PETA spokes-idiot "Pink" gets her nipple pierced. Titilating video here (NSFW).
Have you ever noticed that the same people who want to ban all tail docking are the very same people who want mandatory spay and neuter laws?
Why is one bit of 10-second work considered "mutilation," while the other (major surgery) is considered the height of "responsible ownership?"
Would these same people push for mandatory spay-neuter laws for humans while supporting a ban on all nipple-piercings, tattoos, circumcisions, tummy tucks and botox injections for people?
And what do these people have to say about Mother Nature which makes naturally bob-tailed animals (including dogs and cats) but which makes no animals without reproductive organs? If "natural" is good and "artificial" is bad, then perhaps they might want to rethink their position?
Or is this simply a case of nannyism -- the precursor to jack-booted authoritarianism?
To be clear, I am no libertarian. Call me a communist if you want, but I think there is a place for police and fire departments, and I want the public health service to be fully funded. I am affirmatively in support of regulated commerce.
I am even willing to concede that there is a place for the state to intercede when individuals maintain misery by not properly taking care of their charges, whether those charges are human or animal.
But I do not get it when it comes to tails, testicles, and tits.
Please do not tell me this is about a concern for dogs when you express horror at a simple tail docking while simultaneouly demanding the mandatory gutting of every female dog.
I am a bit vague on some aspects of animal regulation, but I am perfectly clear on two bits:
- The need to push back on mandatory spay-neuter for all dogs and cats, and;
- The need to led freedom reign when it comes to tail docking.
As for nipple-piercing ... well, I have no opinion and not much interest. If you do, please feel free to add your thoughts in the comment section!
No comments:
Post a Comment