Dear Mr. Friedman,
In your October 27, 2012 Op-Ed “Why I Am Pro-Life,” you present a well-reasoned argument why people can’t call themselves pro-life and oppose common-sense gun control or support shutting down the Environmental Protection Agency or Head Start. Your contention that “pro-life” must include respect for how “life is lived, enhanced and protected — not only at the moment of conception but afterward, in the course of that life” contains merit.
You make a compelling case for redefining “pro-life” with one glaring omission — respect for the lives of animals. How can anyone be called pro-life if they support animal agriculture and eat confined, abused, and slaughtered animals when they don’t need to eat them to survive? How can anyone be called pro-life when they support an animal farming industry that wreaks havoc on our environment and causes millions of people to die from diseases? Please consider expanding your definition of pro-life to include the most defenseless among us.
On behalf of the animals,
2 thoughts on “My Letter to New York Times Columnist Thomas Friedman”
RIGHT ON ANDREW!!!!
Wonderful Andrew! Thank you for writing this and submitting to the NY Times. “Food” for thought certainly. I wonder how many ppl will “get” your point of view?