He said this because of his support for animal rights and Madonna's fur wearing habit. I am a life-long fan (I had the lyrics to all his songs tattooed on neighborhood kittens), and I am no defender of Madonna, but my problem with this statement and some of what I hear from the animal rights folks is the equating of human beings with animals. I support animal rights because they are living creatures, many clearly feel pain, and they are completely without guilt. But when the life of an animal comes up against the life of a human (all other things being equal), the human life is far more important. And even the senseless slaughter of animals for coats is cruel but not an important enough issue when human beings are starving in the street and being cut into pieces by cluster bombs. Then there is the consumption of meat - I do it, and I sometimes feel guilty. But mostly because I think it's bad for you. Meat is murder? A great album, but certainly not a true statement.I'm not sure Morrissey meant to equate the lives of the animals killed for Madonna's coat with her adopted son's life - he probably just meant that someone that would have that much disregard for suffering generally is probably just as heartless when it comes to human life. I'm not sure if that's true, but I do think Madonna is pretty pitiful.
7 comments:
if meat is not murder, then what is it?
it's meat - animal flesh - potential food
Morrissey said: "It's death for no reason and death for no reason is murder."
Nonsense! People die all the time for no reason - that isn't murder. In fact people are murdered all the time for various reasons, though I think what Morrissey means by "reason" in his song is "legitimate purpose."
Animals are killed for a reason - for food. Though I guess the argument is we can get our nutrition elsewhere. True. And I try to eat less meat. But still - not the same as killing a human for food (which under certain circumstances may be necessary).
listen, are you going to come visit me in berkeley, or what?
also, could you make your anti-spam codes easier to type in? guqckum is hard to type and it hurts my head.
so why don't you weigh in on the Michael Vick scandal, you animal hater!? http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,290061,00.html
It is indeed barbaric - the Vick dog fighting stuff. Makes me particularly sad because I'm a dog guy. You know Sebastian has bitten me hard enough to brake skin 3 times since I've moved to San Francisco? Still he's a dog - he has no ill will - he lashes out because of fear or some primitive thoughts about territory or bones or something.
Some would say anyone who is not troubled by senseless harm to animals has problems. This is true, but to play devils advocate for a bit ... a peer of mine in law school, following one of our capital punishment clinic visits to Texas' death row, told me a story he was told by one of the inmates we were visiting. Apparently, when this inmate was a boy he had a dog he loved very much. One day he couldn't find the dog so he went looking for him. Eventually he heard an odd noise from some bushes. When he looked, it was dark, but there was his dog shaking and hiding. When he finally got a better look he saw that the entire bottom part of his dog's mouth was gone; and the dog later died. At a nearby location he found a hook hanging a few feet above the ground from a branch with the bottom of his dog's mouth still on the hook. Turns out, a cruel person who knew this inmate as a boy, beat his dog and then hung the dog on this hook where the weight of the dog's body caused it's mouth to ...
Sorry about such a troubling story, however back to the devil's advocate thing. I don't know what happened to the guy who hung (hanged? - if so I refuse to be correct) the dog, but it was the boy who cared about the dog who later grew up to kill humans (let's assume he did kill humans, even though I have no doubt that there are innocent men on death row), and it was a significant enough part of his psyche that he told the story as an adult during a brief visit by a law student.
Perhaps in extreme cases, care for animals can lead to disdain for humans. Kind of like care for fetuses can lead to disdain for adult humans living outside a woman's uterus. For example, remember after Katrina some people seemed more concerned about the dogs and kitties stranded in the area than the humans? Perhaps it has something to do with the notion that animals are innocent that makes the difference - again like fetuses or little babies. Like Sebastian's lack of ill will - adult humans have ill will, and they do bad things for bad reasons; maybe some of them deserve what they get; and maybe that's what the death row inmate thinks.
What do you think?
There are many different perspectives to take on this subject, but wouldn't you agree that the best way to live your life is to be happy while causing other living beings as little suffering as possible? Maybe help each other out a little? Species does not make a difference. Age does not make a difference. A life is a life, and each one weighs differently in importance to every individual. As a vegan and humanitarian, I do my very best to prevent suffering regardless of species. Those who cause anyone else to suffer should be banned from society so that they can't hurt anymore innocent lives. Human beings are selfish and barbaric by nature. We each have to fight against atrocities in our world. Why not start with something simple and easy to do? Such as not eating meat or hurting animals for your own gain. I just don't understand how anyone who is okay with the senseless slaughter of a completely helpless, innocent, living, breathing, loving being can live with themselves. I know I couldn't.
To me species does make a difference. I just think there is a moral difference between boiling and eating shrimp, let's say, versus boiling and eating you, whoever you are. But obviously this is a complicated issue. There is also a difference between shrimp and chimps in my mind.
Post a Comment