Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The Boxing Ring Revived -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (7166)	12/5/2003 4:39:52 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7720

Again you have to refer to the argument not the anthropomorphic confusion promulgated by PETA and Disney. Deer have deer rights not human rights. It is not advantagious or right to keep them from being slaughtered, eaten, or from starvation in adverse natural conditions. Likewise with domesticated animals. It is not right to keep a sick lamb alive to spread disease or to suffer under our care. They are rightly protected only from the things I mentioned: malicious cruelty (lighting the kitty on fire and dragging it behind your pickup for kicks), neglect when in the hands of a human keeper, pollution and corruption in the case of natural entities. You would have to make a case against deliberately putting an animal to death. For example, dog fights to the death in a betting arena should qualify. Killing animals per se is not cruel in and of itself. We don't associate cruelty to an Eagle (or Ish) who is fishing. We know what cruelty is. It is deliberately or neglectfully causing an animal to suffer while in our care for some perverted emotional lift.