Posted on 12/18/2010 8:39:31 AM PST by a real Sheila
Well, that post clears this up very quickly.
I have a solid understanding of the relationship of God, Man, the earth and its animals, all of which we have been charged with dominion over.
Apparently, you do not. Thus your confusion over what is the proper response to someone who mistreats an animal, and what is the proper response to a thinking human, with a soul, who breaks laws that are part of the legal system our Fore Fathers set up after much prayer and under the guidance of God.
It is that difference that will cause you great difficulty in understanding why thing are done the way they are.
Fortunately, our God based system favors my approach for the incidences you outlined.
Oh, frog snot.
Stop back-pedaling.
You, by _your own words_ stated that “store thieves, home invaders”, etc” should be “six feet under”.
Every word of every post you’ve made on this thread has been rendered utterly -moot- by *you*.
The person who mutilated the pup *first* invaded the home, therefore, you support a death sentence for him.
Or, as it turns out, you -don’t- because a puppy was tortured which leads me to believe that coincidentally inflicting suffering on an animal during the home invasion, for *whatever* sick reason, somehow confers a “pass” for the perp who now *doesn’t* deserve the “extreme punishment of death”.
“I have a solid understanding of the relationship of God, Man, the earth and its animals, all of which we have been charged with dominion over.”
I actually LOL when I read that.
You are a control freak/power tripper.
You set yourself up as judge, jury and executioner for “road rage”/”store thief”/”home invaders” and then mention *God*?
That is SO rich.
Let’s discuss those “thinking souls” of whom you’re so fond [excluding, of course, those you personally enjoy the demise of, dependent upon your “judgment”], shall we?
“Road rage” first: Does that include an oblivious new teen driver who thoughtlessly cuts you off in traffic?
Somebody who willfully steals “your” parking space?
A guy that you unwittingly caused to swerve a mile or two back and who is now driving behind you, honking angrily?
Are they within the parameters for your death penalty statutes?
Store thieves: Does that include the 12 year old who swipes a Snickers bar?
An unemployed mom or dad who steals food for their kids?
Theft is theft, just as sin as sin, in God’s eyes, you know.
[if it’s done in a Wal*Mart and they stop by the pet section and maim a hamster before leaving, does that exonerate them?]
Home invaders: Well, this one is easy. They should all die *unless* they torture an animal.
Then, they shall walk free due to some random, twisted “logic” you apply.
“Thus your confusion over what is the proper response to someone who mistreats an animal, and what is the proper response to a thinking human, with a soul, who breaks laws that are part of the legal system our Fore Fathers set up after much prayer and under the guidance of God.”
I have no confusion.
My views are -consistent- and *not* hypocritical, unlike your own.
Your “proper response” to someone reaching in your car window is to kill them.
I’m sure God is all for that too.
[that was sarcasm because I’m sure you don’t “get” that, either]
Your proper response to “store thieves” is to kill them.
I’m sure God is all for that too.
[”]
Your proper response to home invaders is to kill them, unless they hurt an animal.
I’m sure God finds that one as...um...”disturbing” as the rest of normal, mortal people would.
I’m also delighted that I *have* a soul.
[You, I’m not so sure of since your parameters for meting out death penalties is so wide and arbitrary]
Your _own words_ damned you.
Live with it.
Wipe the spittle from you mouth.
Remove the mote from thine eye.
Face it...you can *not* un-write what ~you~ have written.
Snide, childish remarks can not negate your blatant, unrepentant hypocrisy.
You hung yourself, “judge”.
If my displaying it here for *all* to see angers you, too damn bad.
Get over it.
:)
[”you mouth”? Seems as though *I’m* not the one coming unhinged by hysteria, here]...LOL
My observations are consistent with one another. The killing of evil men, and my questioning the emotional responses to mistreatment of animals are consistent.
As I pointed out upthread, your lack of understanding of the foundations that our Fore Fathers built our Country on, and form there and its legal system, prevents you from understanding that constancy.
Fortunately, our Fore Fathers understood the consistency, and so do today’s courts.
You may win the most spittle generating post, but you (fortunately) won’t win in today’s courts. The courts see it the same way I do.
By way of example; that case of my out-of control neighbor who was shot to death as he was trying to kill an old man in his car, no charges were ever filed against the shooter. Even the police recognized the right of the old man to kill the attacker. Do you?
Back pedal.
Back pedal.
Back pedal.
Back pedal.
Back pedal.
Back pedal.
Back pedal.
Back pedal.
Back pedal.
Back pedal.
Back pedal.
Back pedal.
Back pedal.
Back pedal.
Back pedal.
Back pedal.
Back pedal.
Back pedal.
Back pedal.
Back pedal.
LOL
*Owned*
Wow, I am so inside your head. Inside the head of a rock.
Nope, it isn’t, and I fully understand your inability to see it because after all your posts it’s clear to everyone here you just have not thought this through from more than just one viewpoint. Not even from a private proerty angle.
You do realize the law allows (in almost all states) for a person to shoot a burglar committing felony theft. Kidnapping a pet worth thousands of dollars is felony theft. That would also apply to protecting said animals’ life if that life was being threatened. My animals are my property and they are not replaceable, and almost all people who have animals view it that way. Many people depend on their animals for a living. You destroy their animals you destroy their ability to earn a living and jeopardize their families’ futures. Why you’d think people wouldn’t defend their animals is assinine.
Have you not ever thought these things through from more than just one angle? You might want to try sometime instead of just looking at an issue from one view.
I don’t expect you to understand, I don’t think you can.
I’m glad that you seem to have the time and desire to delve more deeply into complex issues of Justice. I don’t really have the time to do so. I also suspect that my feelings about appropriate punishment for individuals who would do this to a helpless animal or baby or child or adult won’t matter a bit when it comes to the dog’s breakfast of legislating the issue.
So I hope your quest for an amiable debating partner will conclude satisfactorily and that you have a Happy Holiday and a Happy, Healthy and Safe New Year.
You are afraid to answer my simple challanges, aren’t you?
Such easy questions I ask, answers that can be given in a simple sentece or two, yet you feel you must write paragraphs and paragraphs, carefully dancing around the most simple question.
Is it appropriate to kill the person who mistreats an animal?
Like a wild animal, you are reduced to jumping and screaming at things beyond your comprehension.
You better define “mistreat”. I am talking about ‘torturing and killing’, in the context of this article.
I already know where you stand on it. By your own replies to me, you’d let someone come into your house and slaughter your pets, even if you had a gun and could stop them. You’d be a real great steward for animals, much less, your own property.
You’re reading comprehension leaves much to be desired. Any one who follows your advice as to how to treat me and mine when they break into my home may be in for a surprise.
As far as being a good steward, I’ve raised over a quarter million hogs, each and everyone of which was cared for with great care, as my very livelihood depended on their good health. I’ll stack that against anything you’ve done to care for animals.
As to the mistreatment definition, I was the first to raise it, and everyone has been too terrified to answer. And to date, no one has. I raised it because the ultimate penalty raises concerns just far the death penalty will be extended.
For example, a hunter shoots an animal with an arrow which doesn’t kill the animal. The hunter is too tired to follow the animal an put it out of it’s misery, and so it crawls off into the brush and dies a long and painful death.
Do those actions by the hunter qualify for torture and justify the killing of the hunter?
You are one to talk about reading comprehension, I addressed the question in your last paragraph that you keep bringing up. You just can’t read. I keep forgetting rocks can’t read.
And you did explicitly post you would not shoot someone who was torturing and killing your animal. I asked you that question and you said “Of course not.”
Of course I would not shoot someone over the mistreatment of animals. Even in my house. I have much more practical means to deal with such things. That isn’t at all inconsistant with my most recent answer as to what may happen to someone who breaks into my house, torturing animals or no.
However, I am unable to find your answer to my question about the hunter who allows an animal to suffer becasue he doesn’t go after it. You simply tossed all hunters into one basket. Is that how you want it? OK, I’m can go with that.
In my example, because the animal suffered greatly, I think some would call it torture, you obviously don’t.
So where is the line where the death penalty begins to apply to the person?
Talk about drooling, foaming at the mouth, irrational, bargain basement histrionics.
Lacking any other *logical* rebuttals, you resort yet again to juvenile ad hominem.
[not that I expected better of you]
Funny how I can remain calm enough to *not* resort to such lame tactics while you simply *can't* restrain yourself.
You have lost your "power over" and it's driving you mad with rage and frustration.
Back pedal until the wheels come off your tricycle.
It makes absolutely no difference, now.
Your own words, positively laced with blatant hypocrisy hanged you right here in public.
I laugh at your sad attempts to ‘recover’ your theoretical “dignity”.
[Good luck with that]
You got owned.
But please, ~do~ continue with your asinine “rebuttals”.
Every time you post, you only further validate everyone else’s position on this matter.
Thanks!
:)
Is it appropriate to kill the person who mistreats an animal?
I see you’ve both chosen to run away rather than answer the simple question “Do you believe it is appropriate to kill a person for mistreating an animal?”.
Probably the smartest move you’ve made on this thread, as the answer you appear to support makes you look foolish when in print. It’s indefensible and most likely illegal too.
Big change from your earlier bold proclamations.
If you read my threads you’d know. The answer is “it depends”.
If that person is in the process of killing MY animals, I will shoot that person to save my animals and stop the threat. Won’t hesitate an instant.
If an officer is responding to calls and the person is caught in the process of killing animals that aren’t his/hers, and refuses to stop, the officer will fire on that person to stop them from killing more.
And you are a freaking idiot that you can’t see in my prior posts I make a distinction between lawful hunters and scum like we are talking about in the story.
And you’re a nutjob to sit there and not define what you mena when you say ‘mistreat’. I have always been talking about ‘torturing and killing’- I am very specific and applying that to the context of this crime, a guy torturing and killing another person’s animals. You’re the moron expanding this to “mistreat”. That may be what others have said, so argue with THEM about what THEY said, that’s not what I said.
The more i’ve seen you post, the more I see, and everyone else does here, you’ve epitomized the stupidity of what people here have to deal with on this site. Go and yell at your wife, I’m not married to you, I don’t have to put up with your stupid crap.
Gee, what a grump. I asked a simple question; one you couldn’t answer directly without looking stupid, and you chose to dance.
In the unlikely event someone does break into your place and begin to torture your animals, I’ll wager that you won’t stick to the ‘I killed him because he was torturing my dog’ bit. Such a lame excuse will surely bring murder charges, and probably a conviction.
Even someone like you whose view of right and wrong is clouded by emotional knows not to use such a nutty excuse.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.