If You Are "For the Animals" in Australia, You Can Break the Law with Court Approval
I hope there is more to this story than meets the eye:Shock waves are continuing following the Federal Court's ruling in favour of animal activist Ralph Hahnheuser, who broke into a sheep feedlot four years ago and contaminated the feed with shredded ham.
The incident seriously disrupted the live export trade and the immediate shipping of 72,000 sheep from Portland, Vic.
But Justice Gray dismissed the legal case by Rural Export and Trading (WA) and Samex against the activist on the grounds that Mr Hahnheuser had been acting in the interests of environmental protectionism, given sheep are part of the environment. He also believed Mr Hahnheuser had not intended to hinder trade.
Decisions like this will lead to chaos. And if animal activists can do it, why can't pro lifers, gay rights activists, or anti-illegal immigrant proponents?
Labels: Lawlessness Supported by Courts
posted by Wesley J. Smith @ 10:51 AM
2 Comments
2 Comments:
You could use similar logic to justify the murder of people: since protecting the environment is a desirable end, and since human beings are destructive of the environment, it's desirable to get rid of human beings.
Idiocy.
Dear Gregory:
That *is* the logic that at least one group is using to justify teaching people how to eat other humans to cut down on waste and avoid eating animals (I kid you not, I'll find the website if you'd like). Ironically, the same group, when asked why they don't all just kill themselves to help do their part, all say they're too important as they're pushing the right message and can't afford to die yet.
I note that the guy contaminated the sheep food with shredded ham. So, what, it was okay for a pig to die in the name of animal protection?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home