BS: Animal Terrorists

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Feb 06 - 09:13 PM

I've seen clawed cats and de-clawed cats. I'm in favour of the latter, given the choice.

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Feb 06 - 09:14 PM

Sorry. Typo. Exactly the other way around. I'm in favour of leaving them their claws intact.

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Feb 06 - 09:22 PM

To look at the qestion objectivly, are humans really superior to other animals ?
Do we have the moral right to hurt or kill orther "lesser" animals in the hope that it may make our lives in some way easier?
Would we sacrifice an innocent animal to save the life of say Hitler or a child murderer?

Many other animals have far superior pphysical powers than humans.
The human brain is more developed than most animals ,but we use it to destroy other animals including our own species, even perpetrating vile acts like the sex murder of our children.
I dont' believe we have any moral right to toture other animals who may have poweres more beneficial to the welfare of the planet than humans.
We do it because we can! The animals cannot protest!

If we would not sacrifice a pet dog or cat to save the life of a war criminal or child murderer, the moral argument is invalid.

These are simple examples of how we should look at the treatment of other living creatures.
If we want to live in a brave new world, we've got to start thinking...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Cluin
Date: 04 Feb 06 - 09:26 PM

If you've got little kids around, you should have the cat declawed.

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Feb 06 - 09:27 PM

You're correct Akenaton. We do it because we can. If people got to spend some time inside the commercial slaughterhouses and saw what goes on in there, they'd stop eating meat pretty fast! I knew of 2 guys who that happened to, matter of fact. They both gave up eating any commercially packed meat whatsoever after a stint working in the slaughterhouses. Not on a moral basis, exactly...more because they just could not stomach it any longer. Literally couldn't keep it down.

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Cluin
Date: 04 Feb 06 - 09:35 PM

Morality is a very subjective thing.

What might be right for you may not be right for some.

A man is born. He's a man of means.
Then along come two; they got nothing but their jeans.

But they've got different strokes.

And it takes different strokes.

It takes different strokes to move the world.

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 04 Feb 06 - 09:45 PM

LOL! Yer a goof, Cluin!

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Feb 06 - 09:49 PM

Thanks LH, no one could ever accuse you of being a non-thinker.

I 'm convinced that people like Bunnahabhain, who catagorise protesters as "bad, mad and dangerous to know", are more worried about the effectiveness of the protests, than the future of research or the welfare of animals.

These folks usually have a right wing agenda going, and try their best to "dis" any movement that they see as a threat to the status quo...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: GUEST,Cluin
Date: 04 Feb 06 - 09:53 PM

I don't have little kids around but when I did, I had cats that were not declawed. Neither of my children were ever scratched. Then again, my children never 'asked for it' either.

I'm having a tough time differentiating between using animals for research and domesticating animals to the point of keeping them indoors and having them de-clawed. I am also one of those who believe feed lots and slaughterhouses should be abolished.

I don't see much difference. Its all about human beings abusing their power over helpless animals. As far as I'm concerned, I saved a cat from a certain death at the SPCA. I took her home and I liberated her. She's almost 12 years old and very healthy.

...but like I said. There are plenty who would consider my somewhat 'indifferent' attitude towards the cat, as neglectful. I think we co-exist.

How about these people who actually dress their pets? Pretty twisted if you ask me. I'll bet Clinton replaced the claws with a suit of chain mail. Do you have any pictures?

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: GUEST,Bunny Rabbit
Date: 04 Feb 06 - 09:58 PM

Personally I'm all for humans who try to defend other living creatures from cruel and unnecessary suffering.

There's little difference between a vivisectionist and the President of the United States. Both some to get their kicks from torturing and killing innocent creatures.

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Feb 06 - 10:01 PM

Maybe we should have Clinton "dressed", they say it improves the temperament...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 04 Feb 06 - 10:35 PM

You prefer me naked and you know it...

So does your mother for that matter

:-P

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 04 Feb 06 - 10:37 PM

Cluin - I'm so sorry! I didn't mean to sign in as guest Cluin. It was me, dianavan. I really do need to find my cookie.

I was actually replying to your suggestion about de-clawing cats around children.

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 04 Feb 06 - 10:39 PM

I knew Cluin would never ask to see pics of my pussy in chainmaille......

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Feb 06 - 10:42 PM

You're right Clinton..She always had a penchant for older men!!

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 04 Feb 06 - 10:47 PM

How is Metheusela these days anway?

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Cluin
Date: 04 Feb 06 - 10:53 PM

This is me this time. ;)

I know a kid that was playing with his cat on his bed one day, cuddling with it. He didn't "ask for it" either, but his loving little pussy cat hooked a claw in the kid's eye, batting at the blinking eyelid. It got infected and the kid lost his eye.

How come dog owners have to obey leash laws and pick up their dogs' crap when they walk them (I'm in favour of those things by the way) but cat owners are allowed to let their pets run free, scratch and shit in my garden, piss on my laundry and fight and f__k in the tree outside my window when I'm trying to sleep?

Hey, I love both cats and dogs. I just don't understand the double standard.

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Raptor
Date: 05 Feb 06 - 08:43 AM

I say we take up a collection to have Little Hawk De-clawed.

$2 each should do it.

"Look, man, if you have to imprison an animal and make it live a totally unnatural life indoors just for your enjoyment, maybe that's not such a good thing to do in the first place."-LH

Domesticated cats are not native to North America. And lead an unnatural life no mater what you do with them.

"Raptor - Just because my cat goes outside, doesn't mean she's wild"-Dianavan
"Like I said before, I'm not much of a pet person. I prefer my animals, wild."-Dianavan
what?

Raptor(Still a lunatic)

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Feb 06 - 10:19 AM

I say it would be a crime to de-claw Little Hawk.

He rarely shows them, but when he does they can be very effective...A

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Raptor
Date: 05 Feb 06 - 12:49 PM

How about neutering him then? Surely no one would object to that.

Raptor

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 05 Feb 06 - 01:06 PM

You can't neuter what isn't there

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: GUEST,Bobby
Date: 05 Feb 06 - 01:20 PM

So Little Hawk is just like George W Bush.

No balls!

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: gnu
Date: 05 Feb 06 - 01:34 PM

Cluin... cats eat rats. Now... well trained and cared for cats do no shit on other peoples' property nor piss on their laundry. Nor do they fuck in your trees.

Unfortunately, the law does not require people to be trained for ownership of cats OR dogs. Such would never eliminate all problems, but would go a long way to keeping problems to a minimum. From there, I am sure the odd problem could be managed.

Most problem cats are wild. Fact is, you ain't gonna see them... on accounta they are wild.

I did have a cat once who was crapping in my neighbours flower bed. Once I was told, it only took me three days to train it not to do so.

The cats are not the problem. Ignorant owners are the problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 05 Feb 06 - 01:47 PM

I was all set to post this when the 'Cat went down. gnu touches on much of what I was addressing and saved to post now.

It's way too late to start pretending that if we have pets that we kick out in the yard with or without shots that we're just allowing them to experience the joy of being "wild." We know too much about the science of animal behavior. A good life for a pet doesn't require unlimited unaccompanied "wildness." If you're a pet owner, then it is your responsibility to take care of that animal, to confine them if necessary to prevent scaring or hurting people or other animals, and to keep them out of other people's yards and from freely ranging public spaces. DON'T ADOPT ANIMALS IF YOU AREN'T WILLING TO GO TO THAT EXPENSE AND TROUBLE. Neither dogs as they appear now, nor domestic house cats, were here prior to colonization, they're not native "wild" species. The North American wild dogs that were domesticated by indigenous people weren't "pets," they were as likely to end up in the soup pot as sleeping on someones pallet at night. (Before someone starts down that path--the amplification of human traits in animals in native stories was not as the result of personification but a metaphorical approach to teaching through storytelling.)

Humans make the rules, humans have the language and the standing in the courts, humans bear the responsibility for their pets. Pets may seem like other-than-human people, but it is this failure to understand the natures of cats and dogs that gets so many pet owners into trouble. If you're going to have pets then take the time to work with them and train them and understand the limitations of keeping animals in your home and on your property. In the U.S. at least there is an epidemic of pet overpopulation and a huge number of unwanted pets are euthanized every day, coming from homes that can't control their animals. Having a pet is on a par with having children--if you're going to do it, you should be ready for it. (Unfortunately, it is also on a par with having children in that there are people who are criminally incompetent who have no business being pet owners or parents who are popping out puppies and kittens and babies like clockwork).

Whether or not you declaw your cat is up to you and is based on your decisions regarding the health and comfort of the family and the pets living there. Leaving a cat's claws on so it can defend itself outside means you're going to allow that animal free reign regarding the local pet, bird, and wildlife population (and by the way, they defend themselves perfectly well with their back claws, so removing the front claws spares the furniture but leaves the animal protected). Spaying and neutering is essential to keeping pets who are more comfortable, less likely to fight, and more even-tempered. If an individual adopts a pet and chooses not to neuter, don't give me the crap that they're allowing the animal some sort of autonomy. Pets are property, they AREN'T autonomous creatures in the eyes of the law, and not getting them fixed is an act of laziness on the part of the pet owner, not an act of liberation for the pet.

Can't afford the shots and the occasional veterinary care? Then you need to explore the services in your community that subsidize these things. Your local Humane Society has low-cost programs to spay and neuter pets, and I see signs several times a year for low-cost shot clinics for cats and dogs.

Working animals are not included in this rant of mine--there is an entirely different dynamic going on in that world.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 05 Feb 06 - 01:49 PM

Rap - My statements may seem contradictory but they aren't. My cat is a pet. I prefer wild anmimals not pets but since I have a pet, I prefer to let her outside (except at night). The garden provides her with enough adventure that she rarely leaves my property, if at all. She doesn't bother anyone that I know of.

Cluin - I'm sorry the little boy lost his eye but surely that is a rare circumstance. Its not enough to make me declaw my cat, especially since I have no little ones at home. I wouldn't allow the cat on the bed, anyway, so its hardly a big risk.

BTW - If you declaw Little Hawk, can I have the claws for my medicine bag?

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 05 Feb 06 - 02:06 PM

"you're going to allow that animal free reign regarding the local pet, bird, and wildlife population "

A declawed cat is JUST as capable of hunting/killing as a cat with claws...

If you're concerned about the local 'wildlife' keep yer frigg'n cat indoors...   It sure won't 'hurt' the cat

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 05 Feb 06 - 04:39 PM

I'm not the least bit concerned about the local wildlife that happens into my yard. The bird feeder is on a post with a metal stovepipe around it so the cat (and squirrels) can't reach the birds or the food. My cat stays well away from the raccoons and the the occasional skunk. The squirrels are much faster than the cat. I'm glad she kills the mice and shrews or I would have a rodent problem like many of my neighbors.

We're happy and I haven't heard any complaints from the neighbors. In fact, they all know the cat because she greets them at the gate.

But this is thread drift. The original post is complaining about militant animal rights activists. Listening to your concern about a pet who is happy and healthy, makes me wonder how you feel about using animals for testing purposes. Perhaps you should be directing your concerns to that practice.

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 05 Feb 06 - 04:43 PM

Who is "you?"

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 05 Feb 06 - 05:30 PM

you'all.

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Feb 06 - 06:50 PM

You're not a lunatic, Raptor...you're just a little dense, that's all. ;-) Cats ARE natural creatures. The moment they step into nature they become natural. Doesn't much matter where they are. In North America we have lynxes, bobcats, and pumas. In more ancient times we had sabre-tooth tigers and other cats. Nature changes as time goes by. Our present domestic cats are possibly descendents of small wild felines that were domesticated by the Egyptians, but it may go back farther than that. Should I assume you only believe in letting them go outdoors in Egypt?

I'll tell you what kills too many birds in North America. Man's pollution and man's destruction of wild habitat kills too many birds. To blame it on domestic cats is just plain silly. The bird population is not going to be decimated by domestic cats catching birds in the back yard.

Oh...Clinton... Clinton? Hey, old buddy, got somethin' just for you here...

A big salute to a guy who has earned it many times over...

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Cluin
Date: 05 Feb 06 - 07:26 PM

I wasn't running down cat owners, gnu (though I'm dubious on the idea of "training" a cat). Just wondering about the legal dichotomy between dog owners' and cat owners' responsibilities.

And my girlfriend's little Cairn Terrier would make short work of any rat it happened upon as well. We still don't let her run free.

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 06 Feb 06 - 12:08 AM

I have to disagree, Little Hawk. There is evidence that cats do a lot of damage to the wild bird population.

From the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Cats

In the fall of 1990, a study on the effects of cats on wildlife was reported in the scientific and mass media. Researchers estimated that house cats and feral cats are responsible for killing approximately 78 million small mammals and birds annually in the United Kingdom.

Feline predation is not "natural." Millions of backyard birds and other animals are slaughtered by cats each year. Cats are a serious threat to fledglings, birds roosting at night and birds while they're on the nest, at the feeder and using a bird bath.

If you are unwilling to eliminate free-roaming cats, do not attract birds to your yard by putting out feeders, nest boxes and baths. Eliminating free-roaming cats is the best way you can "protect" your backyard birds from cat predation.

Responsible pet owners keep their cats indoors. Most local jurisdictions have enforceable leash laws for cats and dogs. Contact your local humane society for help.

Here's a Google search on the topic.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Feb 06 - 12:31 AM

You make a convincing argument there, Stilly.

I expect that people's opinions on this are often influenced by their childhood experiences. We always lived in the country when I was a kid, and we always had outside cats, as our ancestors had done before us, so the whole idea of the outside cat is one I simply take for granted. It doesn't seem right to me to incarcerate a cat indoors for its entire life. It's so....icky sort of control freak sounding...just to me, you understand, because of my personal background.

That basically is why I like the idea of letting cats go outside. I'm used to it. I am well aware that they kill a lot of small animals. I accept the fact that they do as a basic fact of life, and I doubt that cats are at all likely to exterminate any species of bird in North America.

I presently own no cat, however, so put your mind at rest. I am in no way imperilling the many birds that happily exist in the 10 acres or more of forest behind this house. A few of our neighbours have roaming cats, and I couldn't care less whether or not they did.

You should see Trinidad! (maybe you have...) Not many cats to be seen, only a few...but...there are literally hundreds of thousands of roaming dogs...all over the place, totally free to wander where they wish. And the amazing thing is, it doesn't seem to bother people a bit. The dogs and the people and everything else coexist just fine. I like the Trinidad dogs. They call them "pothounds". Most of them sort of live somewhere...that is, they hang around a certain house or neighborhood in a fairly predictable manner.

Smaller, less potentially dangerous dogs wandered around outside freely in the small towns I lived in in the 50's. No one cared. We kids knew those dogs by name ("King", "Baron", "Perky", "Frisky"), and sometimes the dogs tagged along with us when we played in the vacant lots, just like Spanky and the Little Rascals in those old films. God, it was great. Well, you sure as hell don't see that anymore in North America now, because EVERYTHING has a restrictive rule of law applied to it now! I love freedom, and I am not impressed by what happens when a society gets too overdeveloped and way too overlegislated.

What people think is either "okay" or "unacceptable" varies wildly from one culture to another...and it's mostly dependent on nothing more that what they are already used to and think is "normal". It's largely arbitrary, in other words.

This debate about inside and outside cats didn't exist in the world I grew up in.

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Crystal
Date: 06 Feb 06 - 05:08 AM

Hi Smiler,
I DON'T work with animals. I'm a cell researcher, the institution which I work at dosn't even have a licence to do animal experiments. You call me evil, but if you wish to support the work of those who cause unnessecerry suffering to people and animals by means of bombs, threats and general nastyness fine, but I can call you evil too if I wish. Hell it is a free internet, you are free to say what you want, but don't get upset by other peoples opinions.

BTW hypothetical question; if you need life saving treatment will you refuse it because it has been tested on animals?

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 06 Feb 06 - 12:34 PM

I'd only accept it if it HAD been tested on animals....

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Feb 06 - 12:49 PM

"if you need life saving treatment will you refuse it because it has been tested on animals?"

Heh! Well...that's not the first thing I would have on my mind to ask the medical staff about in such a situation...

Quite apart from that...

Life will never be perfect. Those who can't accept that life is imperfect can always be relied upon to pass a few hundred more restrictive laws that limit somebody else's freedom so THEY can feel "safe". The real truth is, they will never feel safe! It isn't within their psychological grasp to feel safe. It doesn't match their paranoid outlook. We have all been mentally and culturally f*cked by lawyers and insecure, demanding people who never feel "safe". We are living in an Orwellian maze of legalisitic idiocy, and it was crafted mainly to benefit the legal profession and the big business community, who are the only people who can really afford to utilize the legal profession to their advantage.

Just wait. More laws are coming. And they will NOT make your life any safer. They will just smother it a little more.

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Feb 06 - 02:31 PM

Well said little Hawk!

We Have a little Indian GP who is tormented by octogenarians,who either can't run five miles before breakfast or can only manage three erections a night.
The poor wee man is driven to distraction by these self obsessed wrinklies, who are taking up space in his surgery which could be taken by folk who were really ill.

He's started telling them,"Whats matter with you? ...you want to live forever?!!"

Some of us do want do live forever, however useless and unsatisfactory our lives have become, and we don't care how we acheive that impossible dream.

The use of disposable objects like animals is just one of the ways....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 06 Feb 06 - 02:37 PM

"but don't get upset by other peoples opinions"

That's all some people have to get them through the day

Personally, I like to stand back and laugh at them

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Raptor
Date: 06 Feb 06 - 03:18 PM

Little Hawk You my friend are the one who's dense. The house cats aren't NATIVE to this country.
So they are not Natural Here!

Penquins are not native in Saskatuan so they are not natural there. although there are different spiecies of birds that live there.

Mabey if you'd have gone to science class a little more and didn't watch so much Star Trek...

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 06 Feb 06 - 03:34 PM

"So they are not Natural Here!"

Ya... but then again, neither are we...

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Raptor
Date: 06 Feb 06 - 03:53 PM

Good Point

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: GUEST,Art Thieme
Date: 06 Feb 06 - 03:54 PM

I think it's high time we use actual animals (other than humans) as suicide terrorists! For instance: Place bombs inside male animals of the bovine species.

I do understand that some of you will feel I am completely off the wall suggesting this. I also know that others will see the suggestion as totally abominable! (But it is really only a-bomb-in-a-bull!!)

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 06 Feb 06 - 03:56 PM

So, maybe we should be keeping each other inside all the time too eh?
LOL
(Honestly, not a bad idea, as it could be applied to some)

Here's yet antoher tangent...
How long after invading can a species still be said to NOT be native?

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 06 Feb 06 - 04:06 PM

Bartender... Art needs his bill....

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Feb 06 - 05:00 PM

Took the words right out of my mouth twice there, Clinton.

Like he said, Raptor, WE are not natural here. Look at all the weird stuff you and I do on a daily basis with our cars, our TVs, our microwaves, our ovens, our headphones, our plastic whatnots, our air conditioners, our electric dryers, our rubber-soled footwear, our stereos, all our silly stuff. Almost NONE of it is natural. And you want to save the natural world by keeping cats indoors?????

Gimme a fucking break. LOL! Where is a poor cat to go anymore when he's "not natural here"?   He's not natural inside the house either. Poor cat. We should immediately ship all domestic cats back to wherever they are "natural", wherever the hell that is...

I don't think anyone knows where it is anymore. Well, I do. It's outside in the fresh air, that's where.

This BS isn't debatable in Trinidad. You know why? They don't have sealed glass on most of the windows there, they have lots of openings so the fresh outside air can blow in and out of the building and keep things healthy. It is therefore virtually impossible to keep a cat indoors in Trinidad unless you confine it permanently to a windowless, locked room. Good for Trinidad!

You and I are living in a North American cultural fishbowl, Raptor, in which the fish take it all so seriously only because they are unaware it's just one more stupid arbitrary fishbowl.

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Cluin
Date: 06 Feb 06 - 05:49 PM

Let your kitty run free if you want.

When he doesn't come home, go check the menu at the local Manchu Wok.

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Peace
Date: 06 Feb 06 - 06:07 PM

Cat doesn't taste bad at all, IMO.

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 06 Feb 06 - 06:38 PM

I 'm convinced that people like Bunnahabhain, who catagorise protesters as "bad, mad and dangerous to know", are more worried about the effectiveness of the protests, than the future of research or the welfare of animals.

Why, thank you Ake. Actually, I'm more worried that these terrorists will start killing people directly. They're already killing people indirectly through the difficulties they are causing for researchers.

And they will drive the research to somewhere less regulated. The final result would be more people and more animals suffering and dying. How does that do anyone any good?

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Leadfingers
Date: 06 Feb 06 - 07:11 PM

I am somewhat concerned about SOME of the Animal Rights people - Which animals rights are they worrying about when they break open a Mink Farm and release several hundred SERIOUS Killers into the local habitat ? Or as happened a month or so back when Four Hundred Wild Boars on a farm were released into the Endlish Countryside ?
And how the HELL is removing an old ladies body from her grave going to help Animals ??

Subject: RE: BS: Animal Terrorists
From: Leadfingers
Date: 06 Feb 06 - 07:12 PM

AND 100 !!!