We Defend Animal Rights

[Delmar]

7-24-07

We Defend Animal Rights

*Caller Tom: from Dearborn, Michigan, comments on the hypocrisy of national media for condemning Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick for dog-fighting cruelty, while forgetting about the 4,000 living babies who are torn apart and butchered daily in abortion clinics nationwide.

*Animal Rights: Every animal has the right to be hunted, killed, cooked, and eaten. Defend animal rights!

*Sales call: on BEL. All sales calls during the show are put through LIVE, callers beware.

Today's Resource: BEL now has Bob Enyart's entire series of The Plot Bible Study albums available on MP3 CD! To order any one or all five albums, The Plot, The Treehttp://www.kgovstore.com/servlet/Categories?category=Audio&searchpath=121047&start=9&total=11, The Law of Moses, Last Days, and Miracles, Signs and Wonders (a.k.a. Details Galore). To order, either click on a link above, or call 800-8Enyart (836-9278).​

 

[red77]

Having read the article it's based on a strawman anyway, you can fight against abortion while being able to recognise that brutality towards animals is wrong also, seems pretty straightforward....

 

[Turbo]

Having read the article it's based on a strawman anyway, you can fight against abortion while being able to recognise that brutality towards animals is wrong also, seems pretty straightforward....

This a the strawman. Maybe you should actually listen to the call and try again. :wave2:

 

[red77]

This is the strawman. Maybe you should actually listen to the call and try again. :wave2:

Unfortunately there's no way to listen to the call on the current computer I'm on at work, if that isnt the caller's position then fair enough, but it was certainly what the article on screen came up with - namely it being hypocritical to be concerned about animals while ignoring abortion

Which is a strawman, there's no reason why you cant be concerned about abortion and simultaneously recognise brutality to animals is also wrong, is that fair comment?

i'll try and listen to the actual call later on at home

 

[Turbo]

...if that isnt the caller's position then fair enough, but it was certainly what the article on screen came up with - namely it being hypocritical to be concerned about animals while ignoring abortion

Which is a strawman, there's no reason why you cant be concerned about abortion and simultaneously recognise brutality to animals is also wrong, is that fair comment?

Neither the caller nor the host suggested that one cannot be concerned about abortion and simultaneously recognise brutality to animals is also wrong. Those are not the people being discussed. (In fact, both the caller and the host are such people!) So it is you who is making a strawman.

Nothing in the show's summary suggested a person cannot both oppose abortion and simultaneously recognize that brutality to animals is also wrong. You jumped to that conclusion on your own. You are arguing against an invented position. That's what a strawman is.

Do you not agree that a person who believes that Michael Vick should severely punished (even put to death), yet believes that abortion should remain legal, is a hypocrite whose priorities are out of whack?

Which is more wicked?:

tearing apart a dog limb from limb
or
tearing apart a child in the womb limb from limb ​

(Don't answer that they're both bad. I'm asking which is worse, which implies that they are both bad. You may answer that they are equally wicked, if that's what you think.)

 

[Ktoyou]

Here is a way to look at it:

A woman yesterday was arrested for cooking and eating a dog she obtained earlier in the week from an advertisement in the local paper. After neighbors complained about the appearance and rather quick disappearance of dogs, they became suspicious. When police questioned the woman, she admitted she had been eating dogs for several years to supplement her diet. She was arrested and is now out on bail. Some citizens are outraged, animal rights groups are calling is mass murder and another Jeffrey Dahmer story, while others say the act simply violates an implied contract between the woman and the previous dog owners, others say that the woman’s actions mainly violated cultural norms and should be treated as a misdemeanor.

Now, write the same fiction about children and it becomes an absurd nightmare!

 

[asilentskeptic]

Here is a way to look at it:

A woman yesterday was arrested for cooking and eating a dog she obtained earlier in the week from an advertisement in the local paper. After neighbors complained about the appearance and rather quick disappearance of dogs, they became suspicious. When police questioned the woman, she admitted she had been eating dogs for several years to supplement her diet. She was arrested and is now out on bail. Some citizens are outraged, animal rights groups are calling is mass murder and another Jeffrey Dahmer story, while others say the act simply violates an implied contract between the woman and the previous dog owners, others say that the woman’s actions mainly violated cultural norms and should be treated as a misdemeanor.

Now, write the same fiction about children and it becomes an absurd nightmare!

I am just mad she didn't invite me over.

My neighbors raised chickens and did the same thing!

But yeah, writing the same thing about children WOULD be different.

 

[Delmar]

Here is a way to look at it:

A woman yesterday was arrested for cooking and eating a dog she obtained earlier in the week from an advertisement in the local paper. After neighbors complained about the appearance and rather quick disappearance of dogs, they became suspicious. When police questioned the woman, she admitted she had been eating dogs for several years to supplement her diet. She was arrested and is now out on bail. Some citizens are outraged, animal rights groups are calling is mass murder and another Jeffrey Dahmer story, while others say the act simply violates an implied contract between the woman and the previous dog owners, others say that the woman’s actions mainly violated cultural norms and should be treated as a misdemeanor.

Now, write the same fiction about children and it becomes an absurd nightmare!

Since when is it against the law to kill and eat animals?

 

[Ktoyou]

Since when is it against the law to kill and eat animals?

In the abstract, it should not be against the law. I have hunted all my life and ate many things that would make some sick to mention, but for some conventional reasons, doggie stew is usually off the menu. Perhaps the idea of eating man’s best friend is offensive to many people, including me. Now cats, well, I think they are critters, yet my general respect for convention would prevent me from partaking in such a dish. I have eaten raccoon and if you haven’t, you might want take my word for it, possum is better.:chew:

 

[Delmar]

In the abstract, it should not be against the law. I have hunted all my life and ate many things that would make some sick to mention, but for some conventional reasons, doggie stew is usually off the menu. Perhaps the idea of eating man’s best friend is offensive to many people, including me. Now cats, well, I think they are critters, yet my general respect for convention would prevent me from partaking in such a dish. I have eaten raccoon and if you haven’t, you might want take my word for it, possum is better.:chew:

When you consider how many dogs are put to sleep every year because they are not wanted I see no reason for people with such an appetite not to eat them.

 

[kmoney]

When you consider how many dogs are put to sleep every year because they are not wanted I see no reason for people with such an appetite not to eat them.

I don't think I could eat dog, it just doesn't seem right. They are pets to me, not food.

 

[Delmar]

I don't think I could eat dog, it just doesn't seem right. They are pets to me, not food.

I understand, but that is a cultural bias, not a moral issue. I used to have a pet cow that I really liked. She would follow me around the feed lot and rub her head up against me so I would pet her. She also tasted GREAT!

 

[kmoney]

I understand, but that is a cultural bias, not a moral issue. I used to have a pet cow that I really liked. She would follow me around the feed lot and rub her head up against me so I would pet her. She also tasted GREAT!

I agree it isn't a moral issue, but I sure hope eating dogs, or cats, never catches on here.

 

[Ktoyou]

That reminds me of my pig story.

I raised a pig
My father said I had to learn to be responsible.
I shot my pig and cried.
It made me hard and realistic
I did not make my son shoot the pig he raised.
End of story

 

[jeremiah]

umh............does anyone besides me realize that dogs, are not people food?

Eating dogs, is just as bad as eating pigs, or eating vultures.

 

[Delmar]

umh............does anyone besides me realize that dogs, are not people food?

Eating dogs, is just as bad as eating pigs, or eating vultures.

I love sausage!

 

[csuguy]

I couldn't eat dogs. They are too human-like. Some of them are really smart - like my dog - and have emotions. But, then I suppose other creatures we eat show such traits. It comes down to culture.

Fish on the other hand are stupid :TomO:

 

[poptart]

Do you not agree that a person who believes that Michael Vick should severely punished (even put to death), .....

Michael Vick should be put to death for losing me 50 bucks on the Eagle game.

Csu, I am currently living in S. Korea.
I tried dog soup a few months ago.
Didn't care for it.
Had nothing to do with the fact that I knew I was eating a doggie.
I just didn't care for the meat.
Was kind of soft and stringy .... and just not a good taste.
But my wife and daughter both like it.

Oh wellz .......

 

[csuguy]

Michael Vick should be put to death for losing me 50 bucks on the Eagle game.

Csu, I am currently living in S. Korea.
I tried dog soup a few months ago.
Didn't care for it.
Had nothing to do with the fact that I knew I was eating a doggie.
I just didn't care for the meat.
Was kind of soft and stringy .... and just not a good taste.
But my wife and daughter both like it.

Oh wellz .......

pleasant...

 

[red77]

Neither the caller nor the host suggested that one cannot be concerned about abortion and simultaneously recognise brutality to animals is also wrong. Those are not the people being discussed. (In fact, both the caller and the host are such people!) So it is you who is making a strawman.

Nothing in the show's summary suggested a person cannot both oppose abortion and simultaneously recognize that brutality to animals is also wrong. You jumped to that conclusion on your own. You are arguing against an invented position. That's what a strawman is.

Do you not agree that a person who believes that Michael Vick should severely punished (even put to death), yet believes that abortion should remain legal, is a hypocrite whose priorities are out of whack?

Which is more wicked?:

tearing apart a dog limb from limb
or
tearing apart a child in the womb limb from limb ​

(Don't answer that they're both bad. I'm asking which is worse, which implies that they are both bad. You may answer that they are equally wicked, if that's what you think.)

In that case if the caller recognises that cruelty towards animlas is wrong regardless then fair enough, I'll admit to having a bit of a knee jerk reaction to the article after seeing a poster's comment on the 'Michael Vick' thread where they were against abortion but unable to condemn animal cruelty at the same time....

i dont personally think that Michael Vick should be put to death even though I despise his actions, I think he should be severly punished, for those who believe abortion should remain legal then I would assume they mean in the very very earliest stages of conception where no such tearing apart of limbs could occur

Tearing apart any helpless living creature limb from limb is utterly barbaric and I make no excuses for either, I hold human life above animal life but cruelty towards any life is wrong...

What do you make of this segment quote from the OP?

"*Animal Rights: Every animal has the right to be hunted, killed, cooked, and eaten. Defend animal rights!"

:think: