In the final analysis, the last line of defense in support of freedom and the Constitution consists of the people themselves. If the people want to be free, if they want to lift themselves out from underneath a state apparatus that threatens their liberties, squanders their resources on needless wars, destroys the value of their dollar, and spews forth endless propaganda about how indispensable it is and how lost we would all be without it, there is no force that can stop them. The time has come to act on these words. May future generations look back on our work and say that these were men and women who, in a moment of great crisis, stood up to the politicians, the opinion-molders, and the establishment, and saved their country.
- Congressman Ron E. Paul, 2008.
Comments
Refreshing, delightful, informative
Dispassionate and highly useful discussion. If one assumes that every major sector of this economy is as agriculture described here, the kernel of this nation is preserved. But, lest everyone now therefore disarm and disengage, we would do well to cherish the proselytizing activist and the open forum. Dr. Curtis points out that very recently the agriculture industry is addressing inhumane animal treatment. Flatly, this is now happening because of , not in spite of, activists such as those cited in Rolling Stone.
Hollow Argument Reveals Weakness of Model
Inhumanity to Sentient Animals Has No Place to Hide.
Inhumane Treatment of Animals breaks into 3 categories, according to Dr. Curtis. 1) Abuse (whipping, hurting), 2) Neglect (failure to address important needs e.g. food, shelter, sickness, etc.), 3) Failure to address emotional needs eg. fear, etc.
Categories 1 and 2 are universally resolved to be completely UNACCEPTABLE treatment of animals.
But the discussion turns a dead ear to Catagory 3, ostensibly on the basis of the inability to measure, to quantify emotions of animals. Dr. Curtis readily embraces the hypothesis that psycological/emotional needs of animals, including humans (Homo sapeins sapeins), cannot be measured. On this basis he exempts Catagory 3 type of inhumane treatment of animals.
Then it follows according to Dr. Curtis own argument, that Inhumane treatment of humans is acceptable, so long as it is of the Category 3 type.
But we know this to be false. Our own Declaration of Independence, in no uncertain terms, identifies rights, inalienable rights in the pursuit of happiness.
Humans do not escape the yoke of responsibility in treatment of animals just because such treatment can be shielded as Category 3.
Either the basic three category model is fatally flawed, or Inhumane psychological/emotional treatment of humans (extortion,intimidation, terrorizing, etc.) is acceptable.