Re: CA Proposition 6

Gregory Alan Bolcer (
Mon, 02 Nov 1998 12:09:58 -0800

Okay, chicken little. I can see making an argument
that we don't need prop 6 because a horse broker who
misrepresents himself is actually committing fraud,
and fraud is already on the legal books, but this
alarmist, generalization of what seems to be your
own fears is just plain silly, Eric. So, are
you saying we've already been lead down the primrose
path because California already has a ban on exotic
animals for human consumption law?

So, do you believe that it's well within your
rights as a CA citizen to BBQ your neighbor's dog
because he's getting rid of it and that you deserve
a human fetus every morning draped over your oatmeal?

Heck, I'd even be sympathetic to an arguement that
you were a strict libertarian anarchist and thought
the government had no business in these types of issues,
but this fear-mongering argument doesn't really stand up
all that well. Explain it a little better, will you?
Assume Prop 6 passes, then what are the N-steps in
between that happen that allow vegiterrorist extremists
to take away all our steaks and burgers, etc.


Does that include turkey burgers?

>Guys, this is serious. No, it's not "aimed at those silly
>French." It's more like the attacks on reproductive choice in
>Congress. They tried--and failed--to enact an outright ban, so
>they targeted rare "late term abortions" as a "first step"
>toward a more comprehensive agenda.
>Ever see "Escape from L.A.?" Y'know, the dystopian future with
>Fundie political leaders enforcing a "moral America" (including
>the infamous "no red meat")? Why "protect" horses? Because
>there aren't any horses slaughtered for food in California!
>This isn't about horses. The vegiterrorist extremists want to
>take away your steaks, your burgers, your chili con carne, even
>your Thanksgiving turkeys. They want government to restrict your
>freedom to choose. Vote NO on Proposition 6!