Natalie, we pride ourselves on our rationality. You are aware that animals used food food and research are NOT treated compassionately. So, how can you approve of these exploitive businesses (and pet breeding), as though they were compassionate? I agree with you about human overpopulation, completely. That is why, before having any children, I was sterilized at the age of 24. Have you any children? All births (after 7 billion!) are excessive! Like lots of people, I fight for justice for people, AND to stop the exploitation of all other animals for all human uses. They don't belong to us, any more than we, as women, belong to men, or blacks belong to whites.
This discussion got way off topic. My bad. I'm sorry. My dream of justice for all will no more come true, than our lovely fantasy of an atheist nation/state of Vermont. Let's get back to Plutocracy or Democracy.
You may face only mild discrimination. Although you may want to wait/see if the teabaggers get in. But our problems as a civilization in this sphere of religiously based discrimination and oppression are a little awful.
And I am in no way minimizing the importance of the issue. It just seems logical to me that the people issues are paramount.
There are a number of sharp and thoughtful comments here.
Dogly, when I refer to discrimination emanating from the corpse or religion I am not so concerned about discrimination against atheists. It is significant but it is minor in relation to the whole.
You are correct in pointing out our utter failure in connection with animals. I just dont think humanity as it progresses (if it progresses) will be willing to place much importance there until out own ship stops listing.
Do you consider Jefferson a great man? I dont. Cant buy the excuse that his acceptance of slavery was excused by the mores of his period. And perhaps it is so with those of us who realize animals are sentient and emotional and intelligent; that inspite of that knowledge we alter our practices little to none.