Conclusion
Animal rights is the idea that some, or all, non-human
animals are entitled to the possession of their own lives and that their most
basic interests—such as the need to avoid suffering—should be afforded the same
consideration as similar interests of human beings.
Appearance
Slave Veteran Negro (Pro Se Plaintiff) Louis Charles Hamilton II herein (USN)
#2712 Furtherance’s Affirm, state and fully declare all allegation, contention,
disputes, disputation, argument, conflict and disharmony, fully cause of action
for “official”
Motion
for Recusal David Hittner ‘United States District Judge”, according to “White
Mans” applicable law, to Wit:
Animal
rights is the idea that some, or all, non-human animals are entitled to the
possession of their own lives and that their most basic interests—such as the
need to avoid suffering—should be afforded the same consideration as similar
interests of human beings
Advocates
oppose the assignment of moral value and fundamental protections on the basis
of species membership alone—an idea known since 1970 as speciesism, when the
term was coined by Richard D. Ryder—arguing that it is a prejudice as
irrational as any other
They
maintain that animals should no longer be viewed as property or used as food,
clothing, research subjects, entertainment, or beasts of burden.
Advocates
approach the issue from a variety of perspectives. The abolitionist view is
that animals have moral rights, which the pursuit of incremental reform may
undermine by encouraging human beings to feel comfortable with using them
Gary
Francione's abolitionist position promotes ethical veganism. He argues that
animal rights groups that pursue welfare concerns, such as People for the
Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), risk making the public feel comfortable
about its use of animals.
He
calls such groups "the new welfarists." PETA argues that Francione's
criticism does little to help alleviate the suffering of individual animals and
also trivializes the efforts of workers in the field who handle cruelty cases.
It also creates divisiveness within the animal liberation movement instead of
focusing on shared goals.
Tom
Regan, as a deontologist, argues that at least some animals are
"subjects-of-a-life", with beliefs, desires, memories, and a sense of
their own future, who must be treated as ends in themselves, not as means to an
end.[6] Sentiocentrism is the theory that sentient individuals are the subject
of moral concern and therefore are deserving of rights.
Protectionists
seek incremental reform in how animals are treated, with a view to ending
animal use entirely, or almost entirely. This position is represented by the
philosopher Peter Singer.
As a
utilitarian, Singer's focus is not on moral rights, but on the argument that
animals have interests—particularly an interest in not suffering—and that there
is no moral or logical reason not to award those interests equal consideration.
Multiple cultural traditions around the world—such as Animism, Taoism,
Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism—also espouse some forms of animal rights.
In
parallel to the debate about moral rights, animal law is now widely taught in
law schools in North America, and several prominent legal scholars[who?]
support the extension of basic legal rights and personhood to at least some
animals. The animals most often considered in arguments for personhood are
bonobos and chimpanzees.
This
is supported by some animal rights academics because it would break through the
species barrier, but opposed by others because it predicates moral value on
mental complexity, rather than on sentience alone.
Critics
of animal rights argue that animals are unable to enter into a social contract,
and thus cannot be possessors of rights, a view summed up by the philosopher
Roger Scruton, who writes that only humans have duties, and therefore only
humans have rights
A
parallel argument, known as the utilitarian position, is that animals may be
used as resources so long as there is no unnecessary suffering; they may have
some moral standing, but they are inferior in status to human beings, and
insofar as they have interests, those interests may be overridden, though what
counts as necessary suffering or a legitimate sacrifice of interests varies considerably
Certain
forms of animal rights activism, such as the destruction of fur farms and
animal laboratories by the Animal Liberation Front, have also attracted
criticism, including from within the animal rights movement itself,[10] as well
as prompted reaction from the U.S. Congress with the enactment of the
"Animal Enterprise Protection Act" (amended in 2006 by the Animal
Enterprise Terrorism Act).
“However”
on or about On or about “October” 9th
2012 (RICO) enterprise David Hittner ‘United States District Judge” having full
conscious knowledge and professional legal expert fiduciary responsibility
that:
1. The 1790 Naturalization Act reserves
naturalized citizenship for whites only was fully enforced against the (Pro Se
Plaintiff) the first Presidential Negro Family (Obama) and 44.5 Million Negros
legally without legal citizenship after 1865 “civil war” trapped by this
continual 1790 (RICO) Naturalization Act.
2. Articles of Agreement Relating to the
Surrender of the Army of Northern Virginia. April 10, 1865, was fully violated
and that “Mississippi” never freed the (Pro Se Plaintiff) the first
Presidential Negro Family (Obama) and
44.5 Million Negros legally without legal citizenship after 1865 “civil war” trapped
by this continual collusion of the defendant (USA) The 1790 (RICO)
Naturalization Act.
3. The 13th amendment to the “United States
of America” was destroyed, annihilate, wipe out, and fully obliterate, fully in
law and equity” official in leaving (Pro Se Plaintiff), the first Presidential
Negro Family (Obama) and 44.5 Million Negros legally born between the exact
dates of August 20th 1619 - February 7th 2013 “Slaves of The United States of
America”, as so legally Born unto “Slavery Servitude”.
4. The 14th amendment to the “United States
of America” was also destroyed, annihilate, wipe out, and fully obliterate,
fully in law and equity” official in leaving (Pro Se Plaintiff), the first
Presidential Negro Family (Obama) and
44.5 Million Negros legally born between the exact dates of February 7th 2013 –
2099 pursuant to “Elite Secret Whites Only”
Judicial
Government The 1790 Naturalization Act reserves naturalized citizenship for
whites only having “officially” denaturalization (Pro Se Plaintiff), the first
Presidential Negro Family (Obama) and
44.5 Million Negros legally born between the exact dates of February 7th 2013 –
2099 “Leaving”
(Pro Se Plaintiff), the first Presidential
Negro Family (Obama) and 44.5 Million
Negros “without” any legal citizenship, any just equal claim legal standing
before any Federal Court of Law, and “official property” of all “card-holders”
of the Knights of The Klu Klux Klansmen, and United States of America et al
forevermore, Pursuant to: Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857),
Notwithstanding
Pro Se Slave Negro Louis Charles Hamilton II declared “Legally” 1000% Dead (DOA)
to have his minor children kidnaped by the “Church of Jesus Christ of Ladder
Day Sainst in an ongoing (RICO) fraudulent cover up by defendant United States
of America (Utah), as Being an open unlimted quite morbid statute of limitation
wi9thy a (MIA) dead wife Body being the same all occurred in (UTAH) mystery of
2016 undersigned notary sealed date herein on additional defendant
RICO
enterprise abduction of a pronounce “dead nigger pro se slave” (Hamilton) by
also (Texas) State Hospital defendant herein of a Legally declared Dead Pro Se
Nigger Slave Plaintiff, (Hamilton) in a fix 1619 – 2013 years of scheme of
things surround among others Masterful Complex Bully in Obstruction of Judicial
Branch of
Uncouth
inbreed godless slim civilization of Conquering Klansmen Justices Government and
“Whites Only”, Ho’s 1000% safe and always secured by The 1790 Naturalization
Act reserves naturalized citizenship for whites only and enforced by David
Hittner ‘United States District Judge” having full conscious knowledge and
professional legal expert fiduciary responsibility with additional exhibit(s)
filed in support herein fully as follows:
- Exhibit I august 15th 2011 letter from Andy Vickery Re: Civil No. 4:10-CV-2709 “Deposition” of defendant Harry C. Arthur being official property of “Slave Nigger Louis Charles Hamilton II, herein
- Exhibit J December 11th, 2015 “Letter” of Defendant (Houston Texas Police) claims of destruction of all “Slavery Servitude” As “Slave Negro Pro Se Plaintiff “Louis Charles Hamilton II” herein affirm as follows:
- Hamilton v. Arthur 4:2010-CV-02709 filed on 07/30/2010
- Hamilton v. United States of America 1:2010-CV-00808 filed on 12/15/2010
- Hamilton v. Zanders 1:2011-CV-00005 filed on 01/05/2011
- Hamilton v. United States of America 1:2011-CV-00122filed on 03/09/2011
- Hamilton v. UPS et al 1:2011-CV-00240filed on 05/13/2011
- Hamilton v. U. S. America 1:2011-CV-00442filed on 09/13/2011
- Hamilton v. State of Texas 1:2011-CV-00510filed on 10/04/2011
- Hamilton v. Harris County Texas 4:2011-CV-04420filed on 12/02/2011
- Hamilton v. State of Texas 2011-CV-04256filed on 12/02/2011
To
include before the Honorable Court Material facts surrounding Criminal Case No.
132156401010 “State of Texas v. Hamilton “Assault-Bodily Injury, on
“Indictment” date of Offense 9/23/2011 exactly arrested 10 after filing 3rd
suit against Defendant herein “U. S. America on 1-2011-CV-00442 filed on
09/13/2011, and now
- “Pro Se” Nigger Slave Hamilton herein (now) mystery to be found to be in-competent by (Texas) “Never spoken a dam word but yet to stand stupid hidden in his owned defense of a “Mystery Texas arrest, as further “Nigger” to be so stupid not even allowed to speak to a Rouge (MIA) Rouge court appointed attorney,
- Further incompetent to be even seen or heard or to even meet the crooked White Bitch” Ho Ass “Fu-cked Up Loser Ass Rouge Crooked Texas Judge in Open Court”…? And On record…? For the criminal charges of Case No. 132156401010
- “State of Texas v. Hamilton “Assault-Bodily Injury, on “Indictment” date of Offense 9/23/2011, as Defendant “State of Texas herein now counsel of record Natalee B. Marion” attorney in charge, Texas Bar No. 24075362, Southern District ID: 2724917, Assistant Attorney General for defendant “State of Texas” “Seeks” to ride the same dead maggot horse of
- RICO Corruption in the abduction of Nigger/Negro Slave Pro Se Plaintiff, as United States of America, also being a Party in the same abduction, to keep “Slavery Servitude” ongoing in 2011 as described in the “Legal Time Frame “Hamilton v. Arthur– Hamilton v. State of Texas
- Hamilton v. Arthur 4:2010-CV-02709 filed on 07/30/2010
- Hamilton v. State of Texas 2011-CV-04256 filed on 12/02/2011 which Whites Supremacy United States of America RICO Judicial Fraud and “Obstruction of Justices as described in (p and q) is the same Conquering Klansmen and “Whites Only”, secured by The 1790 Naturalization Act reserves naturalized citizenship for whites only and enforced by David Hittner ‘United States District Judge” having full conscious knowledge and professional legal expert fiduciary responsibility
No comments:
Post a Comment