RFT readers debate the rights of animals, Dumpster divers, pregnant women and mustachioed men

Humane Society doing the right thing: I thought this was a really well-written piece that showed everyone in a neutral light ["Down on the Farm," Kristen Hinman]. I have yet to hear any farmer admit that under current practices not all animals are able to stand up, lie down and turn around freely, and fully extend all limbs. I don't see anything radical about the modest reforms the Humane Society of the United States is proposing. I'm glad that animals have someone like Wayne Pacelle with the testicular fortitude to stand up for them. People keep coming up with all these stupid reasons to oppose the HSUS, and yet 99 percent of the reasons are B.S. The fact of the matter is, these industries don't want to change. Ask yourself why anyone would be adamantly opposed to giving a sow a big enough space to turn around in, and see if you can come up with any reason besides money. And don't try to tell me it's the only way to keep a sow safe, because it's not. There are alternatives. It's time to see the light, people.
RabbleRouser, via the Internet

A country girl's take: Just a minute: "Animals that are built to move are able to move?" What about humans? Let's turn this around a second to put it into a more universal perspective: Do I get to tell Microsoft or Johnson & Johnson that their employees should each have an eight-by-ten office and that cubicles are inhumane?! No. Then why do people who have never been to my farm, or any farm for that matter, get to tell me how to run my business? The Humane Society is a misleading, criminal organization. This article asks who should decide how agriculture is run, but it leaves out one huge population involved in the life cycle of our products: the entire rest of the world. You want to ask the nations that depend on our chickens, wheat, eggs, beef or pork to vote on this? Then also tell them that if the HSUS gets its way, the United States will not be able to send any cheap, nutrient-rich food to them because legislation has driven U.S. farmers out of business. Thank God I'm a country girl.
Xuberance, via the Internet

Prefer to eat untortured animals: HSUS is a pretty moderate organization compared to the likes of PETA and Animal Liberation Front. The ballot initiatives are only asking to return to more humane animal-husbandry practices that have been used before factory farms came into the picture. When people imagine where their food comes from, they think of a pastoral setting of green grass and rolling hills. The "farms" of today are like something out of a nightmarish science-fiction movie. The public wants to be assured that the animals they are eating are not tortured before they get to their plates.
Donny, via the Internet

Be aware: In the article, Princeton professor Peter Singer is quoted several times because of his book Animal Liberation. In addition to the relatively mild quotes in the article, readers should be aware that Singer also feels that a mature chimpanzee is more important than a human baby. He has written that parents should be able to have their handicapped child killed by lethal injection, and he argued in a 2008 talk at Washington University that babies weren't human until they reached Jean Piaget's level of understanding object permanence — generally, at about one year old.
Joe Kras, via the Internet

Not so humane after all: The HSUS is a scam. They have an agenda to eliminate the family pet, and force us to become vegans. They also raise money using false means. HSUS will show up where they think they can find money, hence they used my name to raise $1.2 million over my tortured life as a victim of dog fighting. How did HSUS use the money? Funny, after that fundraiser they bought stock in Steak 'n Shake. I guess you all know that Wayne does not even own a pet? Funny how in the picture he is making sure the fur does not touch his expensive suit. Please read the truth about HSUS instead of using rose-colored glasses. Animals do need to be treated in a humane fashion. So I only purchase free-range chicken and beef. Please let the free market dictate — not a bunch of con artists.
Fay, via the Internet

Value-added garbage: Let me get this straight ["Trash Workers in Columbia Busted for Taking Discarded Beer from Landfill," Chad Garrison]. The owner of that beer didn't want it anymore; it would have gone to waste. Some people who found value in it opted to put it to use. And these folks are losing jobs or facing discipline over it? It's not like they were relabeling it and putting it back on the market, people! Especially in difficult economic times, if folks can find value in someone else's trash, doesn't it make sense that they be allowed to use it?
Pelagius, via the Internet

A to Z, APRIL 15, 2010
One fine collector: I had the pleasure of befriending Rob in the mid-to-late 1980s, and he was always willing to make mixtapes from his amazing collection, of which I still have a few of those cassettes ["Last Collector Standing: Long-time Local Musician (and Current Euclid Records Employee) Rob Wagoner," Jon Scorfina]. His contribution to the mid-1980s KCFV (89.5 FM) radio show Faster & Louder was always a learning experience for anyone lucky enough to have been able to be around to hear it back then. It made being around a radio on Saturday nights essential.
Jim, via the Internet

A tax break, that is: Indeed, people of Mustached American heritage, after supporting the government's request to improve American good looks by 22 percent, are owed retribution in the form of $250 annually ["Mustache Institute Demands Tax Break for Lip Hair," Chad Garrison]. It's a small price to pay for good looks and for supporting American companies that make items needed to maintain a Mustached American lifestyle such as mustache trimmers, wax, bacon grease and condoms.
Dr. Abraham Jonas Froman, via the Internet

Slippery slope: I'm curious about the ramifications of this ["Bill Allows Pregnant Women to Kill Someone Threatening Their Unborn Child," Chad Garrison]. At first glance, it sounds perfectly reasonable, but I have to wonder why twenty people didn't think it was. Does this open a door for a third party to kill someone whom they perceive to be threatening the life of someone else's unborn baby? (Say, a doctor who performs a legal abortion.) To harm a woman's unborn child, an aggressor would logically have to do substantial harm to the woman. I would think that threat would give a woman reason to believe force is necessary to protect herself, and thus, her child.
ASTX813, via the Internet

And a click, click here: Excuse me sir, can you put out that cigarette? Click, click, boom!
Sean Bahr, via the Internet

And a click, click there: What do you mean? My unborn fetus isn't allowed to smoke K2? Click, click, boom!
Anonymous, via the Internet

Keep on digging, Glenn: I imagine the backhoe that Glenn Miller is renting from the Home Depot to dig himself an even deeper hole is costing the state of Missouri a pretty penny ["Racist Missouri Senate Hopeful Glenn Miller Interviewed by Howard Stern," Chad Garrison].
MrHacks, via the Internet

Maybe next time: It would have been cool if Google Maps would have captured the actual body lying on the driveway ["Marcus Gosa, East St. Louis Homicide No. 5, Found in Driveway With Bullet to Head," Chad Garrison].
Anonymous, via the Internet