There is no place for reality in the world of the animal rights loons. Trust me; I'm the guy who wrote the book on them, now sadly outdated. While I was engaged heavily in researching that book, I engaged a lot of live animal rights loonies in their natural habitat, Usenet. (Remember Usenet? I miss Usenet.) They do not acknowledge biology or any of the other life sciences, except when they can cherry-pick something that supports their cause.
They sound a lot like climate scolds in that respect, don't they?
Of course, a real disaster is likely to occur if one of these people ever gets hold of, you know, an actual animal. These are the people who have scrawny, sickly "vegan" cats, after all. Case in point: An animal rights loon in Dorset, in the United Kingdom, stole a sheep and nearly killed it through incompetence.
A vegan activist who stole a lamb from a farm and almost killed it with her botched attempts to hand-rear it has been banned from owning sheep.
Louise Murguia, 49, kidnapped the animal from a field because she thought it was injured and in distress and she could take better care of it.
She took it home where she shampooed it to remove the identifying number on its fleece and fed it cow’s milk and a formula feed she bought from Amazon.
The animal was confined in her house for three weeks before police attended the property and found it was malnourished.
A vegan activist. Of course, she was.
She later told police she had taken the lamb because it appeared to have a broken leg and she thought it wouldn’t survive the night.
But she did not seek medical treatment for it and simply made a splint for its leg herself.
When it was recovered by police, the stolen lamb weighed just 5.8kg, while the other lamb that was hand-reared by the Ludwell family was 9.95kg.
Louise Murguia may describe herself as a "vegan activist," but what she is is a thief, a self-righteous nitwit, and an ignoramus of the first water.
See Also: PETA to Kick Off National Tour to Harass People Into Avoiding Turkey on Thanksgiving
PETA’s Latest Groundhog Day Demand Leaves People Asking If They're for Real
One of the things I noticed while engaging with these people online and, at times, in person - a few live debates and a fair amount of talk radio, from 1999 to about 2003 - was that the animal rights loons all shared four personality traits. The percentage of the four traits varied from person to person, but all four were always present. Those traits are misplaced compassion, denial, intellectual laziness, and arrogance. Here are some details of each and how they relate to the animal rights loons:
Misplaced compassion: Advocates of "animal rights" claim a moral high ground in animal issues. They claim that they really, really care about animals. They care much more about animals than you do. They care so much that they claim the ultimate moral authority in deciding what is compassionate and what is not. Non-vegan, non-animal rights loons have no say, in their minds.
Denial: This is the most common trait among animal rights loons. Denial is necessary to maintain the viewpoint, as science, research, public opinion, and common sense all point you in the opposite direction.
Intellectual laziness: Their ideology is based not on fact but emotion. Proponents of the animal rights agenda have the same information available to them as anyone else, from scientific journals to encyclopedias; they just tend to ignore information that doesn’t concur with their emotional rhetoric. Information is readily available, for example, on the benefits that medical science has obtained through animal research. Animal rights loons won’t bother to look at it. The animal rights groups already have their attention, with lurid, easily digested fact sheets proclaiming the evils of vivisection.
Arrogance: This is the character trait that motivates the legislative agenda pursued by animal rights nuts. Since they care about animals so much more than you do, they see themselves as having the moral high ground in deciding public policy. After all, you’re just a vivisector (medical researcher), a murderer of helpless, innocent animals (hunter), a slaveholder (pet owner), or something else as bad, if not worse. Who are you to argue with someone so compassionate?
And boy howdy, Louise Murguia is just the perfect example. She stole someone's property. That's arrogance. She almost killed an animal through incompetence. That's misplaced compassion and denial. She couldn't be arsed to take the animal to a vet or see that it was treated properly. That's intellectual laziness. And then, she defends herself by proclaiming that she "loves and respects animals." More denial, more intellectual laziness.
The lamb's proper owner, when the animal was returned to him, was not happy.
Mr Ludwell said in his victim impact statement: “I was relieved it was alive, but shocked by its poor condition – it’s [sic] sibling was nearly double the size and it could barely stand.
“It took over a week of intensive medical care to ensure the lamb’s survival and a significant amount of money and time.
“The entire ordeal has left me angry – stealing a lamb under the guise of welfare only to keep it in solitary confinement.”
There you have it, folks. The animal rights movement in a nutshell.
