photo: dieselboii/ BY

Recent horrific incidents of animal abuse have abounded in the media, and they're obviously very troubling to me. There's the story of Cheyenne Cherry, who broke into a home, stole things, and put the owner's kitten in a 500 degree oven, leaving it to die and an Ohio firefighter who shot his dogs in his basement to avoid paying kennel costs while he went on vacation. Then there's the suspended NFL star Michael Vick, who recently was released from his three year federal sentence for dogfighting. And then there are the rumors of abuse that spread virally through web video, one particularly heinous one depicting two Marines stationed in Iraq throwing a puppy off of a cliff.  I used to think that showing kindness to animals was a given for everyone; but with all these examples, now I wonder whether people need some direct instruction in the matter of relating to animals.

In a way, these extreme examples should be enough to teach people that it's wrong to harm innocent creatures that are dependent on us. And perhaps they are more the exception than the rule. But, what puzzles me is how passively so-called innocent bystanders react when they witness such acts. As a child, I would see total strangers throw rocks at dogs and cats that would appear frail and scared. It didn't stop there: cars would attempt to run over squirrels that were simply running across the street to climb into a desired tree. When I would attempt to ask older people, related or not, why people would even want to do such things to an animal that wasn't even bothering them, no one would ever answer my question directly. All of them, however, used a method that they felt allowed them to escape explanation of their animal attacks: the Bible. The verse of choice was Genesis 1:26: "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." I can see where this power being granted to man would be a good thing; after all, the meat and skin of animals provided food and clothing for early humans' survival, or were used to aid people in work purposes. In present times, people no longer have to eat meat if they don't want to, like in the practices of vegetarianism or veganism; cotton, silk, and other synthetic materials can be used for clothing and other accessories; and today, the work that horses have traditionally performed in farmer's fields for years have been replaced by machinery. Throughout all of these changes, animals have been there at human's beck-and-call, even when humans have done some extremely unsavory things to these creatures. Where do we draw the distinction between man's real need for animals versus straight animal cruelty?

Although I will say that in recent years there has been more focus on animal rights than concern over the treatment of fellow human beings, that doesn’t take away from the fact that animals are special creations that humanity should respect. I’ve spent my entire life around dogs, and can’t imagine the world without them: sweet faces with tails wagging, with stomachs always ready to consume the next meal, giant balls of energy that protect their human families with their hearts. Consider this little tidbit: there are service animals that help people who are blind or physically handicapped who handle tasks that those of us who have full physical capabilities take advantage of every day, like walking, shopping, or taking care of home-oriented tasks; others work to help save people’s lives in natural disasters or perform law enforcement duties. What pet owner doesn't love the idea of being jumped on, licked, and kissed by their animal when they come home from work or a long trip?

Fortunately, there are others that work tirelessly to eradicate animal abuses like ASPCA, an organization that has been influential in rescuing abused animals and serving as a haven from abuse until the animal has been adopted by a loving owner. I find the list of things that the ASPCA do for animals to be nothing short of outstanding: they have their own police force, assist police departments in tracking down information that is relevant to situations where abuse is suspected, and lobby for laws that focus on the humane treatment of animals.

There are some animal rights groups, however, that want to fight for the rights of animals so hard that they violate natural human rights. Even though I love what PETA is trying to do when it comes to making the public aware of serious abuses, certain methods that they use are classified as no-no's to me. Many people are aware of PETA members appearing at red carpet events, and throwing paint all over the clothing of people who are wearing anything involving fur. Spinning off of PETA's anti-fur campaign,although I won't wear fur, I certainly wouldn't want to go around naked. While I personally would never be caught dead in authentic animal fur, I can't condone those kinds of tactics because people still need to be respected. I often wonder if it is these type of tactics that cause people to avoid anything to do with animal welfare causes, while they might be active supporters under usual circumstances.

If one is not killing an animal for the sole purpose of food (something that many groups of people have to do for survival), then I can’t truly understand the pleasure of sport hunting, dog-fighting, and elephants being whipped by their circus trainers. As it is, the distinction definition of animal cruelty becomes very complicated when the topic of animal usage in medical research is discussed, and I will admit honestly that I am stuck on the fence about this practice. On one hand, there are certain medications that can be harsh on a human body; at the same time, it leaves questions as to how each animal feels during those procedures. Certainly, it makes me wish that animals could talk: people can only speculate on animal's experiences, but they never really know how it feels.

In the past, animals (dogs especially) were bred to be hard workers, good hunters, and loyal protectors, while still being subjected to the animal fighting rings where participants could make heavy money from the violence. Today's treatment of animals is certainly much better than it has been (organizations designed for protection, pet adoption services, loving owners who treat their pets like family, etc.), but I think we still have a little ways to go. In the future, I would love to see senseless animal abuse become a thing of the past. I figure that if the animal is not seeking to harm you or kill you, why harm and kill that animal? Most animals may not be able to walk upright, drive, pay bills, or cheer for a winning football team, but they are living beings that deserve to live in a world where they abused just for the sake of it. Not only do I think that animals are here to help us, I believe that God created animals for people to love. So, why not step back and let them do what they were made to do?