PETA'S FLAWED PHILOSOPHY

I dare consider myself a rational, objective thinker. An opinionated, sarcastic and often acerbic thinker, to be sure, but seldom one who fails to give due and proper consideration to the relative de/merits of the venerable bovine he sallies forth, on occasion, to bitchslap. 

It was earlier this fine evening, having just read a statement from those noble crusaders for sentient equality - PETA - and having judged it, at face value, to be as mad as a hat-full of spoons, that I decided to apply my ‘mind’ to that creative document that passes as the PETA Manifesto, in the aforementioned objective, pre-disciplinary, mode. 

I confess I failed, miserably. By all reasonably accepted definitions of failure, that is, in fact, what I succeeded in.

For those readers who've been living beneath non-sentient geological structures, PETA stands for "People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals".

Here’s the thing. PETAphiles believe all creatures are equal, with equal status in creation, equal emotions and responses to pain and so on.

They believe that while we human creatures may not be equipped to perceive the personal satisfaction a common house fly may derive from a job well done, or even as a result of humping some buxom floozy fly behind da missus’ back, atop a bemused 5 year-old’s ice-cream, that is no reason to assume he doesn’t shudder at the end and roll off feeling ‘complete’ just like any self-respecting, underachieving, human creature might.

With me so far? Good!...  

Now don’t get me wrong. I admire flies, especially for the way they can shag unobtrusively in public spaces, while hanging upside-down from the ceiling for instance – that is a superpower the fool dismisses out of sheer envy, rather than reason – but I find it more than a little challenging to accept the premise that flies are our ‘equals’.

My skepticism has many facets, but to apply the PETAphiles’ own logic, wouldn’t the designation ‘equal’ be rather dependent upon first establishing a consensus view among flies that they do not, in fact, believe they are superior, which they doubtless believe they are, if only because, unlike us, they can get sheilas to come-across even though they vomit all over their dinner.  I know I can’t!

Sexualising image inserted to attract your attention to this article
by exploiting and objectifying women.

The equality that PETAphiles magnanimously bestow upon all creation is thus revealed to be somewhat arrogant. In fact, it as an arrogance in every respect equal to the arrogance PETAphiles attribute to those among us who do not believe all creatures are equal. Or more accurately perhaps, those who hold that it is neither important, nor our place, to acknowledge them as equals.

I must admit that in concluding that PETA is peopled by folk who, for the sake of the future of the human race, I am really quite pleased to see conscientiously depriving their offspring of animal protein, I have assumed a PETA-embraced premise or two, which I have absolutely no doubt, whatsoever, the ardent PETAphile has more than one  cunningly fibonacci-esque, if syphilitically insane, rebuttal for. To wit:

    1. All creatures are equal

    2. Murdering a fellow equal creature is wrong

Therefore ergo and thus, is it not wrong for brother Lion and sister Spider, to murder sister Elan and brother Fly respectively?

Also too and as well, isn’t it reasonable to conclude that given humanity has existed on earth for a fraction of the time brother Crocodile has been scoffing sister Anyfeckingthing that wanders poolside, it is really rather arrogant to claim 99.9999% of all life on earth has been evolving on completely the wrong diet for a couple of billion years?

I mean, we’re not talking flippin’ gluten here!

Finally, is it not reasonable to postulate that it’s the height of egomaniacal hubris for one group among equals (Them) to assume they have the authority and indeed the obligation to judge another group among equals (Us) in error, simply for adopting the same principles of ‘inequality’ (to wit eating other equals) as practiced by the vast majority of life on Earth?

Or in other words, does the equality of a fellow equal preclude it from serving its function as food, or indeed, preclude humans serving in their roll as food for another equals?  

I think not!

In closing, I cannot readily call to mind another group of humans that cleaves to a philosophy as fundamentally flawed in logic and as gobsmackingly egocentric as the PETAphile, with the possible exception of the Extreme Greens and their associated propeller-headed brethren.

What about them flies, ‘ey?

Anyway, I'll get outaya way now...

Follow the blog on Twitter @Hunters_Stand

If you'd like to share this post the link to cut & paste is http://thehunterstand.blogspot.com.au/2015/07/petas-flawed-philosophy.html

For those wishing to leave comments either anonymously or under their own names (go-orn, I dares ya!), please select the 'Name/URL' option from the drop down menu beneath the comments section at the bottom of this page. You do not need to enter a URL.

If you would like to receive notifications when new posts are uploaded to the Hunters' Stand, send your name and email address to thehunterstand@gmail.com This service will not include notification of new comments. All information provided will be treated with the utmost confidentiality and discretion.