thomsen.

Leather gloves. What if you were given the choice between a glove, in which the animal was killed with psychological hardship and torture, or a glove in which that the animal was killed in a peaceful way that had not in any way caused any psychological hardship or enduring pain, choose to pick the one that was the cheapest (which meant the glove that the animal was killed with psychological hardship and endured pain)?  The logical assumption would be that we can apply this kind of rational thought to all humans. When humans see fur, a leather glove, or any clothing that is made from animals, all they see is the clothing itself.

They cannot envision how these harmless animals were killed, or how foxes, when stuck inside a cage, will self-mutilate themselves by biting at their skin, tails and feet. Yet, even worse, they have been found to cannibalize each other--where does it all end? What would be different alternatives of what could be done to spread more awareness of what these fur companies were doing to the animals? Would a label process similar to that of the cigarette company be sufficient?  Should Congress be able to mandate regulation that would ensure that they animals are well taken care of and that they are killed in a more humane way?  It seems that as much as we try to prohibit fur companies from doing certain kinds of procedures... fur companies will continue to protest and delay the process of mandating a policy that would ensure better treatment of these animals.

Watch the trailer below: