Religion & Animals

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, September 1993:

The 19th General Synod of the United
Church of Christ, held in St. Louis during July,
adopted a resolution on “Respect for Animals,”
which invites members to “evaluate human use
of animals and the resulting effects” through a
set of six questions. The full text is available
from the Rev. Marc Wessels, executive director
of the International Network for Religion and
Animals, POB 1335, North Wales, PA 19454.

BOOKS: Native American Animal Stories

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, July/August 1993:

Native American Animal Stories, told by Joseph Bruchac,
Fulcrum Publishing (350 Indiana St., Golden CO 80401, 800-992-2908), 1992, 135
pages, softcover $11.95.)
Every culture has stories to teach
children about the world and the creatures
in it. If these native American stories
occasionally evoke memories of the
Grimms’ Eastern European folktales, it’s
because their respective cultures had more
in common with each other than either has
with modern industrial society. Yet,
though we raise our children on myths of
science and technology, something about
fairy tales transcends time and culture to
fascinate each new generation.

Read more

WOOFS AND GROWLS

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, July/August 1993:

USDA-licensed Class B animal dealer Noel
Leach of Chase City, Virginia, facing disciplinary action
for 46 alleged violations of the Animal Welfare Act, sued
Friends of Animals on May 24 for purportedly defaming
his character and interfering with his business relation-
ships in connection with bringing many of the alleged vio-
lations to the USDA’s attention. Leach claims FoA under-
cover investigators trespassed on his property while gath-
ering evidence. FoA attorney Herman Kaufman respond-
ed to the suit with a request for dismissal, pointing out
that the action is based on an alleged tort in 1990 for
which the statute of limitations is just two years, and that
the statute of limitations in defamation cases in Virginia,
where the suit was filed, is only one year. Well known to
USDA inspectors, Leach was rapped for six previous
AWA violations in 1983. His primary business is selling
dogs and cats to research labs and dissection supply firms.

Read more

Guest column: Supreme Court did not okay animal sacrifice

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, July/August 1993:

by Gary L. Francione and Anna E. Charlton
ANIMAL RIGHTS LAW CENTER
On June 11, 1993, the Supreme Court issued its
decision concerning animal sacrifice in Church of the
Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah. The next
day, most major newspapers carried headlines proclaim-
ing that the Court had held that animal sacrifice is protect-
ed by the First Amendment freedom of religion clause.
Typical of those proclamations was the one splashed
across the entire front cover of New York Newsday: “Top
Court OKs Animal Sacrifice.” Reading the comments of
major humane organizations in reaction to the decision,
including those such as the American Society for the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals which have the police
power to stop the infliction of cruelty on animals, we have
been distressed to realize that the decision has been read
far too broadly, and that there is the mistaken impression
that humane officers are now powerless to stop the brutali-
ties of animal sacrifice.

Read more

Supreme Court rules: Animal sacrifice ban overturned; VERDICT DOES NOT AFFECT ANTICRUELTY LAWS

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, July/August 1993:

WASHINGTON D.C.––Anticruelty laws were unaffected by a June 11 United States
Supreme Court verdict that overturned a ban on animal sacrifice imposed in 1987 by the city of
Hialeah, Florida. The Supreme Court unanimously held that although governments do have the
authority to enforce prohibitions on cruelty, the keeping of livestock, and violations of zoning,
the set of six ordinances enacted in Hialeah were unconstitutional because they were adopted in

Read more

Supreme Court did not okay animal sacrifice

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, July/August 1993:
  
by Gary L. Francione and Anna E. Charlton
Animal Rights Law Center
   
On June 11, 1993, the Supreme Court issued its decision  concerning animal sacrifice in Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah. The next day, most major newspapers carried headlines proclaiming that the Court had held that animal sacrifice is protected by the First Amendment freedom of religion clause. Typical of those proclamations was the one splashed across the entire front cover of New York Newsday: “Top Court OKs Animal Sacrifice.” Reading the comments of major humane organizations in reaction to the decision, including those such as the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals which have the police power to stop the infliction of cruelty on animals, we have been distressed to realize that the decision has been read far too broadly, and that
there is the mistaken impression that humane officers are now powerless to stop the brutalities of animal sacrifice. The Court’s opinion in Lukumi was somewhat convoluted and was confused by current disagreement among Justices concerning how the constitutional guarantee of the free exercise of religion should be interpreted. In light of these misunderstandings, we have offered the resources of the Animal Rights Law Center to assist municipalities and concerned individuals to assess their options for working to protect animals from sacrifice.

Read more

Greyhound racers, cultists on the run in Brazil

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, June 1993:

SÅO PAULO, Brazil––As of January, the Brazilian
humane group Uniao em defesa das baleias/Uniao em defsa da
natureza had no files on greyhound racing. Then, president Ana
Maria Pinheiro told ANIMAL PEOPLE, “Dino Miraglia imported
30 greyhounds from New England.”
Quick to investigate, Pineiro obtained thick dossiers on
greyhound racing and training as practiced in the U.S. from the
World Society for the Protection of Animals, translated the materi-
als into Portugese, “invited the press, and had a meeting with the
attorney general,” who is empowered to enforce the Brazilian
humane laws.

Read more

Editorial: Welcome, brother or sister. Come on in.

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, May 1993:

A recent study by Western Carolina University psychology professor Harold A.
Herzog Jr., published in the Journal of Social Issues volume 49, #1, concluded after inter-
viewing 23 grassroots animal rights activists that there are “several parallels between an
involvement with the animal rights movement and religious conversion.” In particular,
Herzog discovered that “animal rights activism,” for his study subjects, “usually entailed
major changes in lifestyle,” including both subtractive changes such as giving up eating
meat, hunting and fishing, and wearing fur, and additive changes such as becoming politi-
cally active: writing letters, carrying petitions, giving speeches, picketing, prosletyzing.
Herzog’s findings probably surprise neither committed activists nor critics of the animal
rights movement, many of whom frequently disparage the overt missionary zeal of some
activists (especially new converts). A few opponents of animal rights have even called the
cause a new religion. At least one member of the fur trade press has warned that animal
rights threatens the fundamental premises of Judaism, while several prominent anti-animal
rights authors have claimed the idea challenges Christianity.

Read more

Religion & Animals

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, April 1993:

The General Association of Davidian
Seventh Day Adventists, a 500-member vege-
tarian sect active in New York, California, and
South Carolina, wish to make known that they
have nothing whatever to do with the Branch
Davidians, who have been involved in an armed
standoff with police and the FBI since February
28 at their compound near Waco, Texas.

Read more

1 9 10 11 12