cmotherofpirl Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Obama nominee: Animals can sue people Jim Brown - OneNewsNow - 7/22/2009 2:45:00 PM A consumer-freedom group says President Obama's nominee for "regulatory czar" is an "animal-rights zealot" who may make life difficult for hunters and meat-eaters. Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) has placed a hold on the nomination of legal scholar Cass Sunstein to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the Office of Budget and Management. Cornyn is worried that the Harvard professor may push an aggressive animal-rights agenda in the White House. Sunstein has argued in favor of outlawing sport hunting and meat-eating, and written that animals should be allowed to file lawsuits "with human beings as their representatives." David Martosko with the Center for Consumer Freedom shares Cornyn's concern. "If Cass Sunstein is ultimately confirmed to be the regulatory czar, having an animal-rights zealot in that position for the first time could be problematic for Americans who love to hunt, who like seeing circuses, [who like] having animals, who like taking their kids to the zoo, who like feeding their children meat and milk at lunch time," he warns. "This is a guy who I would think will use every means at his disposal to push the radical animal-rights agenda." According to Martosko, Sunstein may one day be appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court -- so Senators Cornyn and Saxby Chambliss (R-Georgia) have both placed holds on Sunstein's nomination because they want the constitutional lawyer on the record now so that if he does something different they will be able to use it against him in a future confirmation hearing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 They never taught us how to cross-examine animals, except of the rapist variety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marie-Therese Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 That's IT. I have had it! We are governed by imbeciles!!!!!!! Are these people SERIOUS????????? I love my dog. I think animal abusers should be punished. I also eat meat. If I get a lawsuit filed against me by a cow, then I am defecting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffpugh Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Wow. Boredom much. Don't these people have anything better to do with their lives? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Sunstein or Doolittle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 If the unborn could have standing to sue, then I'd be impressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zunshynn Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 [quote name='CatherineM' post='1930352' date='Jul 23 2009, 10:22 PM']If the unborn could have standing to sue, then I'd be impressed.[/quote] I wonder if that would go for unborn animals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InHisLove726 Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Gee whiz.... I'm all for animal rights and preventing animal cruelty (I am a former vegetarian), but some people take the animal rights thing WAY too far! Animals cannot talk, so how they will be able to sue people is beyond me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmjtina Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 This is coming from a guy who agrees with Peter Singer.....aka the professor who thinks infanticide is okay and should be done until 2 years of age if the parent doesn't want it. Think: abortion for 2 year olds. It literally makes me sick. [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/style_images/ip.boardpr/folder_post_icons/icon8.gif[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 [quote name='Marie-Therese' post='1930246' date='Jul 23 2009, 11:29 PM']That's IT. I have had it! We are governed by imbeciles!!!!!!! Are these people SERIOUS????????? I love my dog. I think animal abusers should be punished. I also eat meat. If I get a lawsuit filed against me by a cow, then I am defecting.[/quote] But I'm confused... If a cow has a right to sue for being eaten, doesn't s/he have to have been wronged (ie eaten) in order to make a claim against the eater? Wouldn't that be too late? A cow that has not been eaten can not sue for having been eaten. [quote name='InHisLove726' post='1930468' date='Jul 24 2009, 05:34 AM']Gee whiz.... I'm all for animal rights and preventing animal cruelty (I am a former vegetarian), but some people take the animal rights thing WAY too far! Animals cannot talk, so how they will be able to sue people is beyond me... [/quote] Animals don't have "rights" any more than plants do. (yeah, I know... that's next...) We have an obligation to animals but they are not endowed with any "rights." The founding fathers would just shake their heads in wonder of our stupidity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Didacus Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 [quote name='Marie-Therese' post='1930246' date='Jul 23 2009, 11:29 PM']That's IT. I have had it! We are governed by imbeciles!!!!!!! Are these people SERIOUS????????? I love my dog. I think animal abusers should be punished. I also eat meat. If I get a lawsuit filed against me by a cow, then I am defecting.[/quote] I'll meet you in Alaska. We'll take over, and start from scratch. Bring as many cows as you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Didacus Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 (edited) [quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1930488' date='Jul 24 2009, 07:25 AM']But I'm confused... If a cow has a right to sue for being eaten, doesn't s/he have to have been wronged (ie eaten) in order to make a claim against the eater? Wouldn't that be too late? A cow that has not been eaten can not sue for having been eaten. [snip][/quote] I believe the charge would be murder 1, and the cow's caretaker will be able to sue under wrongful death. Edited July 24, 2009 by Didacus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 [quote name='Didacus' post='1930491' date='Jul 24 2009, 07:32 AM']I believe the cahrge would be murder 1, and the cow's caretaker will be able to sue under wrongful death.[/quote] Wouldn't the cow's caretaker have been the one that lead him to the slaughterhouse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Didacus Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 [quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1930493' date='Jul 24 2009, 07:35 AM']Wouldn't the cow's caretaker have been the one that lead him to the slaughterhouse?[/quote] In that case, the caretaker would be complicit in the murder, and the cow's children (or husband?) would be the ones to file for wrongful death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted July 24, 2009 Author Share Posted July 24, 2009 they will probably start suing meat eaters for cowicide... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now