Skip to main content

quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:
Its not his skills but his style of playing Quarterback, for all his running and throwing the Falcons still sucked. The new breed of young quarterbacks coming out college have different playing styles that are suppose to be more consistent with the future of the position.


The Falcons sucked not because of Vick's not being able to pass, but sorry ass receivers not being able to damn catch his passes.
what is wrong with realizing the other side of the coin when it comes to white people's obsession with pets? WS as a system has many aspects and mass-production as well as mass-killing of animals and pets also belongs to it.
quote:
Pet's are cool, but don't diminish the struggles of a PEOPLE by denying the truth about white people's obsession with dogs and cats

where did I deny white people's obsession with pets? And my examples are meant to show such people's hypocrisy, the same is true for many alleged animal protection organizations and has nothing to do that I would diminish the struggles of a people.

quote:

you are, that's fine. Pet's are cool, but don't diminish the struggles of a PEOPLE by denying the truth about white people's obsessionwith dogs and cats and then trying to compare the black experience with white supremacy to puppy mills.


I am not an animal activist and I didn't deny the truth of white people's obsession with pets, but I am looking behind their curtain, and the truth behind this obsession is bigotry.
quote:

For me personally there is no either-or. No either human rights or animal welfare or environmental protection. All belongs together for the balance of life.

Where does this indicate for you that I allegedly value pets more than humans?
And the dogs in my avatar were my own dogs, I was able to protect them from white people's obsession to kill.
Let me put myself in Vick's shoes: I'm the best thing that has hit the Atlanta Falcons since Deon Sanders, I'm a double threat with my arms or my legs. I make millions of dollars a year and can put myself in a position to be one of the highest paid atheletes of all time. I've nearly reached icon status and I'd rather spend my time fucking around with dogs. Yeap, throw away the damn key.

You know the Vick family must have been out of town when God was passing out brains. Let's not forget that Vick's brother threw his career away over some stupid shit too before he even had the chance to make the pros.

Thinking Michael Vick got a raw deal for financing dog fighting is like thinking a teacher got a raw deal for having consensual sex with a minor. Get over it. Y'all act like the FBI and the CIA zeroed in on Vick while other offenders were only given a slap on the wrist, which is why I posted those other two articles earlier in this thread.

This isn't about white people's obsession over pets or needless hunting because the issue of dog fighting or any mistreatment of animals is illegal - bottom line. Y'all probably thought Tookie Smith should have been set free too. Just let it go. If you're dumb enough to get caught I say you deserve what you get I don't give a damn what race you are.
Isn't it funny? Some folks EAT dogs. Some folks get locked up in cages LIKE dogs; sometimes for their whole lives. Some folks THINK cows are sacred. Some folks EAT cows. Humans eat everything on this planet, sometimes EACH OTHER. Humans think NOTHING of killing EACH other, executing EACH OTHER, bombing EACH OTHER, waterboarding EACH OTHER, shooting EACH OTHER. Sometimes, if humans do a real good job of EXTERMINATING each other, (like in the millions), they get medals. In my opinion, HUMANS have their priorities totally FLUCKED UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! One insane bunch of Screwy Lewies!!
A new twist.

Does the First Amendment not matter within the NFL?

http://www.wsbtv.com/sports/14875683/detail.html

Falcons Players Fined For Public Vick Support

ATLANTA -- The NFL has fined five Atlanta Falcons players after they showed support for disgraced quarterback Michael Vick during the Falcons nationally televised loss to the New Orleans Saints last Monday.

The NFL said the very public displays of support for Vick violated NFL uniform code policy in a couple of cases and, in fact, was so "in the face" of NFL leadership that the fines were doubled in some cases.

Tight end Alge Crumpler, cornerbacks DeAngelo Hall and Chris Houston and wide receiver Roddy White were fined $10,000 each. Hall and Crumpler wore black eye strips with writing on them supporting Vick. Hall also carried a poster supporting Vick which he taped to the back of the bench where players sit.

White wore a "Free Mike Vick" shirt underneath his jersey, which he showed after scoring a touchdown. Wide receiver Joe Horn was fined $7,500 for pulling up White's jersey.
It has not been made clear exactly what Houston did to violate the code.

Vick was sentenced to 23 months in jail on federal dogfighting charges Monday.
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
Originally posted by listener:
It wasn't meant as a plea for animals, it is the face of white supremacy when it comes to animals and the disconnection of European culture from live and nature. I do not agree with organizations which make animals more important than humans or people who look away when it comes to human rights violations but can organize when it comes to animals.
But I also don't agree that humans are the only ones who belong to planet earth, because earth can exist without us, but we can't without earth.
For me personally there is no either-or. No either human rights or animal welfare or environmental protection. All belongs together for the balance of life.


I can definitely get with that...


So could I. I agree 101%.

quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:

*gasp!* You mean Daisy Moo isn't in a better place? ek mama! Jazzdog in here meddling!

Just kidding.

I am a carnivore and a guppy killer. I do not have a problem with animals dying.


I don't feel that way. I do care about animal's dying because animals are living beings that have feelings and feel pain and joy just like human beings. I don't think that just because humans have a higher mind that it makes our suffering more important.

However, I can't stand people who wag their finger at Vick for killing dogs while they munch on their next hamburger or hot dog. Fuck 'em. I can't stand self-righteous hypocrite assholes who think they're so much more enlightened than the Negroes while they get ready to go kill an animal for enjoyment (hunting).
People get killed in the streets everyday!!

But what the hell does that have to do with Michael Vick financing an illegal dog fighting ring?

People eat dog meat!!

But what the hell does that have to do with Michael Vick financing an illegal dog fighting ring?

People hunt and kill wild animals all the time!!!

But what the hell does that have to do with Michael Vick financing an illegal dog fighting ring?

Tookie Smith should not have been executed!! He wrote childen's books!!

But what does that have to do with Michael Vick financing an illegal dog fighting ring?
quote:
Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:
People eat dog meat!!

But what the hell does that have to do with Michael Vick financing an illegal dog fighting ring?


How is killing animals for sport in hunting any more acceptable than a dog fighting ring? It's both still inflicting suffering and death on animals for human enjoyment.

Why is it okay for white Billy Joe Bob to blast a defenseless deer's brains out just so he can have a good time, but it's wrong for black ass Michael Vick to fight dogs?

quote:
People hunt and kill wild animals all the time!!!

But what the hell does that have to do with Michael Vick financing an illegal dog fighting ring?


If Michael Vick should go to jail, so should they. There is no reason to kill an animal if you aren't going to eat it and if it is not necessary for you to survive. This is 2007 C.E, not 2007 B.C.E.
quote:
Originally posted by Empty Purnata:

How is killing animals for sport in hunting any more acceptable than a dog fighting ring? It's both still inflicting suffering and death on animals for human enjoyment.

Hunting certain wild animals is legal, that's why they regulate the times and places by season each type of animal can be hunted, and which animals are completely off limits, and the purpose for having a hunting and a fishing license. However, all domesticated animals are protected under federal law. But what the hell does that have to do with Michael Vick premeditatedly choosing to involve himself in an act that is known to be illegal?

Why is it okay for white Billy Joe Bob to blast a defenseless deer's brains out just so he can have a good time, but it's wrong for black ass Michael Vick to fight dogs?

Billy Bob can blast a defenseless deer's, duck's, Fox's, Quail's, etc. brains out because, firstly, he has a hunting license and, secondly, he's hunting during the designated season and, thirdly, depending one where he's hunting, hunters are needed to help control the population of a certain breed of wild animal or a certain breed of animal is bred for hunting purposes. But what the hell does that have to do with Michael Vick premeditatedly choosing to involve himself in an act that is known to be illegal?


If Michael Vick should go to jail, so should they. There is no reason to kill an animal if you aren't going to eat it and if it is not necessary for you to survive. This is 2007 C.E, not 2007 B.C.E.

It's legal to buy Tylenol over the counter but illegal to buy crack. If a person can go to jail for buying crack, then everyone else should go to jail for buying Tylenol, Advil and all other over the counter medication. This is 2007 and Tigers, lions, Rhinos, Elephants, and various other exotic animals are poached everyday by multimillionaires that definately don't need to hunt to survive. But what the hell does that have to do with Michael Vick premeditatedly choosing to involve himself in an act that is known to be illegal?
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
Originally posted by nuggyt:
White people are not the only people that hunt.


But European culture is the only one that established hunting as a 'sport'.

Great white hunter anyone?

Michael Vick is a moron IMO, but that doesn't stop the laws and their application from being 'unfair'.


My point in bringin up the fact that white folk are not the only hunters was in response to the poster who seemed to believe only white people hunt. I got cousins down in Virginia that can shoot a ground hog from 100 yards away at night. AND THEY EAT THEM!!!!
quote:
Originally posted by nuggyt:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
quote:
Originally posted by nuggyt:
White people are not the only people that hunt.


But European culture is the only one that established hunting as a 'sport'.

Great white hunter anyone?

Michael Vick is a moron IMO, but that doesn't stop the laws and their application from being 'unfair'.


My point in bringin up the fact that white folk are not the only hunters was in response to the poster who seemed to believe only white people hunt. I got cousins down in Virginia that can shoot a ground hog from 100 yards away at night. AND THEY EAT THEM!!!!


I figured posters meant that only white folks hang trophy heads on walls, a.k.a 'hunting for sport' rather than for sustinance... and I would think there were acceptions to that rule also... but their 'culture' established this.

Of course every culture/people hunts. I doubt folks didn't know that.

On another note... I wonder how ground hog tastes... 19
quote:
Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:
Black people around the world love to hunt for sport. And I know for damn sure hordes of black people from the Northeast and Midwest love to hunt and fish. They run down here in droves right along with the white hunters and do their thing right along with everyone else.


This was non-responsive...

and I repeat...

...But European culture is the only one that established hunting as a 'sport'.

...I figured posters meant that only white folks hang trophy heads on walls, a.k.a 'hunting for sport' rather than for sustinance... and I would think there were acceptions to that rule also...but their 'culture' established this.

...European cultural norms are now globalized via imperialism... which is not a 'good' thing...
quote:
Originally posted by Diamond:
I'm shocked he was sentenced to 23 months in federal prison. Let me state upfront, I don't believe in "dog fighting" as a sport. But,I must say I've seen where murders get less time. For example, the minister's wife who served less than a year for murdering her husband.


Sport hunting, cock fighting, dog fighting, or the killing of animals for ANY reason is inhumane in my opinion. The difference is that hunting is legal and dog fighting is NOT. Regardless of the absurdity or until the laws change (which they won't), there's no justifying what Michael Vick did. Even in cases where a murder gets out in less time than what Vick has to pull, it doesn't lesson what Vick did. He committed a crime and now he must pay his debt. It's that simple for me.
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:
So the killing of animals for food no matter how humane is wrong in your opinion. Never mind the fact that people have been killing and eating animals for thousands of years long before treating them as equals became fashionable.


Yes, in my opinion, as a vegetarian, slaughtering animals and using their flesh for food is wrong...or should I say it's wrong for ME.
And to your point about animals being killed for years, people have also been committing murders since the beginning of time but that doesn't make it right.
quote:
Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:
Hunting certain wild animals is legal,


So let me get this straight:

What Mike Vick did is bad because it was illegal, but what hunters do is okay because it's legal? Confused

So if something is legal, it's morally okay?

Is what Mike Vick did morally worse than what hunters do?

quote:
that's why they regulate the times and places by season each type of animal can be hunted,


Dog fighting is pretty organized too. So the fact that deer hunting is organized makes it okay? Confused

quote:
and which animals are completely off limits, and the purpose for having a hunting and a fishing license. However, all domesticated animals are protected under federal law.


So that's the crux of your argument. I knew it. What Mike Vick did is only wrong because it was a DOMESTICATED animal (ie. an animal that white people consider pets and most people consider "cute"). So you're only worried about the abuse of cute pets, not about animal cruelty. As long as it's not a cute pet, it's okay to do whatever to them. If Mike Vick had been raising and fighting snakes or lizards, would you be as upset?

You're like the rest of the fucking hypocrites crying for Vick's blood while feasting on hamburgers made from cows that were slaughtered under unspeakably horrible conditions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kU64LACa5cc

quote:
But what the hell does that have to do with Michael Vick premeditatedly choosing to involve himself in an act that is known to be illegal?


Why the hell should I cry over the dogs or curse Vick when other people do things just as bad or worse than what Vick did but no one sees anything wrong with it?

quote:
Billy Bob can blast a defenseless deer's, duck's, Fox's, Quail's, etc. brains out because, firstly, he has a hunting license and, secondly, he's hunting during the designated season and, thirdly, depending one where he's hunting, hunters are needed to help control the population of a certain breed of wild animal or a certain breed of animal is bred for hunting purposes.


Ah, so as long as it's a stupid wild animal but not a cute little doggy, it's okay. Cry for your doggies, you hypocrite. But let me make it clear that you have absolutely no credibility with me, flaunting your socially-inherited, perverse white Anglo Saxon moral outrage.

quote:
It's legal to buy Tylenol over the counter but illegal to buy crack.


And it's legal to buy oxycontin in large enough quantities to get high off of. WTF is your point?

quote:
If a person can go to jail for buying crack, then everyone else should go to jail for buying Tylenol, Advil and all other over the counter medication.


Again, how is killing wild animals for sport more morally acceptable than killing dogs? The fact that you drew the comparison of the difference between buying tylenol and crack shows that you apparently think harming dogs is worse than harming deer and squirrels. Why is that? Because dogs are pets and are "cuter"?

And don't keep bring up that "it's legal" bullshit. It used to be illegal for a black person to refuse to give up their seat for a white person. According to your logic, Rosa Parks deserved to go to jail for what she did and so did those black college students from Greensboro who staged a sit-in. All sorts of shit is legal that is not right.

quote:
This is 2007 and Tigers, lions, Rhinos, Elephants, and various other exotic animals are poached everyday by multimillionaires that definately don't need to hunt to survive.


And they should be condemned as well.

quote:
But what the hell does that have to do with Michael Vick premeditatedly choosing to involve himself in an act that is known to be illegal?[/b]


What's wrong with doing things that are illegal? I don't think everything that is legal is morally/ethically right. Something is not wrong just because it is illegal.

I'll take your criticism of Vick more seriously when you stop knowingly participating in industries which continue to slaughter animals in worse ways than Vick. You are no better than Vick because you are a co-conspirator. None of us who eat processed meat are better than Vick.
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:
So the killing of animals for food no matter how humane is wrong in your opinion. Never mind the fact that people have been killing and eating animals for thousands of years long before treating them as equals became fashionable.


Raping women has been going on for thousands of years too before human societies started making it a legally punishable offense. Does that mean we are wrong for trying to make it stop?

Likewise, just because we have been killing animals for millenia, does that mean we are wrong for trying to stop? Just because something occurs in nature doesn't make it right. Murder has been happening since the dawn of humanity, that doesn't mean it is wrong to try to stop it as much as possible.

Humans, unlike animals, have the ability to transcend our primal urges. Just because an urge is natural doesn't mean it should be acted upon.
quote:
Originally posted by I_am_Mahogany:
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:
So the killing of animals for food no matter how humane is wrong in your opinion. Never mind the fact that people have been killing and eating animals for thousands of years long before treating them as equals became fashionable.


Yes, in my opinion, as a vegetarian, slaughtering animals and using their flesh for food is wrong...or should I say it's wrong for ME.
And to your point about animals being killed for years, people have also been committing murders since the beginning of time but that doesn't make it right.


Thats a weak argument, and just proves the whole point that when people keep trying to equate animals to people. There is a profound different from killing an animal for food and murdering a human being, if you don't know the difference oh well....
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:
quote:
Originally posted by I_am_Mahogany:
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:
So the killing of animals for food no matter how humane is wrong in your opinion. Never mind the fact that people have been killing and eating animals for thousands of years long before treating them as equals became fashionable.


Yes, in my opinion, as a vegetarian, slaughtering animals and using their flesh for food is wrong...or should I say it's wrong for ME.
And to your point about animals being killed for years, people have also been committing murders since the beginning of time but that doesn't make it right.


Thats a weak argument, and just proves the whole point that when people keep trying to equate animals to people. There is a profound different from killing an animal for food and murdering a human being, if you don't know the difference oh well....


How many hunters need to hunt to eat in the US? Like I said, this is 2007 A.D., not 2007 B.C. Very few if any US hunters have to rely on hunting to live.

And since we're on the subject, why is murdering dogs so bad? I mean, dogs aren't people. How is what Vick did any worse than murdering snakes and lizards?
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:
Thats a weak argument, and just proves the whole point that when people keep trying to equate animals to people. There is a profound different from killing an animal for food and murdering a human being, if you don't know the difference oh well....


Jazzdog, don't twist what I wrote. I was not comparing killing animals to killing humans. That wasn't my point at all, and if you don't know the difference oh well...

Look, the bottom line here is that we live in a country of laws. Are there inconsistencies in those laws? Yes. But if a person chooses to do something illegal, he or she takes the punishment given out and no one else should question it. No one forced Micheal Vick to do the wrong thing. He didn't have te be in jail today, he's in there at his own peril.

Now as for all of the LEGAL but IMMORAL acts that people take part in, that's something for individuals to work out with their Creator.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Empty Purnata:
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:
quote:
Originally posted by I_am_Mahogany:
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:
So the killing of animals for food no matter how humane is wrong in your opinion. Never mind the fact that people have been killing and eating animals for thousands of years long before treating them as equals became fashionable.


Yes, in my opinion, as a vegetarian, slaughtering animals and using their flesh for food is wrong...or should I say it's wrong for ME.
And to your point about animals being killed for years, people have also been committing murders since the beginning of time but that doesn't make it right.


Thats a weak argument, and just proves the whole point that when people keep trying to equate animals to people. There is a profound different from killing an animal for food and murdering a human being, if you don't know the difference oh well....


How many hunters need to hunt to eat in the US? Like I said, this is 2007 A.D., not 2007 B.C. Very few if any US hunters have to rely on hunting to live.

And since we're on the subject, why is murdering dogs so bad? I mean, dogs aren't people. How is what Vick did any worse than murdering snakes and lizards?


The problem is that you and others are trying to dictate what people can and can't eat, no one is forcing you to eat meat, don't define what methods I have to use to get the meat I want to eat. And yes there are quite a few hunters who hunt because it provides food that they prefer to eat just like you prefer particular food to eat. Considering the cost of buying beef versus shooting a 800 lb elk that you can eat off for one year, for alot of folks it makes economic sense.

As I have say before a couple of the folks who work for me are hunters, these are people who raised cattle for sale to provide income, their food came from the land i.e. hunting, they prefer the taste of wild game versus the stuff sold in the supermarket. So they should just give up their way of living because people suddenly have a moral issue with eating meat.
Jazz, I don't try to dictate what other people do. I'm a vegetarian and I believe strongly in animal rights but I'm not a fanatic. In fact, if you re-read what I wrote I said IN MY OPINION killing animals is wrong. I never once suggested that hunting should be abolished. I don't approve of it, but that's just me having an opinion about something I'm morally opposed to.
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:
quote:
Originally posted by Empty Purnata:
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:
quote:
Originally posted by I_am_Mahogany:
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:
So the killing of animals for food no matter how humane is wrong in your opinion. Never mind the fact that people have been killing and eating animals for thousands of years long before treating them as equals became fashionable.


Yes, in my opinion, as a vegetarian, slaughtering animals and using their flesh for food is wrong...or should I say it's wrong for ME.
And to your point about animals being killed for years, people have also been committing murders since the beginning of time but that doesn't make it right.


Thats a weak argument, and just proves the whole point that when people keep trying to equate animals to people. There is a profound different from killing an animal for food and murdering a human being, if you don't know the difference oh well....


How many hunters need to hunt to eat in the US? Like I said, this is 2007 A.D., not 2007 B.C. Very few if any US hunters have to rely on hunting to live.

And since we're on the subject, why is murdering dogs so bad? I mean, dogs aren't people. How is what Vick did any worse than murdering snakes and lizards?


The problem is that you and others are trying to dictate what people can and can't eat, no one is forcing you to eat meat, don't define what methods I have to use to get the meat I want to eat.


Like Mahagony, I'm not trying to dictate what other people eat. Far be it from me, that's not what I'm about. What I am about is calling people out when they are being hypocrites. And it is the height of hypocrisy for people who either kill animals in ways almost, equally or more brutal than Vick or co-conspire in horrendous animal slaughter by eating products from the meat industry to shake their heads at Vick.

It's like someone going to an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting and shaking their head at the people for having an alcohol problem while chugging a beer and looking for their keys to drive home.

I'm not dictating what people eat, I am calling people out for judging Vick from their high horse while they have no problem with people doing what Vick did a hundred times over or not condemning industries which do things that make Vick look like a PETA member.

quote:
And yes there are quite a few hunters who hunt because it provides food that they prefer to eat just like you prefer particular food to eat.


That's voluntary. They eat that food because they want to, not because they HAVE to. In other words, it's still recreation. Not a necessity. So they are still no better than Vick.

quote:
Considering the cost of buying beef versus shooting a 800 lb elk that you can eat off for one year, for alot of folks it makes economic sense.


So does sweatshop labor. It makes economic sense in that it allows companies to save money and allows Western consumers to buy products for lower prices. Would you say it's a good thing?

Slavery was very economically beneficial. What's more economically sound than free labor? High production, no costs.

quote:
As I have say before a couple of the folks who work for me are hunters, these are people who raised cattle for sale to provide income, their food came from the land i.e. hunting, they prefer the taste of wild game versus the stuff sold in the supermarket.


Doesn't change the fact that they still kill animals just like Vick. The only reason you are complaining about what Vick did is because they were "cute doggies". Not because you actually have any concern for animal rights, as you are showing right now. If Vick was raising and fighting and killing boa constrictors you wouldn't give a damn.

quote:
So they should just give up their way of living because people suddenly have a moral issue with eating meat.


Should Vick give up what he does just because you value doggies above other animals? Some people hunt wild animals for sport (ie. don't eat them, just kill them for fun). How is Vick any worse than him? He enjoyed animals getting killed for sport, and so do those white hunters.

So don't condemn Vick like you actually give a damn about animal welfare. You don't. You just condemn him because it's considered illegal (the whole "it's wrong because it's illegal" logic). If it was legal, you wouldn't be complaining. Or even if you did still complain, it's only because it's "cute puppy dogs" and you were raised with Western values which values dogs above other animals (seeing pet dogs as deserving more concern than other animals has long been a part of aristocratic culture in Anglo-Saxon societies). If they weren't animals that are considered "pets" you wouldn't care.

I find it disgusting that those dogs are probably being taken care of better than victims of Hurricane Katrina. It really shows where America's values lie. Dogs are worth more than the lives of lower class black people.
Its not consider illegal it is illegal, and yes it bothers me to see animals suffer, however, since legal hunting has benefits that if you bothered to educate yourself on you would see that the monies raised from hunting are actually put back into the system to set aside land not just for hunting but also for animal reserves where hunting is not even allowed, it provides for educational programs to educate the masses (like you) on wildlife conservation.

Second, anybody who has ever spend anytime out in the woods (no the Zoo does not count) understand that with any population that gets to large it becomes susceptible to disease and hunger, there are several states that recently open up hunting for animals that were traditionally not hunted in recent years because the population got so large the animals were actually straving themselves out, so they reduced the population in which turn actually allows the herd to stay healthly and not just for hunting. And of course there is the hunting done to remove animals that have become a threat to humans (scared housewife saw a squirrel), not because animals wander into the city but because people have decided to move into areas traditionally considered wilderness which puts them into direct contact with the current owners of the land the "wild animals".

As for dogs being more deeming of care, obiviously you never talked to a horse person who would give you a different perspective, and did you know that they eat horses, it hard to find somebody to provide the meat but it can be done.

While the sentence was to long I have no pity for the fool, anything that you have to do behind close doors because its illegal, when you get caught so sad for you, considering the pathetic amount of money to be made from the sport versus what he got paid for playing ball really makes me not feel a damn thing for the dummy.

Oh, by the way there's this white guy in LA who got 10 years for dog fighting and he was not a professional football player, I wonder if you are beating your chest over his sentence.
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:

Oh, by the way there's this white guy in LA who got 10 years for dog fighting and he was not a professional football player, I wonder if you are beating your chest over his sentence.


My dad and his peeps were hunters. I have been taken hunting and fishing. I was a member of the 4-H club, not the brownies/girlscouts. My family has had game wardens release "extra" wild animals near our property in the name of "wildlife conservation"

With all that said, I can still see that the common thread in big game hunting, sport hunting, dog fighting and cockfighting is that animal death is exploited for human pleasure. Animal death provides human satisfaction.

and the white guy who received 10 yrs? was it a federal sentence? or a state one? had he been arrested for the same offense or others before? How many animals were involved in his operation? These questions have to be answered before he can be compared to Michael Vick's case.



P.S. Is that a leather belt, wool sweater, and snakeskin boots youre wearing? Big Grin
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:

So they should just give up their way of living because people suddenly have a moral issue with eating meat.



actually the moral issue at hand is

Why would some have us believe that dog killing is any more reprehensible than the slaughter of a majestic 800 lb vegetarian creation of god roaming the woodlands minding its own business?
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:
So the killing of animals for food no matter how humane is wrong in your opinion. Never mind the fact that people have been killing and eating animals for thousands of years long before treating them as equals became fashionable.


Don't worry, Jazzdog. Eventually we'll be eating mud and rocks because some mentally ill activist group will declare that eating plants is inhumane. There's an activist group out there lead by some white chick that thinks it's wrong to eat fish. Umm, HELLO, plants have to die so that these precious vegetarians can eat their glorious salads and get preferential treatment in heaven once they die.
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:

So they should just give up their way of living because people suddenly have a moral issue with eating meat.



actually the moral issue at hand is

Why would some have us believe that dog killing is any more reprehensible than the slaughter of a majestic 800 lb vegetarian creation of god roaming the woodlands minding its own business?


Actually the issue at hand has greatly been ignored. Dog fighting was illegal long before Michael Vick hit the NFL. Black men as well as other races of men have been going to prison long before Michael Vick hit the NFL. Michael Vick knew dog fighting was illegal when he got into the business.

Why weren't all of you extremist activists screaming and hollering with your arguments about immorality and inhumaness before Michael Vick got caught? Your arguments are hollow because there have been men going to prison for the same crime Michael Vick committed and y'all didn't have a damn thing to say.

I posted two different articles in this very thread where other men will be serving much more time than Vick and not a single damn one of you responded to those articles. But y'all are ready to march upon the steps of the House of Congress over this Michael Vick conviction.
quote:
Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:
So the killing of animals for food no matter how humane is wrong in your opinion. Never mind the fact that people have been killing and eating animals for thousands of years long before treating them as equals became fashionable.


Don't worry, Jazzdog. Eventually we'll be eating mud and rocks because some mentally ill activist group will declare that eating plants is inhumane. There's an activist group out there lead by some white chick that thinks it's wrong to eat fish. Umm, HELLO, plants have to die so that these precious vegetarians can eat their glorious salads and get preferential treatment in heaven once they die.


Plants have to die? Excellent point. I mean, there are so many similarities between harvesting and picking fresh produce and enslaving, torturing and slaughtering animals. Although plants don't have central nervous systems (the only indicator of pain that I know of), I can see why anti-vegetarians would compare eating a salad with eating a pork chop. ***note the sarcasm***
And oh, by the way, if someone knows of website or link that gives scientific evidence of plants being able to feel or perceive pain I'd love to check it out.
quote:
Originally posted by I_am_Mahogany:
quote:
Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:
So the killing of animals for food no matter how humane is wrong in your opinion. Never mind the fact that people have been killing and eating animals for thousands of years long before treating them as equals became fashionable.


Don't worry, Jazzdog. Eventually we'll be eating mud and rocks because some mentally ill activist group will declare that eating plants is inhumane. There's an activist group out there lead by some white chick that thinks it's wrong to eat fish. Umm, HELLO, plants have to die so that these precious vegetarians can eat their glorious salads and get preferential treatment in heaven once they die.


Plants have to die? Excellent point. I mean, there are so many similarities between harvesting and picking fresh produce and enslaving, torturing and slaughtering animals. Although plants don't have central nervous systems (the only indicator of pain that I know of), I can see why anti-vegetarians would compare eating a salad with eating a pork chop. ***note the sarcasm***
And oh, by the way, if someone knows of website or link that gives scientific evidence of plants being able to feel or perceive pain I'd love to check it out.


Your sarcasm is null and void. Plants are living organisms that grow, adapt to their surroundings, reproduce, and die just like reptiles, marine life, and mammals. Just because a tree, a flower or even a cabbage can't scream out and cry when it's being processed doesn't mean it has any less significance than other forms of life. Your menu for today is mud a la mode with a side of minced pumice rock and creek water seasoned with sea salt and pond scum. Bon appetite!

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×