A Stitch in Haste

Spiked provides a report on how the U.K. government is dropping the ball on fighting animal rights terrorists, who gathered in that country recently to stage a "direct action teach-in" (for background, see my posts here and here):

Few people will challenge activists' arguments head-on, and defend the moral value of animal research. Few people will argue that research that saves human lives and furthers scientific understanding justifies the death and maiming of animals. Instead both government and scientific authorities seem to be embarrassed about the matter, mumbling that they aren't really doing that much research on animals, or that they are looking for ways to try to avoid it.
...
After being lobbied by the Political Animal Lobby, the Labour Party pension fund withdrew its investment from Huntingdon Life Sciences, citing its reasons as 'ethical'. Meanwhile, Oxford University's scientific establishment reacted defensively to protests about its planned animal research facility, saying that it was merely concentrating existing facilities, and emphasising that the new laboratories would help to provide 'the best available conditions of animal welfare and housing'.

When the government stands up for the rights of goldfish, and research scientists pose as defenders of animal welfare, it's hardly surprising if animal rights protesters think that they are on to something.

Notice the parallels between the response to animal rights terrorism and the response to Islamic terrorism: Show any sign of weakness or appeasement, try to "apologize" for doing whatever it was that angered them and suggest that "it's not really all that bad," and what do you get? More terrorism, more demands, more appeasement, etc.

I have posted the following several times before: The philosophical underpinnings of animal rights terrorists are just as toxic and decrepit as al Qaeda's. Just as Islamic terrorists are motivated not by love of Islam, but rather by hatred of the West, animal rights terrorists are not motivated by love of animals, but rather by hatred of humans.

The Spike article echoes my view:

In fact, there is nothing noble about the animal rights cause. Activists tend to spout a fairly mindless brand of misanthropism -- indicated by one photo of a young female activist who had scrawled the word 'terrorist' on her forehead. 'In the end it is all about the animals, not about us, we mean nothing', one of the Kent activists said. ...Here we see activists' contempt for human lives -- if 'we mean nothing', no mouse should suffer to save a man. It is because animal rightists place human health and knowledge so low that they place the guinea pig so high.

If scientific and political authorities stopped jumping at activists' every threat, and started arguing with them, the protesters' cloak of martyrdom would soon start to slip.

Exactly. It's unfortunate that we have to invent this wheel twice, first doing backflips to convince "moderate" Muslims that we're not bigots (those same Muslims who have done essentially nothing to save their own religion from those who slaughter in its name). But now we're also doing the exact same philosophical gymnastics to appease people who would also gladly see you die...in their case for the sake not of jihad but rather for the sake of a lab rat.

Pathetic.