IWA For Sunday 112810

Animals Over People?

Hey folks,

I've been asked over the years how I can say in one breath, "I like Animals more than I do most people." and then say things like "If my family is starving and there is a Spotted Owl over there, we are having us a BBQ." How do I reconcile the two apparently opposite views on the topic of Animal Rights?

Well, first, I do not feel Animals have "Rights." Do I feel there should be laws to protect them from abuse? Of course. I do not think anyone has the "Right" to harm a helpless Animal. Yet, "Rights" I feel should be allotted to Humans.

Second, I DO like Animals more than most people, because they are INNOCENT. They do their Animal things without thought of Greed or Harm to others for self gain. They simply want to live, procreate, and be loved. That's it. People have Free Will and, as the Word declares, "for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth" Gen 8:21 And in Galatians 5:

19Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,

20Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,

21Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

Animals do not have these flaws. They just are. So, in this light, I DO like Animals more than most people.

However, I also understand that People, are more important, the most important, "things" if you will, on Earth. That's right. Human Beings ARE the most important creation on Earth. We have domination over the Earth and all things upon it. With that Right, we have a responsibility to treat kindly, and protect to a degree, those that can not protect themselves. But NEVER at the expense to Humans.

In other words, if the "Jones" Family buy a home, and start to build on it, and someone finds a Spotted Frog, or whatever, the Frog loses. Sorry. The "Jones" come before a Frog.

Our Idiot this Week, is one of those Animal First People. He is not happy with Obama. He thinks he has not done enough for "Endangered Species." I believe that the Polar Bears may still be on this list even though they are no longer Endangered. The Polar Bear Population is exploding and is greater than in the Past. Yet, they serve a political agenda.

Well, our Idiot said this.

"Species on the candidate list continue to deteriorate while waiting for care. The 251 species now under consideration for federal protection are glaring reminders that we can and should do more to safeguard our valuable natural resources."

Yes, Bob Irvin, Senior VP for Conservation at Defenders of Wildlife. According to this Piece: AP - Critics say Obama lagging on endangered species By MATTHEW DALY, Associated Press Matthew Daly, Associated Press – Fri Nov 26, 2:46 am ET

Many of the species listed as candidates for protection have been waiting for such a designation for decades, including the Oregon spotted frog, found in three West Coast states, and the eastern massasauga rattlesnake, found in nine Midwest and Great Lakes states. The frog has been a candidate for the endangered species list since 1991, the snake since 1982.

So one has been a Candidate for 20 years, and the other 30? Yet, they are still here. Why do we never hear about all those NEW Species they find all the time. Including those thought LONG extinct?

So what could I possibly, being an Animal Lover, have against the Endangered Species Lists? It is the fact, that once an Animal is listed, it is now protected by Law. In other words, the Federal Government can come in and regulate the land, take the land, control whatever anyone wants to do on the land, in the name of compassion for and the protection of, the Animal. Meanwhile, to Hell with the people in those areas.

Congratulations Bob Irvin, for attacking Obama for being equal to Bush on Protected Species YOU declare endangered, YOU are the Idiot of the Week. Not to mention, Obama doesn't care about the American People, do you REALLY think he cares about the Spotted Frog? Seriously? If you do, then you are more than well deserving of this award.

How about those Caribou?
Peter

Sources:
AP - Critics say Obama lagging on endangered species

National Forest Roadless Policy Nothing More Than Anti-Drilling BS

Another Get Back at Bush thing as well.

Hey folks,

I got this Press Release and thought to myself, "Well, that's good." As I have talked about last week and various times over the years, I'm an animal lover and I love Nature. So I was thinking that this is a good thing. But then I started to look into it a bit more. Here is the Press Release:

WASHINGTON, Aug. 14 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Jane Danowitz, director of the Pew Environment Group's U.S. public lands program, today issued the following statement on Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack's support for a national forest roadless policy and the Obama administration's decision to join environmentalists in an appeal to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals of a 2008 Wyoming federal district court ruling that struck down the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule.

"We are pleased the Secretary of Agriculture affirmed the importance of a strong nationwide standard for protecting roadless areas. The Secretary's support for a national roadless policy, along with the administration's move yesterday to join conservationists in defending the roadless rule in court, marks an important step toward resolving the conflicts and patchwork approach that have hindered forest management for decades.

"We hope this signals that the Obama administration intends to move quickly toward fulfilling its pledge to reinstate the roadless rule as the best policy to preserve pristine forestlands across the country."

Background: In 2005, the Bush administration attempted to replace the popular Roadless Area Conservation Rule, issued in 2001, which protects roughly 60 million acres of America's remaining undeveloped national forestland with a discretionary state-based petition process. In May 2009, the Pew Environment Group praised the Obama administration for calling a "time out" on activity in roadless areas until legal and administrative conflicts are resolved. Last week, on August 5, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court decision to reinstate the 2001 roadless rule for the majority of roadless areas.

Pew Environment Group is the conservation arm of The Pew Charitable Trusts, a non-governmental organization that applies a rigorous, analytical approach to improving public policy, informing the public and stimulating civic life. www.ourforests.org

So why did Bush decide to repeal this? Well, one, it SHOULD be State by State, and NOT the Federal Government controlling STATE LAND. Some state rely on the Lumber on some of these lands and they should be able to say what can and can't be done. This is even opposed by Libertarian and Federalist Political groups. Two, ENERGY! That's right. Energy. OUR Energy. Oil, coal, ETC.

On November 29, 2006, Judge Laporte issued an order to ban road construction on 327 Oil and Gas Leases issued by the Bush administration since January 2001, most of them in Colorado, Utah, and North Dakota.

San Francisco -- A federal district court ruled yesterday that the Roadless Area Conservation Rule should be applied to prohibit road construction on hundreds of oil and gas leases issued since the rule was first enacted in 2001. The November 29 court order by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Laporte follows up on her September 20, 2006, ruling that the Bush administration violated federal laws in repealing the Clinton-era Roadless Rule.

The new ruling means that 327 oil and gas leases issued by the Bush administration since January 2001 are now subject to the Roadless Rule's prohibition on road construction or reconstruction. Most of the affected leases are in roadless areas of national forests and national grasslands in Colorado, Utah and North Dakota.

Just like the Kooks that want to prohibit drilling off the coast and drilling in ANWAR, they would rather "Feel Good" about "Saving the Planet" than they would educate themselves to the FACTS and REALITY in this debate.

Once again you see the Envionuts say Screw Humans in the name of a SCAM. Once again, in the face of reality, we have Kooks claiming that we are destroying the Planet. Once again, it is these SAME Kooks that will keep us dependant on foreign Oil and keep Gas at an inflated rate. Higher than it ever needs to be.
Peter

Sources:
Pew Environment Group
Earth Justice - Court Orders Roadless Rule Implemented Against Oil and Gas Drilling