In the December 2011 issue of Science, a study by University of Chicago neurobiologists proved that rats are empathetic creatures with a strong impulse to aid other troubled rats. This study has further strengthened the theory that even rats are more compassionate than Republicans.
The study of rat empathy consisted of a series of experiments in which one rat was free to roam while another was caged. If the free rat applied pressure on the cage it was able to free the captive rodent. Once it learned this result, it consistently freed his neighbor. After further testing it was concluded that, “They freed cagemates even when social contact was prevented. When liberating a cagemate was pitted against chocolate contained within a second restrainer, rats opened both restrainers and typically shared the chocolate. Thus, rats behave pro-socially in response to a conspecific’s distress, providing strong evidence for biological roots of empathically motivated helping behavior.”
The implications of this study have already begun to permeate the public consciousness as Americans look toward the 2012 elections. Would Mitt Romney free a caged Rick Santorum? Would a cage even hold Newt Gingrich if chocolate is involved? We may never know the answers to these questions; however we can use empirical evidence to determine the likely results.
Romney and Santorum share many conservative ideologies. They believe that the U.S Constitution should be amended to declare that marriage be defined as a union between a man and a woman. Thus, it could be concluded that both candidates are anti-love when that love does not meet their personal criteria. Further, Romney, Santorum and many Republicans are advocates of the death penalty. When asked whether it troubled him that one of the 234 death row inmates in Texas might be innocent former Republican Presidential candidate Rick Perry replied, “No sir. I’ve never struggled with that at all.” Therefore, while these conservatives are anti-love they could also be considered pro-death.
Compassionate acts display three requisite steps: First- the recognition of distress. Second- the desire to help the creature in distress. Third- action to alleviate that distress. Romney may be unable to differentiate between living and non-living beings as he states, “corporations are people too”. Hence, he may not be able to recognize true distress from a disappointing earnings report. Texas Governor Perry does not have any desire to help those in distress stating, “Many homeless have chosen their lifestyle.” In fact, when those in distress succeed in freeing themselves, they are often condemned for their courage. In 2005 Santorum stated, “The radical feminists succeeded in undermining the traditional family and convincing women that professional accomplishments are the key to happiness?” From this statement Santorum seems to indicate that he actually prefers certain people, primarily those who are not Caucasian males, to remain in distress.
Given that the Romney and Santorum are among those chosen by all Republicans to represent them in the 2012 election, it could be concluded that the majority of Republicans are less empathetic than rats. If however you need further proof, let’s look at David Crocker the Republican Mayor of South Fulton, Tennessee. Crocker imposed a $75 annual fee for anyone who would like to have the city’s fire department extinguish their burning home. Last December, firefighters watched as Vicky Bell’s trailer home and all of her possessions went up in flames. For want of $75 a Republican Mayor will watch a person’s home burn. Clearly the people in Fulton would be better off if a rat were in charge.
In conclusion, it must be conceded that rats appear to be significantly more empathetic than Republicans. When presented with this evidence, Republicans vilified rats as “Socialist” and “anti-American”. The concern still remains, in order to win in 2012, Republicans may need to “rat up”.
Orbson Rice is a deeply disturbed professional Writer and Editor. He is also the “Creator” of the blog “The Orbson Oracle” which is thoroughly offensive, often thoughtful and occasionally funny. Stroke your mouse and visit the Oracle to read more from the God of Words himself.