Old Hippie

God, I can't believe these iditoc, so-called animal activists! Killing a baby polar bear rather than allowing humans to feed it. How does this make sense? They have managed to twist the meaning of animal rights to include the right to die. Not really the "right" to die but a "demand" to kill.

This cute litte, cuddly, adorable baby bear and his brother were abandoned by its mother. Left to die by starvation. The brother did just that. Finally the Berlin Zookeepers intervened and saved Cute Knut, as he became known.

"Feeding by hand is not species-appropriate but a gross violation of animal protection laws," animal rights activist Frank Albrecht was quoted as saying by the mass-circulation Bild daily, which has featured regular photo spreads tracking fuzzy Knut's frolicking.

"The zoo must kill the bear."

.How ridiculous is that? I wonder if he would have the same opinion if it were someone facing death row or a life in prison. Is it better for him to die rather than to live like that? In that unnatural state?

How does this man feel that mankind can be the enforcer of nature's laws? We do things every single day that alter the course of our or someone else's lives. Most of the time we do this without ever knowing what we changed. Every decision we make has the potential to be a gross violation of nature's laws. How can he possibly know that killing this poor defenseless bear bear is what is best for him? How can he know?

He cannot. Yet he "feels" like he knows what is best and that is all the real reason he needs. It's about imposing his will, where his will isn't wanted. He is, after all, an "animal rights activist" and his wisdom should not be questioned.

Just wondering, were the people who were calling for Terry Schiavo to be pulled off of life support "human rights activists"? After all, feeding by intravenous tube is not really "species-appropriate" either.

My nickel.
OH