I think that I have not had a change of heart about Church leaders turning their back on animal cruelty.
I’ll explain once more for clarity.
I have always been pro secular state. Church and politics should be separate. I do not like the interference of the Church in politics.
The fact that the Church has an effect on political issues such as stem-cell research and abortion is in my eyes, not acceptable.

For a short while, I twisted my thinking to suit my agenda, thinking: ”If the Church interferes with politics about life issues then they should also interfere politically in animal welfare issues”.
This reasoning didn’t feel right- I realised that I had twisted my thinking to suit my agenda. This was pointed out to me and discussed with RObert and Yabby. I snapped out of my twisted thinking ;)
I still thought that church leaders have a responsibility to teach their flocks, that religious schools should educate kids about animal welfare and cruelty as well. So I fully agree with you when you say: “"Of course the Church leaders have a reasonsibilty to animal welfare." They are there to teach compashion to fellow man and God Creatures”.

All I said and am still saying is that the Church should not interfere in politics. They have a responsibility to educate people, not a responsibility to directly influence the government.

So I have said that Church leaders turn their backs on animal cruelty and am still saying the same; the only difference is that I changed my mind about their political involvment.

About fickleness, I will take that to RObert’s carpark ;)