Please read this paragraph from an article about the life of  Mother Teresa, written by Victor Sheperd:  Several years ago she came across an emaciated man near death on the sidewalk. No hospital would admit him. She took him home. Soon she had gained access to an ancient Hindu temple which she turned into her ‘home for dying destitutes.” To this home the sisters bring the seventy- and eighty-pound adults who would otherwise die on the street. When Westerners scoff at the so-called band-aid treatment she gives to these people she replies, “No one, however sick, however repulsive, should have to die alone.” Then she tells whoever will listen how these people, with nothing to give and with a past which should, by all human reckoning, embitter them forever, will smile and say “Thank you” – and then die at peace. For her, enabling an abandoned person to die within sight of a loving face is something possessing eternal significance. (http://www.victorshepherd.on.ca/Heritage/mother.htm)

The answer to the title question is…of course not!  Too too many years ago in Calcutta, India a tiny, frail little nun known as Mother Teresa took on an overwhelming task.   It broke her kind heart to see the poorest of the poor suffering from diseases or starving to death alone and shunned by society on the streets , so she set out to help them.  Although she had very little money and many times she did not have enough food to go around or the wherewithal to cure the desperately sick, she did the best she could.  She sometimes had to result to “band aid” treatments to in an attempt to ease their suffering.  The people in her care understand, they appreciated what she did for them and they were grateful just to have somewhere to go, shelter,  a little food,  and a few comforts in their final hours.

In this country there are thousands of homeless cats and dogs living on the streets, abandoned by their owners, sick and abused…starving to death.  The light of hope has gone out of their eyes and there are few people who are willing to step up and do anything about it.   The ones who do are taking a serious risk, for there is a faction in our midst today known as the animal rights movement.   Many times the animal sanctuaries or  no kill shelters of caring individuals have been raided, the animals taken away and sometimes destroyed on the spot by law officials under pressure from animal rights activists.  The reason given is usually that there are “too many animals” (the hoarding card played), or some of the animals are sick and not receiving what they consider appropriate care, but  “band aid treatment.”  Sound familiar?

What it all boils down to is a difference of opinion and philosophy between the sanctuary operators and the animal rights activists.   To the sanctuary operator, taking the animals in, giving them food and water and as much medical care as can be afforded, is a labor of love.  The animals might not have perfect lives, but they have better lives than they would on the streets and they know the animals can sense that somebody loves and cares about them.   The animal rights activist on the other hand is convinced that if an animal does not have a perfect life, then it should be deprived of life, period.  They call it euthanasia, whereas no kill advocates call it heartless murder.

Stop for just a minute and compare Mother Teresa’s mission side by side with an animal sanctuary.  Mother Teresa is hailed as a saint and beloved of all (and rightly so) whereas many animal sanctuary and shelter operators have been vilified as hoarders and abusers, arrested, dragged into court and stripped of their animals and their property.   Many have been charged with and convicted of animal cruelty for doing the very same thing with animals that Mother Teresa did with human beings under similar circumstances.    Did she not have too many people at her mission?  Was there often  not enough medical care and supplies to go around and was it perhaps not perfectly clean all the time?   If people who rescue animals are “hoarders, “ wasn’t  Mother Teresa also technically a “hoarder?”  Has someone somewhere persuasively managed to strip kindness and compassion of its meaning and substitute a new image wrapped up in an ugly word like hoarder ?

How can we not see what is happening and how warped and twisted the animal rights movement has become?   When a group of people have enough money, enough power and enough influence they can control the thinking of a nation.  Please, I beg you… if you want to save the lives of animals give to a local animal sanctuary, a local no kill shelter or your local SPCA or Humane Society and never the major animal rights organizations.  Let’s restore a sense of reason and a sense of real compassion toward animals.