What's Wrong with Killing Dogs?
So it's a federal crime to be mean to dogs? Who knew?
What's wrong with what Michael Vick did? I have no inclination to do what he did with dogs, but I have no comprehension of what all the fuss is about. Most people who are upset about killing dogs or letting them attack each other have at some point in their lives caught a fish, which is as extreme a form of murderous torture of an animal as I can imagine. Not only have most of them caught a fish, they have actually eaten many more of them than they've caught. Which is weirder, killing an animal or eating its dead flesh? Most of us have never eaten dog meat, but in some countries it is a delicacy. Is there something evil going on in those countries? Are they violating the natural order of things? Should we invade them or get the UN to intervene? They are killing and eating dogs for god's sake!!!
What is the moral basis -- the natural law, if you will -- that accords special respect and protection to dogs in our written laws? And how does that same natural law allow for fish being clubbed to death on boat decks if they haven't died already from the hook-in-mouth trick we so enjoy pulling on them?
Our reverence for dog life resembles our reverence for human life. Up to a point. It's okay to kill your dog if you think your dog is too sick to go on living much longer or if you just can't afford medical help for your dog. And, don't worry, no legal authority is ever going to ask you to prove that your dog was really sick enough to kill or even sick at all. If you don't have the stomach for killing your dog yourself, you contract with a dog killer -- otherwise known as a veterinarian -- to do the dirty work for you. No federal law against that yet. Our dog reverence is so shot full of loopholes that there is no describable moral order to it at all.
Americans revere horses too, but it's okay to shoot your racehorse in the head in public if it so much as breaks a leg--something I saw the first time I went to a racetrack. And it's more than okay--politicians consider it a leadership demonstration--to hunt. Shoot 'em, kill 'em, cook 'em, eat 'em is the American way for a lot of pretty birds and every four-legged animal other than dogs, cats, and horses.
Between bites at McDonald's today there will be a lot of outrage expressed about Michael Vick getting off easy. I won't understand a word of it.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
You look in the eyes of the dogs that were rescued from dogfighting and tell me there's no difference than a dog who has a good home.
the obvious pain and suffering in their eyes hits you as quickly as light in the morning.
And those who might think this is "anthromorphizing" (which I don't believe in, as we are all mammals, so I believe all beings have feelings and emotions).
Mr. O'Donnell,
Were you at ground zero where the dogs were scrambling over dangerously shakey and very sharp rubble, with cut pads and no masks trying to find survivors? Where were you Mr. O'Donnell when bomb sniffing dogs in Iraq were blown up protecting their units? Have you ever seen a seeing eye dog assisting a blind individual getting on public transportation in a city?
You have never read literature both ancient and contemporary about man's high regard for the faithfulness and companionship of dogs?
Think a little bit before you hit the comp next time Mr. O'Donnell.
jonesy
Allowing a living being to be tortured to death is ok? why? because it isn't "human" ? guess what? humans are animals! sorry to
be insulting, but that is the truth. In other words we can be as cruel as we want to other living creatures because they aren't humans is that you're argument? to have not pity or compassion? Vets who have to put animals down do it in a humane fashion. Two wrongs do not make a right. Go and see how dogs and other animals are treated in other countries, it's not a pretty picture. I have heard people who have seen animals killed in packing houses, in some cases, have never eaten meat again, because of the horrendous conditions. Oh,, but that's right, they dont' have "souls"., Maybe when we are told we are anthromorphizing, we are in fact acknowledging in ourselsves what is also in animals., that we have it backwards, that all animals have feelings and emotions - but we can't accept that, can we, as that would make us "less special"..
Vick is our pitbull. We are Vick. Get it?
May God there's a difference between food and sport !!
The goal of those "activities" you so boldly use in your flawed & twisted debate is either for food or to end suffering. Did you see any stories about Barbaro ?? I worked with another great Apollopalooza, he also broke a hind leg. But pure champions heart to the end. Watching him- I saw true strength. but when his 'heart ' could carry him no further- we let him rest. Hind sight- I wish they had just put him down immediately. He inspired me, but he struggled for three months. Pehaps our companion animals are put on this earth to remind us of our own unique strengths and beauty. you've obviously never truly comunicated with another animal, and so you have never really communicated with another living being. I've assisted in euthanasia procedures- cats, dogs and horses- friends. Rarely is it a violent and that is only due to the unique response to the drugs. Mostly it is quiet and peaceful.I
The evil does not lie in the hearts of animals, but in the actions of man.
O'Donnell makes a good point - though the animal rights activists would never drop their agenda long enough to be objective about what is said in the editorial.
What is saddest is that the animal rights people often put the welfare of creatures above that of human beings. If a pro football player assaults a person or beats his wife and kids he will be slapped on the wrist and perhaps sent to therapy - but his career would in no way be threatened.
I, too love dogs! My 13+ year old friend is lying beside me here as I type this. The dog before that was with me every day for over 17 years! Both have had happy, somewhat pampered lives.
I don't advocate fighting dogs for sport. I am not a fan of any sports. But I think we are seeing a knee-jerk reaction blown all out of proportion to the actual facts. The man (Vick) broke the law; he should be punished; and then, having paid his debt to society, should be forgiven.
Let's find something important to worry about.
I'm so glad O'Donnell blogged on this. The reaction over this has assumed monumentally hysterical proportions. No. I don't condone what Vick did. He's a sadistic, animal torturer/murderer, he broke the law, he gambled, something that is against NFL rules and Vick should be punished! (Last I checked, he is.) But, like all prisoners, he has the right to serve his punishment and should be eligible for REHABILITATION. The dog lovers have summarily dismissed his right to this privilege. I don't agree that humans should be treated such in deference to what people feel about animals. There's something wrong there.
Vegetarians have become like all fundamentalist religions: radical. They won't even listen to the FACTS. Sadly, the poor way Americans eat have produced these radical vegans who now confuse good-eating practises with bad ones. The way Americans eat has certainly created a food supply system that treats animals cruelly. But that's what happens when a consumer-driven society develops into a gluttonous one. We consume too much of everything: meat, soda, sweets, juice, bottled water, paper products, aluminum, plastic, you name it. We're killing ourselves and the planet with this lazy, hedonistic lifestyle. Michael Vick is simply the worst example of what our way of life spawns.
Here's an idea, how about all of these people that are so up in arms about the dog fighting channel this same rage into protesting the pointless war going on in Iraq? Surely if a dog's life is worth this much outrage, you should be appalled at the daily loss of human life. I'm not saying I support dog fighting, in fact I think it's sick. I just find it sadly amusing how self-righteous and pissed off all these people are getting over dog fighting, yet for some reason, many of these same people are probably remaining silent about the biggest elephant in the room of them all.
What Vick did is a crime in this country. He plead guilty and he will pay the consequences.
As for the vegan/vege
And what of countries that don't have enough agricultural land to produce the crops to feed their populations? Every country would be using all their farmland to feed their own people. There simply would not be enough to provide nearly 6 billion people with healthy balanced diets for years to come. There would be famine in some countries and if a drought or frost were to wipe out some crops, what then?
Ultimately there would be war. World war, not for money, not for oil, but for food, land to grow more and population control.
Think about it a while, and you can see this is not absurd.
Humans have it coming. Dogs do not.
Good post. I'm not for dogfighting; It's a brutal and unnessecary sport. But unless we provide the same equal protection for ALL ANIMALS that we provide for the ones we call "pets", we don't have (as a society) a toe to stand on on this issue.
Truth be told, millions of animals die in inhumane manners all across this country, and we have to stop collectively deciding which animals have the right to live or die. George Carlin broke it down the best way I've ever heard it when he said (paraphrase) "I've never seen a bumper sticker that said 'I brake for advanced melanoma'. We've got a pretty sweet deal on the whole sanctity of life thing. We get to decide which forms of life live, and which ones die. How did we get it? We made the whole thing up!!!"
One of George W. Bush's hobbies as a child was to catch frogs, shove fire crackers up their anuses, light the fuse and watch them explode.
Takes a REAL MAN to do something like that, or to pick up a beagle by the ears (ala LBJ) or transport a dog for twelve hours in a cage on the roof of a car (ala Mitt the Sh*t).
You self-respecting trolls out there surely don't want to have some wuss in the Oval Office who can't find some enjoyment in torturing a helpless animal (or even better, some hapless detainee, who just might be possibly guilty of something), do you?
The author makes an illogical jump.
He tries to link moral basis of laws to natural law or, the laws of nature. He asks, "If you will" as if to say, if you will f accept his assumption
Morality has to do with trying to create distance between man's animal nature to seek a higher, more God like, holy, harmonious level of behavior and thought...
Nature displays no morality. Nature is also full of killing. Still, seldom does one find an animal that tortures another in order to entertain itself.
Vick is capable of moral judgement, yet he chose to pleasure and enrichen himself by torturing dumb(innocent) animals.
There is a big difference between killing for the pleasure suffering provides and other forms of killing. A dumb animal would not know any pleasure.
There is a big difference between laws of nature and the laws of man. Man has some sense of Right and Wrong.
On September 11th, we are encouraged not to shop, go to work, or be visible. And definitely not to consume meat on our premises.
Same thing that is wrong with killing pundits, it is against the law. Change the law if you can
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
