The HSUS Bible: Where the Manger Meets Infanticide

HSUS Bible

The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is a propaganda machine, twisting all kinds of facts to fit its narrative that everybody needs to adopt a PETA lifestyle and go vegan. It’s no surprise to check its website on any given day and find something out of context or flat-out false. But what we saw the other day shocked even us.

HSUS posted a defense of radical professor and animal “liberation” activist Peter Singer, who is notorious for his moral defense of killing newborns and children up to 3 years old and euthanizing the disabled. Singer once said that “if killing [a] hemophiliac infant has no adverse effect on others, it would, according to the total view, be right to kill him.” If that seems nuts, the essay on HSUS’s website, written by Charles C. Camosy, a professor of Christian Ethics at Fordham University, is even battier—it argues that Peter Singer actually generally “agrees with pro-lifers on abortion.” Minor details like homicide aside.

This argument is so patently ridiculous that it’s hard to know where to begin. It’s like someone arguing that Pontius Pilate actually saved Jesus.

Here’s what we think is going on: HSUS is trying to improve the brand of a notorious professor who is an intellectual saint in the animal liberation movement. (That seems eerily similar to how HSUS did P.R. rehab for Michael Vick—after getting $50,000 from Vick’s employer, no less.) HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle has said that Singer’s views on animal liberation influenced him. HSUS co-wrote an op-ed with Singer last year, and now it is using this essay to make the argument to Christians that Peter Singer is actually just a misunderstood guy with whom they have a lot in common. In reality, Peter Singer is an atheist who wants total animal liberation, and this defense of him is trying to blur the lines and slip his fringe beliefs into mainstream religious thought.

That’d be laughable if it wasn’t so serious. HSUS launched a religion department about 5 years ago to churn out anti-farmer and animal rights propaganda with Christian, Jewish, Muslim, or other religious tints to it. The department is run by CEO Wayne Pacelle’s former live-in girlfriend. (We wonder how Wayne’s fiancée feels about him and his ex still working together.)

The entire purpose is to repackage animal liberation—meaning the idea that using animals for just about any reason is wrong—by cloaking it in religious language. Show mercy for animals, HSUS says. Show mercy for animals by not eating cheese, is what HSUS means.

Skeptical? Just look at what Camosy’s defense of Singer led to. “Finally,” Camosy concludes, Singer “can help us rediscover the deeply Christian idea of self-denial—especially when it comes to fasting by avoiding meat and dairy.”

There you have it. A contorted defense of someone who justifies infanticide, made with an appeal to Christianity, leading to an opportunity to shill for veganism. There’s a lot we could write about the misanthropy of the vegan/animal liberation ideology and how it conflicts with mainstream religions, but we’ll leave that for another time.

It’s bad enough that HSUS rips off well-meaning Americans who think that their donations are going to help care for pets. Does HSUS really have to sink so low as trying to infect religions with animal liberation ideology? That’s something PETA has tried, as we documented a few years back in a report called Holy Cows. But since HSUS is really just PETA in a suit and tie—or perhaps now a clerical robe—you shouldn’t be surprised it has adopted the same tactics.

Posted on 02/22/2013 at 11:19 pm by HumaneWatch Team.

Topics: MeatReligion


  • Heidi Kastner

    No doubt Singer is forcing everyone to encounter the limits of human logic/reason by asserting that a logical act ie. murdering an ill infant or unproductive adult, is the way to reduce society’s burdens. If we are willing to murder infants, then why not grind their remains into edible meat?? Oh, how horrific/ghastly/disgusting is that!! This entire enquiry of human vs. animal rights is invalid when seen in biblical terms. God gave Adam dominion over the critters BEFORE the Fall ie. serpent,Eve, Adam, fruit and God. Man/people have twisted that dictum over time into conditions which gave and give PETA a righteous mandate to stop the cruelty, abuse, suffering and all for the sake of profit. What PETA and other animal rights organizations are fighting, the hideous meat industry, was never God’d intent. Kindness and consideration for well-being of animals even as they work for us and/or die to provide us with food is the Bible’s command throughout. God watches over His creation and it all is holy! Blessings.

  • SpeakTheTruthToday

    How strange…Singer…Sanger (as in Margaret, founder of murder-mill Planned Parenthood). There’s some irony here…

  • Kevn0

    Solzhenitsyn pointed out that when the mad-dog communists came, they came from the universities. And they claimed to hold some sort of moral high ground, as well. I think McCarthy was right, we did have anti-American,anti-Christian, hardline commies in institutional settings working for the destruction of the Republic. We still do, and the cancer has metastasized. Perhaps a citizen remedy is in order, if the government is too feeble, corrupted, and usurped to act.