amy frank

Ann Arbor, MI

amy signed the petition | about 1 month ago

Tell Verizon: Drop the fee for paying bills online
amy signed the petition | 10 months ago

Protect Peace Corps Volunteers: Back Anti-Sexual Violence Legislation
amy signed the petition | over 1 year ago

Tell Humane Society of Huron Valley: Breed Specific Legislation is Never Okay
amy signed the petition | over 1 year ago

End Breed Specific Legislation in Denver
amy commented on the article | about 2 years ago

Dairy Industry Fears Becoming Next Animal Welfare Target

Amanda-I completely admire and respect your passion for choosing a vegan lifestyle. I think your comment above, however, doesn't take into account the idea of "privilege."

Being vegan is an important, beautiful, healthy lifestyle, but it is not something that everyone can easily access. Your comments do not take into consideration individuals, whether they are from low-income areas or not, and their access to the same supports, resources, information, and food variety that you have that makes being a vegan easy, fun and cheap for you.

For someone to be a successful vegan, that person needs to be able to access information, to understand the social and political implications of being vegan: why it is healthy, why it is a socially important choice, etc. The person needs to have access to a social system/support system in which this lifestyle is embraced and nurtured. This person needs to have access to a variety of foods, not just staples like canned/dried beans and whole grain pasta (as a vegan, regardless of income--can you really imagine just subsisting on whole-wheat grains, canned and dry beans, frozen veggies and whole-wheat pasta? Can you imagine being vegan without access to a variety of fresh fruits and vegetables?)

Additionally, I wanted to comment on your statement, "maybe they don't know how to cook" in regards to folks living in a low-income community. Income level has nothing to do with ability to cook. We can't assume just because someone has a lower income that they are any less skilled, talented, competent or worthy as someone with a higher income. Oprah is probably the wealthiest woman in the world and she has personal chefs.

Finally, you commented on Stephanie's post, interpreting it as her saying that being is "impossible and unnecessary." I did not get that at all from her post. She indicated that she supports it when it is a healthy choice for the individual.
amy signed the petition | about 2 years ago

Tell Obama: Protect Pets from Climate Change
amy commented on the article | about 2 years ago

Putting the Gore in Gourmet: The Death of the Foie Gras Ban

I am new to change.org and the Animal Rights and Animal Welfare dialogue. I'm still working on where my beliefs fit into the broad spectrum. So, after reading these posts above, I had to go back and remind myself what the purpose of change.org is. I found this:

"Change.org aims to address this need by serving as the central platform informing and empowering movements for social change around the most important issues of our time."

I needed to do that, because in reading your post, Alex, I was somewhat horrified that you used the analogy of you raping a mentally impaired individual...well, to anything. In terms of empowering movements for social change, I think your comment did nothing but discredit anything legitimate you might have had to say and did nothing to further the work of the Animal Rights movement.
amy commented on the article | about 2 years ago

5 Things That Make Animals Thankful

I think you might be taking this post in the wrong tone. if you look at how vegetarian issues are approached in her other posts, it seems that Stephanie is intentionally oversimplifying the issues in this post for the purpose of adding levity and hopefulness to a frightening predicament this planet and its inhabitants are in.

i don't think she's trying to say vegetarianism solves everything or even that everyone should do it--just that in a hypothetical world where animals could be asked and could respond, they would probably say they'd prefer not to be eaten.

In response to your feedback on #2, I think is inaccurate to state that MOST domestic animals are surrendered due to animal/child interactions. I did not see in the article that you posted anything specific that related directly to child/animal interactions, or how the time required to care for the animal is directly related to children. Certainly, there are many cases each year of animals attacking their people, including children. Many people--individuals and families- adopt pets into their homes without fully understanding the unique and specific needs of the animal. So many are unwilling to put in the work that it takes to care for a pet, whether or not the people have children in the family.
amy signed the petition | about 2 years ago

Tell Your Representatives to Pass the HAPPY Act for Pet Care Tax Deductions Now