H$U$ (Humane Society of the US an animal extremist group) AR propaganda in our schools

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Pearl Cunningham

To: dog_anti-rescue_anti-peta_new

Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2008 10:02 PM

Subject: dog_anti-rescue_anti-peta_new H$U$ AR propaganda in our schools

Bear with this long article and read about how H$U$ has infiltrated
schools with their propaganda (towards the end of the article)!!!!
----------------
Connecticut Task Force
Sets Dangerous Course

by JOHN YATES
American Sporting Dog Alliance
http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org

HARTFORD, CT – A proposed task force to study the link between
cruelty to animals by children and violent acts by adults is both
unnecessary and will have the unintended consequence of allowing
extremist animal rights groups access to the state's legal system,
schools and children's minds, an investigation by The American
Sporting Dog Alliance (ASDA) shows clearly.

ASDA has no doubt that such a link between animal cruelty and
violence exists, and we believe society should respond both
decisively and with compassion. However, the task force simply
cannot accomplish its goals in an ethical manner, because only a
handful of children under the age of 18 are charged with animal
cruelty offenses in Connecticut, and even fewer are convicted.

The result of the task force, which is being sponsored by Speaker of
the House James Amann and chaired by Rep. Diana Urban, will mean
only the creation of another meaningless and wasteful layer of
bureaucracy in the juvenile justice system, and the intrusion of
animal rights groups into the state's schools and social services
agencies. There can be no other conclusion, based on the clear
record of what has occurred nationally and in other states.

For dog owners, professionals and hunters, the issue boils down to
the clear conclusion that the task force would be used as yet
another way of brainwashing our children to embrace the animal
rights agenda, while doing nothing to help solve the actual problem.

The task force is being formed now, and meetings are set to begin
this month. We urge dog owners to contact Rep. Amann and Rep. Urban
to express opposition to this task force. Their email addresses are
Jim.Amann@cga.ct.gov and Diana.Urban@cga.ct.gov. Connecticut
residents also should contact their own legislators and senators.
Please feel free to use any information from our analysis (see
below) in your letters, and also to cross-post and forward this
article to your friends.

The American Sporting Dog Alliance is a grassroots movement working
to protect the rights of people who own or work with dogs of breeds
commonly used for hunting. We vigorously oppose the animal rights
agenda, which seeks to gradually eliminate the private ownership of
dogs and other animals, and to ban hunting and using animals for
food. ASDA encourages sporting dog owners and professionals to join
us in this fight with your membership and participation. We are
funded solely by donations from our members. Please visit us on the
web at http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org.

The announcement for the task force sent up the first red flag for
ASDA. Only a small part of it actually focused on children who hurt
animals, or the fact that some of these children grow up to become
violent adults. Instead, the bulk of the announcement described
irrelevant emotional issues that are exploited by animal rights
groups, such as the Michael Vicks dog fighting case and cruelty at a
slaughterhouse for cattle in California, combined with broad
generalities about "the place of animals in society."

Our society does not condone real cruelty to animals in any form.
However, that does not mean that we accept animal rights groups'
definition of cruelty to encompass farming, eating meat, raising
animals, owning dogs and hunting. The mainstream of American society
clearly accepts those things as both ethical and desirable.

First, let's look at the facts that are clearly established in
research. There is a clear link between children from abusive
families and the tendency for this tragedy to extend to the abuse of
animals. In addition, there also is a clear link between many
violent adult criminals and a reported history of abusing animals as
children. The real issue is how to break those links.

The first step in breaking the link is to identify children who have
abused animals, and then to see that they – and their families – get
the help that they need. But this is where the idea of a task force
breaks down, as statistics for the past several years show very few
arrests of minors for animal cruelty, and even fewer convictions.

A national database study profiled 9,049 cases of animal abuse. Of
those, 44 of them were alleged to have been committed by children
under the age of 10, 222 by children aged between 10 and 14, and 451
by minors aged between 14 and 18. Thus, only 8% of the animal abuse
allegations were against juveniles.

Connecticut's statistics are even lower. There were 19 cases of
animal abuse in that state in 2007, and only four involved violent
acts against animals (the rest were mostly for things like neglect
or abandonment). Of those violent acts, only one allegedly was
committed by juveniles (Teen-aged boys broke into an animal shelter
and wounded a dog with a pellet gun. No charges were filed.). In
2006, there were 32 total cases in Connecticut, with seven involving
actual violence to animals. None of the allegations were against
juveniles. In 2005, the state had 27 reports of animal cruelty, with
12 involving violence. Two involved juveniles, and both cases were
counted twice in the statistics. One case involved a child who swung
a dog against a tree. The other case was about police reports of a
group of teen-aged boys who trapped, beat and poisoned many cats,
resulting in 20 animal deaths. No charges were ever filed in this
situation.

Thus, over the three-years of data, only three cases involved
juveniles, and two of those did not result in convictions; the
disposition of the third case was not reported.

It is likely that other children who hurt animals are never charged
with animal cruelty as part of a plea-bargaining arrangement. These
arrangements are common in an overloaded court system. In plea
bargains, people most often plead guilty to a lesser crime, in
exchange for a lighter sentence. However, there is no need for these
juveniles to fall through the cracks, as counseling can be ordered
by a judge as part of a plea bargain agreement.

Actual convictions for animal cruelty or a guilty plea in a plea
bargain arrangement are the only ethical justification for
government to mandate counseling for a child. Under this criterion,
no more than one child would have received help from a mandatory
intervention program over the past three years, the data shows.

Rep. Urban sponsored a law mandating anger management therapy for
minors who are convicted of animal cruelty. According to Urban, the
law took effect four years ago, and only one child was ever ordered
to undergo therapy (a child who killed puppies). It must be noted,
however, that this was the only child who was convicted over this
four-year period.

The issue of actual convictions is central. Rep. Urban correctly
points out that there may be many other instances of animal abuse by
minors that do not result in mandatory intervention. However, it
simply is a violation of the American idea of justice and civil
liberties for the courts to impose a sentence on someone who has not
been convicted of a crime. The courts are not empowered under the
Constitution to dictate the lives of people who are not proven to be
guilty of a crime.

We also believe that there is no reason for these children to fall
between the cracks of current social services programs. Available
research shows that most of these reports come from programs to help
women who are victims of domestic violence, or from families who
have been adjudicated to work with children's service agencies
because of substantiated allegations of child abuse. In each
situation, if there is a failure of the system to address the
problem of animal abuse in counseling and therapy, the solution is
to correct these deficiencies in current programs.

However, from a civil liberties and constitutional perspective, it
is never appropriate to mandate treatment of any kind for people who
are not convicted of any crime, including animal abuse. Please keep
in mind that only one child was convicted of animal abuse in
Connecticut over the past four years.

Given that stark fact, what will the task force actually do?

Two things are probable. First, they are likely to recommend a "Big
Brother" intervention program to reach children who may abuse
animals. Second, they are likely to recommend a prevention program
focused on the schools.

Intervention means identifying a likely population of adolescents
who may abuse animals, and then providing mandatory counseling. Keep
in mind that counseling already is mandatory for adjudicated child
abuse cases, and that voluntary counseling is available in domestic
violence programs. An intervention plan will identify children who
come from troubled families, who do poorly in school, who present
behavior problems in school or in the community, or whose families
are involved in programs to help the poor.

These children already have been stigmatized among their peers, and
this simply will make it worse. They will be given still more
reasons to feel anger and powerlessness, and to believe that their
lives are out of their control. These are the major factors that
cause abuse in any form. Intervention takes a bad situation and
makes it worse. No one likes being watched by Big Brother, even if
he is smiling.

Prevention means education and developing positive peer pressure.
This is done by exposing all children to the program, and schools
are the usual place where it happens.

The only existing school programs are authored and sponsored by the
Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), which is a radical
animal rights group that opposes many mainstream cultural values
such as eating meat, owning animals and hunting. HSUS is not the
local Humane Society that helps animals. Instead, HSUS is a powerful
national political organization that actively works for laws that
will accomplish its own animal rights agenda.

ASDA has studied these in-school programs in detail. All of them
blatantly evangelize the HSUS animal rights agenda. The programs
specifically target the schools, and HSUS also has formed several
alliances with domestic violence groups.

The HSUS program is called First Strike®. Here is the organization's
brief description of it: "The First Strike® campaign can help in the
process of bringing professionals together from a variety of
agencies. We facilitate workshops and provide educational materials
specifically for various professionals working to prevent family
violence… (such as by promoting school and) inter-agency
collaborations to reduce animal cruelty, family and community
violence."

Another statement urges educators and social workers to "teach
elementary schoolchildren in your community to be kind to animals
via KIND News, a nine-times-a-year newspaper published expressly for
kids. The prize-winning publication is produced by The National
Association for Humane and Environmental Education (NAHEE), the
youth service division of the HSUS. NAHEE also produces other
publications and has programs like Adopt-a-Classroom…."

School children are given printed materials written by HSUS and
encouraged to visit various online communities sponsored by HSUS,
such as The Humane Teen Network. A review of this organization's
website shows blatant sermonizing against hunting, animal ownership,
farm practices, rodeos, circuses and kennels. The flashy format is
accompanied by music videos performed by pro-HSUS rap singers and
pop idols such as Brittney Spears. Kids are being advised to turn in
their friends, parents and neighbors.

HSUS is waging an all-out battle to control the minds of our
children, and to seduce them into beliefs that are at odds with the
mainstream of American society and their parents. We think this is
wrong, and we urge Reps. Amann and Urban to disband their task force
and forcefully disavow the animal rights agenda for our children.

.

---

Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live. Get it now! __._,_.___

STOP ALL SPAY and NEUTER. If there is actually a dog overpopulation after 30 years of intensive SPAY and NEUTER then the practice of spay and neuter is a failure.  Why continue the practice? 

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___