Angry in the Great White North

Update: Andrew at bound by gravity takes me to task over my glib definition of utilitarianism. He's quite right. We're all utilitarian to a degree -- the default means by which we make decisions is often based on maximizing good. That Peter Singer takes this approach to be the only valid means by which decisions are made, and defines good in purely mechanistic terms (more money, more food, etc, etc), is where the the problem lies. And it lies with me too, for having painted all of utilitarianism as being the sort advocated by Singer. My bad. So go read Andrew's post and be enlightened. And for goodness sake, don't believe everything you read on my blog!

With a hat tip to Michelle Malkin, the latest PETA outrage:

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, a national animal rights group, posted giant photographs of people, mostly black Americans, being tortured, sold and killed, next to photographs of animals, including cattle and sheep, being tortured, sold and killed.

"I think it is an apt comparison," said Josh Warchol, 26, of Wallingford, president of the Southern Connecticut Vegetarian Society, which is aligned with PETA.

Of course he does. Required reading for PETA is the works of Peter Singer, in particular, "Animal Liberation".

Peter Singer is a philosopher for a school of thought called utilitarianism. It essentially lowers humans to the status of animals. For all the intelligence humans possess, the only thing Peter Singer thinks it's really good for is to make determinations about whether you are better off dead now or later. In the end, you'll die anyway, and the only question is whether you were much use or you overstayed your welcome.

I wrote about how Peter Singer sees infants as "replaceable non-self-conscious babies" that ought to be killed if they aren't born right.

Most people rebel against these ideas (as well has his other weird ideas, like his support for bestiality). For PETA though, if they can draw a connection between a cow being slaughtered for food and the murder of a human being, then maybe we'll stop killing cows.

Funny thing here is that Peter Singer is arguing the opposite -- we don't deserve to treat ourselves any better than cows. Half-full, half-empty -- it's still a cup of crazy either way you look at it.

But to take on the NAACP, well, that's a whole new level of crazy:

One man demanded that the NAACP get involved immediately. Five minutes later, Scot X. Esdaile, president of the state and Greater New Haven chapters of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, arrived at the scene, surveyed the photos and blasted the organizers.

"Once again, black people are being pimped. You used us. You have used us enough," Esdaile said. "Take it down immediately."

"I am a black man! I can’t compare the suffering of these black human beings to the suffering of this cow," said Michael Perkins, 47, of New Haven. He stood in front of a photo of butchered livestock hung next to the photo of two lynched black men dangling before a white mob.

"You can’t compare me to a freaking cow," shouted John Darryl Thompson, 46, of New Haven, inches from Carr’s face. "We don’t care about PETA. You are playing a dangerous game."

You think PETA would have learned from the first time they tried this stunt, calling a steak a "Holocaust on Your Plate":

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) continued its denunciation of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) for its "Holocaust on Your Plate" project for trivializing the murder of six million Jews and called its appeal for approval by the Jewish community "outrageous, offensive and taking chutzpah to new heights." The PETA exhibit was unveiled in New York City's Duffy Square, the heart of the theater district.

[Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director:] Abusive treatment of animals should be opposed, but cannot and must not be compared to the Holocaust. The uniqueness of human life is the moral underpinning for those who resisted the hatred of Nazis and others ready to commit genocide even today.

Uniqueness of human life? Not a Peter Singer fan, I'd wager.

The ADL got a semi-apology from PETA's Ingrid Newkirk (fitting name, by the way, since "new kirk" means "new church" in Scottish, environmentalism being the new secular religion of choice):

Our mission is a profoundly human one at its heart, yet we know that we have caused pain. This was never our intention, and we are deeply sorry.

Hard as it may be to understand for those who were deeply upset by this campaign, I was bowled over by the negative reception by many in the Jewish community. It was both unintended and unexpected. The PETA staff who proposed that we do it were Jewish, and the patronage for the entire endeavor was Jewish.

The apology runs over 1000 words, but it can be distilled down to these four sentences. We're sorry you were bothered by this, but not for doing it in the first place. And if you need to blame someone, blame the Jews.

Nice.