Animal Standing

I heard today on the radio that certain activists are pressuring judges and legislatures to give animals the right to sue humans in a court of law.

Legitimate law schools, as Yale and Harvard, already have classes and seminars instructing advocates, who apparently mean to volunteer to represent the beasts much as a court-appointed attorney represents children or madmen or other incompetents, how to represent their bestial clients. Hence, in the near future, if a do-gooder sees you spanking your dog for peeing on the carpet, appoint himself the dog’s attorney, extort your fortune, and use the money to continue spreading his particular brand of do-gooding.

Has anyone heard anything else about this? If I did not live in a world of malignant lunatics, I would dismiss the story as incredible, but, as I do, I cannot.

It soothes them, you see, these modern thinkers, to abolish distinctions. Since all they dream about is getting mothers to kill their children in the womb–black children, mostly, but any color will do–since all they dream about the way you or I dream of true love, or heroic deeds, happy families or a productive life is child-murder, they must of course pretend children in the womb are not human. So it likewise soothes them to pretend that beasts are human, or as good as: as long as the line is blurred, the better modern philosophy likes it.

Ancient philosophy was the seeking after truth using reason to investigate man and nature and reality: modern philosophy is a combination of a con game and a psychological maneuver meant to silence reason, flee reality, and destroy man. The tens of millions dead at the hands of Marxism, that quintessential modern philosophy, bear mute witness to the serious destructive power of modern thinking–or, rather, the modern attempts to elude thought at all costs.

A legal fiction to define beasts to be men and men to be beasts seems a minor thing, considering the intellectual heritage of the Twentieth Century.