Democrats Push Pro-Kitten Bill, Days After Backing Human Infanticide
A leading pro-life leader is criticizing House and Senate Democrats for promoting a bill that would protect kittens in research experiments from harm, days after the same Democrats opposed a bill that would protect human babies who survive abortion.
Sen. Jeff Merkley, a Democrat from Oregon, introduced the Kittens In Traumatic Testing Ends Now Act, on March 7, which would halt experiments within the U.S. Department of Agriculture that cause pain to kittens. A USDA laboratory breeds kittens and euthanizes them when the experiment is complete. Nearly 3,000 kittens have been used in research since 1982, according to one USDA administrator.
‚ÄúThe KITTEN Act will protect these innocent animals from being needlessly euthanized in government testing, and make sure that they can be adopted by loving families instead,‚ÄĚ Merkley said in a press release....
Thanks Frank, and Ladybug. Crazy stuff when it's all put into some sort of perspective, isn't it? Murdering babys in the womb over all of these years, has been tragic enough, but the fact that the liberals are doing their best to step up their game in an all-out effort to secure all the votes they can by appealing to women's rights advocates, and their supporters, etc., by allowing them to murder right up to, and following delivery, is a new level of wickedness. Woe to them all.
Girls under the age of 18, in many states, can get an abortion without their parents knowledge or consent, and others require a judicial bypass in order to, once again, skate by without the parents ever knowing. Once again, the madness continues on, because these very same girls need a parental guardian in order to go and see the Gosnell movie.
I love animals, but just by way of example: if a dog, belonging to any of these same girls, had a litter of puppies, but there were too many to care for, what would happen if they were drowned to get rid of them? An adult would go to jail. A minor would be arrested, as well, but would probably be released with court ordered coucilling, etc. The problem for the minor is that killing animals is often a precursor to a troubled adulthood, and a potential sign of becoming a psychopath.
The priorities, and imbalance, where a puppy basically has constitutional protection, so to speak, and is protected by law in every state in the union, are seriously out of whack, and who cares? Few. A healthy little, helpless, human baby can be eaten alive with saline, or sucked apart, alive, with a vacuum, but a child can't be spanked, and a puppy can't be harmed.
Douglas Fir wrote: Can you imagine a sermon about how cats and dogs are treated in the Bible? It would make no one happy. Plain fact is that dogs in Jesus' days were considered very low animals, thus you have the woman replying to him, 'even the dogs eat the crumbs from their master's table' Notice the masters do not buy dog food for them; the only food they get is from table scraps. Even Catholics with their statues of St. Lazarus has dogs licking his wounds, not a clean sight at all.
Great points here, DF. Dogs and cats are unclean animals per Leviticus chapter 11. It seems that there was no prohibition in owning unclean animals, including camels, only against eating them. And being licked (or even eaten by dogs - Jezebel) was not something positive. I do not believe that cats, other than large, dangerous ones like lions and leopards, are mentioned in the Bible. House cats do not appear to my memory.
There is a problem with concluding that pets will go to heaven, although Isaiah 11 does mention the presence of animals in heaven. It is unclear how they got there. They could be animals left alive and sanctified through the making of the new earth.
Pet food sure has changed over the years. Those dogs you mentioned might be better off.
Today was my 2ND time watching I love it. My sister Anne Cradit gave me the web site she also has me doing bible study which I love Think you sis for showing me the way God bless all have a blessed day the sermon was great
Interesting, because if it's the same type of thing I'm thinking of, they've become big business around here. Pharmacies, for sure, but other stores, as well, sell, somewhat life-like, robotic, fur covered cats. I'm sure there are other selections, but the cats seem to be the main sellers, since that all I've seen. Anyway, my wife's grandma is 101yrs old, and lives in a nursing home down the road from me. When I walk through the common area, these cats are sitting across the laps of residents, who are petting and brushing them, etc. The cats purr, and move their heads around, etc. I'm sure it's therapeutic, as many of them are lonely, and pretty bored, but outside of these situations, I can't imagine what the point would be for anyone else to own them.
Plenty of people believe that all animals go to Heaven, and I've heard it preached as well. I heard one Roman Catholic Priest comfort an owner whose pet died, and was asking if it went to Heaven. The Priest said he believed it did, because God wants her (us) to be happy, and there will be no tears in Heaven. The reasoning seemed to be that if she got to Heaven, and didn't find her beloved pet, then she would be sad, and cry, so the pet will be there waiting, since there will be no tears.ūü§Ē
Good points there, Christopher, because I have noticed the same effect. If you look to Japan, where more people are dying off than being born, they even have robot animals. Sony had a dog that they discontinued some years ago and NHK had a story about a shop that repaired them; the owners, usually seasoned citizens, were very happy to have their little robot dogs back in their lives. Can you imagine a sermon about how cats and dogs are treated in the Bible? It would make no one happy. Plain fact is that dogs in Jesus' days were considered very low animals, thus you have the woman replying to him, 'even the dogs eat the crumbs from their master's table' Notice the masters do not buy dog food for them; the only food they get is from table scraps. Even Catholics with their statues of St. Lazarus has dogs licking his wounds, not a clean sight at all.
DF Wrote: "I guess there are more adults who love and cherish cats (and dogs) than there are those who love and cherish babies."
Around me, and I'm sure, everywhere else, you'd think people's pets were human beings. I never hear anyone refer to them as dogs, for example, but, their kids with their little outfits, and being pampered like little babys. Harm one of them, and you're a monster who makes the evening news, while real human babys, can be tossed into a dumpster, and nobody cares. Wicked mindset. Oh, and they also reserve plots for their animals to lay next to them in the cemetary. I don't care how people treat their pets, but the point is the contrast between the importance of pet vs human baby. The pet has rights to life. The baby doesn't.
I guess there are more adults who love and cherish cats (and dogs) than there are those who love and cherish babies. I've heard terms where a pet is substituted for an offspring, but that might be in Japan where the human race is dying out.
In the UK... "It has been illegal to take the eggs of most wild birds since the Protection of Birds Act 1954 and it's illegal to possess or control any wild birds' eggs taken since that time under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981."
The egg is the embryo of the bird.
But it is NOT illegal to remove and kill the baby (embryo) of a human being from the mothers womb.
Murder of the unborn infant is institutionalized in the western nations.
## Democrats are abortionists. Abortion is the killing of the unborn child.
Life begins at conception. To remove said life between conception and old age you must kill that life.
The utter insanity, and wickedness of these people's list of priorities is beyond comprehension. Some might say, "Hey, they're lost, and that's what lost people do". Hmmm...when I was lost, my mindset was nowhere near anything like this. I was always against murdering babys, and even then, I wouldn't have had any similarities to these people, and their various agendas. No, I think these sorts are on a whole different level, and have something missing within them that allows them to be so cold, callous, void of any understanding, and empathy, while being able to sleep soundly eacb night. Such a strange thing to fight so very hard, and with such passion, to murder babys, en masse, for any reason, whatsoever, and at any stage of growth, even during, and following delivery. A tiny, little, helpless baby; a human life, has no meaning, or rights, and can be murdered on-demand, while anyone who harms a cute little puppy or a kitten, is a disturbed monster who goes directly to jail, and is ordered to undergo court ordered coucilling, after they're released. Strange, strange logic.