By Emil Edward Kusel
No doubt some of the conscience-stricken
readers will brand the author of the sentiments
herein as an extremist rather than a humane enthusiast,
but bethink yourself it is far better to
be "an extremist" on a logical, noble basis than
to be inconsistent under false pretense.
The author is presenting truths from an absolutely
rational standpoint standing firmly on a
real philosophical basis that cannot be overthrown
by a cyclone of protests from the "religious"
flesh-eating faction.
The idea is to show that man, when he gets
"right with God," drifts away from the customs
of ancient times and reasons from the
Golden Rule foundation which is consistent
with a higher life and makes him religiously humane
as well as "pious."
You may allow your quasi-religious principle to
prevail against reason; you may pout and cry
against the Humanitarian's noble philosophy;
you may dream of the imps of hell awaiting his
quietus; you may consult your Bible to bless
your inhumanity and yet mercy for our dumb
fellow-creatures is unselfish, pure and gentle,
resultant from a proper conception of man's superiority
and his God.
If a man's religion is pure and good and undefiled
it would be wrong to present facts to
blast his belief (be it ever so superstitious);
however, when he insists upon inhumanity toward
any sentient creature, he should be severely
criticised.
The scriptural passages that are well flavored
with indecency and the scriptural inhumanity
written in God's name are not one whit more
inspired than are the objectionable lines of sensational
literature.
The Bible has caused more bloodshed, more
hatred; made more hypocrites and caused more
suffering than all else combined. It is a book
containing some lofty ideas and moral laws by
good men, but the many inconsistencies therein
have caused superstition, imagination, insanity,
contemptibility and horrible cruelty that haunts
the brain of the honorable thinking masses.
It is proper to impress indelibly in the minds
of the pretenders of the several creeds "Thou
shalt not kill;" neither shalt thou be accessory
in the killing by encouraging the slaughter
through patronage.
You may erect your massive temples and
dedicate them to Jehovah; you may pray to your
heart's content and sing psalms until doomsday,
yet the earthquake, the cyclone, the tornado,
the volcano overthrows the synagogue, the cathedral,
the church, the brothel and the saloon
without distinction. Evidently the god of Abraham,
Isaac and Jacob is not omnipresent to protect
an institution that stands for inhumanity.
One of the most noticeable inconsistencies
ever presented to thinking people is the representation
of "Divine Love" portrayed under the
title "Peace," symbolized by a child leading
the cow, the calf, the lion, the leopard and the
lamb. This taken from the Bible, is supposed
to represent, "And a little child shall lead
them."
Just think of symbolizing "Peace" with an
innocent child leading animals we actually murder!
No doubt every religionist looks upon
that painting as a masterpiece—an inspiration.
Yet most of them sanction the slaughter of innocence
by relishing a lamb chop or a veal
cutlet.
"And a little child shall lead them!"
Whither? To the slaughter? Is not that a
miserable symbolization of "Divine Love" and
"Peace?"
Such inconsistency painted in the name of religion
is an abomination and deserves strenuous
criticism.
Not the least in the realm of inconsistency
are the Jewish people who fast on their day of
atonement and break the Sabbath fifty-two times
a year by bartering. Now where is the consistency
in such an atonement when the Bible
says explicitly: "Remember the Sabbath day
and keep it holy."
Such incongruity is practised universally
among the orthodox as well as the reformed
element. Like the Gentile, the Jewish religionist,
notwithstanding that he admits the horror
of viewing the death throes of a butchered animal,
eats his flesh food "kosher" to satisfy his
palate rather than live up to the promptings
of conscience.
Judaism, Catholicism, Protestantism, and
Christian Sciencism alike disregard the sacredness
of all animal kingdom, and yet, after admitting
the horror of the slaughter pen, they all encourage
the merciless killing under the cloak
of the Bible.
"The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose"
may well be applied to the religionist who
upholds the killing of our dumb fellow creatures.
The fact that the Bible encourages the murder
of an animal proves it is not entirely from
the pen of holy men.
The individual who professes religion and
says it is right to slay and eat when he can live
without taking sentient life, on the vegetation
which nature so bountifully provides, is a liar,
a murderer and a hypocrite in his own higher
conscience.
The so-called devout man wants to live and
enjoy life, but he eats of the innocent animal
that has been battered to death by the blow of
the ax; he contends that a body which suffers
pain was created for slaughter to satisfy his
beastly palate. Such a man is destitute of the
very essence of God-life be he minister, church-goer
or layman.
Above all things the minister of the Gospel
and the church attendant should be kind and
considerate toward all animal creation and
should construe the Scriptures and preach to
prove the sacredness of their Holy Bible. They
should do God's will one earth as it is in
Heaven, absolutely abstaining from the fleshpots
of Egypt, thereby discouraging the blotting
out of animal life, proving conclusively
by their lives that their God is just and kind
and merciful.
The man who opposes the spilling of life
blood of Nature's creatures is on the higher
plane of life.
After searching for a mode of living through
which we might find perfect peace on earth
and good will toward our fellow-men, we become
partially interested in the different religions,
but we cannot conscientiously close our
eyes and believe a meat-eating, gormandizing
religionist is undefiled and passing on to spiritual
perfection to ultimately, at dissolution, burst
into a glorious immortality.
Read the memorable Sermon on the Mount,
supposed to have been delivered by Christ Jesus,
and note the humility, the tenderness, the love
and all therein that is grand and noble—then
decide that such a meek and lowly Nazarene
could have eaten of the fleshpots or even have
sanctioned the killing of any living creature, and
you deprive that character of the very essence
of divinity.
Flesh eating man's religion cannot emanate
from a kindly heart because with all his intellectuality
and knowledge of right and wrong,
his animalistic tendencies are in excess. His
horror for the slaughter pen is conclusive and
positive evidence that the higher consciousness
is dormant proving that carnivorous man hath
no pre-eminence above the beast.
We fail to see any Christianity in the present-day
Sunday churchianity, and we positively
know there is nothing sacred in the person upholding
the merciless slaughter of animals.
Through all this we are made to fully realize
the inconsistency of nearly all religious professions.
We finally study the Laws of Nature,
and we live from that time on according to the
dictates of conscience and reason, with some
little faith in addition. The first thought that
impresses us is the inhuman custom of taking
life blood, knowing that every man, woman
and child, who possesses an atom of feeling,
would shudder to look upon the butchery of
our dumb fellow-creatures, and we know if the
horror of the slaughter pen is admitted, it surely
is a heinous crime to slaughter. Then we begin to
delve deep into the real scientific subjects of real
scientific men and really discover the real body
builders are proper food, proper mastication,
proper air and proper breathing, and occasional
proper fasting, etc. We live the life as recommended
by these noble logicians and benefactors.
Now we look from the heights to the
vast expanse of empty faith cure, cults and isms,
creeds and dogmas, and theories, and realize
how narrow they all are by not embodying humanitarianism
and the laws of health and hygiene
in their teachings.
From a spiritual conception, it is just as
reasonable to recommend human cannibalism as
the eating of butcher shop carrion.
The 25th day of December is the day set
aside to present gifts to our sweethearts, wives
and friends; the day Santa Claus brings toys
to our little ones to overflow their little hearts
with gladness, but mainly to commemorate the
birth of one of the kindliest characters the world
has ever known.
That holy day is horribly desecrated by the
quasi-pious element throughout our Christian
land in the killing of countless numbers of Nature's
sentient creation.
Thanksgiving Day, likewise set aside for a
sacred purpose—to thank God for the many
blessings bestowed upon our great nation—is also
desecrated by religious people as well as by the
laity. On the day we should send our thanks
to that invisible something (The First Great
Cause) we praise an imaginary personal deity
by killing things to satiate the craving of the
palate.
The Bible condemns the eating of swine flesh
(Deut. 14: 8; Is. 65: 4), but what care the
pharisee so long as he intends pleasing the palate
rather than obey the law of his God and conscience?
When we reach the Holy Mountain (consistent
religion) we will abstain from eating
flesh food and have a heartfelt desire for all
creatures to live and enjoy life as we wish to
live (Golden Rule.)
Selfish civilized intellectual human takes his
gun and repairs to the forest and wantonly
slaughters wild game. Perhaps he kills outright;
perhaps he wounds; perhaps the animal
he has wounded is dying a slow, painful death;
perhaps he wounds or kills a mother and the
young are starving in nest or lair, and perhaps
a professed Jew, Catholic, Protestant or Christian
Scientist is relishing the seasoned carrion
while the little ones are dying for the want of
that mother's care. God forbid the belief in
such a god!
The huntsman, who wounds the wild game,
goes to his couch and rests peacefully while
the poor dumb, wounded animal is dying in
the forest, suffering most excruciating pain.
The deer, the dove, the quail and all of
Nature's blood creation must suffer with horrifying
wounds at the hands of the thoughtless,
cruel hunter; upheld by so-called religious people
who contend that such inhumanity is permissible
in God's sight.
This very day thousands upon thousands of
our dumb fellow-creatures are suffering agonizing
deaths caused through wounds inflicted
by the merciless hunter; and thousands upon
thousands of professed Jews, Catholics, Protestants
and Christian Scientists worship the god
that tolerates such cruelty. Hypocrisy! Inconsistency!
Shame!
Sift mankind down to his noblest thought,
and he must admit the life of an animal is just
as sacred as his own.
Knowing that all humanity feels the horrors
of taking the life blood of defenseless animals,
you are compelled to condemn every religious
institution that does not embody within its creed
the vegetarian diet.
Animals instinctively flee from danger, and
suffer pain, which proves the brute creation has
a right to an appointed time upon the earth.
When man slaughters these helpless creatures
under the selfish idea that they were created for
that purpose, he is destitute of divine principle.
The almighty dollar is the god of the civilized
people—mankind takes the sacred life
blood of God's creatures and barters the carcass
in exchange for money. Nearly all clergymen
and the laity eat of the murdered animal.
Shame!
Let us be at least considerate and reason on
the side of mercy. If your religion sanctions
the killing of innocent animals, well then, in the
name of all that is pure and good, lay aside
your religion and get your soul in tune with the
Infinite, and then use your faculties of reason
to develop up to the highest ideal.
Condemn the killing of innocent, defenseless
animals, and do away with the fleshpots of
Egypt, and praise Deity for endowing you with
reason sufficient to realize the wrong of shedding
life blood, and then sing hosannas for the
nobility of living according to the promptings of
higher conscience.
Do not think of the savory beef and mutton
as it hangs in the market place, but turn your
mind and heart to the abattoirs and see the
horror of slaughter and then acknowledge that
if God is not in the slaughter house to hinder
the killing of a dumb brute he is surely not in
the churches reserving crowns and halos for
a sanctimonious element whose palate takes
precedence of principle.
The church folk encourage the killing of
quadruped, fish and fowl and then have the
audacity to say grace at meal time, thanking
God and imploring Him to shower blessings
upon them.
You believe in all that elevates man to the
highest standard of excellence and yet in the
eating of a slaughtered animal you are an accessory
to the crime of murder—a crime that
is far more morally wrong and horrible than
any so-called venial sin.
The man who "believes" and has "faith"
solely for his soul's safety through fear rather
than through love; the man who affiliates with
the church with mercenary motive; the man who
testifies with lying tongue to the virtue of his
carnivorous unfeeling religion; the man who
shifts the blame of his cussedness to the mythical
Satan; the man who is weak and bent toward
religious emotionalism; the man who sees
the mote in every eye but his own; the man
who stands on the street corner preaching hell
and damnation, "fighting the devil," are the
sorts of men who decry that all beings have an
equal right to live.
If perchance a fellow human becomes tired
and weary of the vicissitudes of this world and
cancels his own captivity (suicide), we frantically
throw up our hands realizing the enormity
of such a crime.
His life is his own and he may do as he
pleases; his sin of self-destruction is between himself
and his God, and yet we grieve at such a sad
exit. The very same man who shudders at the
uncanny thought of another's self-murder will
uphold the killing of a dumb brute to satiate
the "human" palate. The animal does not want
to die yet the intelligent man who has a "merciful
loving God" makes murder permissible taking
his authority from the book he calls "The
Sacred Bible."
The Proverbs, the Psalms, the Sermon on
the Mount, and many other portions of the
Good Book are beautiful, and no doubt the
writers of the select passages were inspired,
but the evil spirit was surely predominant in the
man who depicted the Prince of Peace, in all
his humility, as a flesh eater.
A pitiful story to be told about a little girl
whose father was supposed to be very devout,
and in whose residence the motto,
"GODI S NOW HERE I NOUR HOME"
adorned the wall, confusedly printed by her
illiterate parent.
One beautiful day, as all nature seemed in
perfect harmony, the child strolled to the barnyard
where the hired man was killing the petted
calf preparatory to having a great feast in honor
of the son, returning from a western college of
theology.
A thought struck the child as she saw the
life blood of an innocent animal ebbing away,
through a horrible knife wound.
She hastened back to her father's home, sad
but wiser, and appropriately divided the motto
on the wall:
GOD IS NO WHERE IN OUR HOME.
or as Daniel interpreted King Belshazzar's
dream, the thinking child weighed her
papa in the balances and found him very much
wanting in God principle.
Many so-called pious people throughout the
land condemn theaters, dancing, sociable drinking,
prize-fighting, card playing, pastime
smoking, Sunday recreation, the innocent custom
of Santa Claus and the comic supplements
of our Sunday newspapers, yet none of these
pleasures and pastimes could be half so abominable
and sinful as the encouragement of
slaughter.
Every church member construes the Scriptures
to please his own individuality; sometimes he
construes literally but when the passage does
not coincide with his appetite or manner of
living he invariably finds a figurative meaning.
We justify almost any sort of life by the
Holy Bible, but we cannot pull the blinds over
the eyes of conscience.
The Women's Christian Temperance Union
cannot influence towards reformation effectively;
the women of this religious order are trying
to defeat liquor and cigarette traffic, yet loth
to realize under their profession of Christianity,
they are sinners greater than either the unfortunate
cigarette fiend or the drunkard, because
they all admit the horror of killing, at the same
time relishing a mess of carrion, thereby virtually
encouraging the killer to kill more.
The tiger pounces upon the giraffe and rides
it to death, all the while tearing the flesh from
the bleeding animal; the puma pounces upon the
mountain goat; the hyena tears the entrails from
its living prey and the cat pounces upon the
beautiful song bird and takes its innocent life—where
is your merciful, loving, personal God?
The religionist who lives on hallucination or
believes that faith alone "is the substance of
things hoped for, the evidence of things not
seen," and will not reason, is living in the dark
ages still.
If one desires going into absolute truth concerning
the killing of helpless animals, he
may justly condemn the wearing of leather
shoes, gloves, etc., all of which are worn contrary
to Nature's Law.
The self-styled religious element send missionaries
to foreign lands to spread the gospel
of love when they, themselves, as well as those
they send, are insufficiently human to recognize
the brutality of slaughter.
Take man to the slaughter house to view
the butchery, and then if he contends God
created helpless, dumb brutes for the slaughter
pen, he is positively heartless. If he shudders
to witness the hideous butchery, that proves
conclusively that God is not omnipresent.
If man wishes to disregard spirituality and
remain an agnostic, infidel or an atheist, that is
his privilege and he may continue eating carrion
and encouraging slaughter, from the lower animal
plane, but when he steps over the threshold
into religion and affiliates with the churches and
talks of man's pre-eminence above the beast he
must of necessity be in sympathy with his dumb
fellow creatures and abstain from flesh-eating
to discourage all things not in harmony with
God. (Higher self).
Does it not hurt the innocent lamb when
you cut its little throat? Does it not hurt the
little calf when you take its tender life? Does
it not hurt the cow when you wield the axe with
tremendous force against its forehead? Does it
not hurt the sheep when in the agonies of death?
Does it not hurt when the goat pitifully gurgles
the sound "Oh Lord," as its life-blood is passing
the butcher's knife? If pain does attend
this horrible inhumanity of man, what right
then has he to establish for himself a God in
Heaven when in reality he hath no more feeling
in his miserable carcass than hath the cannibal
of the uncivilized isles.
All things may be possible to God, but the
idea of placing the breath of life into our fellow-beings
to be snuffed out by a superior intellectual
animal is the absurdest of all absurdities.
Dancing, theater-going, rag-time music, and
all other pleasures to kill the monotony of daily
routine, are under the ban of the churches. We
carry ourselves aloof from these awful (?) sins
and walk in the attitude of solemnity to impress
Almighty God with our piety. We preach
against liquor and tobacco while we ourselves
are addicted to the use of tea and coffee (stimulants).
We condemn everything we ourselves
do not care for and we jealously admonish others
to be just like us. Now if dancing, theater-going,
rag-time music, etc., and the immoralities
of life are sins of venial proportion, of what colossal
magnitude must be the sin of taking life
we cannot restore and how immeasurably hellish
are the churches that uphold the killing in the
name of a merciful God!
The dumb animals were created by Nature
same as man (except that we are a little above
the animal in intellect), and have a divine right
to live out their respective allotted time same as
man (minister, church-goer or layman.)
The Buddhist who regards all animal life sacred
is on the right path to spirituality, while the
carnivorous Jew, Catholic and Protestant are
drifting in the rut of dark age fantasy and
fanaticism.
Q. Are you not a little bit radical on the
subject of Humanitarianism?
A. To you I may be "a little bit radical"
because I oppose all religions (yours inclusive)
which make mankind selfish and unfeeling.
Q. If the Bible teaches me to slay and eat
have I not a right to eat flesh?
A. Yes, a legal right and your Bible right,
but not a moral right.
Q. Do not some people believe it is right
to slay and eat lower animals?
A. Yes, from their palate, but all honorable
conscientious men see a wrong in taking
life.
Q. Has not environment throughout one's
life something to do with our eating of flesh?
A. Yes, but come out of it and be in line
with a grander, nobler and consistent life. Lay
aside your palate and let your conscience rule.
Q. Is not the devil in your philosophy?
A. It seems so to you because it is an exposé
of churchianity, proving beyond question the
nothingness of the flesh eating religionist's piety.
Q. Suppose man lives in a country where
he cannot find vegetarian food?
A. Then he might be justified in eating
flesh to preserve his life.
Q. If there is no personal God, who created
this world?
A. It is a scientific proposition, and
so acknowledged by all thinking men.
Q. Do church people get angry at your
philosophy?
A. Yes, sometimes, as when their conscience
is seared by a hot iron.
Q. Have not vegetables life?
A. Not life which suffers an evident pain
nor do they flee when you threaten to pluck
them. Such a question is invariably asked by a
carnivorous wiseacre.
Q. Why are all Vegetarians lank, lean and
skinny?
A. Because you like the taste of meat and
intend to continue eating it.
Q. I know animals have fear and pain, but
supposing God did place them on earth for man
to slay and eat, what then?
A. "God" is no better then than your
"devil."
Q. What were animals created for?
A. What were YOU created for?
Q. What is your conception of God?
A. Nature. Higher self—Conscience.
Q. Do you not kill insects when you drink
water; and do you not cripple and trample
harmless bugs to death with every step you take?
A. Yes, but involuntarily and not with premeditation
and not selfishly to satisfy an inhuman
desire or appetite.
Q. Would you "swat" a fly or kill a flea
or a snake?
A. If a pest or venomous reptile disturbed
my peace and quiet I would be justified in protecting
myself.
Q. Is not the survival of the fittest a natural
law; consequently being superior I may slay and
eat?
A. That's your idea because the "fittest" is
yourself—in your own estimation and power; but
there's no godliness in such a contention. It is
your selfish conclusion that might is right at the
expense of sentient life.
Q. Do I not work hard and do I not know
that I need meat to sustain me in my manual
labor? Do I not know what my system needs.
A. Your system does not require food which
must come from a murdered animal! When you
contend that you must subsist on flesh, you know
not whereof you speak. You are talking to uphold
your inhuman appetite.
Q. Where would medical research be were
it not for vivisection (torture) and killing animals
for experiment in the interest of science?
A. I do not know, but I do know scientific
men have not a moral right to torture and kill
harmless, helpless animals. Experimenting in
surgery, etc., should be done on humans who believe
in the advancement of medical science at
the expense of life.
Q. Do you object to the infidel eating flesh
food?
A. I do not object to anyone eating flesh
food—eat whatever you like, but I do point
out the wrong of taking life and I emphatically
say the religious institution upholding slaughter
is a farce and a pharisaical monument to a man-made
deity.
Q. Do you actually consider flesh eating
the most abominable of sins?
A. Yes, absolutely the most abominable.
Q. What do you think of religious emotionalism
and ecstasy?
A. If from the mouth of a carnivorous
worshipper it is sham and pretense—a mockery.
Q. Is not your feeling toward animals
mawkish sentimentality?
A. There is no such thing as mawkish sentimentality
in decrying inhumanity.
Q. Do not the lower animals prey upon
one another, and do not the big fish eat the little
fish?
A. You profess to be above the inferior
animals and you profess to have a soul; you also
have a Golden Rule supposed to have been
handed down by a kind and merciful Creator.
Q. What shall we do with all the animals
if we do not kill them?
A. Is that why you eat flesh?
Q. Do you really think carnivorous
churchites are not of God?
A. I don't think it, I know it absolutely, because
I know it is wrong to kill and I know they
know it and I know they search the Scriptures
for "proof" to satisfy palate while Conscience
rebels.
Q. What do you think of a religionist who
says, "I am living under a new dispensation
since Christ came and went, and I now eat anything
the Lord sets before me?"
A. If he means he can eat at the expense
of sentient life he is not a Godly man; he is
not living in harmony with the Golden Rule;
he is not living according to the promptings of
a higher self, consequently the God spirit is dormant.
The church carnivora's favorite Bible quotations
to justify his inhumanity are invariably
quoted from a petrified conscience and the region
of the palate. Here are several of the
passages:
"There is nothing from without a
man, entering into him can defile him;
but the things which come out of him,
those are they that defile the man."
"For one believeth that he may eat all
things; another, who is weak, eateth
herbs. But to him that esteemeth anything
to be unclean to him it is unclean."
"Now the spirit speaketh expressly,
that in the latter times some shall depart
from the faith, giving heed to seducing
spirits and doctrines of devils.
Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their
conscience seared with a hot iron; commanding
to abstain from meats, which
God hath created to be received with
thanksgiving of them, which believe and
know the truth. For every creature of
God is good, and nothing to be refused,
if it be received with thanksgiving; for
it is sanctified by the word of God and
prayer."
"In a trance I saw a vision; a certain
vessel descend as it had been a great
sheet let down from heaven by four corners.
I considered and saw four-footed
beasts of the earth and beasts and
creeping things and fowls of the air;
and a voice said unto me, Arise, Peter,
slay and eat."
The Bible says: Be not among eaters of
flesh.
The Bible says: It is better to hear the rebuke
of the wise than to hear the hymns of fools.
The Bible says: If an animal dieth of itself
do not eat it but give it to thy neighbor and let
him eat thereof.
The Bible says: Who knoweth that the
spirit of man goeth upward and the spirit of the
beast goeth downward?
The Bible says: Your stomachs are an open
sepulchre.
The Bible says: Blessed are the merciful,
for they shall obtain mercy.
The Bible says: Prove all things and hold
fast of that which is good.
The Bible says: Do not be as the hypocrites
are, testifying in public places and yet living
apart from God.
The Bible says: Reason is too high for a
fool.
The Bible says: He that follows after mercy
findeth life.
The Bible says: The wise man's eyes are in
his head (he reasons), but the fool's eyes are
neither here nor there, he walketh in darkness.
The Bible says: When a man's ways are in
harmony with higher consciousness he maketh
his enemies be at peace with him.
The Bible says: The Spirit of God made
Samson a murderer.
The Bible says: The beasts of the field shall
honor me.
The Bible says: Fool thou art to believe all
that the prophets have said.
The Bible says: God sent plagues to torment
his people.
The Bible says: Shed not innocent blood.
The Bible says: Praise the Lord every living
creature—the beasts of the field, the birds of
the air and earth, the fish of the waters and
all mankind.
The Bible says: Thy will be done on earth
as it is in Heaven.
The Bible says: Thou art weighed in the
balances and art found wanting.
The Bible says: There are many false lords
and false gods the people are worshipping.
The Bible says: Come now, let us reason
together.
The Bible says: Faith without works is dead.
The Bible says: He that killeth an ox is as
if he slew a human.
The Bible says: Beast and man have one
breath; so that man hath no pre-eminence above
the beast; as one dieth so dieth the other.
The Bible says: Thou hast neither part nor
lot in this matter for thy heart is not right in
the sight of God.
The Bible says: Every moving thing that
liveth (grain, fruits, vegetables, nuts, etc.) shall
be food for you, but flesh with the life thereof
which is blood shall ye not eat.
The Bible says: God blessed every creature.
The Bible says: Behold I have given you
every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face
of the earth and every tree, on the which is
the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall
be for food.
The Bible says: All that cry Lord, Lord,
are not of God.
The Bible says: They shall not hurt nor
destroy in all my Holy Mountain.
The Bible says: I am God, I change not.
The Bible says: Do a little consistent heart
cleaning so that the human mind's eye shall be
spiritual to see and segregate right from wrong.
The Bible says: Christ taught love, leniency,
forgiveness, tenderness and mercy.
The Bible says: Dead flies cause the apothecary's
ointment to send forth a stinking savour.
Capital punishment or legalized murder is
another miscarriage of consistency; it does not
dovetail into mercy and it does not blend into
the law that God has given man an allotted
time upon the earth. What right have twelve
jurors to virtually cancel the life of a murderer?
Incarcerate the offender under a life sentence
with proper food and training, and ultimately
that murderer's heart and soul might be purer
than Judge, jurors and all connected with the
courts of justice.
If a criminal under excitement or cool premeditation
takes the life of a human being, the
cool, considerate jurors, responsible for the death
penalty, are just as guilty of murder as the
prisoner.
The butcher is rejected as a juror on a murder
trial on the ground that his business has
hardened his heart, and yet the Judge of the
Superior Court, the sheriff and his deputies and
the eligible jurors all eat of the beef the butcher
slaughters.
Despite the protests that may come to the
surface in reading the inspired, pointed truths,
the fact should be reiterated that Justice, Kindness
and Mercy for every living creature is in
the heart and soul of the true religionist.
The sand-blind carnivorous faith curist
(who reads his Bible through a pair of eye-glasses
not made by God Almighty) tells us of
a divine healing power.
We hear many testimonies from the lips of
these people praising this wonderful (?) curative
agency, but when sensibly considered we
know the "power" removes only visionary ills.
Imaginary tumors, etc., hypochondria and
other nervous troubles readily yield to this mythical
physician, but no disease or defect in reality,
can be removed until we remove the physical
cause.
If we continue living regardless of natural
health laws all the "belief" and all the "faith"
and all the "Blood" cannot offset the inevitable
result of continued disobedience.
They sometimes speculate as to the stubbornness
and apparent incurability of an ailment and
finally lay the blame to a spiritual insufficiency.
Ridiculous!
Mankind is filled with patriotism when a
victorious war is ended, forgetting the awful
gloom pervading some poor mother's home.
The higher self should make us grieve with
those that grieve rather than be exultant at the
loss or downfall of any nation. We should
love all nations and nationalities as we do our
own, and be bound together by inseparable
bonds, realizing that we all must pass to the
final tomb of man on the same level.
A bow of horse hair coming in contact with
the gut strings of a violin produces exquisite
harmony that thrills every fibre of our being
with ecstasy. We can attribute the melody to
the spirit of the deceased animal appealing to
the human heart. Strange that after life has
departed we can charm the muses with tones
produced on a stringed instrument. What human
being has ever bequeathed to the world a
substance to awaken the emotions of our soul
through concord of sweet sounds like unto the
gut of a deceased animal? Evidently there
is more harmony in the entrails of lower creatures
than we find in the entire carcass of religious
civilized carnivorous man.
The scientist who upholds painful experimental
surgery in the interest of science should
give over his own body for experiment instead
of encouraging the cruelties of vivisection. It
hurts being "cut to pieces," consequently the
heartless scientific fellow, instead of offering his
own body for the dissecting table, tortures a
poor friendless dog or other animal.
The horrible suffering thousands of helpless
creatures have undergone through the process
of vivisection is heartrending.
There should be stringent law against such
inhumanity.
E. E. Kusel,
Los Angeles, Cal.
Sir: I read your "Humanitarian Philosophy"
booklet and I take it as a mass
of devil talk. It is not in favor of the
Holy Bible and it says it is wrong to
kill animals. This is crossing God's
word. You say it says swine meat is
forbidden. That is the only true statement
in your book but that is the law
for the Jews only. You say it says
thou shalt not kill; of course it does,
and that has references to the human
family only. You say the religious man
that does not shudder at the works of
a butcher is heartless and godless. You
tell a falsehood there. I have been a
believer fifteen years and I know all
animals were made for man.
I can see the devil has a powerful
influence over you as it had over Voltaire,
Paine, Ingersoll, Edison, Hubbard
and other non-believers. You infidels
preach against God's Bible and
will be burned in the everlasting fires
of hell for it. You will be glad to have
a drop of cold water in your suffering,
but god will not have mercy—it will be
too late then.
Hell is full of agnostics and infidels
and non-believers burning and suffering
and I warn you to have a care as
to what you say.
The Catholics and Christian Scientists
are as much of the devil's doings
as you are, so you'll have company if
you do not repent of your infidelity.
You are adding to God's word and it
is punishable by his wrath (Rev. 22:18.)
Your book is a lot of lies and infidelity.
N. S. W.
Birmingham, Ala., Jan. 30, 1911.
Mr. N. S. W.,
Birmingham, Ala.
My dear sir: In reply to your letter of
Jan. 30th, concerning my "Humanitarian
Philosophy," I wish to candidly tell
you that I am not at all afraid of your
sort of god. The God I worship is not
very likely to materialize in a selfish
fanatical subject, but always comes to
the surface in the heart and soul of honorable,
conscientious thinking men—men
who either profess nothing and
live according to custom or in men who
profess religion and uphold their God
as kind, loving and merciful.
This latter man is an ethical vegetarian
and will not accept the cruelties
and inconsistencies of the Bible but
says "it is an error in translation."
As to the lower animals, one preying
upon the other, the conscientious, devout
Bible believer presents the theory
of his own freeing God Almighty from
the sinful responsibility. He divides
Bible truth from Bible error—he accepts
the lofty and beautiful and holds
fast to that which is good.
If you intend to preach a gospel of
Love you will find it an utter impossibility
to do so if you do not live a Humanitarian
life—a life that forbids the
killing of any thing that suffers pain,
and fear of death as you yourself may
sometimes suffer.
In conclusion I wish to impress you
with the fact that your letter is sufficient
proof that you read the Bible in a
haphazard style and know not its contents.
Every assertion, every quotation and
every conclusion in my "Humanitarian
Philosophy," my dear sir, is absolutely
true and justified.
Respectfully,
E. E. KUSEL.
The tobacco smoking on street cars
has been very much discussed in your
valuable paper recently. Now, I will
suggest that all persons who object to
the poisonous effects of tobacco register
a protest every chance they get and
spend some good money, as I am doing,
to back up their argument against the
most deadly plant used by human beings.
There is no traffic so degrading
in its influence and effect as tobacco.
It goes hand in hand with liquor, and
when we stop the youth of the land
from using the weed, then the saloon
will have no customers.
G. L. R.
Founder World's Anti-Tobacco League,
Los Angeles, Cal.
(From Los Angeles Herald.)
The church element construe the
Bible to blend into their own desires
and appetites and then in the name of
their god (little g) they commit every
iniquity under the sun, the most abominable
of which is the eating of "a beef
which has been battered in the head
by the blow of an ax or mutton which
has had its throat cut from ear to ear."
Get yourself in touch with the Infinite
and you will see that the taking of
animal life for food is a greater sin
than smoking, drinking or satisfying
animal desires. The three last named
are only sinning against the body but
not commendable by any means, while
the first is the horrible sin of taking
life.
Carnivorous reader (church people
included) think these lines over well
and then move thy tongue seven times
before thou speakest of sin!
E. E. KUSEL.
Los Angeles, Cal.
(From Los Angeles Herald.)
What queer and wild notions religious
faddists get into their heads. T.
J. W. wants us to quit killing cattle
and hogs, etc., in fact all kinds of animals
and birds because God has put
them on earth. I would like Mr W. to
tell us what would become of us if we
followed his advice. Why, the animals
would crowd man off the earth in a
short while. The farmer could not
raise any crops. Cattle, deer, hares and
sheep would eat his grain, the coyotes
his chickens and the lions would eat
him.
C. V. Pasadena, Cal.
(From Los Angeles Herald.)
If you please, Mr. V., I am not a "religious
faddist." I am not religious at
all. I am a firm believer in the Golden
Rule, applying it to man and beast.
In reply to your query, Mr. V. I will
answer briefly: Self-preservation is the
first law of nature, so protect yourself
against the presumed invasion of tame
and wild beasts, birds, etc., but do not
presume we have the right to take life
of anything which endures pain or runs
away from impending danger unless
occasion calls for it.
My letter to the Herald, if you please,
was for those who profess to be godly
and "in the kingdom." Religious people
must be strictly humane or they
are minus the God character and their
profession is either a phantom or hypocrisy.
Of course men like yourself, who are
afraid of being crowded off the earth,
have a special self-given right to raise
and cruelly slaughter any living creature
for eating.
Meat eating will continue until the
end of the world, no doubt, but the Humanitarian
will not eat it; it will be
devoured by ungodly church people and
outsiders who like the flavor of flesh
food, regardless of the wrong of premeditated
killing.
T. J. W.
Compton, Cal.
(From Los Angeles Herald.)
Obvious typographical errors have been silently corrected.
A Table of Contents has been added.
The repetition of the headings "QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS" on five and "IN AND BETWEEN THE LINES"
on three consecutive pages has been removed.
