving soul.

Newkirk wrote, “We don’t believe in ‘Right To Life’ for Animals”.

To summarize:

1. PeTA doesn’t love animals.

2. PeTA doesn’t believe that animals have a right to live.

Which begs the question, WHY on Earth would any genuine animal lover support a group who doesn’t love animals, and who doesn’t believe that animals have a right to live?

That would be the equivalent of the NAACP donating to the KKK!!

The KKK doesn’t love African Americans.
The KKK doesn’t believe that African Americans have a right to live.

Let’s wake up and SNAP OUT OF IT!

What PeTA *says* they “stand for” don’t mean poop.

Words are irrelevant….one’s true nature can be determined by their actions, and seeing as how PeTA kills over 95% of HEALTHY, TREATABLE animals on average, PeTA backs up their non love for animals, and non belief in the right to life for animals, with their lethal actions.

It is time to make PeTA’s murderous, deceitful, cultist, and speciesist actions obsolete, and this can be done by NO LONGER SUPPORTING the frauds in PeTA!

I’m not telling anyone what to do, but understand this: If, after reading this, you STILL support PeTA, then you are a disgraceful excuse for an animal advocate.

292227_4143961523879_241480026_n


An Open Request For Help, By Our Pets

SiameseCatTwins4Ever

Dear Pet Lovers of America and The World Over,

  In an ethically challenged, mentally corrupted and spiritually polluted world such as this one, where there are actually so called “animal lovers” murdering us “for our own good” (Don’t believe that lie..we enjoy life, and have a right to it, equally as much as you) and other so called “animal lovers” actually SUPPORTING our killers, rather than US, the animals who they *claim* to “love”, we need YOU, to come to our AID.

We are in grave danger, and the only hope the killers have of continuing to get away with murdering us, is their hope that you will be one of the apathy stricken, gullible, ethically challenged, mentally corrupted and spiritually polluted lost souls who excuse, ignore or otherwise tolerate the mass murder of us, in places who are pathetic, and audacious enough to call themselves “shelters”.

TRUE animal…

View original post 176 more words


The Three ‘Great’ Prejudices

SiameseCatTwins4Ever

The arrogant, ignorant, speciesist, and incorrect ASSumption by many members of the human animal species, that we are somehow “better” or “more important” than our fellow animals is pure bullpoop, shoveled down from generation to generation, from the time we first created fire and danced around it in excitement to present day, when we get excited and dance around amateur fireworks on the 4th of July. This myth (humans are ‘supreme’) has been brainwashing our species since religious texts were written by mortal, speciesist humans. From the moment the doctor spanks our patootie and sends us home, we are spoonfed this same human ignorance, arrogance, speciesism, etc. That such a myth is a…..well….myth, doesnt seem to penetrate us egotistical (the egotism stems from insecurity..feeling little? Make yourself BIGGER than you actually are…..embrace delusions of grandeur) boneheads in the human race.

Fact: Animals, like the human animal, are living, breathing, thinking…

View original post 849 more words


World Vegan Summit: “Save Pigs and Chickens, But Murder Cats and Dogs in Shelters Until They Go Extinct”

Troubling, disgraceful, intolerable:

By Nathan Winograd

How to Get Uninvited to the World Vegan Summit: Oppose the Extinction of Dogs & Cats

Several days ago, I posted that the animal rights movement may be turning a corner, as I was asked to speak at two animal rights conferences. As many of you may be aware, the animal rights movement has historically either maligned or ignored the No Kill movement, and with it, turned a blind eye to the systematic slaughter of millions of homeless dogs and cats every year. I especially hoped that one of those conferences—the World Vegan Summit —would provide a forum for those voices that have been historically silenced within the animal rights movement—voices such as my own—for being critical of those in positions of power and the policies they pursue that cause animals to suffer and be killed. In fact, some of the other speakers who will be at that conference have also criticized the movement for being top-heavy, prone to censorship, intolerant of dissent, threatened by change, and dismissive of the grassroots. Tragically, my enthusiasm was short-lived. That is because almost as quickly as I was asked to speak, I was promptly uninvited. Why? Because they took offense at a statement I made on my Facebook page.

In posting that I was invited to the conference, I said I was going to challenge the animal rights position promoted by some that living with dogs and cats is a violation of their rights and we should forcibly make them go extinct “for their own good.” With the belief that the “solution” to all dog and cat suffering lies solely in the eventual annihilation of their species, the animal rights movement not only preaches a view that the lives of dogs and cats are dispensable, their loss and deliberate elimination of no moral consequence, their disappearance from our planet no tragedy to mourn, it embraces an agenda which no other rights-based movement in history has ever subscribed to: the deliberate extinction of those it has pledged to protect. We do not further the cause of animal rights by promoting a double standard between humans and non-humans. After all, the idea that we should do to animals that which we would never propose to do to humans—in this case, seek the willful extinction of a particular group of humans—is the double standard that is to blame for so much suffering and killing of non-humans. Instead, we teach respect, we teach kindness, we teach compassion, and then we work to ensure the collective obedience to those values through legal rights, a prescription for change which every other social justice movement that has come before ours has used and used successfully.

I called such a view “arrogant” and “muddled” in its thinking. It apparently hit a nerve so raw with the sponsors of the World Vegan Summit that I was promptly uninvited. They are free to criticize the movement and do it without apology and in the strongest possible terms, but apparently no one else is. “Thanks for your understanding,” read the last line of the email uninviting me. To which 20 years of this very same treatment at the hands of the very people they themselves criticize for such conduct left me with only one possible response: “Oh believe me, I do understand.”

Interspecies relationships in the world are not rare and they are relationships that humans generally celebrate as evidence of the interconnectedness and beauty of life on Earth. But to those who are supposed to be the standard bearers of our relationships with animals— “leaders” of the animal rights movement—such relationships are “unnatural” and therefore “bad” when one of the parties is a human being. The proposed solution? Eliminate cats and dogs from the Earth by pursuing their willful extinction.