Nathan Winograd has this blog about animal rights, right here at blogspot. On Friday he posted about the deceptions of a proposed mandatory pet sterilization law in CA. It’s rather an interesting piece of work, actually.
What I find intriguing is – two things, actually –
I was disappointed that Mr. Winograd doesn’t allow comments on his blog, but a friend has informed me that he’s received numerous death threats from his book. Go figure. We can push for freedom of speech in this country, so long as you don’t offend the wrong people. sigh.
Second, I couldn’t help but notice as I read, the staunch parallels between his beef against these California/Los Angeles animal shelters, for their heavy euthenasia policies, very very strongly parallels the conflict between contraception and abortion.
He points out that the law to sterilize animals, cats and dogs particularly, got bogged down in so many amendments that it ended up being rather invisible – “This isn’t about sterilization, is it?” “No, it’s not,” the dialogue is supposed to have gone.
Forty years ago, Pope Paul VI warned that the increase of artificial birth control would, inevitably, lead to the murder of unborn children via abortion. The link between disrespect for procreative capability of human beings and the willingness to kill is tragic, and indisputable.
Very interesting, indeed.