“No skin, just bones. Left by owner to suffer until death. What do you think? Is there a crime here? And why isn’t there a law against it?” (Text-Glass Walls)
What I think…We owe the first step in downgrading animals to the commodity level to the theory and conviction of the Church.
“Animals have no soul, animals only have instincts and are therefore automatically not the same as humans who have mind and soul – given by God” !!
Much earlier, in ancient Greece, the philosopher Protagoras created the saying, which is still highly valued today: “Of All Things Man Is The Measure”! which every idiot still considers the manifesto of human rights today.
In the Middle Ages, the existence of animals was under catastrophic conditions.
The animal hater and philosopher René Descartes (1596-1650) gave “spiritual” support to the laboratory experimenters for the cruelest animal torture of all time with his insane saying“Cogito ergo sum”.
With which he wanted to signal nothing else than that the animals are senseless and numb reflex automatons and their screams of pain when psychopaths slash them alive in the laboratory, like the squeak of a machine should be viewed.
If we want to claim today that we have developed in art, mathematics, medicine, architecture and, last but not least, in animal welfare, we should not regard animals as commodities, and certainly not treat them as such.
That would actually be the sign that we have developed spiritually and morally.
But we still don’t do that.
Because we are still depriving animals of their rights today, in the 21st century
In this sense we have not moved essentially from the Middle Ages, and like Protagoras – although there are over 2,500 years in between – we are still of the fascist conviction that “Of All Things Man Is The Measure”! The measure of all things is not man; it is the life!
We are a species of torturer.
A disgusting malformation of evolution.
New Zealand plans to increase the purchase age for cigarettes in a bid to become a “smokefree nation”.
The Smokefree Action Plan introduced by the government on Thursday plans to slowly increase the purchase age from 18 currently to 21 or 25 by 2025.
But not overnight, but first of all, smoking cigarettes is no longer possible only for under 14-year-olds.
And then every year the age limit increases by exactly one year.
So those who currently smoke can all continue to do so without any problems.
But future generations won’t start with it.
Nicotine addiction should therefore not even arise.
Most people inevitably develop an addiction to nicotine while smoking; few people are genetically immune to it.
The government argued this will make it harder for teenagers under the age of 18 to be exposed to older pupils who smoke and to access cigarettes, citing research that states that 80% of smokers start before the age of 18 while nearly 97% start before they turn 25.
“This is a historic day for the health of our people,” Associate Minister of Health Dr Ayesha Verrall said in a statement.
“We want to make sure young people never start smoking so we will make it an offence to sell or supply smoked tobacco products to new cohorts of youth. People aged 14 when the law comes into effect will never be able to legally purchase tobacco,” she added.
Other measures the government wants to roll out to curb smoking include reducing the number of shops allowed to sell tobacco products; decreasing nicotine levels in smoked tobacco products to make them less addictive and help people quit; and banning the sale of cigarettes with filters as some people who smoke are “under the misconception that filters mitigate the harm of smoking.”
“Smoking rates continue to head in the right direction but there is a lot more mahi (work) ahead of us,” Population Health and Prevention Group ManagerJane Chambers said.
“Smoking kills approximately 4,500 to 5,000 people every year in New Zealand – that is around 12 to 13 deaths every day due to smoking or exposure to second-hand smoke. Smoked tobacco products take too many lives, and the impacts disproportionately affect Māori and Pacific people.”
“We must move swiftly and strategically to address these marked inequities and the disastrous impacts of smoked tobacco products so tamariki (children), rangatahi (young people) and our future generations are protected from harm” she added.
The Action Plan notes that most of the measures being considered have not been tested elsewhere and that New Zealand would be the first country in the world to introduce them.
The bill will be put before Parliament in mid-2022 and if passed, could come into effect on January 1, 2023.
And I mean…There are already a lot of critical to angry comments against such bans, mainly with the argument: Ultimately, people’s freedom is restricted!! “A state that treats its citizens with prohibitions instead of education meets with skepticism and resistance” is the basic reaction.
From the comments in German forums:
– “We do not need (and I want) no government that educates responsible citizens”! – “… people have a right to self-determination …” – “I detest it when such prohibitions encroach on a person’s personal sphere”.
What do you think of New Zealand’s law, dear readers, that increases the minimum smoking age year after year?
I mean .. Our freedom has been looking pretty bad since Corona.
Because not everyone and not in time fought for the values that define freedom.
But woe oh woe, if someone wants to pass a meaningful law for the next generations, then every hobby revolutionary stylizes himself as a courageous freedom fighter in the fight against the dictatorship of the smoking ban.
‘Dutch highly eurosceptic!’ Nexit calls erupt as only 10 percent of Dutch want more EU
Euroscepticism is growing in the Netherlands, despite a lack of debate in the media over the EU’s role in the country, according to EU expert Gabriel van de Bloemfontein. The Nexit Denktank researcher told Express.co.uk that only 10 percent of Dutch people now believe more EU integration is needed.
Mr van de Bloemfontein argued that anti-Brexit scaremongering reports might have lowered the number of people believing the Netherlands is better off outside the EU.
But he added that, according to recent polls, 40 percent of Dutch people still want out, which is “quite high” considering the lack of debate, he said.
He said: “In 2016, 2017, polls showed that there was a majority in the Netherlands for leaving.
“After that, it has declined a bit. I can’t really explain why maybe because of the project fear making people scared in the media.
“But right now, I saw a poll of a Dutch public broadcast company, and they showed that around 40 percent would like to leave the EU, which is not low at all without any campaign going on.
“And recently, the news are all about coronavirus. Even at the last elections, not one bit was discussed about the EU.
“So I think it’s actually quite hight. Despite the scary stories we constantly hear.
“What’s even more interesting is that it also shows that only 10 percent of the Dutch people want more EU integration, which is very low.
“But yet it still happens. But this is a promising statistic.
“It shows that the Netherlands is actually very eurosceptic.”
In 2005, the Netherlands, like France, voted in a consultative referendum on the Treaty establishing a constitution for Europe.
Official results say that 61.6 percent of voters rejected the Constitution, on a turnout of 63.3 percent.
Last month, Royal Dutch Shell said it would scrap its dual share structure and move its head office to Brexit Britain from the Netherlands, pushed away by Dutch taxes and facing climate pressure in court as the energy giant shifts from oil and gas.
The company, which long faced questions from investors about its dual structure and had recently been hit by a Dutch court order over its climate targets, aims to drop “Royal Dutch” from its name – part of its identity since 1907 – to become Shell Plc.
The Anglo-Dutch firm has been in a long-running tussle with the Dutch authorities over the country’s 15 percent dividend withholding tax, which Shell sought to avoid paying with its two share classes. Its new structure would resolve that issue.
In a further knock to its relations with the Netherlands, the biggest Dutch state pension fund ABP said last month it would drop Shell and all fossil fuels from its portfolio.
The move infuriated Nexit campaigners who were quick to blame the Dutch government’s submission to the EU for Shell’s decision.
Nexit Denktank representatives wrote: “Shell moves to the United Kingdom and becomes fully British on paper. Very unfortunate for the Netherlands, but were we not told in 2016 that all companies would leave the UK due to Brexit? Another lie.
“In 2002, when the euro was introduced, the British were also warned that all companies would leave if they did not adopt the euro as their national currency. That was also a lie. The EU and the euro are not necessary to attract companies.
“The real proof is in the relocations of Shell and Unilever, which are among the largest companies in the world. They wouldn’t leave the Netherlands for the UK if they didn’t take advantage of that. We don’t need the EU, we need a good trade agreement.
“So we are again losing a piece of Dutch pride and history because our Europhile cabinet was more concerned with undermining Brexit than with the interests of the Netherlands. Our government cares about the interests of the EU, not the interests of the Netherlands.
“According to Rutte, we can close the port of Rotterdam, we will lose all our jobs and our economy will collapse if we leave the EU. It’s all scaremongering and EU propaganda. Such things don’t happen in the UK. Shell is the reality NOW.
“We are losing prestige because of the EU. In the long run, it turns out that we can’t do anything ourselves. The unelected bureaucrats in Brussels determine everything for us. The British can have their own policy. Stop believing the scaremongering and EU propaganda. Nothing bad is going to happen after Nexit.”