http://theweek.com/speedreads/index/270848/speedreads-stephen-colbert-credibly-blames-the-nra-for-legal-dog-and-cat-eating-in-pennsylvania
I thought this might be an enjoyable clip to watch. When we talked about the ethics of meat-eating among environmental movements (i.e. some radicals agree that we are animals and should eat animals; ecofeminists believe that it promotes domination), it took it out of context from pets. Due to our culture around dogs and cats, many meat-eaters in America wouldn’t dream of eating them… but pigeons? Nah, shoot them dead. It was more important to keep gun rights above animal lives, even man’s best friend. By eliminating consideration of this bill, the NRA seems to continue our domination over the natural world and has even pushed us further than the norm of respect of pets.
Oddly, it’s very difficult to find mainstream news sources that have information on the bill or even the topic (NYTimes had nothing to show). Any thoughts on why the topic was hidden by everyone but Colbert?
“The dogs and cats have to die, in order for the pigeons to die.” First of all, who is going to eat cats and dogs in PA? I know I wouldn’t. And I have also never eaten pigeon. Where are they selling this cat and dog meat? I really hope it is not at White Castle. This is definitely an odd debate. The NRA can be a little over reaching when trying to protect their guns.