11/22/2002: The Petersburg Orchid - Page 3

Griff · 11-24-2002, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Cam
Griff you seriuosly don't consider your chickens pets do you. And geese are just plain mean.

They cease to be pets somewhere between the axe and the roaster. Geese are really no fun to have around. I'm open to suggestions if anyone has a good recipe, until then they can do perimeter security.

juju · 11-24-2002, 05:07 PM

That same rationalization was also used in the 1800's for slavery. "They like it", "it makes them happy", "They've got it good". All these are very similar to what everyone said back then. It's also the same rationalization that people use to deprive the mentally ill of their freedom.

I'll see if I can find some sources that describe this online. I saw a documentary not too long ago on cultural depictions of blacks, and it talked about how people thought slaves were only happy when they were serving whites. Much of the same stuff.

As to some dogs sticking around when they have the chance to leave. well of course. They don't know any other life. They're practicing what they've known all their life. That doesn't change the fact that they're being deprived of their liberty. I'm not saying it's immoral. I'm just saying it's so. Some dogs do run off, and usually they're re-captured by the gestapo and either killed (oh, I mean "put to sleep"), or returned to their owner's homes.

Cam · 11-24-2002, 06:05 PM

Another thing that supports the theory that pets usually like to be where they are. I lived on a farm as stated earlier and we had wild cats around. Though it didn't happen often there were a couple times when a cat who was wild, after a little prodding by us(not locking them up) but being fed decided to take up residence.
We've also had Tomcats who took off to prown the countryside for some lovin' who came back after a while, and continued to hang around the house. Now if this cat truely didn't like it it would have stayed away, it knows about the wild, and has the complete freedom to leave, instead he usually came back and stayed around the house for a while.

One other thing that I think sets pet ownership completely apart from slavery. THEY DON'T HAVE TO WORK

juju · 11-24-2002, 06:08 PM

Ok, so what would it take for an animal to be categorized as a slave? Or can they be categorized as such at all?

What about horses that plow fields? They do manual labor.

sleemanj · 11-24-2002, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by juju
Because, they're not given a choice of where they live or what they eat. You're forcing both on them.

HAH! I'd like somebody to tell that to my cats ! I don't know about where you live but my cats generally come and go as they please. I have to leave a window open 24/7 so they can get in and out. Sometimes one or two will vanish without a trace for a week or 2 (once it was a month) and then just as you're about to stop looking for them they'll wander in as if nothing ever happened.

And as for eating ! I tried to change thier cat biscuits once to a different (cheaper) brand, I dished it out and they all just looked blankly at the dish, and then back to me, as if to say "what the f*ck is this crap, what the hell are you trying to pull James ?!", after a couple days of silent protest I changed back to the original brand.

Of course, dogs are different they don't get to roam the streets at thier free will, and basically they'll eat anything you put in front of them - but dogs are stupid :-)

I read something once,
Dogs think YOU are god because you feed them.
Cats think THEY are god because you feed them.
I think it's very true :-)

Cam · 11-24-2002, 06:24 PM

Horses I guess could be classifies as slaves, though I still think this is a ridiculous argument.
I guess my feelings are that unless the one being deprived of freedom is of the same species it can't be considered slavery. Ant's enlave other ants. Ants also raise aphids to get food. Is that slavery I personally don't think so.
Our species has enslaved others of our species. We have also raised animals to be our pets, and to work for us. I have a simple question, if we set all of our pets free, let them do whatever they wanted, and quit feeding them, how many of our poor dogs and cats would live more than a week. I have a guess that not many would.

Tobiasly · 11-24-2002, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sleemanj
Of course, dogs are different they don't get to roam the streets at thier free will, and basically they'll eat anything you put in front of them.

Hah! I'd like you to tell that to my dog! He's just as picky as any damn cat I've ever seen.

Of course, we now come to find out that he likely has an allergy to beef and/or chicken. And every friggin' dog food and treat in the supermarket has one of those in it. We had to get him a special venison and potatoes dog food to feed him exclusively for 10 weeks to see if it's indeed a food allergy.

Venison and potatoes! And I've had peanut butter sandwiches for like 50% of my meals this week! Of course, this shit's expensive too. Stupid itchy dog.

ladysycamore · 11-24-2002, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by juju
I'm viciously allergic to cats, and was also allergic to dogs as a child. I was never allowed to own a pet because of this, so I never learned how to "bond" with a dumb animal. I guess that's why I really don't get it.

*cringes at the word dumb for animals*

Sorry about your allergies. Pets are WAY better than having kids, IMO. Nothing better than the unconditional love of a pet, than the ungrateful attitude of another human that you gave life to.

Hey, just calling it as I see it.

Cam · 11-24-2002, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Interesting, that's the same attitude that makes cockfighting legal in OK. Some judge ruled that chickens aren't animals!

Cock fighting is a bunch of shit, don't even get me started on how ridiculously cruel that is. Roosters are programed to fight, you put two together they are going to fight, I've seen them fight, it's not pretty, but at least in the "wild" the loser can get away. In cock fights the winner isn't going to stop until it leaves, and since the loser can't, it's a fight to the death.

ladysycamore · 11-24-2002, 06:44 PM

[quote]Originally posted by Tobiasly

Oh..my...GOD!! Whatta sweetheart!!! That face!!! *turns all to goo* WOOOGIEWOOOOO!!

Hehe, sorry. Always been a sucker for the "puppy eyes".

Tobiasly · 11-24-2002, 10:24 PM

Yeah, that's the response he generates in most people

elSicomoro · 11-24-2002, 10:45 PM

Geese can be evil. They used to attack students at UMSL. They would all sit on the lake...waiting...for the perfect victim. I got shit on 3 times, flown after a couple of times, and tried to kick one once after it flew towards my face.

Quote:

Originally posted by juju
Confining people against their will doesn't sound nice. How about if I lock you up in my basement? Doesn't that sound nice?

Humans are currently at the top of the heap, so for now, we have the right to assert our dominance over "lesser creatures." I'm not saying it's necessarily nice...just the way it is. At the same time, by treating dogs and cats the way we do, I believe that we're actually elevating them to a higher status...they're nearly human for some.

Confining people against their will IS nice if they are criminals. There is no current justification for locking me up in your basement. We're on the same level in the circle of life, nor am I currently considered a threat to society.

Quote:

And who says they have to live in the street? There are thousands of species of animals that live in the wild quite successfully. Why aren't you concerned about contracting disease from or getting injured by those other animals? Would I be better off keeping a gimp locked up in the basement? Hey, that's one less feral homeless person out there that might attack me!

The streets can be the wild for domesticated animals.

And I am concerned about getting injured or contracting disease from animals in the wild. For example, I don't touch stray animals and keep my food high up to protect raccoons from getting into it (if I am camping).

Don't mix apples and oranges, Señor Juju. You keep throwing in humans...we're talking about non-human animals here.

juju · 11-24-2002, 11:19 PM

I see. So if you're not "human", your lot in life is to be dominated. Sounds like predujice to me!

Oh, that's ridiculous, right? Animals don't have rights, because they're just animals. Yet you profess that they're so intelligent and so loving. Intelligence and emotion, yet no rights or status.

Don't you think it's a little contradictory for people to try to tell us that pets are highly intelligent and emotional, and yet they dominate them, buy them, sell them, and own them as property?

They're either things, or they're emotional and intelligent beings. Things deserve to be owned, loving intelligent creatures don't.

elSicomoro · 11-24-2002, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by juju
I see. So if you're not "human", your lot in life is to be dominated.

Yes.

Quote:

Sounds like predujice to me!

It could very well be "prejudice."

Quote:

Oh, that's ridiculous, right? Animals don't have rights, because they're just animals. Yet you profess that they're so intelligent and so loving. Intelligence and emotion, yet no rights or status.

You're not very good at sarcasm juju...keep working on it though.

Could you point out where I mentioned pets having emotion? I'd appreciate it.

Quote:

Don't you think it's a little contradictory for people to try to tell us that pets are highly intelligent and emotional, and yet they dominate them, buy them, sell them, and own them as property?

Not necessarily...at least to me. As I see it, they're different species than us...species that are weaker than us...not as intelligent as us. We're not only taking care of a lesser creature, but protecting ourselves as well.

sleemanj · 11-24-2002, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by juju
They're either things, or they're emotional and intelligent beings. Things deserve to be owned, loving intelligent creatures don't.

Pets are different things to different people, to me, pets are not posessions they are members of your family, you look after them, feed them, love them, when they get sick you take them to the doctor, you provide for thier needs, and in return they give you unconditional love.

To other people pets are posessions, I don't like people like that. For example the type of people who do the cat show/dog show thing, parading the "animal" to vicariously boost thier confidence just make me sick.

I don't own my cats, they are free to come and go as they please (and they do) but if they need food, warmth, comfort, love or help I am always there for them - and they know it, and demonstrate that they know it. They are a member of my family, and I'd like to believe they feel I am a member of thiers.

Edit :
When I say pets I'm talkig traditional cat & dog here. I don't like pets kept in cages/aquariums etc for one reason - if the situation was reversed I would NOT like to live in a cage for my entire life, or even a day - while I wouldn't mind coming back as a cat, they get a pretty nice life by my standards.

11-24-2002, 06:05 PM	#33
Cam dripping with ignorance Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Grand Forks ND Posts: 642	Another thing that supports the theory that pets usually like to be where they are. I lived on a farm as stated earlier and we had wild cats around. Though it didn't happen often there were a couple times when a cat who was wild, after a little prodding by us(not locking them up) but being fed decided to take up residence. We've also had Tomcats who took off to prown the countryside for some lovin' who came back after a while, and continued to hang around the house. Now if this cat truely didn't like it it would have stayed away, it knows about the wild, and has the complete freedom to leave, instead he usually came back and stayed around the house for a while. One other thing that I think sets pet ownership completely apart from slavery. THEY DON'T HAVE TO WORK __________________ After the seventh beer I generally try and stay away from the keyboard, I apologize for what happens when I fail.

11-24-2002, 06:24 PM	#36
Cam dripping with ignorance Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Grand Forks ND Posts: 642	Horses I guess could be classifies as slaves, though I still think this is a ridiculous argument. I guess my feelings are that unless the one being deprived of freedom is of the same species it can't be considered slavery. Ant's enlave other ants. Ants also raise aphids to get food. Is that slavery I personally don't think so. Our species has enslaved others of our species. We have also raised animals to be our pets, and to work for us. I have a simple question, if we set all of our pets free, let them do whatever they wanted, and quit feeding them, how many of our poor dogs and cats would live more than a week. I have a guess that not many would. __________________ After the seventh beer I generally try and stay away from the keyboard, I apologize for what happens when I fail.

11-24-2002, 06:44 PM	#40
ladysycamore "I may not always be perfect, but I'm always me." Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: In Sycamore's boxers Posts: 1,341	awwwwww lookit!!!!!!!! [quote]Originally posted by Tobiasly Oh..my...GOD!! Whatta sweetheart!!! That face!!! turns all to goo WOOOGIEWOOOOO!! Hehe, sorry. Always been a sucker for the "puppy eyes". __________________ "Freedom is not given. It is our right at birth. But there are some moments when it must be taken." ~Tagline from the movie "Amistad"~ "The Akan concept of Sankofa: In order to move forward we first have to take a step back. In other words, before we can be prepared for the future, we must comprehend the past." From "We Did It, They Hid It"

11-24-2002, 11:19 PM	#43
juju no one of consequence Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Arkansas Posts: 2,839	I see. So if you're not "human", your lot in life is to be dominated. Sounds like predujice to me! Oh, that's ridiculous, right? Animals don't have rights, because they're just animals. Yet you profess that they're <i>so</i> intelligent and <i>so</i> loving. Intelligence and emotion, yet no rights or status. Don't you think it's a little contradictory for people to try to tell us that pets are highly intelligent and emotional, and yet they dominate them, buy them, sell them, and own them as property? They're either things, or they're emotional and intelligent beings. Things deserve to be owned, loving intelligent creatures don't.

11-24-2002, 05:07 PM	#32
juju no one of consequence Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Arkansas Posts: 2,839	That same rationalization was also used in the 1800's for slavery. "They like it", "it makes them happy", "They've got it good". All these are very similar to what everyone said back then. It's also the same rationalization that people use to deprive the mentally ill of their freedom. I'll see if I can find some sources that describe this online. I saw a documentary not too long ago on cultural depictions of blacks, and it talked about how people thought slaves were only happy when they were serving whites. Much of the same stuff. As to some dogs sticking around when they have the chance to leave. well of course. They don't know any other life. They're practicing what they've known all their life. That doesn't change the fact that they're being deprived of their liberty. I'm not saying it's immoral. I'm just saying it's so. Some dogs do run off, and usually they're re-captured by the gestapo and either killed (oh, I mean "put to sleep"), or returned to their owner's homes.

11-24-2002, 06:08 PM	#34
juju no one of consequence Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Arkansas Posts: 2,839	Ok, so what would it take for an animal to be categorized as a slave? Or can they be categorized as such at all? What about horses that plow fields? They do manual labor.

11-24-2002, 10:24 PM	#41
Tobiasly hot Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Jeffersonville, IN (near Louisville) Posts: 892	Yeah, that's the response he generates in most people

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)