Circus controversy ignored |

Circus controversy ignored

I was disheartened to see that Ticket featured the article “Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus brings ‘Built to Amaze’ marvels to Consol” . Further distressing was that it mentioned nothing about the longstanding controversy surrounding this circus’ training practices and treatment of the (naturally) wild animals performing in its shows.

Instead, the article paints a benign portrait, presumably with the intent of attracting children and families who mistakenly believe it’s a show of lighthearted fun. Internet searches about this circus reveal disturbing photographs and videos of cruel training practices with bullhooks, whips and electric prods. There are also articles about the U.S. Department of Agriculture citing Ringling Bros. numerous times for serious violations of the Animal Welfare Act, including improper handling, failure to provide adequate veterinary care and unsanitary feeding practices.

Instead of aiming to “teach the audience about some of the engineering factors in circus acts,” why not present them with the truth about what actually goes on behind the scenes — the deplorable treatment of these animals for the sake of greed and profit? This is nothing less than socially sanctioned slavery in which the animals are objectified for profit. That may be a bold statement to some, but easily understood when one sees that these animals spend most of their lives in chains.

Compassionate, aware people recognize that what one does to another living being, one does to the greater whole of humanity. Please think twice about attending what is falsely billed as “the greatest show on earth.”

Carole Hanlin

Penn Township

Westmoreland County

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.