The Honorable Lynwood W. Lewis, Jr.
P.O. Box 760
Accomac, VA 23301
Dear Senator Lewis,
On behalf of our Virginia members and supporters, we are writing to you in the hope that you would consider introducing “Maya’s Law,” a draft of which is enclosed. Maya’s Law would end the practice of killing animals in Virginia shelters when those animals have a lifesaving alternative, a practice already embraced in those shelters dedicated to saving lives. It is a common sense and compassionate approach to protecting animals’ lives and empowering those who want to save them. Such a law is not only necessary, reasonable and an effective means of preventing future tragedies such as the killing of Maya, its passage would also bring your state’s sheltering procedures more in line with the humane, progressive values of the American public…
History reveals that social progress does not occur in a steady, linear fashion. Often, the most groundbreaking change occurs in response to tragic events which throw a pervasive issue into stark relief, giving us an opportunity to define as a people what it is we stand for, as well as what it is we don’t. The decision by PETA to take and kill Maya, a beloved family pet, is one such seminal event.
Sadly, we cannot bring Maya back. And we will forever remember her killing at the hands of PETA as many things: tragic and heartbreaking, chief among them. Nothing can alter that calculus. But we can lessen the futility of Maya’s death if we learn from it, and alter our society in such a way as to prevent such a betrayal from ever happening again. Maya’s Law would accomplish this vital and important outcome, and on her behalf, on behalf of her family, and on behalf of animals and animal lovers all over the great Commonwealth of Virginia, we ask that you introduce it.
Very truly yours,
To read about the theft and killing of Maya by PETA: http://delmarvane.ws/1DCwIxQ
For a copy of Maya’s law: http://bit.ly/1zJoHDb
For a copy of the No Kill Advocacy Center petition: http://bit.ly/1zxqE5o
For a copy of the Richmond SPCA letter: http://bit.ly/1sxijIO
The theft and killing of Maya is merely the latest in a long line of untoward actions on the part of PETA which uses its status as a shelter to acquire animals for the purpose of killing them and to have access to sodium pentobarbital, the controlled substance used to poison the animals. Since the late 1990s, PETA has killed over 30,000 animals, roughly 2,000 animals a year including kittens and puppies. Learn more: http://www.whyPETAkills.org
By Nathan Winograd:
As many of you know, following the arrest of two PETA employees for the theft and killing of Maya, a family’s dog, the No Kill Advocacy Center petitioned the State Veterinarian at the Virginia Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services (VDACS) to revoke PETA’s status as a “shelter” for violations of law including larceny, state holding periods, and state regulations regarding the killing of animals in shelters: http://delmarvane.ws/1DCwIxQ
The No Kill Advocacy Center’s call for an investigation is joined by:
– The Virginia Federation of Humane Societies which writes that “PETA is ‘using’ its status as a ‘shelter’ to the great detriment of animals in the Commonwealth [of Virginia]”: http://bit.ly/ZgBzfb
– A Virginia state senator who has called for an investigation of PETA, writing that “they are worthy of intense review and scrutiny”: http://bit.ly/1uAn44m
– And many others.
Now, the Richmond SPCA adds its voice as it Stand for Maya. Read their letter to VDACS: http://bit.ly/1sxijIO
The theft and killing of Maya is merely the latest in a long line of untoward actions on the part of PETA which uses its status as a shelter to acquire animals for the purpose of killing them and to have access to sodium pentobarbital, the controlled substance used to poison the animals. Since the late 1990s, PETA has killed over 30,000 animals, roughly 2,000 animals a year including kittens and puppies.
Here is the data, self-reported by PETA to the Virginia Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services, showing roughly 9 out of 10 animals they seek out are killed by them: http://bit.ly/1ba9xdC
Here is an inspection report by the Virginia State Vet showing PETA kills 90% of animals within 24 hours without even trying to find them homes: http://bit.ly/1eHkWlD
Here is an OpEd piece written by PETA founder Ingrid Newkirk which appeared in newspapers across the country where PETA says it supports a policy that all pit bulls should be killed in all shelters in America: http://bit.ly/XrvcKf
Here is a newspaper article about the 2007 trial of PETA employees after they were found to be rounding up and killing animals in the back of a van after promising to find them homes: http://bit.ly/XCSdI3
Here is the news station report of PETA stealing a little girl’s
“happy and healthy” dog and killing him: http://bit.ly/1EIsEHq
Here is a video made by Shelby County KY shelter volunteers after PETA celebrated when that shelter announced it was going to resume killing after four years as a No Kill shelter: http://vimeo.com/48651351
Here is a letter written by PETA to a Mayor telling him to kill all pit bulls, not to foster animals, and not to work with rescue groups: http://bit.ly/ZAnrvQ
Here are photographs of animals PETA has killed: http://www.whypetaeuthanizes.org/photos/
There’s more. Much more. PETA is letting loose upon the world individuals who not only maniacally believe that killing is a good thing and that the living want to die, but who are legally armed with lethal drugs which they have already proven—29,426 times in the last decade—that they are not adverse to using.
Maya was stolen and killed by PETA despite being a “happy and healthy” and much loved dog.
Miscreants like PETA want pets to go extinct, so they claim that pets living in warm loving homes is a form of ‘cruelty’. THAT IS INSANE. It’s time that the delusional PETA, and others (HSUS) stop pretending that they have a clue as to what pets want.
Article by Nathan Winograd
I believe in the rights of animals. But I do not subscribe to some of the dogma of the animal rights movement. When it comes to living with dogs and cats, the animal rights movement gets it WRONG in promoting the view that living with dogs and cats is a violation of their rights:
– “There is simply no way to have an institution of ‘pet’ ownership that is consistent with a sound theory of animal rights.”
– “Let us allow the dog to disappear from our brick and concrete jungles—from our firesides, from the leather nooses and metal chains by which we enslave it.”
– “This selfish desire to possess animals and receive love from them causes immeasurable suffering.”
With the belief that the “solution” to all dog and cat suffering lies in the eventual end of people living with dogs and cats, 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.
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. 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.