More Fun With PETA

I recently congratulated Eric Potter's effective smackdown of PETA related anti-fishing nonsense. PETA itself has not responded, but a sympathetic Norfolk womyn name Lacey Mullins has:

As for the dire things that will supposedly come to pass if PETA has its way, why not give it a try and see what happens? I'd bet that if everyone went vegan, heart attack, stroke, obesity, diabetes, and cancer rates would plummet (bad news for cardiologists and oncologists, but good news for everyone else).

This is classic liberalism. An idealist finds a program that works for herself, and proposes that we all would be better off if we would simply do as she says. Nevermind that this woman probably decries McDonald's for victimizing poor ignorant people unable to manage their diet effectively. Somehow, she would expect that these same ignorant people will, through some epiphany, figure out how to substitute pinto beans for Big Macs as a protein source.

Our waterways would be cleaner without all the fertilizer (i.e. manure) runoff from dairy, hog, and chicken farms.

So, if we eliminate animal farms and replace them with soybean farms, fertilizer runoff will cease? What, pray tell, nourishes the soybeans? And who, by the way, grows the vegan products? Big Food? Wouldn't that simply empower other villains of the left like ConAgra? If not Big Food, must we each grow our own food? Because that would make it tough for me to find time to practice architecture. Not to mention what would become of the urban dwellers. It seems Mr. Potter's prediction of a return to subsistence farming isn't that outlandish after all. It is the obvious outcome of Ms. Mullins ideology.

Endangered whales wouldn't be caught in fishing lines if no one was eating fish (many of which are contaminated with mercury, PCBs, and other toxins).

There you have it. If the world just starts behaving like a good liberal, utopia ensues. Never mind that fish oil has been shown beneficial to the heart (oops, maybe those cardiologists don't need to become veterinarians after all). Never mind that fish farming would eliminate fishing lines just as surely as veganism would. After all, it's not really about saving the whales, it's about controlling the humans.

And maybe, just maybe, deer populations would be better managed with contraceptives than with hunter-friendly programs designed to boost deer populations.

This is my favorite part. How, pray tell, does one introduce "contraception" into a wild deer population? By dumping hormones into their food supply? And what prevents those from spreading into the rest of the environment (and ultimately affecting even the whales)? Maybe we could take the very best hunters and turn them into marksmen charged (and, of course, overseen by the newly-minted Federal Department of Whitetail Fertility) with shooting Bucks in the testicles and Does in the . . . um, well never mind, we'll just concentrate on the Bucks I guess, huh Lacey? Now that would prevent animal suffering.

I say the "animal killers" have had their way long enough. Time to try a kinder, gentler approach.

Unfortunately, Ms. Mullins has no real clue what her kind and gentle approach would mean in a real sense.