Rev. Al, Russell Simmons, PETA add their two cents on Vick...

[joseephuss]

That is still a leap in logic. It is one thing to say all serial killers abuse animals, but completely different to say that all animal abusers are serial killers.

How about the influence on kids? It isn't a leap to think that if Vick goes unpunished that some kids will think it is okay to be cruel to animals. I means kids are pretty stupid. Okay, maybe not stupid because I think kids today are much brighter than I was when I was their age. But they are still kids and can be influenced.

 

[blindzebra]

That is still a leap in logic. It is one thing to say all serial killers abuse animals, but completely different to say that all animal abusers are serial killers.

They didn't say that.

They said that someone who is so indifferent to a living thing that they would beat, shoot, electrocute and fight dogs that can they be trusted around any living thing...IMO, no they can't, they are defective people.

That defect is the are sociopaths which means they are a danger to anyone and anything around them.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

at least we know these wierdos are sadists

I wouldn't trust a sadist around anyone's kids

 

[burmafrd]

http://hum.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/38/12/1113

http://cats.about.com/cs/crueltyconnection/a/cruelty.htm

Just a couple showing the connections

 

[superpunk]

Good point, punk! Where I live I see all kinds of seeing-eye-cows leading the blind around and the fire department close to where I live has a trained steer that goes and helps out in fires!

The air base that I used to work for has a bomb sniffing lamb and another cow that rides around in a police car to help catch criminals.

Let's see...what else? Oh yeah, there are some chickens over here where I live that work as guard chickens in a junkcar car lot to keep theives out...so, yeah, I agree, it's blurry...indeed!

So you rationalize cruelty towards animals who do not help us in any way? Can we fight cats, then? Pretty much all they do is act prissy and stick their anuses in our face when we try to pet them.

The fact that you had to go through scenarios why dogs help humans as justification for being cruel to animals that are of no use to us kind of demonstrates the point - the line is a bit fuzzy. There's only a clear distinction where you personally have made one. One way may be "more humane" than another - but at the end of the day, it's all the same thing, isn't it? Animals dying for our enjoyment.

 

[Alexander]

The Sharpton thing is funny b/c another poster railed against him yesterday with regards to how Al would come out to defend Vick at any moment.

Anyone that defends him would be branded a monster.

But I can only lament that Johnnie Cochran is now pushing up daisies, otherwise he would be a natural to lead the defense.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

So you rationalize cruelty towards animals who do not help us in any way? Can we fight cats, then? Pretty much all they do is act prissy and stick their anuses in our face when we try to pet them.

The fact that you had to go through scenarios why dogs help humans as justification for being cruel to animals that are of no use to us kind of demonstrates the point - the line is a bit fuzzy. There's only a clear distinction where you personally have made one. One way may be "more humane" than another - but at the end of the day, it's all the same thing, isn't it? Animals dying for our enjoyment.

I see the line being blurry between dog-fighting and calf-roping, though I condone neither, but it's not that difficult to see the difference between slaughter for the benefit of man and dog-fighting, which benefits a small group of greedy individuals, which in the end doesn't really better anything, and at the cost of innocent animals, it's such a total waste

 

[bbgun]

The Sharpton thing is funny b/c another poster railed against him yesterday with regards to how Al would come out to defend Vick at any moment.

God you're dishonest. I predicted that Sharp would throw a hissyfit if Goodell decided to suspend Vick ahead of the trial. That hasn't happened yet. Now I see that Sharp has decided to stick his nose in this anyway. BTW, who asked him to? How exactly is the good Reverend relevant to this case? Is he Vick's agent? Spiritual adviser? Or does he just pop up whenever a stripper cries rape? The mystery widens.

 

[superpunk]

I see the line being blurry between dog-fighting and calf-roping, though I condone neither, but it's not that difficult to see the difference between slaughter for the benefit of man and dog-fighting, which benefits a small group of greedy individuals, which in the end doesn't really better anything, and at the cost of innocent animals, it's such a total waste

Could you live without red meat?

Certainly you could - but who would want to?

You (and everyone else who isn't quite getting it) don;t have to convince me that dogfighting is horribly HORRIBLY wrong. I'm just trying to illustrate the point that animal cruelty is animal cruelty - we've just chosen to make some animals pets, and so we tolerate less cruelty to said animals. Maybe people to whom dogs are not pets - but rather posessions - feel differently about their treatment morally, regardless of what the law says.

 

[Danny White]

Michael Vick has NOTHING on this sadistic Tour de France cyclist:

http://www.breitbart.tv/html/3178.html

 

[burmafrd]

I really think that anyone that tries to say that calf roping and dog fighting are even in the same galaxy really needs to take a hard look at themselves.

 

[superpunk]

I really think that anyone that tries to say that calf roping and dog fighting are even in the same galaxy really needs to take a hard look at themselves.

You're right. I was three clicks away from becoming a serial killer. Thanks to your call for self reflection, I was able to turn my life around.

Thank you burmafrd. Thank you for not reading.




Jesus H. Christ......

 

[5Stars]

So you rationalize cruelty towards animals who do not help us in any way? Can we fight cats, then? Pretty much all they do is act prissy and stick their anuses in our face when we try to pet them.

The fact that you had to go through scenarios why dogs help humans as justification for being cruel to animals that are of no use to us kind of demonstrates the point - the line is a bit fuzzy. There's only a clear distinction where you personally have made one. One way may be "more humane" than another - but at the end of the day, it's all the same thing, isn't it? Animals dying for our enjoyment.

Just for you, punk...this is what a dog is all about. Do you own a dog?

Cats? You can love a cat too...but, it's hard to train them. Taco spelled backwards...o cat..., but they are domesticated also as are other living things. Others animals are breed for food and is regulated buy the Food and Drug Admin...and their blurry ways.



1do·mes·ti·cate Pronunciation: \də-ˈmes-ti-ˌkāt\ Function: transitive verb Inflected Form(s): do·mes·ti·cat·ed; do·mes·ti·cat·ing Date: circa 1639 1 : to bring into domestic use : adopt 2 : to adapt (an animal or plant) to life in intimate association with and to the advantage of humans 3 : to make domestic : fit for domestic life 4 : to bring to the level of ordinary people

 

[Crown Royal]

It is a FACT that virtually all serial killers abused animals. It is also a fact that many violent criminals abuse animals. It is not a leap of logic to consider Vick a risk.

I understand where you are going, and maybe he is an increase in risk, but I still don't think that just because there are violent criminals/serial killers that torture animals that there is not a degree of torture/animal cruelty in those who would otherwise never harm a human. A great deal of people consider animals completely unrelated to humans. Rene Descartes dissected live cats because he considered them 'automatons.' I don't see that it is apples to apples.

 

[burmafrd]

super- you try and defend it. Go ahead. This should be interesting- sort of like watching a car accident in progress.

 

[Crown Royal]

How about the influence on kids? It isn't a leap to think that if Vick goes unpunished that some kids will think it is okay to be cruel to animals. I means kids are pretty stupid. Okay, maybe not stupid because I think kids today are much brighter than I was when I was their age. But they are still kids and can be influenced.

I don't disagree with this at all - obviously kids can be influenced. But I got from the letter that it was trying to say that Vick had potential to inflict physical harm on children, which is something different.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Could you live without red meat?

Certainly you could - but who would want to?

You (and everyone else who isn't quite getting it) don;t have to convince me that dogfighting is horribly HORRIBLY wrong. I'm just trying to illustrate the point that animal cruelty is animal cruelty - we've just chosen to make some animals pets, and so we tolerate less cruelty to said animals. Maybe people to whom dogs are not pets - but rather posessions - feel differently about their treatment morally, regardless of what the law says.

it's you who doesn't quite get it

the end justifies the means, to what end is dog-fighting? nothing

to what end is slaughtering cows? human nourishment

I'm not even arguing which is more horrible, but which has benefits, slaughtering cows has many, dog-fighting has none, zip, zero, the line isn't blurry, now calf-roping, yes, I can see that argument as it has no benefits either

 

[burmafrd]

Sounds like Descartes was somewhat warped.

 

[Crown Royal]

They didn't say that.

They said that someone who is so indifferent to a living thing that they would beat, shoot, electrocute and fight dogs that can they be trusted around any living thing...IMO, no they can't, they are defective people.

That defect is the are sociopaths which means they are a danger to anyone and anything around them.

This is like what I said above - you are grouping living creatures in the same category, while people like vick who are involved in dogfighting, I would assume that they consider dogs far less than human (which I assume most do). Maybe I am making too many assumptions?

 

[superpunk]

Just for you, punk...this is what a dog is all about. Do you own a dog?

Cats? You can love a cat too...but, it's hard to train them. Taco spelled backwards...o cat..., but they are domesticated also as are other living things. Others animals are breed for food and is regulated buy the Food and Drug Admin...and their blurry ways.



1do·mes·ti·cate Pronunciation: \də-ˈmes-ti-ˌkāt\ Function: transitive verb Inflected Form(s): do·mes·ti·cat·ed; do·mes·ti·cat·ing Date: circa 1639 1 : to bring into domestic use :adopt 2 : to adapt (an animal or plant) to life in intimate association with and to the advantage of humans 3 : to make domestic: fit for domestic life 4 : to bring to the level of ordinary people

I don't have the slightest idea what your point is.

If it is that we can't be cruel to dogs because we have domesticated them - that's exactly what I'm trying to illustrate. And that maybe - just maybe - there are people out there who don't view dogs in the warm and cuddly way that most of us do, viewing them instead as objects that they can do with as they please. The law does not agree with them, but the law does not determine our morality.

it's you who doesn't quite get it

the end justifies the means, to what end is dog-fighting? nothing

to what end is slaughtering cows? human nourishment

I'm not even arguing which is more horrible

Is either one necessary? Can humans get the nourishment provided by red meat from sources other than shoving a spike through a cow's head or an electrode up it's butt?