Posted on 07/28/2005 9:29:48 PM PDT by smoothsailing
PETA hooks the wrong fish
By Eric Heyl
Friday, July 29, 2005
I was in a custom auto shop yesterday, and as you might imagine, the topic of whether fish are capable of experiencing pain was broached.
I know, I know. Seems like you can't take a car in to be turbo-charged these days without having a discussion on the sensory capabilities of cold-blooded aquatic vertebrates.
"I never really thought too much about it before," said Meagan Barker, co-owner of Strict Fab Automotive Solutions on Route 51 in Jefferson Hills. "But no, I don't think a fish can actually feel a hook in its mouth."
Barker is thinking about such things with greater frequency since her exposure to the latest outlandish publicity stunt by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
PETA is protesting the sadistic animal cruelty it believes will occur in town this weekend at the CITGO Bassmaster Classic. The radical animal rights group is using as its tool an ad on a huge billboard directly above Strict Fab.
The ad features a computer-altered picture of a dog with a fish hook through its bloody lip and poses the question," If you wouldn't do this to a dog, why do it to a fish?"
Possibly because dogs and fish aren't really comparable creatures.
You can't walk, pet or groom a fish.
Try asking a bass to fetch a stick.
Or submerging a dog -- of any breed -- under water for a prolonged period. A few initial yelps of protest are liable to be followed by uninterrupted silence.
When it comes to animal blood sport, fishing never has ranked up there with pit bull fighting. Scientists and zoologists can't even agree on whether fish are intelligent enough to be cognizant of pain.
Given those facts, it's...
(Excerpt) Read more at pittsburghlive.com ...
No, fish cannot feel pain.
But I heard a carrot scream once.
Seals and Sea Lions come pretty close. They are pretty much dogs with flippers. They even bark.
A fish can't run alongside when you ride your bicycle...(maybe the fish needs one, too..).
Along with a hefty helping of Freedom Fries!
I had a golden retiever that would stay in the water as long as you let him! Never had him hunt oysters though as I never took him to the ocean. If he could have breathed under water I don't think I would have been able to get him out of it:)
Eating such animals is a commonly-accepted practice.
...just not in our culture.
I've never seen a fish on a bike, but my lab could ride a surfboard!
It is kind of a poke at the old lesbian saw about "a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle".
Fish respond to injury the same way they respond to many other stressors -- rapid swimming with back-and-forth motions. While not definitive, this suggests that fish react to stress/danger/badthings, but do not really have distinct pain. Not that I'm addressing the ethics of causing stress/danger/badthings to fish, just the idea that fish experience what humans call pain.
One which we describe with terms like "barbaric," "primitive," "savage," and a wealth of others I can't post here. My question is this: How is the eating of pigs more enlightened and morally justifiable than the eating of dogs?
Falling back on the ol' our-culture-does-it = morally right breaks down for these types of issues. (Our "culture" permits abortion, does that make it right??) The Bible condemns it, as do most moral philosphers (for different reasons of course.)
Yeah, but seals and sea lions don't leave a pile of doo in your backyard.
I have fished for many years on hundreds of lakes. And not once has a fish complained about it's treatment or even given me a dirty look.
Does a fish have a right to eat another fish?
Do I have as much of a right to eat a fish as another fish does?
Serious minds want to know! (ROTFLMAO!!)
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.