|
Post by uk4life on Aug 22, 2007 16:40:26 GMT -5
Cathouse, I agree with what you are saying, but I feel as if you are ONLY upset because these are dogs. I mean, other animals get slaughtered every day, but nobody cares this much. As a matter of fact, most Americans support it, seeing as how Americans do eat meat. At least PETA sticks up for ALL animals, unlike every single person I have heard make an opinion on the Vick scandal (on this board, elsewhere on the internet, on TV, etc.)
|
|
|
Post by uk4life on Aug 22, 2007 16:41:02 GMT -5
I have never heard of a police pig. I'd argue that point. hahah
|
|
|
Post by tayshaun on Aug 22, 2007 16:41:27 GMT -5
Your argument that killing pigs and chickens is the same as killing humans is not very convincing. IT sounds like something PETA would say (you have mentioned PETA before). Are you familiar with peta's "holocaust on your plate"? Where PETA says that killing chickens is the same as killing people. PETA is not that great, and I do not agree with what peta says most of the time. But this, i do agree with them. And, also, I think you should be adressing your last question to someone who participates in killing animals. I do not kill any animals. I do not hunt. I do not work at a meat factory. I do not sell animals as food. I didn't invent the machines that kill the animals. I am not the one on trial. The one on trial is Michael Vick. Or do you not think he should be on trial, and he shouldn't be punished for his actions?
|
|
|
Post by uk4life on Aug 22, 2007 16:45:40 GMT -5
OK, my argument is not "that killing pigs and chickens is the same as killing humans." If you can find that quote from me anywhere, then you win. I never even said I was a huge PETA supporter, just that PETA is consistent when it comes to defending all animals, whereas you are consistent in defending ONE animal. Its pretty clear that you don't care about PETA, fine, I really don't pay them any mind either. And no, you don't kill the animals, but I didn't hear you saying that you don't eat those animals either. If nobody ate meat, these animals wouldn't be bred just to be slaughtered. I'm not even telling you to become a vegetarian. All I am saying is that a dog is no better than a chicken, a pig, a deer, or any other animal that is killed all the time.
|
|
|
Post by uk4life on Aug 22, 2007 16:47:37 GMT -5
And by the way, I don't want to sound like I am just picking on you tayshaun. You just happen to be online and responding in this thread. Don't take it personally.
|
|
|
Post by tayshaun on Aug 22, 2007 16:50:55 GMT -5
There is no possible way that what Vick did is comparable to a human eating an animal.
|
|
|
Post by cathouse on Aug 22, 2007 16:52:24 GMT -5
Cathouse, I agree with what you are saying, but I feel as if you are ONLY upset because these are dogs. I mean, other animals get slaughtered every day, but nobody cares this much. As a matter of fact, most Americans support it, seeing as how Americans do eat meat. At least PETA sticks up for ALL animals, unlike every single person I have heard make an opinion on the Vick scandal (on this board, elsewhere on the internet, on TV, etc.) I don't like to see any animal hurt. I know we raise pigs, chickens, etc for food and their sole purpose on this earth is to be eaten by us. dogs cats,and horses are sacred to us ,we treat them like they are family, other parts of the worls kill and eat horses "remember what happened to Ferdinand" we people here in the USA would not put up with the slaughter of horses for food I think there is a court case going on now about the slaughter of wild horses....
|
|
|
Post by uk4life on Aug 22, 2007 16:53:57 GMT -5
There is no possible way that what Vick did is comparable to a human eating an animal. Well its a good thing I never made the comparison. What I am comparing is the killing of other animals to the killing of dogs and saying there should be no difference. But for some reason, a lot of people seem to think that dogs deserve to live more than those other animals, and I think that is wrong.
|
|
|
Post by tayshaun on Aug 22, 2007 16:54:50 GMT -5
There is no possible way that what Vick did is comparable to a human eating an animal. Well its a good thing I never made the comparison. What I am comparing is the killing of other animals to the killing of dogs and saying there should be no difference. But for some reason, a lot of people seem to think that dogs deserve to live more than those other animals, and I think that is wrong. You have never given me a reason as to why it is wrong.
|
|
|
Post by uk4life on Aug 22, 2007 16:56:21 GMT -5
Cathouse, I would argue that the sole purpose of pigs and chickens is not to be eaten. It may be the sole purpose in this country, becuase we rely so heavily on their meat, but saying thier sole purpose is to be eaten implies that they have no right to live. I disagree with you on that. There are a lot of animals out there that seem pretty worthless to me, but I don't think we should slaughter them.
|
|
|
Post by uk4life on Aug 22, 2007 17:01:25 GMT -5
Well its a good thing I never made the comparison. What I am comparing is the killing of other animals to the killing of dogs and saying there should be no difference. But for some reason, a lot of people seem to think that dogs deserve to live more than those other animals, and I think that is wrong. You have never given me a reason as to why it is wrong. In that case, I want to hear explicitly from you that dogs are above other animals and deserve to live more than other animals. Clearly, you feel this way because you like your dog. What if I like my pet chicken (for argument's sake)? Just because its unorthodox to have a pet that isn't a dog or cat, doesn't mean that people don't feel for those animals. Dogs should not be put above other animals, just like other animals should not be put above dogs. Horses, chickens, deer, etc. They should be treated equally. You act as if I have it out for dogs and want them all to die. On the contrary, I'm sticking up for the other animals that are killed daily but nobody makes a big deal out of it. What Vick did was wrong, but you all want to lynch him? If you say you want to go out and crucify every other person that kills animals senselessly then more power to you. But until then, your attitude is hypocritical, no offense.
|
|
|
Post by cathouse on Aug 22, 2007 17:02:14 GMT -5
There is no possible way that what Vick did is comparable to a human eating an animal. Well its a good thing I never made the comparison. What I am comparing is the killing of other animals to the killing of dogs and saying there should be no difference. But for some reason, a lot of people seem to think that dogs deserve to live more than those other animals, and I think that is wrong. we are talking about the treatment of animals, I would have no problem shooting a rabid dog, or a dog thats gets mean and attacks prople , we are talking about the treatment of animals, I don't like cock fighting either. In vick's case he was torturing his dogs like drowning and electrucating{spelling} his dogs. maybe we should stick a hot wire up his butt so he could have a dose of his own medicine..
|
|
|
Post by stagger on Aug 22, 2007 17:02:25 GMT -5
If we didn't eat pigs and chickens, they'd be hugely overpopulated and become a nuisance. That's the very reason there are hunting seasons for deer.......they become overpopulated and they're all over the roads getting hit by cars and sometimes injuring people. Think about it, what would happen if we didn't kill anymore pigs or chickens? People wouldn't care for them because there wouldn't be any money to be made, so they'd pretty much be released into the wild to roam and crap wherever they see fit. In theory, they could wind up in towns causing health concerns from pig crap being all over the streets and sidewalks. Water contamination, animal attacks, property damage would all result from the lack of animal control.....not to mention the millions of pairs of shoes that would be wasted due to stepping in animal doo doo. Animal control is necessary....and sometimes, human control is necessary also.
|
|
|
Post by uk4life on Aug 22, 2007 17:08:24 GMT -5
But stagger, if we didn't eat pigs and chickens we also wouldn't breed them the way we do. They would go about reproducing themselves, not the way farmers do it now, which is to increase their yeild so as to make the most money. Besides, if these animals were in the wild, they would have their own natural predators to keep their numbers at a reasonable level. Nature has its own way of working things out.
|
|
|
Post by cathouse on Aug 22, 2007 17:09:31 GMT -5
Cathouse, I would argue that the sole purpose of pigs and chickens is not to be eaten. It may be the sole purpose in this country, becuase we rely so heavily on their meat, but saying thier sole purpose is to be eaten implies that they have no right to live. I disagree with you on that. There are a lot of animals out there that seem pretty worthless to me, but I don't think we should slaughter them. you're right , we use chickens, pigs, etc for medical expermints and for laying the eggs we eat, then they are slaughtered and put in chicken soup, dog food , etc, other than that just what good is a chicken, pigs, well I had a pet pig once, sold it after showing it at the county fair. and i'm sure it ended up on some ones dinner table,
|
|