Quote:
Originally Posted by wildcard  I am sorry if I used the term in an offensive way but I am at a lost to find a different word to describe those persons who support msn. I am sure that not all persons who believe animals have "rights" support it so I probably over-generalized and I apologize for that.
So much comes down to differing beliefs concerning the legal status of animals. From my viewpoint, dogs are not humans. They do not understand the concept of rights. They are creatures that rely on us for their care. This is a legal issue for me, not one of compassion or emotion. I own my dogs, and because of that, I get to make decisions concerning their care and well-being. I understand fully that some people abuse this privilege, and I support the use of anti-cruelty laws to avoid that. Those that I have admittedly stereotyped as "animal rightists" are more than entitled to have their own opinions on these issues, I don't find an evil intent behind it or anything, I just disagree. |
Thank you, I'm really heartened by this entire post.
I don't know what the answer is regarding this bill or anything regarding possible solutions to what we
all want an end to: those 3.7 million euthanized animals each year. People keep crying for more education and perhaps there is an answer in there - but I think we're educating in the wrong way. I almost think humans simply, on the most primal level, don't
get animals. I'm reminded of my favorite quote by Milan Kundera:
"Mankind's true moral test, its fundamental test, consists of its attitude towards those who are at its mercy: animals. And in this respect mankind has suffered a fundamental debacle, a debacle so fundamental that all others stem from it."
I think until humans are educated to understand that quote above and believe it to their very core, animals will continue to suffer in ways that they shouldn't.