Network for Good is one source that lists many organizations involved with Tsunami Relief, that people can donate to right on their site. One thing I like about this list is that, in addition to a wide variety of humanitarian aid, it also includes some organizations that are providing relief and helping the animal victims of the Tsunami. Nice!

You can click on the highlighted names of any of the organizations to find more information on them, like what they do, how much they spend on programs vs. administration, etc. — or to link to their websites for further information.

[Again, when it comes to feeding programs, Food for Life is veg'n, and ADRA seems to be vegetarian (with the possible exception of the sheep listed in their gift catalog, which has nothing to do with their Tsunami relief effort).]

---

More information:

http://tsunamihelp.blogspot.com has news and information about resources, aid, donations and volunteer efforts.

Click here, to view some amazing “before” and “after” photographs of the Tsunami devastation.

Thai tsunami workers turn vegetarian - report

---

Today’s blurb bumped ‘Tsunami — help for the animals; tomorrow’s sermon and FARM’s appeal to the Sabina Fund’ with a link to Kindred Circle’s e-newsletter from the home page. If you’re interested in information on other organizations that are helping animals, you might want to take a look at that, too.

Click on the banner to donate to…

What was going to be a 5-line post has grown out of control. Oh well. The “Page Down” button is your friend.

Frequently Asked Questions about a variety of animal issues:

- General

- Vegetarianism

- Hunting

- Vivisection

---

As a clarification of where I stand, my personal attitude is more “animal rights”. My public attitude is more “animal welfare”, because I think society in general has an easier time accepting the word “welfare” over “rights”. I prefer “animal advocacy”, which sounds like a “Via Media” — and which can incorporate the best of both definitions, without the worst connotation of either. (But I’m sure I irritate a few people, no matter how I choose to label myself.)

---

The Anglican Society for the Welfare of Animals’ official statements on the use of animals for research and on factory farming are posted below. They also have an official position on hunting. But I don’t have access to it at the moment.

“We are greatly concerned at the suffering caused to many animals in the course of research and we believe that the goal should be an urgent end to all experimentation on live animals. We support those organisations which actively and responsibly promote and develop alternative methods. As we work to achieve the end of animal experimentation, we furthermore, given the current situation, urge that governments, industry and the international scientific community provide both the will and the funding to (1) take immediate steps worldwide to eliminate pointless or needlessly duplicated experiments (2) improve techniques so that the number of experiments using animals and the number of animals used are radically reduced and (3) where use of animals at present continues, adopts international guidelines to ensure that animals are protected at all times from pain and distress, not only in actual experiments but in the sources of supply and in their living conditions. Finally, we appeal most strongly for full implementation of EU Directive 86/609 which states that animal experiments should not be performed where non-animal procedures are available, and that the European Commission itself must encourage the development and validation of alternative methods.”

“[T]he Anglican Society for the Welfare of Animals opposes all farming systems which frustrate the strong needs of animals to practice exploratory, social and grooming behaviour and deprive them of sufficient space for movement and comfort. In particular we oppose cages and barren environments in which animals live on metal slats. We also oppose breeding and feeding methods, designed to speed food production, which distort and deform the bodies of animals causing many to suffer. ASWA believes that, if animals are to be slaughtered for food, maximum effort must be made to lessen pre-slaughter stress and suffering and is opposed to long-distance transportation and any slaughter methods likely to result in pain and terror prior to death.”

---

As posted elsewhere, please choose kindly when giving to disease-related charities. Below is a link to a site that lists charities that fund animal research and charities that don’t. Please bookmark that site, because some of the names are very similar. This is especially important to know when your employer is promoting a cause, like mine does so often. It is also important to keep in mind when a family member dies, and the survivors are thinking about where they’d like memorial gifts to be sent. Funeral homes may have an easy answer for grieving families, with ready-made envelopes for some charitable organization. It is important to know whether that organization funds animal research, so another charity can be chosen.

http://www.caringconsumer.com/searchcharities.html
And on that same site, you can find companies that do or do not test consumer products on animals.

And while we’re on the topic, here is a page that shows which pet food companies don’t test on pets:
http://www.peta.org/feat/iams/food.html

Please note that two of the brands listed are also vegan.
(There are other vegan brands available, and also recipes for homemade vegan pet food. But they haven’t signed on to this list. So it isn’t known whether or not they do animal testing. So if you want to try a 100% cruelty-free option on your cat or dog, try Evolution or Harbinger for a New Age, or Natural Life’s vegan variety.)

“The humane cause is about preventing suffering. A species does not suffer; individual animals suffer. Organizations which favor causing individual animals to suffer in the name of conservation should accordingly receive no support from any humane donor.”

(From an editorial from “Animal People”, 12.03)

Please read the full editorial, if interested in determining where your donations go, which animal-related charities actually help animals, etc., amid all the solicitations you might receive in the mail. It also has information about “wildlife conservation” charities, etc., which is important for people who care about wildlife to read. (See “*” below.)

Animal People’s site: http://www.animalpeoplenews.org

Recent newspaper issues

* There is a huge difference between the ideologies of “conservation” (or “sustainable use”) and “rehabilitation”. As an “independent source” who knows and supports the work of Fellow Mortals, Inc. whenever I can, I recommend them for your consideration as an organization worthy of support. Please visit their site at http://www.fellowmortals.org.

[Today's post knocked '...To do the right deed for the wrong reason' from the home page.]

Last summer, some lady remarked to me that we have so many human problems in the world to deal with, that animals are not our primary concern. I was just mulling over how many little things we could do, which wouldn’t take away from our humanitarian efforts or resources. I’ll just offer this comparison:

Does it take away from our humanitarian efforts or deplete our resources for charitable giving, if we choose to throw an empty aluminum can into a recycling bin, instead of into the waste basket?

If not, then how many little choices could become second nature to us as individuals and as a society, that would help alleviate the suffering of animals?

- Could we ask our doctors to prescribe estrogen replacement therapies that don’t cause suffering to pregnant mares, or create a “cash crop” of foals for the European and Japanese meat markets?

- Could we choose not to buy fur or leather?
- Could we choose a veggie burger instead of a hamburger?

- Could we buy our eggs from a family farmer who allows his hens to move freely about the farmyard?
- Could we adopt companion animals from shelters or rescue organizations, instead of buying them from pet shops and breeders?
- Could we remember to bring our companion animals along with us, if forced to evacuate from a natural disaster like a hurricane, flood, or wildfire?
- Could we choose entertainment that doesn’t exploit animals?
- Could we stop hunting animals for sport?
- Could we slow down our car for a non-human pedestrian?
- Could we buy brands of products that aren’t tested on animals?
- Could we choose to give to charities that don’t fund animal research?
- Could we stop ourselves from the inclination to want to step on an ant on the sidewalk?
- Do we need to keep breeding “companion snakes” who have no life, confined in our aquariums?
- Could we buy a bigger fish bowl for our lonely beta who also has no life?
- Could we stop buying animals altogether, and lose the whole concept of animals-as-property, that is reinforced in our culture by language such as “pet ownership“?
- Can we support humanitarian relief organizations that don’t (overtly, if at all) exploit animals?
- See links to resources found at ‘Plant-based Hunger Solutions: common sense food policy for a healthy well-fed world’

- Is there something else that could be added to this list?

How much would any of these things detract from our ability to care about other people?

“To shut your mind, heart, imagination to the sufferings of others is to begin slowly but inexorably to die. It is to cease by inches from being human, to become in the end capable of nothing, generous or unselfish - or sometimes capable of anything, however terrible.”

–John Austin Baker (Bishop of Salisbury), Sermon on the World Day of Prayer for Animals, 4 October 1986

For more info on the topic of charities and animal research, see:

http://www.curedisease.com
(Americans for Medical Advancement voices opposition to animal models based on science, not ethics. C. Ray Greek, MD and president of AFMA, co-authored Sacred Cows and Golden Geese: The Human Cost of Experiments on Animals and Specious Science with his wife, Jean Swingle Greek, DVM.)

http://www.charitiesinfo.org — Charitiesinfo.org is a public service provided by the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM)

Consumers can call 1-866-TEST-KIND for a free guide to charities that do and do not fund animal experiments. Or, order PETAís ìGuide to Cruelty-Free Charities,î because your donation should help end sufferingónot cause it.

(When a friend or family member dies, there is usually more than one choice people are given at the funeral, for making memorial donations. If there is more than one choice, please choose the one that doesn’t fund animal research. This is fresh on my mind, because I’m going to a funeral today, and will choose to make a donation to the church, rather than to the American Cancer Society primarily for that very reason.)

Last Sunday, I spent the morning with a few people handing out Physicians’ Committee for Responsible Medicine’s leaflets to people at the March of Dimes “WalkAmerica”, informing them that March of Dimes funds animal research, and that there are other similar organizations that do not. This has weighed on me, because I know people give to charities out of the goodness of their hearts. I happened upon an Australian animal welfare site that had information on various charities, and was struck by the sentence, “You don’t have to be cruel, to be kind.”

Besides hoping that individuals will avail themselves to the resources that inform them which companies do or do not test their products on animals, or which charities do or do not fund animal research, and limit their giving to the organizations that don’t harm animals, I also hope that the churches will begin to look at, and recognize, the various ways we directly or indirectly perpetuate the misery and deaths of animals, and actively look for alternatives. “You don’t have to be cruel, to be kind” has echoed through my mind throughout this past week.

I have not yet been able to find a “cruelty-free” world hunger relief organization that churches would support. But they are out there. If, for whatever reason (and I suspect that there are some understandable ones) they aren’t endorsable by the Church, I would hope that individuals would choose to support them, anyway, again, over the endorsable Christian humanitarian organizations that are inherently cruel to animals. (For now, I’ll leave it to you to search the Internet, if interested, for something like “vegan world hunger relief”, and you will find a number of organizations that help humans without harming animals. Here is one thing I found: http://www.vegsource.com/joanne/qa/qahungry.htm.)

Churches also owe it to their own best interests, not to fall into the category of charitable non-profit organizations that fund the perpetuation of cruelty to animals — especially, knowingly. (Maybe I shouldn’t say that. But I feel pretty strongly about it.)

“Cruelty must be whitewashed by a moral excuse, and a pretence of reluctance.”
– unknown origin

Cruelty-free alternatives links to lists of companies and charities that do not test on animals, and also links to information about cruelty-free investing. It is now its own ’story’ listed on the right side of the screen.

“In all fairness there is more than enough to go around…”

Plenty International is an organization I just discovered last night, while surfing the Internet.

If your church is looking for ways to help humans, without exploiting animals, this organization might be one you’d like to consider.

Here is Plenty’s mission statement:

Believing that all life is connected and how we live affects the world, and recognizing that poverty, injustice and environmental degradation threaten our humanity and our habitat, Plenty’s mission is to help protect and share the world’s abundance and knowledge for the benefit of all. To this end, Plenty facilitates the transfer and exchange of renewable and non-exploitive technologies, practical skills, information, and friendship among peoples and communities across cultures and generations.

---

[Posting today's entry has caused the 10/28 entry to go into "calendar limbo". If interested in books about Christian vegetarianism, or my comments on the Resolution on Non-Violence, click on October 28th on the calendar to the right.]