From: black@che.serum.kodak.com (Robert Black (x37236))
Subject: Re: Putting People First
Keywords: Putting People First
Organization: Eastman Kodak
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 16:25:51 GMT

In article <1992Apr7.200213.3919@cbnews.cb.att.com> lvc@cbnews.cb.att.com (Larry Cipriani) writes:
>The following article is from the March 1992 issue of the PROponent,
>the monthly newsletter published by The Peoples Rights Organization
>(PRO), a pro gun, pro constitutional rights group based in Columbus,
>Ohio.
>
>As a member of the PRO -- Electronic Information Committee,
>I am posting this article for information only. Questions or
>comments may be directed to:
>
>PEOPLES RIGHTS ORGANIZATION
>5 E. Long St., Suite 412
>Columbus, OH 43215
>(614) 268-0122
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>(Begin article "PPF" from March 1992 PROponent)
>
>PPF...
>
>     Putting People First is an organization that was founded by
>Kathleen Marquardt, in Washington, D.C.  This group was started to
>counter-act the lies, 

Name some lies along with the individuals who stated them.  Without
some specifics, it's impossible to even discuss this any further.  They
might as well save their ink, unless their aim is to disseminate lies
and propaganda themselves.

>                      sabotage, and hyperbole of the anti-animal
>activists.  PETA, or People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals,
>is one such group that has demonstrations against stores that sell
>fur coats, trappers, and those that wear articles of clothing made
>from animals.

So.  What's so bad and extreme about demonstrations?  It's a common
way to focus attention on an issue.

>     Some of these extremists even go as far as to say that you
>should not wear wool, drink cow's milk, eat cheese or eggs.  They
>even equate the lives of people on an even keel with rats and
>cockroaches!  They want to extend the idea of racism to
>"speciesism" which is to say that the termites have as much "right"
>to eat your house as you do to live in it.

WHO has said this about termites?  One person once?  two perhaps in 
the heat of an argument?  Or none at all?  Is this just a strident
and sneaky way to win adherents?  Even the pseudonymous "Helen", a
purported ALF member quoted in the March 12, 1990 issue of THE NEW
REPUBLIC assured the author that if termites were destroying her
house, she would call an exterminator.  If PPF needs to rely on
inaccurate and farfetched examples to bolster their case, then they
don't have a very strong position to work from.

[... more descriptive material about PPF in which the writer applies
     the types of techniques that AR groups are being accused of ...] 

>     "Obviously I believe that when our side is heard very few
>people would choose to become an animal "rights" proponent.  Common
>sense shows it's people who have rights, not animals.

To say that "Common sense shows ..." anything is often a copout.  Let's
hear something more persuasive.

>                                                      We must all
>be very conscientious about animal welfare, but there's a big
>difference between animal 'welfare' and animal 'rights'.

No doubt, there are differences.  But whether they're "big" depends on
who's talking and what teir impressions are of these terms.
>
>     "Putting People First is a nationwide group of concerned
>citizens from all walks of life who object to being intimidated by
>animal 'rights' extremists.  Our organization does not represent
>any industry or special interest.  Instead, we represent the
>average American who drinks milk and eats meat, benefits from
>medical research, wears leather, fur, wool, hunts and fishes, owns
>a pet, and goes to zoos."

What are some of the "benefits"?  Do they outweigh the costs ...including
those costs associated with adverse effects on humans due to the dangerous
extrapolation of experimental results from one species to another?

>     Marquardt continues in her letter informing the reader about
>the $15 a year dues to PPF and asks people to sign the petition
>that accompanies her letter.  Copies of her petition may be
>obtained at the PRO gun shows in Hillard, Ohio, just west of
>Columbus.  Her Petition to the Congress of the United States
>resolves:
>
>     "To oppose those who would put millions of Americans out of
>work by closing any business or industry that entails the use of
>animals; and

Is Ms. Marquardt willing to pay taxes to keep these millions in work,
even if that work inflicts untold agony on animals and provides in
return little or no appreciable gain for humans?
>
>     "To enact legislation which will combat intimidation,
>terrorism, and violence as used by animal activists and protestors;
>and

Don't we already have laws against intimidation, terrorism, and
violence?

>     "To continue funding medical research and other testing which
>uses animals responsibly;

Will Ms. Marquardt support the AR side when animals are used
IRRESPONSIBLY?  Would she have opposed and spoken out against cases
like these (taken from SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENT by Hans Ruesch):

      -	a dog is crucified to study Christ's agony?
      -	a pregnant dog is disemboweled to observe maternal instinct
	in the throes of agony?
      - beagles tortured until they attack each other, to study juvenile
	delinquency?
      -	a hundred years of fatal scaldings of all sorts of species?
      - millions of animals slowly blinded by acids, subjected to
	repeated shocks, disemboweled, frozen, starved, left to die
	thirst - all repeated over and over, in many cases after various
	glands have been removed?  and often done without anesthesia
	because that might corrupt the results?

Or are these considered to be using "animals responsibly?"
>
>     "And generally, to resolve legislative conflicts between the
>interests of human beings and those of animals in favor of human
>beings."

Has Ms. Marquardt considered that maybe many of these conflicts are
IMAGINARY ones?  Or that a lot of conflicts are between two groups of
humans with animals caught in the middle?  Would she have opposed, for
example, the movement of rabid raccoons from Florida into Virginia?  This
practice was intended to replenish trapped-out stocks, but also hastened
the northward movement of rabies and now threatens New York State
residents?  Had she known, would she have stood up to that small special
interest group, whose benefit was served at the expense of the rest of us?

[... more deleted ...]

No doubt, there are many sincere and honorable people in PPF.  The same
is true of the AR movement.  Let's get facts and arguments out in the open
so both sides can evaluate what is true and what is propaganda.  So far,
from what I've seen, PPF appears to be short on facts.  But as an 
openminded individual, I will write for further information amd evaluate
whatever material I receive.  I would request that PPF people do the
likewise with regard to the AR organizations.  Any takers?
>
>-- 
>Larry Cipriani, att!cbvox1!lvc or lvc@cbvox1.att.com
>"Fight fire with fire, I always say." -- Bugs Bunny

RB (black@serum.kodak.com)
These views are not necessarily the views of my employers.