Any Dog Lovers On Here?

uscitizen said:
Yep, I almost got whipped ontime by some Christian Greyhound rescue types. they were trying to get me to take some greyhounds to save their lives. I asked them why not ship them to africa or SE Asia to feed to starving children, darn if I did not think they were going to whip my butt.
BTW I thnk those rescuers are actually supporting the greyhound racing industry they claim to hate.
Click to expand...

WHy do you say that? The owner of the place I work at rescued 2 greyhounds years ago. Sadly tho,she has had to put them both down in the last 2 months because of cancer and other health problems:mad:

Most of the ones I have talked to seem very sincere in their hopes to save the breed.
 
In practice I'm sure they are. OTOH, all laws are "culturalist" in that all laws are expressions of cultural norms.

If anti-cruelty laws were based on circumstance rather than species, would that do it for you? One can differentiate between livestock and pets rather easily without reference to species. Yes, there are grey areas -- guard dogs and barn cats, for example, or livestock raised for FFA or 4H projects. Still, drawing an arbitrary line and then letting a court decide the fuzzy cases is a tried and true principle of our legal system.

We may use members of other species for a variety of purposes. That does NOT give us the right to inflict unnecessary cruelty, however.
__________________

Why should the fact that it is livestock vs. a pet have any bearing on what an owner can do with an animal. Both are considered property of an owner. Livestock and pet can be interchangeable. A pig can be taked from the sty and made a pet. Why cannot a kitten be taken from the litter and made livestock.
 
OrnotBitwise said:
In practice I'm sure they are. OTOH, all laws are "culturalist" in that all laws are expressions of cultural norms.

If anti-cruelty laws were based on circumstance rather than species, would that do it for you? One can differentiate between livestock and pets rather easily without reference to species. Yes, there are grey areas -- guard dogs and barn cats, for example, or livestock raised for FFA or 4H projects. Still, drawing an arbitrary line and then letting a court decide the fuzzy cases is a tried and true principle of our legal system.

We may use members of other species for a variety of purposes. That does NOT give us the right to inflict unnecessary cruelty, however.
Click to expand...

I agree on the cruelty issue. I do not support being cruel to any creature 2 legged or 4 legged or even no legged.
Technically / legally the only way I can have a poor suffering dog put to rest here is by lethal injection at a vet. I wonder if the vets lobbyied for that law ?
A quick bullet to the head works fine, which I have done, why prolong and increase my friends suffering by taking him to a vet which terrified him and waiting in the office, etc... My friend, my duty. Hard duty though........
At least he died as peaceful and happy as was possible.
The vet is the easy way out for the person, not necessarially for the pet though.
 
bob said:
P eople
E ating
T asty
A nimals
Click to expand...



Even tho I am an animal lover,I cannot stand Peta. They are in it for money and not for the animals IMO. Bunch of extremists. Anyone that shows up at a fishing competetion in a giant fish costume is nuts. Anyone who says milk is bad for kids(something to do with the cow) is nuts,. You see the pattern
 
uscitizen said:
I agree on the cruelty issue. I do not support being cruel to any creature 2 legged or 4 legged or even no legged.
Technically / legally the only way I can have a poor suffering dog put to rest here is by lethal injection at a vet. I wonder if the vets lobbyied for that law ?
A quick bullet to the head works fine, which I have done, why prolong and increase my friends suffering by taking him to a vet which terrified him and waiting in the office, etc... My friend, my duty. Hard duty though........
At least he died as peaceful and happy as was possible.
The vet is the easy way out for the person, not necessarially for the pet though.
Click to expand...

Do you honestly believe that dog was better off with a bullet being put threw his brain?!!!! At the vet his last moments can be calm and tranquil with you holding him. Painless too.
 
IHateGovernment said:
In practice I'm sure they are. OTOH, all laws are "culturalist" in that all laws are expressions of cultural norms.

If anti-cruelty laws were based on circumstance rather than species, would that do it for you? One can differentiate between livestock and pets rather easily without reference to species. Yes, there are grey areas -- guard dogs and barn cats, for example, or livestock raised for FFA or 4H projects. Still, drawing an arbitrary line and then letting a court decide the fuzzy cases is a tried and true principle of our legal system.

We may use members of other species for a variety of purposes. That does NOT give us the right to inflict unnecessary cruelty, however.
__________________

Why should the fact that it is livestock vs. a pet have any bearing on what an owner can do with an animal. Both are considered property of an owner. Livestock and pet can be interchangeable. A pig can be taked from the sty and made a pet. Why cannot a kitten be taken from the litter and made livestock.
Click to expand...
Who says that laws regarding the treatment of other species have to be reduced to a simple question of property rights? Most people, I submit, do not believe that animals can be treated entirely and simply as property. The owner has some rights of property over a non-human animal but not the same rights of property that he would have over a table, or even real estate.

I think that many people -- most people -- would accept the proposition that when you take a pet into your home, it brings with it a burden of implied responsibilities for the animal's welfare. I submit further that there's nothing inherently wrong with trying to codify and explicate some of those nebulous implicit responsibilities.
 
krisy said:
Do you honestly believe that dog was better off with a bullet being put threw his brain?!!!! At the vet his last moments can be calm and tranquil with you holding him. Painless too.
Click to expand...
Yes I know, he was terrified of any vet and a properly placed .45 slug leaves no time for pain. Ever been shot ? I have and for a bit you feel no pain.
 
BTW Crisy I had one put to sleep as you said holding her ( the wife insisted on the vet) and I am not so sure there was no pain. they die of a heart attack and they are painful. The poor dog jerked a bit and whimpered.
I know the kill your own method is not for most people, but should it be illegal ?
 
Last edited:
krisy said:
All things in moderation keeps a person happy.
Click to expand...
I disagree with you both. One of the things that's gone wrong with our society today is that "extremsim" has gotten a bad name. There has to be room for real dialogue in this nation and where you have real dialogue you will *always* have extremists.

I'm an extremist and proud of it. This nation was founded by extremists. Iindeed, many nations were. We need more extremists and we need more avenues for those with extreme views to be heard.
 
I think that many people -- most people -- would accept the proposition that when you take a pet into your home, it brings with it a burden of implied responsibilities for the animal's welfare. I submit further that there's nothing inherently wrong with trying to codify and explicate some of those nebulous implicit responsibilities.

What is bringing an animal into my home mean. If I have a pig sty in the confines of my house are they pets? If I do the same thing with dogs or hermit crabs are they pets.

I have a big problem with the fact that many of our laws as to what are protected animals with rights and what are animals that don't do not lie in anything outsides of conforming to a eurocentric view of the human animal relationship.

You are on record as supporting multiculturalism join me in condemning such cultural hegemony.
 
I'm with you Ornot I am an extremist as well... at least to others. I don't care for the term though. I simply say I am principles. To call something extremism is to give another idea more credibility by saying it is normative.
 
IHateGovernment said:
I think that many people -- most people -- would accept the proposition that when you take a pet into your home, it brings with it a burden of implied responsibilities for the animal's welfare. I submit further that there's nothing inherently wrong with trying to codify and explicate some of those nebulous implicit responsibilities.

What is bringing an animal into my home mean. If I have a pig sty in the confines of my house are they pets? If I do the same thing with dogs or hermit crabs are they pets.

I have a big problem with the fact that many of our laws as to what are protected animals with rights and what are animals that don't do not lie in anything outsides of conforming to a eurocentric view of the human animal relationship.

You are on record as supporting multiculturalism join me in condemning such cultural hegemony.
Click to expand...
That's exactly why I advocate differentiating responsibilities based on roles and circumstances rather than species. A pig can be a pet or a pig can be a meat animal. Different rules apply in the two cases. Different rules *can* be applied, more correctly. I don't really know if they should or not. I'm arguing simply that there's nothing wrong with the precept.
 
uscitizen said:
You an extremeist Ornot ? I think not. UIs there something you have not told us ;)
Click to expand...
I am very much an extremist, by American standards, on some issues at least. That is to say I hold opinions that all but a small minority of Americans would characterize as "too extreme" or "way out there" or something. Especially on the economic and social libertarian dimensions. I am not, however, an inflexible ideologue. That's something else again.

My point was that, in the modern vernacular, we've conflated "extremist" with "ideologue." That's a bad mistake. It tends to make anyone with unusual or creative ideas suspect.
 
But do you let those views on a few things make you do stupid stuff like dressing up like a fish. Wimmen and booze are the only things that have seemed to cause me to do that kind of stupid stuff.
Perhaps I am confusing zealot and extremsit ? Not sure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top