Do the Animal Activists Despise Humans? Sticker on Car Says They Sure Do

Roy Hanson was right.

Roy was a bright, thoughtful and kind writer and editor with whom it was my privilege to work. And while he had seemingly endless patience with writers who needed his help, or friends or colleagues with problems, he had absolutely no patience for the disingenuous of this world.

Thus, whenever the subject of the animal “rights” movement came up--as it often does among those working on a newspaper science section--Roy would announce with great vehemence, “You know what the problem is with those . . . ? They hate people!”

Despite having little use for the movement, which I believe is interfering with necessary scientific research and progress, I found it difficult to accept Roy’s analysis of the situation.

But one weekend recently, I finally realized that Roy was probably right.

My revelation came in the form of a bumper sticker, and rarely, if ever, have I seen as revealing a sticker.

The car was a shiny, perky Honda Civic, driven by an equally shiny, perky young woman who appeared to be in her early 20s.

The rear bumper displayed a series of messages, all of them announcing the driver’s devotion to the cause of animal “rights.” One sticker proclaimed the joys of vegetarianism. One carried a picture of a closely confined calf with sad eyes and suggested that no humane human would eat such a creature.

Well, there’s certainly nothing inherently wrong with vegetarianism--assuming that, unlike many vegetarians, one is careful to eat a properly nourishing vegetarian diet. And the calf did look pitiful. So while I certainly didn’t agree with the driver’s sentiments, they didn’t upset me. Until I noticed the last sticker:

“Warning: I Don’t Brake for Vivisectionists”

There it was, out in the open. Printed proof of what I have long suspected: A good number of people in the animal “rights” movement value what they consider the “rights” of animals more highly than they value the most basic right--the right to life--of their fellow human beings.

Before you suggest that the above is a sweeping condemnation of an entire group of people based on a message on the back bumper of a single car, I would point out that the bumper sticker was obviously commercially printed and bore the name of a prominent, radical animal “rights” organization. So the Civic driver is obviously not the only person expressing this preference for calves over “vivisectionists.”

It’s horrifying enough that anyone would suggest a willingness to run over any other human being. But consider for a moment who these animal “rights” advocates are proposing to run over.

While the term “vivisectionist” may conjure up an image of some ghoul in a blood-soaked smock laughingly hooking up a kitten to an auto battery, the American Heritage Dictionary defines a vivisection as “the act of cutting into or dissecting the body of a living animal, esp. for the purpose of scientific research “ (emphasis is mine).

Note that that definition says nothing about cruelty. It says nothing about frivolousness of purpose. It says nothing about pain. It says nothing about a lack of anesthesia for the animal or about unsterile conditions. It does not even say anything about killing an animal.

No doubt there are some unnecessary “scientific” experiments involving animals. And no doubt there are some animals subjected to unnecessary pain and suffering in the name of “research.” A perfect example of that was the use of rabbits to test cosmetics. There are abuses of one kind or another in virtually every area of human endeavor.

However, most medical and scientific research and teaching that uses live animals uses them because they are the best model we have for the human system. Most animals are used in research to gain knowledge that will benefit human beings.

It is bad enough to blindly oppose all human medical research involving animals, because ending such research would, without a doubt, lead to an early, painful, death for large numbers of humans. Thus anyone opposing all animal research is clearly implying that they value the lives of other species over those of human beings.

But implying something is one thing, clearly stating it is another. And that bumper sticker leaves no room for doubt:

Roy was right.