Animals have no rights because they don’t pay taxes says Princess of Kent

Facebooktwittermail

The now 70 year old claims animals do not have rights because they (in an outrageous display of selfishness) do not vote or pay taxes.

Princess Michael of Kent
Don’t have a bank account? No rights for you.

The Princess of Kent, married to the Queen’s cousin Prince Micheal of Kent,  has clashed with animal rights campaigners in the past, notably for her love of fur – she owns over 40 fur coats. The newest comments were made in a discussion about her new historical novel at the Henley Literary Festival. This festival is also supported by the Daily Mail.

Framing her conversation around the concept of ‘rights’, the Princess said that attitudes to human rights had shifted, and ‘the times have changed and the responsibilities people feel that they have have changed’.

As for animals though: ‘I’m a great animal lover and I’m involved in a lot of conservation, but animals don’t have rights. They don’t have bank accounts. They don’t vote.” Linking this back to the concept of ‘rights’, the Princess said staunchly: ‘We have obligation. We have obligation to animals, but to say they have rights? They don’t have rights. You only have rights if you pay your taxes. You earn your rights.”

In a classic case of ‘I’m not racist but…’ the Princess stated she loves animals, telling tales of adopting unwanted pets and helping rear a cheetah cub in Africa after its mother was shot. She even claims responsibility for having the word ‘cats’ added into the title of Battersea Dogs and Cats Home. I’m sure all the cats are very grateful.

However, Princess Micheal once revealed that she “unashamedly hates” foxes, after blaming them for destroying her collection of bantam hens. In a brazen display of her hatred for the creatures, she has said “I sometimes see them sitting on the drive [at Kensington Palace] and I shout, ‘tally ho!’ very loudly” she said “but they pay me no attention.”

In the past, Animal campaign group PETA once kindly sent her a faux fur coat, identical to a real fur coat she was spotted wearing in 2007. PETA have simply branded her most recent comments ‘daft’ because due to her insane logic it would basically mean that children and certain classes of human beings are also not entitled to rights. Instead PETA suggest the Princess “study the subject, rather than making an off-the-cuff statement that reflects ignorance of the issue.”

Speaking further on the topic, PETA representative Elisa Allen said:

“Our understanding of who is deserving of ‘rights’ has, of course, progressed … people are waking up to the view that legal rights should not be determined by your species any more than by your gender, age or skin colour. Princess Michael would do well to remember that our society has changed … people will look back on our treatment of these animals with shame, as many of us already do.”