KSL's Doug Wright sounded like someone had slapped him hard.
A caller on Tuesday informed the talk-show host that, if there were a fire where she would have time to rescue either her cat or his son, she'd let the boy die.
It's not a debate about mine vs. yours.
The debate that's raging centers over what has more value: human life or other life — cats, dogs, horses, fish, rats, monkeys, even insects.
This week at the University of Utah, several students duct-taped themselves together to form a barrier to block the entrance to a part of the campus where animal research is done. For a good portion of last month, a handful of students set up a camp in the middle of campus to protest what they view as cruelty to animals.
Whether or not I agree with those students, I have supported their rights to assemble and make their views known. And I was proud of them for doing something positive and nonviolent to call attention to their firmly held views. I was even charmed by the idea of sleeping in a tent in the middle of the commuter-school's comings-and-goings to see that the message didn't get overlooked.
Mostly, I was pleased to see their passion. It has been a long time since apartheid got students excited, and I think such involvement in questions of social justice is crucial, not only for those participating but for those who must pass them and think about their message.
But Tuesday, in the middle of this taped-hands protest, a 16-year-old participant said she didn't see anything wrong with firebombing a fast-food restaurant to get her message across.
She lost me. If she genuinely can't see what might be wrong with that, then she's either not very smart or she's not listening to her own message about the sanctity of all life. It's like saying it's OK to kill a janitor in a clinic where abortions are performed, because you're doing it to save human life. It's just claptrap.
If you love life, then that janitor's life is sacred. And if you don't believe in cruelty to animals, then you must acknowledge that human beings are animals and blowing them up might be a tiny bit unkind.
Somehow, in a passion to protect creatures they view as defenseless, some animal rights activists have gotten their message all twisted up. And too many people have gone along for the ride.
In the Northwest more than a decade ago, a woman was jogging in a rural area when she was attacked and killed by a wildcat. When the animal was found, it was destroyed.
Protesters around the country raised thousands and thousands of dollars to provide for the wildcat's offspring, which were relocated.
Nobody raised a penny for the three young children who were left motherless by the attack.
A few weeks ago, we were all repulsed by the story of a man who, infuriated by another driver, grabbed the woman's dog and threw it to its death in oncoming traffic. That man, I think most of us can agree, is a barbarian who needs to be taken off the streets. It was one of the most shocking stories I've heard recently.
Outraged people from around the country have rallied and put together a reward of more than $110,000 for the arrest of this creep. Unfortunately, he hasn't been found.
I don't remember when I last saw such a magnificent reward for the arrest of a child killer. Or kidnapper. Or molester. And while I think that reward is great and will perhaps fuel the search for the barbarian, it makes me sad that a dog, no matter how cute or friendly or smart it is, is valued above the life of a child.
If you're talking about innocence and the need to love something and keep it safe because it can't do it itself, children are every bit as helpless — and certainly as worthy — as any creature you can name. Besides which, children who are loved and protected and nurtured are most likely to be loving and protective and nurturing of others, including animals.
I won't even try to justify cruelty to animals; I don't think it can be done. But humane research is a different matter. You will never convince me that an activist who faces a serious illness himself or in a much-loved child or parent or friend would reject medical research that could save that life because it involved animals. It's a matter of perspective.
A caller asked Tuesday if the cat of the woman who would sacrifice Wright's son is a vegetarian.
That's a very good question.
If you preach the value of life and maintain that animals have rights equal to those of a human, you've just acknowledged that humans have rights. And to tromp on them in the name of getting your message across means you're not even hearing your own message.
So don't expect the rest of us to listen.
Deseret News staff writer Lois M. Collins may be reached by e-mail at lois@desnews.com