Free anti-badger cull leaflet/poster to print out.

Please share + print out this free A4 leaflet/poster to hand out at the National March Against The Badger Cull in London on Saturday June 1st 2013. Alternatively, hand it out in your local area or add to an information stall or library display. Please pass it on to other interested parties.

Full quality PDF file available for free download here:
http://www.filedropper.com/badgerculla4leafletpdf

Full quality JPEG file available for free download here:
http://www.filedropper.com/badgerculla4leafletjpeg

The root cause of all animal exploitation and abuse is speciesism: The notion that non-human animals are inferior to humans, do not have moral value, and may be used by humans as resources. Until we address this attitude, animals will continue to suffer in their billions by human hands. The lives of animals matter. Reject violence, slavery and injustice: live vegan!

Eating/using animals is not a "personal choice".

Many people say that choosing to eat/consume animal products, or choosing to abstain from them (veganism) is a personal choice. But what do we really mean by “personal choice”? In this context, it would infer that engaging in animal use (or not) is inconsequential and simply comes down to a matter of personal preference. As in if you enjoy it, you participate, if you do not enjoy it, you don’t. Just like listening to a certain genre of music, or playing a certain sport. “To each their own”. This appears to be a common opinion on the matter and is often used as a reason to dismiss the issue without giving it proper thought.

Everything we do in life, every decision we make and every action we take, is of course ultimately personal choice. Nobody else makes our choices or acts for us, we are responsible for everything we do. Accepting this, instead of using the term “personal choice” to refer to all of our choices and actions in life, we generally reserve it for issues where the outcome only affects ourselves, i.e choices with consequences that are personal to us. The music we listen to, the books we read, the hairstyle we choose, are all matters of personal preference that are pretty inconsequential to anyone else. In that regard, we can define them as “personal choices”.

But what about choices that do have consequences for others? Actions that do affect their lives in more than just trivial or minute ways? What about when choosing to do something results in serious harm or injustice against someone else? What about when there is a victim involved? In that instance, the choice can really no longer be defined as “personal” as such. It becomes a moral issue.

Eating guinea pigs, humane labelling and our moral confusion towards other animals.

Guinea Pig Gate: Philip Schofield Sparks Public Outrage After Eating Guinea Pig

British TV presenter Philip Schofield has been in the news this week after he ate a guinea pig while on holiday in Peru. Guinea Pigs are farmed and eaten in Peru, but are kept as companion animals or "pets" in the UK. Schofield was overwhelmed with comments on Twitter reflecting the horror and disgust many felt about his actions:

"@Schofe How could you ?? They are little pets not dinner."
 "@Schofe always liked you, but eating a guinea pig is disgusting! I have guinea pigs and what you did is downright offensive."
"@schofe still absolutely disgraceful, scumbag in my opinion!"
(source (warning contains image of cooked guinea pig that some may find distressing:: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/11/05/phillip-schofield-guinea-pig_n_2075354.html)

When discussing the matter on This Morning (the daytime tv show he co-hosts), Schofield exclaimed that the guinea pigs were "humanely raised" and that to eat battery farmed chicken or eggs in the UK is a "far worse crime". 

This public uproar has raised several important points:

1. Firstly that people believe in "humane" labelling-that is, they believe that humane farming/slaughter negates any suffering of the farmed/slaughtered individuals.

2. Secondly that "humane" treatment concludes our moral obligations towards other animals. 

2. Thirdly the public's moral confusion towards other animals. 

Rejecting Fatalism: Social Justice Movements Change The World

Some people say that animal exploitation can never end, because speciesism is simply too vast and too ingrained to ever change. I don’t subscribe to fatalism. After all, if we all did then no injustice would ever be challenged and nothing would ever change. Nobody is claiming that the world will “go vegan overnight”, but a shift in consciousness is gradually happening. 

Have Viva! sold out?

Vegetarian International Voice for Animals is the largest and richest animal advocacy group in the U.K. and Europe. With an often strong media presence, they represent the interests of animals to the public. With all the donations helping to fund various campaigns and a team of paid staff, what are Viva! actually achieving for animal rights?

Are animal rights groups turning vegetarians back to meat?

How the glorification of vegetarianism (and other single issue campaigns) is confusing the public about animal rights. Are the animal rights groups promoting exploitation?

It seems the media are reporting a rising trend in vegetarians returning to eating meat. Could the big animal groups be to blame? 

Organisations such as Viva! and Animal Aid, claim to want to end all animal exploitation (the abolishment of animal use), but what are they actually promoting? Could their message to the pubic actually conflict with this goal?........

The problem of promoting vegetarianism-Why vegetarians are going back to eating meat.

Why vegetarianism isn’t working.

The following article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/8884326/Vegetarians-now-showing-their-softer-side.html#disqus_thread cites “The number of vegetarians has dipped and plateaued over the past decade, partly because successful animal welfare campaigns have turned veggies back to meat.”



As we can see from the rise in articles like this, more and more vegetarians are going back to consuming meat, rather than becoming vegan. The attitude towards vegetarianism and animals themselves is pretty bleak, clearly the author of this particular article does not take them seriously. And is it any wonder? Spending time and resources promoting vegetarianism is not helping the animals. Indeed it seems it is damaging for animal advocates to do so. The message of rights for animals (not to be used as property) is being lost.

Firstly, the position of vegetarianism is an illogical one. It singles out and abstains from just one kind of animal use (flesh). This suggests that this use is morally worse or more “cruel” than all other ways of using animals. This is inaccurate; ALL animals in the dairy and egg industries are slaughtered and get eaten just as “meat animals” do. It could be argued that animals used for eggs and dairy in fact suffer more than those killed for meat (of course a lot of vegetarians are unaware of this). To just boycott meat but to continue to consume eggs, dairy, honey etc, is as silly as just boycotting dairy but continuing to consume meat, eggs and honey. It doesn’t make sense as a rational or moral matter. One of the problems with single issue campaigns (SICs).