animals are not humans and humans are not animals. one isn't the other and vice versa. however animals still are living things and no matter what you may argue, they are apart of a God's creation. and we as Man, as thinking and of higher intelligence beings, should not stoop so low as to bully and deprive these defenceless creatures! we are always spouting and fighting for human rights but what about these creatures who don't have the ability to communicate legibly with us to claim their rights? unlike us, they can't be educated about their rights and even if we tried, they wouldn't be able to comprehend what we were trying to tell them. so by right, it is our responsibility to care of them and ensure their well being (although you may not be an animal lover).
why should we do this? each and every one of us (be they animal, plant or human) are apart of earth's ecosystem and a degradation in a particular sector would mean the fragile equilibrium of our ecosystem would be altered. hence causing many violent and sudden changes in climate and patterns of natural disasters. the predictable will become unpredictable. the unexpected will happen.
furthermore, the extinction of a species would mean the variability of earth's gene pool would significantly decrease. what does that have to do with us? with all the domestication and commercialism in the farming industry, without the wild genes from uncultivated wild plants/animals, our sources of food wouldn't be able to fend for themselves when an ecological change happens. that would snowball into famine and eventual extinction of humankind.
is this what we really want? even with a step-up in educating the people around the world about this issue, the problem still persists. why? man is still man. with our indestructible ego and self-centered quality inborn in us. although not all man are as said above, however the majority are. why do we always have to learn things the hard way?
veering away from the above topic, it's such a horrible thing to witness people polluting our land and acting cruelly to animals. i can't believe open burning is still actually illegally practiced here. my own neighbours do it... do they think it's still some kampung area where they can burn their rubbish in front of their gates and leave it to itself? what is so wrong about letting the garbage collector collect your rubbish? is there some incriminating evidence that they're trying to hide from the public? i don't think that's likely. they probably think they're helping the government to get rid of rubbish or probably they're pyromaniacs! i was sickened to see 2 different open burning sites on the way back from singapore to kl. as if our weather is not hot and hazy enough, these people who live in the countryside must add to our dilemma.
another issue is the deliberate act of cruelty to animals. it's so sickening to see your own neighbours beating dogs with sticks whenever the poor creatures crosses in front of their house gate. also, kids shouting insults and obscenities at other people's pets (within the owner's compound) is becoming a norm. what kind of parents raised these kids? just because you can't touch (or bond with) these animals doesn't mean they are filthy and deserve death. there shouldn't be a class segregation/double standard between cats and dogs.
with the recent news of the dog catchers shooting half of the 2 dozen or so dogs that a man kept in his house is just disgusting! yes, the man was in the wrong but was killing 11 dogs the solution? a more humane action could have been carried out in place of those canine murders, such as getting the spca or paws to take the dogs away to a shelter or giving the man a fine or something heavier. but killing the innocent dogs who don't know that they are in fact illegal or even understand the concept of law and rules is the easy and cowardice way out of the matter. both parties are in the wrong but the severity of the wrongdoing of the authorities outweighs that of the dogs' owner! how could they make such a rash move? did not they think of the repercussions that would occur? i.e. severely hurting a man emotionally (since all the dogs were his pets... and all animal lovers will be able to identify with pets being part of one's family), exposing the fact that they still think like barbarians and also staining their image with acts of animal cruelty (which is a big NO NO if they want to appear favourable in the eyes of the public)
in desperation the man tried to save the rest of his dogs by rushing them away in his car and in the process accidentally knocking the authorities' vehicle. now they are trying to use that as an excuse to cover their asses. do they think that their wrongdoings can be neutralised by charging the man for that accident? well, this can only happen in our unfair world that we live in!
just a thought: would the same punishments be implemented if the case above had involved cats (instead of dogs)?
No comments:
Post a Comment