News of the Strange: Animal Rights Grave Robbers

|

British animal rights activists ghoulishly dug up the body of Gladys Hammond and are holding it hostage until her son-in-law stops raising guinea pigs for medical experiments. The grave robbery is the culmination of a six year intimidation campaign against Darley Oaks Farm animal raising facility. Police have now arrested 5 activists in the case, but Ms. Hammond's body is still missing.

Of course, old-fashioned grave robbers did it to supply medical schools with cadavers for surgical and anatomical research. In this case, the activists robbed a grave in order to deny patients the benefits of medical research.

NEXT: Reason Writers Around Town

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. In this case, the activists robbed a grave in order to deny patients the benefits of medical research.

    I’m not quibbling with the suggestion that the benefits of medical research are more important than guinea pigs, and I don’t know any of the activists involved…

    …but I think they robbed this grave because they think that living guinea pigs are more important than a corpse.

  2. TC: Yes. But also they mean to shut down animal experimentation by intimidating researchers and people who raise lab animals. And thus “deny patients the benefits of medical research.”

  3. If only I could create zombies out of these activits’ loved ones, then refuse to let them have the zombie cure because it was tested on animals.

  4. While grave-robbing is generally morbid and reprehensible, after a while does it -really- matter if your relations are actually still planted in the ground? Digging them up isn’t going to deny them any benefits they may be believed to have in the afterlife, as surely if their soul were going anywhere, it would have already left the body.

    I mean, it’s a shitty thing to do, but I can’t say that holding a corpse hostage would impact my actions much.

    …unless it’s that Corpse Bride. Hot damn!

  5. Let that corpse sit there long enough before you dig it up and it’s all ok- we call that “archaeology.”

  6. Have I mentioned that, in general, I hate animal rights activists?

    And what a great example of ends justifying means thinking.

  7. Lets here it for Gladys; if she can’t do it, no body can.

  8. We honor the dead not for their own sake (they are dead, after all), but rather because it makes us more comfortable knowing that we, too, will be honored when we die.

    These graverobbers, if convicted, should get some very serious punishment.

  9. Digging them up isn’t going to deny them any benefits they may be believed to have in the afterlife, as surely if their soul were going anywhere, it would have already left the body.

    That’s what you think

  10. Why are England’s Animal Rights loonies so much more loony than our Animal Rights loonies?

  11. A few years ago, PETA sued the California Milk Advisory Board. They claimed that the slogan, “Great cheese comes from happy cows. Happy cows come from California.” amounted to false advertising. …because, of course, the cows in California weren’t really happy.

    …I read a blurb from PETA at the time saying that they had no expectation of winning their suit. …and they had no intention of paying some lawyer to go through with litigation. They just wanted to make people think for a moment about the way cows are treated, and they knew that by merely filing a ridiculous lawsuit, they’d get all kinds of media exposure.

    Animal rights activists are the freakin’ tops when it comes to getting the message out! I’m not saying libertarians should go out and steal some corpses, but if we were half as good as they are at guerilla marketing, marijuana would already be legalized.

  12. Cremation is the only way to go. Then let them steal my remains. I can appreciate having my ashes hauled one last time.

  13. I am not a lawyer! But I think that grave robbery, as in sneaking into graveyard to dig up and run off with a corpse, should be called grave burglary.

  14. Pehaps People for the Ethical Treatment of Corpses should sue the government for false adverstising, jdog.

  15. Yeah, some libertarian activist out there!

    …You can use my ashes. When I go, tell ’em that if they don’t drop the capital gains tax, you’re gonna flush ol’ KS straight down the toilet!

    On second thought, somebody would have to care. …and, actually, there are a few people who probably love to see me flushed down the toilet.

    …You’d probably do better threatening to have me stuffed and planted in some budget porker’s front yard. …nude and holding a bird bath.

  16. I agree with everything Steven Crane posted at October 12, 2005 05:42 PM. Except the part about the Corpse Bride being hot. Too bony. And rotting-to-pieces-y.

    My response to the grave robbers would be: “Do your worst.”

    Or, just possibly, I’d threaten to kill one extra guinea pig every day until the corpse is neatly and properly re-buried. Take that.

  17. What’s funny is that if Western culture (and, for all I know, other cultures) didn’t have this freakish relationship with the idea of death and human remains, and didn’t believe that the empty, lifeless corpse was somehow still the person, this tactic would likely have no effect whatsoever.

  18. But also they mean to shut down animal experimentation by intimidating researchers and people who raise lab animals.

    Are they trying to shut down all labs, or just those that are overly cruel and/or especially secretive in their treatment of animals.

    Even if one believes that some animal research is justified, doesn’t mean that one needs to believe that every margin of animal research is justifiable. What margin of the cruelty versus science issue does Darley Oaks represent? Are there ways that Darley Oaks could accomplish their objecxtives with less cruelty? These are relevant question, especially when the civil disobedience is has quite limited economic harm to the property owner.

  19. These are relevant question, especially when the civil disobedience is has quite limited economic harm to the property owner.

    We kill animals for food. …because we like the way they taste.

    …compared to that, medical research is a no-brainer.

  20. No, Tom. We kill some animals for food. Others are illegal to kill for food. And there’s reasons for that.

    Questions about how we treat animals are not nearly as binary as you & Mr. Bailey would have it.

  21. Personally, I love animal rights activists.

    They’re delicious.

  22. You can take my guinea pig away when you pry it from my cold dead boney fingers.

  23. No, Tom. We kill some animals for food. Others are illegal to kill for food. And there’s reasons for that.

    Depends on who “we” is. I can’t think of an animal that cultures somewhere don’t eat, unless it’s too hard to catch or too rare to find.

  24. Questions about how we treat animals are not nearly as binary as you & Mr. Bailey would have it.

    You know nothing of how I would have it.

    FYI, I’ve volunteered for animal rescue. …I’ve known deeply committed animal rights people.

    …and I’m convinced that getting society to treat food as if it had rights is very, very, very hard. …getting society to forego medical research can only be harder.

  25. Sounds like the title of an Ed Wood movie.

  26. getting society to treat food as if it had rights is very, very, very hard

    Do you think it should be legal to kill a dog for food (in non-emergency, non-neccessity conditions)?

    If no, then your error should become clear to you.

    If yes, then, yeah, keep advocating your position. It is helpful to those who care about animals to an intermediate degree.

  27. Well, Stevo, perhaps miss corpse bride could use a little post-mortem plastic surgery. But still, there’s a good foundation there. Also it’s hard to go wrong with Helena Bonham Carter’s voice.

  28. Dave W.-

    It’s legal to kill a dog for food in many countries, and we’ve no right to tell them whether it’s right or wrong. It’s almost as silly as people who go buy their meat in the grocery store, then have the sheer nerve to call hunting brutal.

    What really is the difference between killing a dog and a chicken?

    The answer is cultural norms, nothing more. I own three dogs and four cats, and don’t plan on putting any of them in my belly. But I’m not fooling myself. The reason these cats and dogs are such good companions has everything to do with evolutionary mechanics and is reinforced by our culture. That’s all.

    Who are you to say anyone is making an “error” in their thinking, anyway?

  29. Why are England’s Animal Rights loonies so much more loony than our Animal Rights loonies?

    England doesn’t lock up its violent home invaders. What penalty would a British animal rights protester expect to face?

  30. Are there ways that Darley Oaks could accomplish their objecxtives with less cruelty?

    Probably not, or at least not as well or as efficiently. Otherwise, they would be hurting the GP’s simply for the sake of doing so. You really think they’re sick fucks?

  31. “It’s legal to kill a dog for food in many countries, and we’ve no right to tell them whether it’s right or wrong.”

    We’ve gone from digging up human corpses to ‘What’s for dinner ?’. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

  32. Sounds like Darley Oaks needs to start breeding some attack guinea pigs and give them away to the animal rights people as presents. Just think, they go to pet the tribble and the thing goes bloody nuts like a wolverine…

  33. If animals are equal to humans and the activists hostage experiment succeeds in closing the farm, does this make Gladys Hammond the closest we’ve ever come to an actual human guinea pig?

  34. God damn, Stevo Darkly, that whole bit about killing an extra guinea pig a day was the funniest thing I’ve heard all day (I’ve had a bad day).

    Anyway, I so wish I had thought of that, and just know you affected some poor soul out in the blogosphere in a positive way.

  35. Glad to hear it, eric. Thanks.

    I’ve had one of those days where you put out this little fire and that little fire, but at the end of the day you ask yourself, “So what did I accomplish today?” and the only answer is, “Basically nothing.”

    But tomorrow is another day.

  36. If yes, then, yeah, keep advocating your position. It is helpful to those who care about animals to an intermediate degree.

    Dude, did you miss part of my point? I freakin’ do what I can to help rescue dogs.

    I know people who spend almost all of their spare time rescuing dogs and finding homes for them. …I know people who spend their weekends at malls and pet shops trying to find homes for dogs. …people who cry all the way home every weekend ’cause they couldn’t find anybody to take the dogs home and that was those dogs last chance. …people who already have ten dogs at home that they couldn’t place. …and then they go do it all over again the next weekend too!

    I don’t know where animals fit in in the social contract, but I know exactly where people are. I think other people’s rights end where mine begin. I don’t think people who care about animals should necessarily be able to impose legal restrictions on other people mandating the cruelty free treatment of guinea pigs during medical research.

    …however, I think people should treat animals with as little cruelty as possible and without cruelty whenever possible. I also think people should say nice things about their Grandma’s cooking.

    I’ve learned to pick my battles in life. …and the animal rights battle is a very, very hard battle to fight. …especially considering that so many people think of animals as food, clothing, etc. If animal rights people ever win their fight, it won’t be because they’ve convinced people that guinea pigs are more important than medical research–you may have noticed that this is how some people have interpreted this corpse theft.

    …If animal rights people ever win their fight, it’s going to be because they’ve managed to persuade people to stop thinking about animals as food, clothing and a nice covering for automobile interiors and furniture. …cruelty free medical research will be a natural consequence of that. …and that’s going to be a very, very difficult battle to fight.

    That’s all.

  37. God damn, Stevo Darkly, that whole bit about killing an extra guinea pig a day was the funniest thing I’ve heard all day

    So I go out on a limb, offering to have my corpse stuffed and used as some pork barrel Senator’s lawn ornament, and Stevo gets the laughs?

    Stevo, this means war! ; )

    P.S. …and joe’s People for the Ethical Treatment of Corpses comment doesn’t even get an honorable mention?

  38. Yeah alright– I did find those others funny too, but the guinea pig thing kind of had this, like, irrational visceral appeal– like I wish I were killing a guinea pig at the moment (but only for medical research).

    The other two reminded me of something out of a Cramp’s song.

  39. Hey, I completely missed joe’s “People for the Ethical Treatment of Corpses” comment. Thanks for pointing that out.

    And the mental image of Tom C’s mounted corpse, “nude and holding a bird bath” was also funny, I thought.

    But hey, at the risk of blowing my own horn, you have to admit that the off-the-cuff idea of holding the guinea pigs for counter-ransom had a little ironic twist all its own. Perhaps that’s what appealed to eric.

    Tell you what — Laughter is meant to be share. Let’s all spread the wealth and laugh at each of those comments. Start now.

    Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! LOL.

  40. man, these guys should check out some of the mountain communities in peru. spitroasted guinea pig is apparently quite tasty.

  41. joe’s comment “Pe[r]haps People for the Ethical Treatment of Corpses…” was directed at me.

    I’ll come clean now. I actually Googled “People for the Ethical Treatment of Corpses”. I didn’t drill through *all* the pages, but I got the idea soon enough that joe had sent me on a snipe hunt.

    Fair and square. Good one, joe.

  42. Let’s all spread the wealth and laugh at each of those comments.

    Why do you hate the guinea pigs?

  43. Probably not, or at least not as well or as efficiently. Otherwise, they would be hurting the GP’s simply for the sake of doing so. You really think they’re sick fucks?

    I think it is possible that they place a zero value on all margins of guinea pig suffering. If so, then yeah, they are sick fucks who undervalue guinea pig dignity relative to shareholder profit. It does come down to a balance between guinea pig pain and efficiency of research. Since we are not activists, we do not know the balance here, what the less painful alternatives might be. Surprisingly, many of us are as uncurious about this as the uncurious Mr. Bailey. We like the animals we rescue. We don’t care a fig for any animal we don’t directly encounter. Selfishness. Cruelty by proxy. Get a lil curious at least. For Rover.

  44. Or if not for Rover’s sake, then at least to keep the regulator man away. When private businesses correct abuses on their own, there is less need for gov’t oversight. And that is how its supposed to work anyway.

  45. Reason just loves posting articles about loony animal rights activists (and there are a lot of them). But I noticed they haven’t posted anthing on whether in a Libertarian world animals would have any legal protection against torture.

    Here’s a repost of my late post to the last animal rights thread:

    ***************************

    “Sorry, mediageek, I should have said, “Spike is criticizing libertarianism for his perception of a neutral-at-best position on animal torture.” A perception that he should have been disabused of by reading the thread, but maybe he considers grigory to be the archetype libertarian.”

    Sorry, but support for the right to torture animals is a libertarian position. Try googling “Libertarianism” + “animal rights” + “torture” for some enlightening reading.

    The basic argument is that only adult humans have full rights (because of their reasoning abilities).

    Because children and brain damaged (or brain diminished) humans have less (sometimes much less) reasoning abilities, they should not have the same rights as adult humans.

    But because children (and brain damaged/diminished adults) are in the same category (i.e. human) as adult humans, they should be afforded some rights (i.e. legal protections).

    The argument continues, that because animals (other than the human animal) should not be afforded full rights, that they should not be afforded *any* rights.

    The writers argue though they themselves are shocked and horrified by animals torture, that any laws against animal torture would be a slippery slope towards state intrusions on our liberties.

    One writer even argued that if your neighbor is abusing his dog and it bothers you, that you should trespass onto the abusers property and rescue the dog. If you are arrested, you should be confident that jury nullification would save you from jail.

    Why laws against child abuse are ok but that nothing equivalent could be done for animals is not explained. But at least I haven’t come across any libertarians arguing that laws against child abuse are tyranny.

    If I’m wrong, and the libertarian orthodoxy really does support laws that protect animals against torture, then I would like to see Reason publish an article saying so. It’s the least they can do after publishing the above piece of shit by Mr. O’Dell.

    Spike

  46. I gotta say, I liked the image of specially bred, ferocious ginea pigs.

    Aw, come here litte guy…Aaaaa! Aaaaa!!! Get it off!

  47. Do all rights originate with the ability to reason? Surely the right to life doesn’t, otherwise a newborn could be slaughtered for not being the correct sex or the extermination of the mentally handicapped could be justified. You start to get into the definition of conciousness in this argument. I’m not sure, but conciousness and reason are not equivalent are they? These definitions largely are undetermined I believe.

  48. Stevo’s plan reminds me of Stern getting some hot PETA activist chicks naked by threatening to cook a live lobster if they didn’t strip. It worked. The man is an evil genius. At least when it comes to getting dumb girls nekkid.

  49. I think it is possible that they place a zero value on all margins of guinea pig suffering.

    No, it goes further than that. If they had zero practical purpose to hurt the GP’s, then they would not only be totally insensitive to hurt them, they would be intentionally hurting them FOR THE SAKE OF IT. Do you understand that? Do you understand that that is what you are accusing them of? Why else would they do it if they had no other reason to do it? Even if they only had a minor reason to do it, even if you, in the wisdom you gain from having nothing at all to do with any of it, were to determine that the GP pain was not worth what was being gained by the procedure, they must have SOME reason to do it, or else they wouldn’t do it, simple as that. So unless you’re accusing them, NOT just of having total disregard for the GP’s well being, but of proactively WANTING to do the GP’s harm, it only makes sense to acknowledge that they MUST have some practical reason to treat the GP’s as they do. THAT is why I say they probably (to understate the case) cannot do what they are doing without hurting the GP’s as they do, because I have zero reason to believe they would be hurting the GP’s gratuitously and every reason to believe that they must have some rational, practical purpose for doing what they’re doing.

    Now, exactly what the cost or shortcomings of treating the GP’s more humanely would be, I don’t know. And, it appears, neither do you. But it’s easy to criticize what you don’t know about.

    relative to shareholder profit

    Please remember that it is not just shareholders who are profiting. Share prices don’t go up unless the company provides some goods or services that someone out there values.

  50. Joe:
    Why are England’s Animal Rights loonies so much more loony than our Animal Rights loonies?

    They’re paid better.

  51. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! LOL.

    It was very funny Stevo, but I still kinda like the idea of playing to Salieri to your Mozart. ; )

  52. The other two reminded me of something out of a Cramp’s song.

    Well I couldn’t ask for higher praise than that!

  53. Maybe I’m beating a dead horse here, but presently lab animals do have legal protections against inhumane treatment.

    Under a Libertarian system, they would have no legal protections at all. Some researchers would continue to treat their animals well, but of course some would not.

    Spike

  54. We like the animals we rescue. We don’t care a fig for any animal we don’t directly encounter. Selfishness. Cruelty by proxy. Get a lil curious at least. For Rover.

    I’m contemplating a postulate…

    ’tis difficult to discuss strategy with true believers, no matter the cause.

    …If proven, it could become world famous as Shultz’s Sixth Law of Social Dynamics.

  55. Under a Libertarian system, they would have no legal protections at all.

    That isn’t entirely clear to me. I admit this is an issue libertarians don’t seem to be entirely clear on; indeed, libertarians seem predisposed to reject the idea of animal rights. …but this isn’t the only issue libertarians haven’t ironed out. Take a look at the abortion issue! I think most libertarians are pre-disposed to the pro-choice side of the argument. …I just so happen to lean pro-life.

    I think good libertarians with integrity can have different opinions regarding animal rights too.

    That being said, I don’t think libertarians in general want to seize power and inflict laws facilitating animal cruelty (or any other laws) on everyone else. I see us as more of a persuasion society. …and as I argued above, I think slow persuasion is the only way animal rights people are going to win their fight.

  56. She’s his MOTHER-IN-LAW! Like he gives a shit if she’s dug up!

  57. I really like the comment by Dave W. at October 12, 2005 09:38 PM, if only for its apparently completely unironic use of the phrase “guinea pig dignity.”

    PS: Which would also be a pretty decent name for a band.

    PPS: But not as good a name as “aquatic trauma,” which is the expression a co-worker coined to described what happened to my cell phone over the weekend. (I forgot to take it out of my jeans before I laundered them.)

    PPPS: I let the cell phone dry out over the past few days, and this evening it started working again, A-OK.

  58. Alas, I can’t make a direct link to the sound file I want, but …

    Tom Crick, listen to the 3rd and then 1st clips.

  59. Personally, I love animal rights activists.
    They’re delicious.

    That reminded me of a little conversation I had just the other day. The guy told me he saw a bumper sticker reading, “Vegetarians Taste Better”, and we talked about how the reading would depend upon the sort of car it was on.

  60. Maybe the fetus-rights crowd should start using similar tactics.

    Not because I condone such tactics. But I’d love to see the logic used to justify the acts of one group, but not the other.

  61. Tom Crick – No kidding about PETA being good at getting its message out. They’re a bunch of loonies, but they seem to be in the news every damn week, and ultimately the exposure is good for them. And speaking of exposure, they always seem to be in the news because they’re taking their clothes off. Maybe libertarians should adopt some of their tactics…

  62. The animal rights activists in Europe are roughly a decade ahead of the ones in this country in their organizing and development of various tactics. Luckily, some of the well off ar-activists in this country having been heading off across the pond for a number of years. So much like in soccer, we are catching up. The cheaper and dirtier option for the ar folks is to go undercover and train with the pro-life crowd. Strange bed fellows indeed. I think the left’s general aversion to guns and the right’s general aversion to ar-activism are the only reason we haven’t started seeing murdered researchers yet. Yet.

  63. If the Flying Spaghetti Monster didn’t want us to eat animals, he wouldn’t have made them out of meat.

  64. Under a Libertarian system, they would have no legal protections at all.

    That’s a hell of an assumption.

    I can see making vast progress toward a libertarian society from where we are now before the issue of repealing current laws protecting research animals comes up, after all.

    Would a night watchman state extend itself to protect animals, who are, after all, someone’s property? Seems unlikely, but not impossible.

    Would a market-based society dish out rewards to companies with a clean bill of health on their treatment of animals?

    Why, we already do. In the absence of legislation prohibiting it, many cosmetics manufacturers have given up animal testing, because being able to boast about “cruelty-free” is more valuable in the marketplace than whatever benefit they were getting from animal testing.

    There are other ways to accomplish your goals than passing a law, you know.

  65. Animal rights activists are the freakin’ tops when it comes to getting the message out! I’m not saying libertarians should go out and steal some corpses, but if we were half as good as they are at guerilla marketing, marijuana would already be legalized.

    Considering pretty much everyone thinks animal rights activists are lunatics, and when the issue gets put in the framework they use (“a child with cancer has no more sacred a life than the rat you’d kill to find a cure for cancer!”) virtually no one in the world agrees with them, I’d say libertarians are doing better by at least no making public nuisances of themselves, bombing research clinics, and stealing corpses.

  66. >Stevo’s plan reminds me of Stern getting some hot PETA activist chicks naked by threatening to cook a live lobster if they didn’t strip. It worked. The man is an evil genius. At least when it comes to getting dumb girls nekkid.

    If the girls really were PETA activists they weren’t dumb, they were exploiting an opportunity to promote their cause.

  67. Eric the Half Bee,

    Animal rights activists aren’t trying to be loved. They’re trying to make progress on their issues. And as a matter of fact, a great deal of progress has been made on their issues, on both the legal and social fronts. Despite the fact that people may dislike them personally.

    There are more methods of getting support for your cause than making people love you so much that they do what you want.

  68. There are more methods of getting support for your cause than making people love you so much that they do what you want.

    So, once again, we are back to the “Vote Libertarian, or we’ll shoot this dog” idea.

    How many more dogs have to die?

  69. “…I’d say libertarians are doing better by at least no making public nuisances of themselves, bombing research clinics, and stealing corpses.”

    I repeat…

    ’tis difficult to discuss strategy with true believers, no matter the cause.

    Thanks for the empirical evidence. …It’s not the Sixth Law yet, but it’s getting closer.

  70. Sixty-nine posts on the corpse thread! Woo hoo!

  71. I’m trying to figure out a nice way to say this, but it’s hard. Here goes.

    If you’re having trouble convincing a “true believer” that the whole “dig up a corpse in order to blackmail someone into doing what you want” style of public discourse is a great strategy, maybe the fault is not that of the “true believer”.

  72. Animal rights activists are the freakin’ tops when it comes to getting the message out!

    OK, let’s have a quiz of animal rights activists as to their effectiveness.

    1) Does society agree with and enforce your views on animal rights?

    2) If not, are you succeeding in making more people agree with your views on animal rights? In this case, I mean agree with your viewpoint “animal experimentation should be stopped”, say, not a shrug followed by “some of those medical experiments are a bit much.”

    3) Are you succeeding in getting laws passed to enforce those views? What laws, and how are you taking credit for them?

  73. “they are sick fucks who undervalue guinea pig dignity relative to shareholder profit.”

    Although Stevo already drew attention to this phrase, I have to add that if someone had asked me when Hit & Run launched whether the phrase “undervalue guinea pig dignity relative to shareholder profit” would ever be used on the blog, I would have said they needed to lay off the drugs.

  74. 1) Does society agree with and enforce your views on animal rights?

    Have you noticed that Petco doesn’t sell cats or dogs? …That ain’t ’cause there’s no money in it.

    …Have you noticed that Petco is one of the preferred places for SPCA to hold dog and cat adoptions?

    2) If not, are you succeeding in making more people agree with your views on animal rights? In this case, I mean agree with your viewpoint “animal experimentation should be stopped”, say, not a shrug followed by “some of those medical experiments are a bit much.”

    Just because the public hasn’t embraced some of the more radical animal rights positions doesn’t mean that the tactics of animal rights activists aren’t working.

    …What if the penalty for selling marijuana was no more serious than a speeding ticket? Would you argue that the tactics of libertarians were somehow unsuccessful because drugs of all kinds hadn’t been completely decriminalized?

    3) Are you succeeding in getting laws passed to enforce those views? What laws, and how are you taking credit for them?

    Haven’t done much research on the topic–again, I’m not an animal rights activist–but it’s my understanding that enforcement and prosecution of cruelty to animals cases are way up.

    I understand that the regulation of dog and cat breeders is on the rise.

    P.S. …and while it isn’t a law, I understand that vegetarianism is more popular than ever.

  75. they needed to lay off the drugs

    Maybe, but I used the word “digity” to avoid being graphicregarding the sensations that guinea pigs feel when they are being experimented upon in some of the less sensitive ways. Would some more specific illustrations be helpful to you here, or can we get by with “dignity?”

  76. I wasn’t saying you needed to lay off the drugs, Dave W. I was just saying that if someone had told me that phrase was going to be posted to H&R someday, I would have told them to lay off the drugs.

  77. Tom, the problem is that you’re claiming that some very modest changes that most people will agree with (since most people don’t like cruelty to animals) are due to the efforts of animal rights radicals. What substantiates the cause-and-effect relationship you’re claiming?

    It’s like trying to credit libertarians with the Clinton psuedo-balanced budget.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.