Gandhi Would Be HORRIFIED

Mahatma Gandhi said, “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”    Joyce Tischler, ALDF founder and General Counsel, lifted these famous words and used them in 2008.  I find it outrageous when an extreme activist lifts a selected phrase in this way and uses it in utter disregard for virtually everything the person being quoted stood for.

First and foremost of Gandhi’s principle’s was TRUTH.  Activists who do everything in their power to evade telling the truth, the whole truth, offend the memory of Gandhi in using his words out of context.  But simpler than that is the long history of thought behind Gandhi’s words that reaches back beyond antiquity.

  • Aristotle has often been quoted as saying you can judge a nation by the way it treats its most vulnerable citizens.
  • A decent provision for the poor is the true test of civilization.
    ~Samuel Johnson, Boswell: Life of Johnson
  • The most certain test by which we judge whether a country is really free is the amount of security enjoyed by minorities.~John E. E. Dalberg, Lord Acton, The History of Freedom in Antiquity, [1877].
  • "A nation's greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members." ~ Mahatma Ghandi
  • Our society must make it right and possible for old people not to fear the young or be deserted by them, for the test of a civilization is the way that it cares for its helpless members.~Pearl S. Buck (1892-1973), My Several Worlds [1954].
  • The test of the morality of a society is what it does for its children.
    ~Dietrich Bonhoeffer Bonhoeffer (German Pastor and Nazi opponent who died in a concentration camp)
  • "...the moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; those who are in the shadows of life; the sick, the needy and the handicapped. " ~ Last Speech of Hubert H. Humphrey [November 1, 1977]
  • "Any society, any nation, is judged on the basis of how it treats its weakest members -- the last, the least, the littlest."
    ~Cardinal Roger Mahony, In a 1998 letter, Creating a Culture of Life

We are not so very removed from the animals when this concept of caring for the lesser amongst us stretches back through history and has yet to be realized for the lesser humans amongst us.  Yet what I find striking in all of these quotes is that none of them say that society or civilization is judged by what it mandates or legislates as care for the lesser humans.  They are all speaking of how we actually treat each other.  Period.  A simple concept that we should strive for and that requires teaching and learning by each of us to be better humans and to see to each other’s needs.

Gandhi’s second principle was that of nonviolence.  After WWII, Gandhi said: “the Jews should have offered themselves to the butcher’s knife. They should have thrown themselves into the sea from cliffs…”  And this is where I part ways with Gandhi.

We humans are indeed animals and many of us have a tendency toward violence.  Just as other species have earned their places in the world hierarchy, so have we.  Amongst our own species are the violent activists who would elevate other species at the expense of our own and commit violence in many forms against other humans in the process.  They quote the words of Gandhi and others in hopes we will offer ourselves to their knives, throw ourselves off cliffs, simply cave to their demands.  I'm more inclined to see these activists culled from our society or at least shunned as the minority.  Of course, they have the right to treat their own animals as they see fit but so do the rest of us.  Those who would be so dictatorial as to mandate for all should indeed be severed from or ignored by a society founded upon individual and fundamental rights.

 “Last week, ALDF filed two lawsuits in Kentucky, where the situation for lost and stray dogs and cats is abysmal. Kentucky’s Humane Shelter Law mandates… We’ve heard reports of other counties in Kentucky... Lost or stray dogs are picked up, shot in the head and discarded… Boom… dead; tossed into the pile. What does that say about our society?  This is not some far off third world country. It’s Kentucky and that’s just one state out of the fifty!

“reports of other counties” sure sounds like a rumor to me.  For the sake of argument, I’ll work with that rumor.  OK, so animals are shot.  That is a fast death when done by someone who knows how to shoot.  I fail to see how capturing an animal, transporting it, holding it, and then pinning it down to stick it with needles is more humane that a swift sure death by a bullet.  Would I prefer a world full of responsible owners with fewer animals running at large and where animals are quickly and surely returned to their owners?  OF COURSE.  But that isn’t the world we live in.  Where animals are simply let out to run and procreate where there are few or no responsible owners, then a quick and sure death using as fewer limited resources is humane to both the animals and the HUMANS.

"tossed into the pile" Ashes to ashes and dust to dust.  We are so uncomfortable dealing with the realities of death but we are so willing to make much of nothing with a phrase like "tossed into the pile".  "Funerary customs comprise the complex of beliefs and practices used by a culture to remember the dead."  If we wish to extend our customs to the animals we own, so be it.  However, in nature, they would most likely die a slower and more violent death to be eaten or decay where they died.  "Contrary to conventional wisdom, the WHO advises that only corpses carrying an infectious disease strictly require burial."  From fear of mythical proportions and especially fear of disease from a time in history when there was far more religion than science, come our modern fears and funeral customs (promoted by the massive and growing commercial funeral industry) to reinforce those fears.  Now the activists would have those imposed upon animals by invoked the emotions of "tossed into the pile".

We have laws that regulate disposal of remains, human and animal, in some circumstances.  Of these, notable is those regulating the disposal of animals by veterinarians.  Those laws are to protect the general health and largely exist because animals euthanized are full of poisons that will enter the environment without proper handling.  When we or our animals die of natural causes without infectious disease, there is no need to worry and certainly no need of fear of those remains.  We and the other animals will quickly return to ash, to the earth, if given the chance.  I will not fear or be horrified by imagery founded in ancient mythological fear of death.

In all too many of the animal seizure cases, there is a "carcass", "dead animal", sometimes "piles of dead animals", "MANY dead animals".  Because I am more likely to be ruled by science and logic than fear, my reaction is always "So???, Your point is...?  Rest of the story?  Were they diseased or what? Because, otherwise, that's just plain fear mongering."

What if there was money to…”

Ah, but there’s the rub.  We don’t live in a world of unlimited resources.  Animal activists in ALDF are costing all of us with their antics, as are their buddies in HSUS, PETA, SPCAs, and other activist groups.  They demand laws be adopted and resources spent to enforce those laws while the elderly, the young, the poor go hungry and without medical care.  That is the trade off they see as appropriate while simultaneously lining their own golden parachutes to ensure they are never subjected to the same want they advocate and impose upon others.  They clog the courts with cases about the rights of animals while the rights of humans are ignored even in those cases.

There are many forms of violence.  Those who would change society by force of law and in abrogation of long held rights, do us all violence.  To me, it matters not whether the hammer they use is a real hammer, the poundage of dollars to obtain their legislative votes, or the defamation they use to convict humans in the court of public opinion before being tried in court.  All of these are violences against other humans.  We must fight back in equal measure.  Make no mistake, we have the right to defend ourselves when they show up with real hammers, guns, and accompanied by law enforcement.  Law enforcement must be acting legally to expect our respect and deference; otherwise, they are merely criminals in uniforms.  In fact, the most violent of all often wear suits and we have seen them before.

I would love to advocate complete nonviolence but we live in a violent world that is becoming more violent and abusive as law enforcement increasingly thinks itself to be above the law; as judges simply ignore the law; as the courts routinely convict the innocent and make no real attempt to right these wrongs.  It was to keep that in check that the founders memorialized our right to keep and bear arms, that no government ever consider itself above and beyond the will of the collective people while also memorializing the concept of fundamental rights due all and each individually no matter the will of the collective.

It is largely up to the activists and the existing system to decide if they would have a full out war with us, with the majority of society who own and love animals and who will not be laying down for their knives to slice us.  I know I won't.  I often wonder if Gandhi really would have but, no matter, he was surrounded by those who would ensure that was never put to the test.

I think Gandhi would be utterly horrified to see his quotes being used by ALDF or other known violent activists who would impose their will upon the majority in abrogation of all he believed in.  I do not live in the delusional warped world these activists promote where we deny the reality of who and what we are; of who and what the other animals are.  We are the alleged top of the food chain but we depend upon that food chain.  Wirh rights come responsibilities but it also takes time and education for societies to change and attempts to force change too quickly are generally counter productive.  It comes back to those quotes above about how actually we treat each other and animals; not how we mandate.  The truth, the facts, the science will set us free and allow us to have well written enforceable laws based upon realistic care of animals without rushing to waste resources on hasty, poorly written laws which merely result in more animal deaths anyway.  We must learn enough about ourselves and our animals to teach our legislators so they can say an adamant NO to any proposed legislation not based in fact and science and respective of our established rights.  The average person leads a rather bleak life and so do their animals.  The way to improve that is to improve the lives of the humans who love and respect their animals, not as humans but as the animals they are; that they may raise the living standards of their animals along with their own.  We know they will because it’s just human nature.  If it weren’t the animals would not have come to us, nor we to them in the first place all those thousands of years ago.

If the animal rights activists simply must quote someone, perhaps they should try Hitler or Attila the Hun.

WE must remember that our leaders are chosen by US and need our direction to properly perform their jobs.  That direction often includes telling them when they are screwing up in loud and uncertain terms.  The likes of Hitler and Attila are not history, they are leaders that are created and elected/elevated by the rest of us.  They will continue to be created so long as we encourage and/or fail to discourage them.

Go Back



Comment