Another day, another silly controversy about whether animals lives should be spared at the cost of human lives.
Sometime last year, I think it was, some silly dentist from Minnesota went on a safari/hunting trip somewhere in Africa and either mistakenly or brazenly shot a lion who was much-loved by legions of fans. How or even why an animal has fans I don't understand, but this one did. Cecil the Lion was dispatched by a dentist who was then protested at his office in Minnesota while a debate raged as to whether he should be returned for prosecution. As I remember the situation, he claims he was misled as to whether Cecil was protected or available for killing. That sounds horrible, but the fact is that some animals are protected while others are not, thereby making them available to be hunted and killed.
What I fail to understand is why people who are outraged -- perhaps rightly -- called for the dentist's death? Am I to understand that animals' lives are now on a par with human lives? Is there such a thing as a death penalty for killing an animal? There is no question that there are and should be statutes that include penalties for cruelty to animals. Jail sentences are appropriate for this kind of behavior. But I stop short of advocating that a human life be forfeited for the death of an animal. Not even Hammurabi suggested such a remedy.
So now, there's a couple in Ohio who somehow let their toddler get into the ape enclosure, where he was accosted by a 450 lb. gorilla named Harambe and thrown around like a rag doll. Zoo officials, fearful that the child would be killed accidentally by Harambe, opted not to use tranquilizers and instead shot the animal dead, thereby sparing the life of the three-year-old. Almost immediately, animal activists criticized the action, claiming the wrong choice was made and that the parents were remiss in watching their little one and therefore liable for Harambe's death.
Well. I think it's incumbent on me to point out that Karen and I have two rescue bulldogs and a cat who thinks he's a dog. We love our animals but if it ever came down to it, no human would be taken after one of our animals was saved. Human lives are more important than animal lives. They are our pets, to be sure, but in the end, they're animals.
At the same time, we both denounce animal cruelty. One of our bulldogs, Custer, was beaten so badly that he has dents in his skull, according to a vet who took X-rays of him. Anytime we see a dog or cat that's mistreated, we're heartbroken. But that doesn't mean that humans should be put to death for animal's deaths or injuries, or that where a decision between an animal and a human is to be made, the animal should be accorded the same consideration as a human.
It's a very sad outcome to see Harambe have to be put down. But that toddler's life -- through little fault of his own -- was in jeopardy and according to experts, the only way to ensure that he be save was to kill, not anesthetize, Harambe. Even the noted animal expert Dr. Jack Hanna said it was necessary. It's not the desired result, of course, but in no way should the animal's well-being be placed ahead of a human's life.
(Don't get me going about the parents. How anyone can be so unaware of their children's whereabouts when near wild animals -- even those in captivity -- is beyond me. There are plenty of measures that can be taken against the parents for their woeful parenting. But to suggest that because of their horrible parenting Harambe was killed and they therefore are subject to punishment for his death...that's stretching it. What I could see is that they are liable in a monetary sense for Harambe's death, having to reimburse the zoo for a new gorilla. But they shouldn't suffer any criminal penalty because he had to be killed).
Those who support animal rights need to get a grip. I'm all in favor of protecting animals. I detest cruelty to animals. I differ from vegans and vegetarians, but that's another issue altogether. But when it comes to the primacy of human life over animal life, even when it comes to punishment of humans for their cruelty to animals, human and animal lives are not equivalent deserving of equal treatment. If an animal kills a human when it's not provoked, it should be put down. When a human kills an animal unjustly, he should go to jail. But he shouldn't be put down.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is crazy.
(c) 2016 The Truxton Spangler Chronicles
No comments:
Post a Comment