Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘fur’

Designer Karl Lagerfeld recently attempted to defend his use of fur in his clothing lines.  What was his brilliant argument, you might be wondering?  “In a meat-eating world, wearing leather for shoes and clothes and even handbags, the discussion of fur is childish” and that hunters are only “killing those beasts who would kill us if they could.”  Um….because bunnies and minks are violent human killers!  VIOLENT, I tell you!  I mean, look at these things:

I, for one, am terrified just looking at this picture.  Those eyes are saying “I’m gonna eat you, human!”

Oh wait a minute, they’re not??  Weird. Because if Karl Lagerfeld, an animal behavior expert idiot, says they would, then surely they would, right??

This argument is one of the most irritating I hear from people who try to justify eating, wearing or hunting animals.  The animals we use for our own purposes are generally the most docile animals there are – not to mention the fact that the majority of them don’t even eat meat themselves (rabbits, deer, cows, for example).  Those who do only do so for survival, whereas humans (in general) can easily survive without using animals for food or clothing.

And newsflash to Mr. Lagerfeld: most fur these days isn’t hunted – it’s raised in factory fur farms where the animals (often dogs and cats) are skinned alive.  Maybe he should watch this video so he can see where the fur he’s using actually comes from (note: the video is very disturbing).

Read Full Post »

Our political leaders have a profound effect on how animals are treated in this country. They enact – or fail to enact, in many cases – laws regarding the treatment of wildlife, companion animals, and “food” animals. The U.S. is regrettably behind the times when it comes to many of these issues, and it seems to me that this is most noticeable in how animals used for food are treated. For example, in Western Europe, non-cage egg production has reached 35%, while it comprises a more modest 4% of all U.S. production. The EU will, by law, be entirely cage free by 2012.

Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin is a complete disaster for animals, and electing her to be our next vice president would be a colassal mistake.  Palin has a horrific record when it comes to animal rights – just look at this picture of her sporting fur and you get a peek into her regard for the lives of non-human animals.

In order to boost populations of moose and caribou for trophy hunting, Palin has tried to pass legislation that would make it easier for state officials to gun down wolves and bears from helicopters.  Palin denies that polar bears are a threatened species and went as far as filing a lawsuit to reverse the Bush Administration’s decision to add them to the Endangered Species list.

In her short time as a politician, Palin has clearly demonstrated that her interests are in no way aligned with those of animal rights advocates.  As a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association, and a staunch conservative with no regard for the lives of animals, the thought of her being one step away from the presidency should the Republican party stay in power is terrifying to me, as it should be to any animal advocate.  Given her record on wildlife issues, I can’t imagine her supporting any legislation that would positively impact the lives of those animals who are most oppressed: “food” animals.  We cannot afford to go backwards on these issues, and electing her would undoubtedly hinder any progress toward creating better lives for our farmed friends.

For more information on how politicians nationally and locally have voted on animal welfare issues, check out the Humane Society’s Humane Scorecard.

Read Full Post »