Remember George Orwell’s Animal Farm? Snowball (the pig) inscribed the above maxim on the side of the barn to teach the farm’s inhabitants the "essential principle of Animalism." While most of us understand that Orwell’s classic allegorical novel was meant to educate us about the evils of totalitarianism, the animal rights movement has adopted Snowball’s motto as its own.

Enter Florida, where animal rights activists have successfully qualified an initiative for the November 5 ballot that, if passed, will grant constitutional rights to the state’s population of pregnant pigs. (As if elections in Florida aren’t bizarre enough.)

Amendment 10 would ban the practice of housing pregnant sows in gestation crates — two-by-seven foot cages currently used by some pig farmers to ensure the safety of pregnant porkers during the final stages of pregnancy and for a short time after birth. Supporters of the amendment claim such confinement limits the mobility of the sows to the point that they’re unable to "turn around freely." Apparently, after birth, the internment results in mama pig falling over and crushing her little piglets. Moreover, supporters contend the practice is "inhumane and cruel," and the crates cause a "wide range of physical and psychological problems."

Don’t laugh, we’re dead serious. And so are the animal rights activists who are reportedly spending more than $1 million to ensure that the practice is not only illegal, but also unconstitutional. The punishment for violation — a year in jail and/or $5,000.

But wait, here’s the kicker. Florida is not exactly a pork producing mecca, as it ranks a dismal 30th amongst all 50 states. In fact, there are currently just two pig farms in the entire state that use gestation crates. Animal rights activists are evidently using this initiative to establish a base for similar efforts in large pork producing states like North Carolina and Minnesota. As PETA President and Co-Founder Ingrid Newkirk proclaims, such initiatives work toward the end goal of the animal rights movement: "Total Animal Liberation." (Why didn’t Snowball think of that?)

According to the Center for Consumer Freedom, Newkirk is the same person who said, "Even if animal research resulted in a cure for AIDS, we’d be against it."

As comical as Amendment 10 may seem, one must seriously question the appropriateness of exploiting Florida’s initiative process to grant constitutional rights to pigs. As Wesley J. Smith of The Weekly Standard common-sensically points out, "the Florida Constitution — like the U.S. Constitution and other state constitutions -- is concerned with the rights and responsibilities of people. It is not for pigs."

So all you Floridians planning to go to the polls on November 5, wake-up, have a hearty breakfast — preferably eggs and bacon (we like ours extra crispy) — and proceed to vote NO on Amendment 10. Fortunately, the pregnant pigs can no longer count on pregnant chads.

As for you animal rights activists, perhaps you should finish the book. What are all the other animals going to think when they find out you are pushing constitutional rights only for pigs? "ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL, BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS" led to a rebellion.