Oxford University Press: Should Animals Have the Right to Vote?
A bit of a light-hearted story amid the 24/7 news cycle of death and destruction. Extremists among the animal rights community believe that animals deserve the right to vote in elections. As asinine as this theory sounds, the community has managed to publish their proposal in the Oxford University Press, a respected source. “Should Animals Have the Right to Vote?” explores the possibility of allowing animals to vote.
Identification is not required to vote, so the animals are OK in that respect. Dead animals could even vote in America. Wild animals are not permitted in most public buildings for obvious reasons, which is a great reason to keep mail-in voting available. These people believe that each animal should receive a human representative to cast votes on their behalf. The article explains:
“Suppose it were suggested that animals’ interests would be even better protected if we recognized a right of political participation to animals. One way to do that would be to have human representatives cast votes on behalf of animals with respect to different legislative proposals. Thus, monkeys, parrots, and other creatures in the Amazonian forests in Brazil would have a say in the adoption or rejection of laws impacting their environment. Pigs, cows, and chickens on animal farms would have a say on laws related to their life conditions. This proposal would elevate animals to the status of actual actors in the political process. Right now, animals are merely subjects of our legal protection, but they don’t get to directly influence their own welfare. Under the proposal just stated, animals would have more direct control over their lives.”
How will they know if the deer or monkey is a MAGA extremist incapable of choosing the right candidate? Simple – they will vote in favor of anyone promoting the climate change agenda and other causes that the Democrats support. “For example, some candidates in an election might propose laws offering a mandatory minimum food quantity for certain categories of animals, say rabbits. Similarly, a candidate could promise shelter to various species (e.g., subsidizing farmers to build more sheds for horses and cows). In those cases, the animals’ vote would go to those candidates.”
It is safe to say that dogs would have voted against Fauci’s brutal experiments. Bats will begin forming their own political party after their image was ruined in 2020. The rodents who solely live off of others will vote for socialistic policies.
Does the wildlife support the Great Reset? The article mentions nothing about giving bugs the right to vote, so they’re still safe for consumption since most animals would vote against the slaughterhouse. Perhaps the cows will vote to permit chickens to be slaughtered like the Chic-Fil-A advertisements. A reduced human population would be in their best interest, but dogs would likely oppose such a measure. Cats are anarchists and this could create political upheaval in homes with more than one animal. The animal vote would also overpower the human vote, and at this point the two are barely distinguishable.
