Friday, January 16, 2009

Attention Hunters, Meat Eaters, and anyone who doesn't want their dog to sue them!


This is a very scary Obama pick for "regulatory czar" as reported by the Center for Consumer Freedom:

Exposed: The Secret Animal Rights Agenda Of America’s Next Regulatory Czar

January 15, 2009


Barack Obama’s pick for “regulatory czar,” Harvard Law School Professor Cass Sunstein, may be the incoming president’s most popular appointment so far. Judging from his resume -- best-selling author, “pre-eminent legal scholar of our time,” and an endorsement from The Wall Street Journal -- we can almost understand why. Almost. Because as we’re telling the media today, there’s one troubling portion of the new Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) Administrator’s C.V. that has seems to have flown under everyone’s radar: Cass Sunstein is a radical animal rights activist.Don’t believe us? Sunstein has made no secret of his devotion to the cause of establishing legal “rights” for livestock, wildlife, and pets. “[T]here should be extensive regulation of the use of animals in entertainment, scientific experiments, and agriculture,” Sunstein wrote in a 2002 working paper while at the University of Chicago Law school. “Extensive regulation of the use of animals.” That's PETA-speak for using government to get everything PETA and the Humane Society of the United States can't get through gentle pressure or not-so-gentle coercion. Not exactly the kind of thing American ranchers, restaurateurs, hunters, and biomedical researchers (to say nothing of ordinary consumers) would like to hear from their next “regulatory czar.”A version of the same paper also appeared as the introduction to Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions, a 2004 book that Sunstein co-edited with then-girlfriend Martha Nussbaum. In that book, Sunstein set out an ambitious plan to give animals the legal “right” to file lawsuits. We're not joking:
“[A]nimals should be permitted to bring suit, with human beings as their representatives, to prevent violations of current law … Any animals that are entitled to bring suit would be represented by (human) counsel, who would owe guardian like obligations and make decisions, subject to those obligations, on their clients’ behalf.”


It doesn't end there. Sunstein delivered a keynote speech at Harvard University’s 2007 “Facing Animals” conference. (Click here to watch the video; his speech starts around 39:00.) Keep in mind that as OIRA Administrator, Sunstein will have the political authority to implement a massive federal government overhaul. Consider this tidbit:


“We ought to ban hunting, I suggest, if there isn’t a purpose other than sport and fun. That should be against the law. It’s time now.”


Sunstein also argued in favor of “eliminating current practices such as greyhound racing, cosmetic testing, and meat eating, most controversially.” He concluded his Harvard speech by expressing his “more ambitious animating concern” that the current treatment of livestock and other animals should be considered “a form of unconscionable barbarity not the same as, but in many ways morally akin to, slavery and mass extermination of human beings.” Sound familiar?As the individual about to assume “the most important position that Americans know nothing about,” Sunstein owes the public an honest appraisal of his animal rights goals before taking office. Will the next four years be a dream-come-true for anti-meat, anti-hunting, and anti-everything-else radicals? Time will tell. For now, meat lovers might want to stock their freezers.

9 comments:

Frontier Forest said...

Extremely disturbing reading, brigning chills! My first thoughts for all the aspiring PETA “want a be’s,” take a look at Genesis 1:28. “And God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it, and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” So the question to the PETA folks is simple, who is to rule, man over beast or beast over man? According to God’s Rule, the mandates were established at creation.

Michael Lockridge said...

Meat driven expatriation! Carnivore tourism!

The black market! Back alley butcher shops.

Grow your own meat kits. Can anyone say "rabbit?"

Is the Barbecue Lobby going to stand for this? If they can fund extending the Daylight Savings program to reap billions in barbecue bucks, I think they can fight this.

My dog is old, and I took away his cell phone. We should be good on that count.

Mike

Anglican@last said...

This could be good news. He might try something so ridiculous that it will draw public attention to a dangerous new government office. If he's as effective as drug czars and the bailout czar, we've got nothing to worry about.

Reepicheep said...

LOL Michael!

morsel said...

Sounds like another scheme to enable the glut of newly-minted lawyers to pay back their law school loans!

Emily V said...

I'll bet he supports Stem Cell Research...Ironic no?

Roger Mann said...

He concluded his Harvard speech by expressing his “more ambitious animating concern” that the current treatment of livestock and other animals should be considered “a form of unconscionable barbarity not the same as, but in many ways morally akin to, slavery and mass extermination of human beings.”

“See, Johnny, this is why the Bible calls godless men ‘fools’ (Psalm 14:1; 53:1) and ‘morons’ (Romans 1:22; Gk: moraino)!”

jeff said...

I'm sorry, did he actually say that animals should be able to file suit in court? I must have read that wrong due to lack of sleep, right? right? please?

Rick Calohan said...

I am thinking this man is an agnostic. Agnostic Greek for No Knowledge; Latin Ignoramus; Example: 1Thessalonians 4:13 with Calvin’s Commentary
4:13 {9} But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, {10} concerning them {11} which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.
(9) The third part of the epistle, which is mixed in among the former exhortations (which he returns to afterwards), in which he speaks of mourning for the dead, and the manner of the resurrection, and of the latter day.
(10) We must take heed that we do not immoderately mourn for the dead, that is, as those do who think that the dead are utterly perished.
(11) A confirmation: for death is but a sleep of the body (for he speaks of the faithful) until the Lord comes.

http://www.reformedreader.org/gbn/gbn1thessalonians.htm