Tuesday, October 15, 2019

Fur out, bro

While chewing on a pork chop, state assembly member Laura Friedman tweeted, “Today CA made history - # AB44 was signed into law! After decades of efforts from animal welfare advocates, we are now the first state in the nation to ban fur. CA has no place for the inhumane & unsustainable treatment of animals. Now for other states to follow in our legacy.”

OK, I made up part of that. She may be a vegan for all I know. Nevertheless, the passage of the law is not made up, neither is the hypocrisy imagined. It is fact that California became the first state to ban fur products when “Gov. Gavin Newsom signed legislation Friday that will make it illegal to sell, donate or manufacture new fur products in the state.”
This bill would make it unlawful to sell, offer for sale, display for sale, trade, or otherwise distribute for monetary or nonmonetary consideration a fur product, as defined, in the state. The bill would also make it unlawful to manufacture a fur product in the state for sale. The bill would exempt from these prohibitions used fur products, as defined, fur products used for specified purposes, and any activity expressly authorized by federal law.
The bill would make these provisions operative on January 1, 2023.
Now the compassionate legislators of the far left state have a law that protects the mink, chinchilla, rabbits, and so on. “The bill…applies to all new clothing, handbags, shoes and other items made with fur. Those who violate the law would be subject to civil penalties.” However, the poor cow, pig and sheep received no compassion – leather, cowhide and shearling being exempt from the ban. “Fur products used for religious purposes or by Native American tribes” – which likely are equivalent in the religious realm – are also exempt. And I’m sure some of the compassionate voters will still be eating their rib eyes, hams, and lamb chops.

PETA – People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals – and Direct Action Everywhere are working to change the world for animals everywhere. PETA says they “worked with compassionate legislators to push these lifesaving laws forward and looks to other states to follow California’s progressive lead.”

Maybe we need PETA to go to work on abortion. While California’s abortion laws are not as liberal as one might expect, in that state women have the “fundamental right” to choose between giving birth and having an abortion, with certain restrictions. How about compassionate legislators creating more lifesaving laws for the human babies? PETA? Laura? Gavin?

With Jesus we might ask today, “How much then is a baby better than a fur-bearing mammal?” (Cf. Matthew 12:10-12.)

No comments: