Vegans of Color

Because we don’t have the luxury of being single-issue

obama “cares about animal rights very much” January 25, 2008

This is probably old news to lots of folks — I’ve been trying to limit my consumption of election news, for my sanity — but the AP had a story on January 16 called “Obama Pledges Support for Animal Rights.” It’s a short article, but here is the relevant chunk:

Obama responded that he cares about animal rights very much, “not only because I have a 9-year-old and 6-year-old who want a dog.” He said he sponsored a bill to prevent horse slaughter in the Illinois state Senate and has been repeatedly endorsed by the Humane Society.

“I think how we treat our animals reflects how we treat each other,” he said. “And it’s very important that we have a president who is mindful of the cruelty that is perpetrated on animals.”

Sounds decent at first, especially considering we’ve lost Dennis Kucinich again, & Clinton has ties to corporate agriculture.

But what does Obama mean? How far is he really willing to go on behalf of animals (& on a personal level, does he eat meat or dairy)? The Humane Society is definitely an animal welfare group — as opposed to animal rights (ie. “happy meat” is okay, even though the animal still dies unnecessarily). Hm, maybe that’s what Obama means — he’s interested in supporting small farmers who slaughter sentient beings, & not large corporate factory farms. Great. Unfortunately, the “cruelty perpetrated on animals” doesn’t stop when you give them access to the outdoors & feed them grass, instead of making them cannibals… & then still kill them at the end.

(And I hope, that if his children do persuade him to add a dog to their household, that he doesn’t buy one from a pet store — & better yet, that he adopts one that already needs a home.)


8 Responses to “obama “cares about animal rights very much””

  1. A Mom Says:

    I’m a strict vegetarian mom. My kids and their dad eat meat, dairy & eggs and I shop for their food. While I agree that animal cruelty doesn’t stop when you give animals access to outdoors, etc., it is less cruel than forcing a cow to eat rendered Beef fat or turning a chicken into an egg machine. That’s why I purchase grass-fed, free range, organic fed for the family.

    It’s all just steps on the ladder. There are industrial omnivores, grass-fed/free range omnivores, lacto-ovo veggies, strict vegetarians, local food only, and so forth. I don’t eat any animal products. But, am I really doing what’s right for the earth when I eat food grown in California? Of course not. Everyone takes the steps their ready to take. So, praise him for this realization. Perhaps in the future, he’ll take the next step.

  2. vegansofcolor Says:

    The problem is, though, that “happy meat” makes people feel that eating meat is okay, so they eat more of it. There have been a ton of articles lately about this, including folks who used to be veg*n & decided that now that there was “cruelty-free” meat, it was okay to eat it. I don’t see “happy meat” as a step on the ladder towards veganism for this reason.

    Food miles is another important issue, of course.

  3. Cia Says:

    There will NEVER be anything such as happy meat, it is a psychological feel good paridigm. Just as you would resist to offer your flesh for food, do animals the same, they run for dear life itself, and at the slaughterhouse there is nothing peaceful or happy about it, when these animals are forced through electric prodding to enter, b/c they smell the blood and hear (the silent to humans) groans.

  4. warwak Says:

    Even Barack Obama commented on the Agriprocessors ethical black hole on a campaign stop in Davenport, IA, remarking, “They have kids in there wielding buzz saws and cleavers. It’s ridiculous.”

  5. warwak Says:

    Happy meat my ass! Nothing “happy” about murder! No matter what anyone argues, schools feeding unsuspecting children the corpses of once living beings and promoting breast milk–complete with its blood, puss, and hormones–stolen from confined, drugged, and tortured creatures as normal and healthy beyond infancy is a socially, mentally, spiritually, and ecologically damaging, unnecessary crime against humanity.

  6. Noemi M Says:

    warwak, I don’t know how well your shock value comments would convince the principal at my kids school that meat is bad for them.

  7. Kelly Says:

    What’s shocking about Warwak’s comments? It’s just the truth. I never understand why people think vegans are radical when they narrate what happens on factory farms, and yet, no one calls agribusinnes radical for torturing and slaughtering 10 billion animals a year. What’s shocking and grotesque to me are the McDonald’s and Bruger King ads that brainswash people into believing that murder for taste buds is normal and natural. Agribusiness is well aware that if the common consumer knew what really happened in factory farms and slaughterhouses, most people would stop eating meat immediately. So, they’ll do eveyrthing o conceal it–that’s shocking.

  8. warwak Says:

    Corpse-munching is a dangerous activity. Margaret Mead wrote, “One of the most dangerous things that can happen to a child is to kill or torture an animal and get away with it”. Getting away with murder is a terrible thing in itself, rewarding children with happy meat and father and son “traditional” hunting trips is a crime against humanity. Obama guilty as charged.

    Hunters, farmers, and corpse-munching presidents are really just grown-up boys getting away with murder. These bad men are immature selfish little boys who have acquired the power to prevent reason from taking away their toys. Yes, I am talking about you Barack Obama. You are a very bad boy. The worst of the lot.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s