By Thomas A. Glessner, J.D.
July 8, 2009
On June 16 during an interview on CNBC President Obama swatted at and killed a fly. The matter was treated with good humor by most. I, for one, wanted to say "Nice shot Mr. President." However, the animal rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) felt differently and publicly chastised the President for his apparent cruelty to the insect.
"We support compassion for the even the smallest animals," says Bruce Friedrich, VP for Policy at PETA. "We support giving insects the benefit of the doubt." Friedrich says PETA supports "brushing flies away rather than killing them". Later PETA sent to Obama a fly catching device that traps flies and then allows for their safe release back into nature.
Upon hearing of the compassion PETA has for the smallest of creatures I wondered what position they took on abortion. After all, if this organization believes in the protection of the lives of flies surely they would be adamantly opposed to the killing of the unborn. Hence, I immediately did a search on the Internet to find an answer to my question. I found out that PETA's compassion for unborn human babies falls far short of its compassion for flies.
In regards to abortion, PETA's official statement reads:
PETA does not have a position on the abortion issue, because our focus as an organization is the alleviation of the suffering inflicted on nonhuman animals. There are people on both sides of the abortion issue in the animal rights movement, just as there are people on both sides of animal rights issues in the pro-life movement. And just as the pro-life movement has no official position on animal rights, neither does the animal rights movement have an official position on abortion.
Now let me understand this clearly. To PETA the life of a fly deserves to be respected and must be treated with dignity, but the life of an unborn child subject to abortion is apparently of no concern. One can be a member of PETA and support the killing of the unborn as long as that person supports the right to life of a fly.
Even if one believes that humans are no more than a higher evolved form of animal life they must surely oppose the killing of unborn children if they oppose the killing of flies. But this logic escapes PETA. Apparently, it is politically correct to PETA for people to have compassion for animals (even flies), but it is not politically correct to stand against the killing of unborn children.
This kind of logic borders on insanity but exists today because American culture no longer accepts the sanctity of life ethic upon which our nation was founded. This ethic, embodied in our Declaration of Independence, proclaims that all human beings are made in the image of God and as such are afforded the inalienable right to life. The Creator bestows this inalienable right upon humanity because humanity is made in His image.
In accepting abortion on demand and the killing of 50 million unborn children since 1973 the American nation has departed far from the principles of it's founding. I do believe that most Americans do not accept PETA's dogma that the lives of insects are more important than the lives of human unborn children. Yet, the American public tolerates the ongoing killing of 3,300 unborn children in abortion clinics everyday. How many more unborn will needlessly die until the American nation wakes up and demands an end to this carnage?
PETA boldly stands in the public arena for the protection of the life of a fly. When will the majority of Americans who call themselves pro-life stand up boldly in the public arena for the protection of the lives of the unborn?
Until this happens the killing of the unborn will continue.
Copyright © 2009 by Thomas A. Glessner. All rights reserved.