Princess Michael Of Kent Insists Animals Don’t Have Rights Because They Don’t Vote, Pay Tax, Or Have Bank Accounts
The Queen’s cousin in law, Princess Michael of Kent, has come under fire for insisting that animals don’t have rights because they are incapable of voting, opening bank accounts, or paying tax.
Princess Michael of Kent is no stranger to controversy with her loose-lipped ways and opinionated offerings, but this latest royal outburst is sure to offend anyone who has ever kept a brightly-colored bird in a three-foot cage or lovingly placed a tropical fish in a 15-liter tank.
Princess Pushy, as she’s sometimes affectionately known by the British tabloids, is often guilty of belligerently baiting animal rights groups, and her famed indulgence of swanning around the manor in glamorous fur goats has enraged many a hardcore fan of Watership Down.
The Daily Mail reports that the Princess, who is married to the Queen’s cousin, Prince Michael of Kent, launched her latest vitriolic verbal volley during a discussion at the Henley Literary Festival about her new historical novel, Agnes Sorel: Mistress of Beauty.
Speaking about how the concept of “rights” had evolved, the princess admitted that there had been a dramatic shift in attitudes towards human rights over the centuries, but the royal raconteur remained fiercely adamant that it was impossible for animals to have any rights whatsoever.
“Today we are always hearing about animal rights. 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.
“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.”
It may be worth mentioning that a child doesn’t have a bank account, vote, or pay taxes, but it would take an unhinged mind indeed to argue that they don’t have rights. All living things have rights, and they don’t have to “earn” them either, it’s called their “birthright,” something all royals and members of the aristocracy should be all too familiar with.
As sure as the chicken follows the egg, or the egg follows the chicken, animal rights campaign group PETA locked horns with the princess, calling her comments “daft,” “ignorant,” and oblivious to the fact “people are now waking up to the view that legal rights should not be determined by species.”
“PETA urges Princess Michael to study the subject, rather than making an off-the-cuff statement that reflects ignorance of the issue … her daft assessment would mean that children and certain classes of human beings are also not entitled to rights.
“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.”
Princess Michael, who reportedly owns 14 luxury fur coats, is no stranger to the wrath of PETA, but now famed animal lover Ricky Gervais has waded into the debate, calling the royal a “f****** waste of space.”
The princess, who lived rent-free in a Kensington Palace apartment palace for 23 years before getting the Queen to subsidise her when Her Majesty’s government found out, has yet to respond to the funnyman’s accusations, but it might get a little bit interesting if and when she does.
Remember, this is the same princess who reportedly told a group of black bankers and lawyers in a restaurant to “get back to the colonies.” Princess Michael of Kent later denied it and claimed she referred to them as “a bunch of rappers.”
On a final note, what untold damage Prince William’s reckless royal relation has done to his and Prince Harry’s mission to save the world’s elephants, only time will tell.
[Image Credit: Chris Jackson, Clive Brunskill/Getty Images]