---

Copyright 1912

by Emil Edward Kusel.

All rights reserved.

---

---

Table of Contents

NOTE.
KIND WORDS.
COMPLIMENTARY.
A NOBLE WOMAN.
THE HERMIT.
Humanitarian Philosophy
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
IN AND BETWEEN THE LINES
A DEVOUT (?) ADMONITION.
A REPLY.
FROM THE W. A. T. L.
THE "WORST" SIN.
MAN AND BEAST.
VEGETARIAN'S REPLY.

NOTE.

When one meets with adversity and all the world seems bitterly against him or when one realizes the short duration of life and hopes for a splendid immortality, no doubt it is a consolation for many to read the inspired and lofty sentiments of the Bible.

Therefore in writing the following epigrams condemning inhumanity, I felt confident that kindly people would see that it is far from my motive to cast reflection upon any individual inclined to accept the comforting and humane passages of either the Old or New Testament.

I merely aimed to prove the inhuman Mosaical law giving man the idea to kill is not a law of a kind and loving God. I also aimed to prove that the flesh-eating religionist is an accessory to a crime more bestial in the sight of God than any other sin known to the human family.

EMIL E. KUSEL.    

---

KIND WORDS.

"Humanitarian Philosophy" has taught me that God and conscience are in unison. I would have liked to condemn the writer for opening my eyes to the truth, but the Lord is on his side.

"Humanitarian Philosophy" is an eye opener for the true religionist who never before thought on the wickedness of killing.

"Humanitarian Philosophy" is a blessing for those who wish to live the Christ life, although it will not appeal to the religionist who is inhumanly self-righteous.

Since digesting "Humanitarian Philosophy" I know a conscientious person can read the stinging truth without a selfish protest. The truth is mighty.

"Humanitarian Philosophy" at first reading made me angry, but praise God, the vegetarian's heart is in the right place.

"Humanitarian Philosophy" is an inspiration.

---

COMPLIMENTARY.

Have always been very much interested in the subjects of our able ministers, but since receiving a copy of Mr. Kusel's philosophy against flesh eating I am a convert to the doctrine that neither minister nor congregation can be "a child of God" until they are vegetarians.

It is impossible for me to now believe otherwise on account of the tremendous cruelty and horror of taking the life of animals.

I never thought of the truth as Mr. Kusel puts it forth, and I am surprised to think preachers never preached against blood food. I also thought it would be meet and proper to criticise shoe, glove and belt wearing, but the leather using is a secondary proposition; the animal is first killed for food purposes and secondarily to avoid the waste we may utilize the hide, and still we should discourage that argument.

Mr. Kusel is defending God Almighty nobly in his "Humanitarian Philosophy" and has given the church doctrines a slap no man can gainsay.

When we favor meat eating we favor killing, and when we favor killing in the name of God we know we are liars and murderers, for God is kind and loving, and surely opposes the taking of life. Let churches preach the murder of animals, but pray do not say wickedness (killing) is God's will. The world needs more conscientious men like Mr. Kusel to protect God Almighty from defamation.

T. J. W.  

(From Los Angeles Herald.)

---

A NOBLE WOMAN.

Mr. Emil Edward Kusel,

    Los Angeles, Cal.

Dear Mr. Kusel:—I have been wonderfully guided and blessed by reading "Humanitarian Philosophy" as it is truly an inspired work that should be thought upon by all religious people.

The beauty of your blessed reasoning is that you cast all biblical chaff to the four winds and look to God in the true light of love and mercy.

Yes indeed, you show the inconsistency of a religion that gives us an evil right to kill things while every last one of us, without exception, cling to life with the tenacity of a coward.

You fully convince me that false prophets had a hand in writing the Scriptures because God in His Infinite Love could not have created the dear innocent lamb our Savior carried in his bosom to be killed nor could he have created the sweet little baby calf to be slain and eaten by human beings. You convince me that God is not in the slaughter-house, neither in the midst of those who patronize the butcher any more than He is in the heart of the wild beast of prey.

I do believe in a personal God as I could not live without hope for a blissful future life beyond the grave. This pilgrimage, to me, without religion would make this world a very dreary and lonesome place.

Heretofore I lived a carnivorous life, always wondering why God created poor sentient things for human food but now, thank God, I realize, without humanitarianism spirituality is not a reality and I applaud such men as Mr. Kusel for standing out boldly on a grand philosophy that puts all church doctrines to shame and presents a religion consistent with reason.

Your trend of thought, my dear brother, is indeed marvelous from a gracious heart and I believe some mighty power is preparing you for a special great work.

Yours very truly,

MRS. J. R. B.  

St. Paul, Minn., May 16, 1911.

---

THE HERMIT.

---

In religion, what damned error but some sober brow will bless it and approve it with a text, hiding the grossness with fair ornament.

—Shakespeare.    

---

The untold suffering the human family sanctions through a wrong conception of what is right, should make every Christian heart ache.

—Platt.    

---

When men go hunting (to kill) they call it sport but when the hunted animal (perhaps wounded) turns to fight for its life, they call that ferocity.—Shaw.

---

Let all creatures live, as we desire to live.

—Tolstoy.    

---

THE RELIGION OF BUDDHA.

(An Idea from "Light of Asia.")

---