Piece of Sh*t starves dog to death as "Art" wins first prize

[SomeKid]

cb, it does not logically follow when your first post blatantly insinuates you taking a position like the hand of God, then commenting that you will act on your morals, whether legal or not. Your intent was clear, however you didn't like being called on it, and are trying to speak out of both sides of your mouth.

[Matthew Carberry]

cb, it does not logically follow when your first post blatantly insinuates you taking a position like the hand of God, then commenting that you will act on your morals, whether legal or not. Your intent was clear, however you didn't like being called on it, and are trying to speak out of both sides of your mouth.

Nope, I made myself very clear and very precise.  Precision in meaning is necessary in the law and in discussions of morality. 

We could put it to a vote.


My first post?

My actual comments said:

I may not have legal standing to intervene, but I do feel a moral obligation.  Abuse of the helpless cannot be condoned and should be actively opposed when possible.

Guess what happens when someone without legal standing intervenes in a situation?  They are legally responsible for their actions.

Implicit in my recognition of the law is my willingness to submit myself to it for punishment when I violate it.

And yes, if I'm walking down the road and see a dog getting whipped, my first step based on my moral beliefs will be to "actively oppose" the abuser.  "Actively oppose" can mean a lot of things and given that I'm versed on SD law, it would begin with a verbal confrontation, ie "Hey you, quit hitting that dog!" in order to stop the whipping.  Now, if the abuse doesn't stop and matters progress so that ends up in a tussle so be it.  I'll accept the consequences for doing what I feel is right.

I'd then, as in any other confrontation that did not allow for a prior report, contact the lawful authorities.



Were you thinking I'd actually play out an anecdote?  I didn't realize you made that leap into fantasy.

The anecdote which I posted was relevent to Paddy's and BlueStarLizard's comments preceding it. 
It was a "Hey, here's something similar to your comment." 

You'll notice that I then went on to give my actual position on the matter, if only in a nutshell, and that my position was not identical to either of those two posters nor of the anecdote itself.

Or maybe you are also taking my syllogism to Geronimo seriously?  First off, it's invalid and thus one I would only use in jest.  Secondly... really?  You took that as some sort of statement of my position?  When I followed it up with a Batman reference?

You go guy.

[SomeKid]

Were you thinking I'd actually play out an anecdote? 

Yes, I did. We live in a world with PETA fanatic types, and you were talking exactly like some I have met. You almost sound like the animal = people type psychopaths.

All that said, I am sick of wasting my time quoting you, only to have you say you did not mean what you said. If you have something to contribute, do so. Anyone can go back and read our very clear conversation.

If it wasn't for the fact that I like dogs, I would whip one right in front of you just to see if you really would physically attack a person to make them stop doing something you find morally objectionable, even if no humans are harmed.

[Matthew Carberry]

I welcome the reviews of anyone still reading as to whether I was being clear and consistant.

As for being willing to beat a dog simply to prove a point?

That's real human of you.

[freakazoid]

I would like to say "Thank you, Captain Obvious."  But that would be too obvious.

I guess my point in your quote wasn't very obvious then?

Post me a working link to view whatever horrible atrocity it is, I am not wasting my time reading webpages of whining. DO that, and I will answer your first question.

The links don't work? Works for me. But if they don't work for you then how can you go on to say, "webpages of whining."?

[SomeKid]

zoid, I saw no video or pictures, just massive volumes of text.

[LadySmith]

What makes humans better?
Im not kidding around or trying to pick a fight.
I honestly would like to understand a different point of view.

Im not misanthropic (anymore), and it was being able to care for animals that allowed me to be able to care about people. But Im not quite at the humans are better than animals stage. I see them as simply different with both possessing good and bad qualities. Ive never been stalked by an animal, but on the other hand, Ive never had a person crap on my floor.

[BlueStarLizzard]

humans arn't better or worse then animals.

hello, we are animals (mammals to be exsact) and we do what we do and they do what they do. there is a theory that canines civilized the human race. caveman saw the wolves working together to bring down game and living in a orginized hirarchy, and then copied it. 

as for domesticated animals. well, we domesticated them and as far as i'm conserned that means we owe some responicbilty to the dogs and cows and chickens and all the rest. does this mean i think we should treat them like a human? NO. they wouldn't like it and, honestly, wouldn't get it cause they ain't human. But it does mean that humanity has a responcibilty to make the domesticated animals have healthy and productive lives. and believe it or not this works out better for both humans and animals. because not only is it crule to the cow to make it stand in its own muck and covered in sores from beatings but its also not exsactly healthy to eat that cow (and i want to eat cows, beef is tasty).
the human relasionship with domesticated animals is not a parasitic relasionship. its a symboytic one, and it benifits all species to rememeber that.

and somekid, you are right. it is not legally acceptiable for a person to beat the crap out of another person who is beating a dog. and i don't think anyone is argueing. however for me, it is morally ok. why? because i think that anyone who gets their jolly's off beating a dog has sunk beneath the defination of human and has become a piece of sh*t.

[freakazoid]

zoid, I saw no video or pictures, just massive volumes of text.

Don't know why, it works for me.  Unless you mean video or pictures of what the person did to the animal, well that isn't on there. What do you mean by massive volumes of text. The first link you can just read the part where it says Background, the second link is a vid with text that goes more into what the vid was like.

[Balog]

Just curious: to the posters who're saying people aren't better than animals. Are you vegan?

If animals are equal to humans, owning domestic animals is equivalent to slavery, and killing and eating them is tantamount to murder.

I also wonder how many animals you apply this standard to. Insecticide kills millions if not billions of insects. Are they less worthy of life because they're icky? Heck, there are several studies showing that millions of cute n' furries are killed by wheat and soy combines every year. Shall we boycott grains and soy products since their harvest brutally slaughters millions of animals?

[The Annoyed Man]

So acting on morals is an OK defense against the law now? Lets think about things that have been done in the names of morals, and not the law.

How is it that you think the law allows you to beat and/or torture an animal?  I submit that in most jurisdictions those actions would get you prosecution, as well it should.

[SomeKid]

Lady, three reasons. Two if you don't follow some kind of Judeo-Christian view.

1st, God created Man in his own image. This alone puts even the lowest among us above the most well trained anything.

2nd, How many animal species have developed space travel? Developed electricity? Created anything even close to what we can? Sure ants build nice nests, out of mud. Creating and using things like steel or making better weapons to augment our bodies (swords, guns) or machines to make life easier are far beyond anything else. The fact that we are different in a way that makes our survival better proves superiority.

3rd, as noted by Balog, if animals are not a lower life form, then we are committing modern day slavery and murder by owning and eating them.

Paddy, laws are not always universal. It may be illegal to do something in your county, where it is legal the next county over. Secondly, laws do not allow, they only restrict. Your second sentence I am in partial agreement. Most places it is illegal, but I don't really think jailing someone for years and making them a felon for kicking a dog is a wise use of public funds.

[LadySmith]

Bluestarlizzard,
I agree with you about being responsible for the animals in our keeping and not treating them as human because theyre not. Beating, stomping, starving and torturing them is not part of my animal responsibility contract.

Balog,
"Animal slavery" reminds me of an episode of Star Trek-The Next Generation. Theyd taken aboard aliens on some diplomatic mission who brought their own live food. Riker told them, We no longer enslave animals for food.

Im not vegan. I went that route once and had to stop because my pets were starting to look and smell really, really tasty. 
Im a meat eater. I eat animals, and animals eat us. Its fair. Some die so that others may live. But it is within our power to grant quick and humane deaths. Not so with much of the animal kingdom.

SomeKid,
I agree that we are a creative species. If our ability to create is what makes us better, shouldnt it also cause us to rise above our ability to debase those were supposed to be superior to?

I wouldn't hang around somebody who beat and tortured animals. Id have to question their motives. Why beat the dog? What did the dog do to you? Couldnt you find something better to do? Just like that artist in the OP. Did he do that because he cant paint? To me, it shows that the human has some serious issues. Animal abuse speaks to me of epic fail on the humans part.

The animal torturers Ive seen were horrible examples of humanity. One (male) was sadistic. He did it because he could, to show what he could do to me and because it aroused him. Another (female) was insane. She lashed out at anything smaller and weaker than her in fits of rage. There were a few more. All they did was make me hate and eventually become dead inside for a long time. It was getting to know people from the opposite end of that spectrum that turned me around. So yeah, maybe I'm biased. 

Things Im going to think about&
If G-d created us in His image, does this mean we just look like Him or are we supposed to emulate Him?
Since He created animals first, I wonder if He prefers that we respect His creations or ab/use them as we see fit?
How would I prevent animal abuse in a non-violent manner?
Could I go vegan again and not want to eat my pets? 

[SomeKid]

Lady,

Being superior does not mean we should be unwilling to acknowledge it. Arrogance is only a problem when it is undeserved arrogance. Example: When someone wins, they celebrate, because they are the ones who are superior. There is nothing wrong with exalting the champions. Humanity is the champion of life on this Earth.

I agree totally with the second paragraph to me. I knew some guys who thought killing a dog by holding it down and holding a BB gun in its mouth would be great. They actually did it, they held a dog down, inserted a BB gun into its mouth, and kept shooting until it died. I never had any desire to hang out with them at all, for a host of reasons (the killing of the dog was one of their lesser acts of stupidity. As to your third paragraph, all I will say is hatred is not a bad emotion.

Fourth paragraph, No idea, put here for our needs, abusing them is wasting God's gift, so I am against wasting His gifts, protest, make it a offense, but only punished by a nasty fine (wastes little or no taxpayer dollars, beats sticking them in a jail cell and paying for that), no, eat meat. Meat is good for you.

[LadySmith]

Humanity is the champion of life on this Earth.

I got a strange visual about that:
Announcer: Humanity, you are the champion.
Humanity: We are the champions&we are the champions&of the world!
Announcer: So how are you going to celebrate?
Humanity: Were going to create Disneyland! Oh, and were going to starve a dog to death. 

Hatred&got to be careful with that stuff. Also rage&and vengeance. 

protest, make it a offense, but only punished by a nasty fine (wastes little or no taxpayer dollars, beats sticking them in a jail cell and paying for that)

This makes a lot of sense to me.

As for non-violent intervention, I think if I saw a guy beating his dog on his property, Id report it and confront him. Hopefully Id be enough of a distraction to keep him off the dog until the authorities arrived. And then Id be a witness.
If I saw a guy beating a dog on public property, Id report it, confront him and step between him and the dog if necessary. Its public property, right? And I wouldnt be touching either one of them.
If I came across a starving dog as art, Id rescue the dog even if I had to buy the whole stupid exhibit or bribe the museum guards.
Itll probably be a whole nother story once I get good at throwing rocks.

no, eat meat. Meat is good for you.

Mmmm&meat. 

I also wonder how many animals you apply this standard to. Insecticide kills millions if not billions of insects. Are they less worthy of life because they're icky? Heck, there are several studies showing that millions of cute n' furries are killed by wheat and soy combines every year. Shall we boycott grains and soy products since their harvest brutally slaughters millions of animals?

I apply it to all animals. I dont consider any of them icky, from ants and maggots to slugs and hagfish.
I will destroy something that attacks me & mine (fleas, ticks, criminals), and I understand the use of pesticides in agriculture or for disease prevention. Id even like to go hunting if I ever come across the chance to do so. Im not PETA-type crazy (yet). 

[SomeKid]

LS,

I had the same visual, part of the reason I went ahead and worded it that way. Hatred, rage, and vengeance are all fun and games, especially when someone else loses an eye, right?  I still do not see a reason to act against an idiot who starves a dog to death. They just are not worth the time to punish them. Besides, why are we saying their life is worth less
 than a dog's?

I figured my (Warning! Bad pun alert!) Fine solution would appeal. I think it may be a good way of doing things. Beats incarceration, and pays for some things. At the same time it can punish the moron. Granted, you can't make the fines excessive, or it is as bad and stupid as jailing them.

Or just toss the dog poisoned meat. It gets a quick death, and everyone thinks you did a humane thing (one way or another). Why blow the money buying the dog? That just rewards the idiot artist.