From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Hitler (was "A rat is a pig is a.....")
Organization: WP Group
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 21:24:34 GMT


Russell Lawrence writes:
rl> Please define the concept of "animal rights" that was allegedly
rl> advocated by the nazis.

From article <1992Dec21.190724.5546@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, by jhoskins@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (James M Hoskins):
jh> I'm not sure if the following will prove to help define nazi
jh> animal rights advocacy in any meaningful sense but here goes:

Why don't you simply define the term, "animal rights", so that we 
can study your own views, as well as these alleged nazi views, to see 
if they conform to your definition?  

======================================================================
>>An an article translated from the german publication called Die Wiesse
>>Fahne, volume 14, 1933, attributes the following quote to Dr. Goebbels:
>>" Adolf Hitler does not drink alcohol or smoke, and moreover, is a
>>vegitarian.
>>
>>Brother Nationalist Socialist did you know
>>
>> ...that your Fuhrer--- out of persuation and out of love for for
>> the world of animals--- is a vegitarian.
======================================================================

What sort of publication was "Die Wiesse Fahne" [sic]?

If you accept this claim at face-value, please explain why Hitler
received periodic injections that were manufactured (if memory serves) 
from the testicles of cattle.   [see Speer, Albert.  _Inside the Third
Reich_.]   Why were animal products served at nazi dinner parties? 

Would you say that all men and women who love animals are "animal 
rights" advocates?

Would you say that all vegetarians are "animal rights" advocates?

======================================================================
>> ...that your Furher is the strongest opponent to any form of animal
>> torment; especially vivisection, which is the "scientific"
>> torture of animals, and a hienous product of the Jewish
>> materialistic school of medicine, about which he states: "In the
>> Nationalist Socialist state, this situation will end very soon"?
======================================================================

Isn't it true that "vivisection", as practiced in Germany during the
30's, involved invasive operations performed *without* anesthesia
or analgesics?   Would you be opposed to such a practice?  If so,
would this lead us to believe that you're an "animal rights"
advocate?

======================================================================
>> ...that your Fuhrer plans to prohibit all kinds of animal torture,
>> especially vivisection, and by implimenting this plan will save
>> animals from their endless and nameless tortures and suffering?
======================================================================

The animal welfare act prohibited "vivisection" [in the context used 
above] in research funded by HHS.  Would it be accurate to label the
members of the US congress who supported this act as animal rights 
advocates?

Thanks in advance for defining your terms so that we can study both
sides of the argument unequivocally.

-- 
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals