Humanitarian Philosophy

EMIL EDWARD KUSEL

Extracts From His Letters

Fourth Edition

Thou shalt not kill.—Bible.

The individuality created by God is not carnivorous.—Mary Baker G. Eddy.

Kill not but have regard for life.—Buddha.

Los Angeles, California

1912

NOTE.

When one meets with adversity and all the world seems bitterly against him or when one realizes the short duration of life and hopes for a splendid immortality, no doubt it is a consolation for many to read the inspired and lofty sentiments of the Bible.

Therefore in writing the following epigrams condemning inhumanity, I felt confident that kindly people would see that it is far from my motive to cast reflection upon any individual inclined to accept the comforting and humane passages of either the Old or New Testament.

I merely aimed to prove the inhuman Mosaical law giving man the idea to kill is not a law of a kind and loving God. I also aimed to prove that the flesh-eating religionist is an accessory to a crime more bestial in the sight of God than any other sin known to the human family.

KIND WORDS.

"Humanitarian Philosophy" has taught me that God and conscience are in unison. I would have liked to condemn the writer for opening my eyes to the truth, but the Lord is on his side.

"Humanitarian Philosophy" is an eye opener for the true religionist who never before thought on the wickedness of killing.

"Humanitarian Philosophy" is a blessing for those who wish to live the Christ life, although it will not appeal to the religionist who is inhumanly self-righteous.

Since digesting "Humanitarian Philosophy" I know a conscientious person can read the stinging truth without a selfish protest. The truth is mighty.

"Humanitarian Philosophy" at first reading made me angry, but praise God, the vegetarian's heart is in the right place.

COMPLIMENTARY.

Have always been very much interested in the subjects of our able ministers, but since receiving a copy of Mr. Kusel's philosophy against flesh eating I am a convert to the doctrine that neither minister nor congregation can be "a child of God" until they are vegetarians.

It is impossible for me to now believe otherwise on account of the tremendous cruelty and horror of taking the life of animals.

I never thought of the truth as Mr. Kusel puts it forth, and I am surprised to think preachers never preached against blood food. I also thought it would be meet and proper to criticise shoe, glove and belt wearing, but the leather using is a secondary proposition; the animal is first killed for food purposes and secondarily to avoid the waste we may utilize the hide, and still we should discourage that argument.

Mr. Kusel is defending God Almighty nobly in his "Humanitarian Philosophy" and has given the church doctrines a slap no man can gainsay.

When we favor meat eating we favor killing, and when we favor killing in the name of God we know we are liars and murderers, for God is kind and loving, and surely opposes the taking of life. Let churches preach the murder of animals, but pray do not say wickedness (killing) is God's will. The world needs more conscientious men like Mr. Kusel to protect God Almighty from defamation.

A NOBLE WOMAN.

Dear Mr. Kusel:—I have been wonderfully guided and blessed by reading "Humanitarian Philosophy" as it is truly an inspired work that should be thought upon by all religious people.

The beauty of your blessed reasoning is that you cast all biblical chaff to the four winds and look to God in the true light of love and mercy.

Yes indeed, you show the inconsistency of a religion that gives us an evil right to kill things while every last one of us, without exception, cling to life with the tenacity of a coward.

You fully convince me that false prophets had a hand in writing the Scriptures because God in His Infinite Love could not have created the dear innocent lamb our Savior carried in his bosom to be killed nor could he have created the sweet little baby calf to be slain and eaten by human beings. You convince me that God is not in the slaughter-house, neither in the midst of those who patronize the butcher any more than He is in the heart of the wild beast of prey.

I do believe in a personal God as I could not live without hope for a blissful future life beyond the grave. This pilgrimage, to me, without religion would make this world a very dreary and lonesome place.

Heretofore I lived a carnivorous life, always wondering why God created poor sentient things for human food but now, thank God, I realize, without humanitarianism spirituality is not a reality and I applaud such men as Mr. Kusel for standing out boldly on a grand philosophy that puts all church doctrines to shame and presents a religion consistent with reason.

Your trend of thought, my dear brother, is indeed marvelous from a gracious heart and I believe some mighty power is preparing you for a special great work.

THE HERMIT.

In religion, what damned error but some sober brow will bless it and approve it with a text, hiding the grossness with fair ornament.

The untold suffering the human family sanctions through a wrong conception of what is right, should make every Christian heart ache.

When men go hunting (to kill) they call it sport but when the hunted animal (perhaps wounded) turns to fight for its life, they call that ferocity.—Shaw.

THE RELIGION OF BUDDHA.

Humanitarian Philosophy

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,

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:

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.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

A. To you I may be "a little bit radical" because I oppose all religions (yours inclusive) which make mankind selfish and unfeeling.

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.

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.

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. I know animals have fear and pain, but supposing God did place them on earth for man to slay and eat, what then?

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.

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.

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.

A. If from the mouth of a carnivorous worshipper it is sham and pretense—a mockery.

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.

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:

IN AND BETWEEN THE LINES

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: Do not be as the hypocrites are, testifying in public places and yet living apart from God.

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: 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: There are many false lords and false gods the people are worshipping.

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: 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: 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.

A DEVOUT (?) ADMONITION.

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.

A REPLY.

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.

FROM THE W. A. T. L.

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.

THE "WORST" SIN.

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!

MAN AND BEAST.

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.

VEGETARIAN'S REPLY.

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.

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK HUMANITARIAN PHILOSOPHY, 4TH EDITION ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™

Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.

The Project Gutenberg eBook of Humanitarian Philosophy, 4th Edition

Humanitarian Philosophy

NOTE.

KIND WORDS.

COMPLIMENTARY.

A NOBLE WOMAN.

THE HERMIT.

THE RELIGION OF BUDDHA.