brokenhearted

what a backwards world we live in. it amazes me to find the things that people get in an uproar about, things people outlaw, things people blast all over the news to attract public awareness and attention, and the things people 'allow,' condone, celebrate and applaud.

i was reading about (and seeing clips of tv news) how they have been working to find new, loving homes for the dogs confiscated from Michael Vick's home after he was found to be participating in dogfighting. the news is celebrating, applauding, writing articles and interviewing people about these 'heroes' who are giving these poor dogs new homes, after being rescued from the big bad evil Michael Vick. it's amazing how he, because of his dogfighting activities, has been blacklisted, arrested, suspended from athletics, and bad-mouthed all over the country. i've read web threads where people have said he should be strung up, killed, beaten - really brutal responses from people outraged that he would condone and participate in such cruel and violent "sport" with animals.

let me first say, that i do not, in ANY way condone, support, agree with, or tolerate any animal fighting. it is disgusting, cruel, violent, and inhumane and anyone found to be running those kinds of operations should be jailed and/or penalized severely.

however, how is it that a nation that largely supports abortions of hundreds of thousands of unborn babies can be so outraged over animals?? abortion is perfectly legal in this country, and while there are quite a few anti-abortion activists, there are still even larger numbers of people (men and women) who support a woman's right to "choose" to abort her baby because "it's her body." but is it not even more cruel, violent, and inhumane to abort a developing human being before he/she gets to take their first real breath?

i know a lot of abortion supporters will say that in the first several weeks after conception, it is arguable as to whether or not the "embryo" has human status yet. many say that it is merely a shapeless clump of cells. others say, yes it may very well be a baby, even in the early stages, but still, a woman has a right to choose whether or not she wants to kill it. and those who oppose dogfighting would say that it's cruel and punishable because those who engage in it are facilitating cruel treatment of animals who are innocent victims and don't get a say in the matter.

but isn't an unborn baby, no matter how small and yet-to-be-developed an even more innocent victim? he or she doesn't get a say either. why should we have a legal "right" to kill an unborn child, but we have no legal right to cause harm to an animal?

don't misunderstand: i love animals - heck i'm a vegan and i have four pets at home! and i support groups who work to protect the lives of animals, especially those being abused and mistreated. but even given my love of animals, i do recognize a huge difference between an animal and a human being. and i find it disturbing that this country gets outraged at the maltreatment of animals, but lets so much slide when it comes to the mistreatment of people.

and for those who will argue that most abortions take place within the 5th week to the 12th week of pregnancy and that it is not technically yet a "baby," have you ever seen pictures of a developing baby? even at 7 weeks, a tiny head has formed, he has eyes, she has little tiny fingers, he has a tiny heartbeat, she has tiny toes.

and the very people saying that it's not a "baby" yet in those early stages, if it were your own child, and someone violently and viciously, without your consent or permission, came along and ripped your developing child from your womb, you'd be appalled, outraged, and filing charges to have that monster imprisoned for killing your child. not your "clump of cells." your child. think about it.

but yet if the circumstances were unfavorable, and the pregnancy unwanted, that same child would no longer be a child but would be and "embryo" and you'd have the right to terminate his/her life. and the doc performing the procedure isn't seen as a monster, but as a medical professional, because you have given your consent, permission, and money. same baby, different situations. how does the preciousness of an unborn child change based on the current feelings and life-circumstances of the mother?

i'm not saying abortion should be illegal. i'm not saying it shouldn't be. my point in all of this is, why do we fight more for the protection of dogs than we do for our beautiful unborn children?

why do we fight for the right of a woman to terminate the life of an unborn baby, but turn around and fight against anyone who hurts and animal?

when did animal life become more sacred than human life?