There have been some celebrities defending the dog killings by Michael Vick. However, none of the defenses of Vick are as bizarre as those put forward by Lawrence O'Donnell in his Huffington Post blog, What's Wrong with Killing Dogs? Posted on 08/25/2007 4:31:39 AM PDT by PJ-Comix
There have been some celebrities defending the dog killings by Michael Vick. However, none of the defenses of Vick are as bizarre as those put forward by Lawrence O'Donnell in his Huffington Post blog, What's Wrong with Killing Dogs?
What's wrong with what Michael Vick did? I have no inclination to do what he did with dogs, but I have no comprehension of what all the fuss is about. Most people who are upset about killing dogs or letting them attack each other have at some point in their lives caught a fish, which is as extreme a form of murderous torture of an animal as I can imagine.
Huh? Didn't O'Donnell ever hear of catch and release? It is done all the time. A fisherman catches a fish and then releases it so it can be caught over and over again. No "murderous torture" of an animal here since the released fish go back to calmly swimming in their watery environs again. From "murderous torture" of fish, O'Donnell goes on to the absurd flesh eating argument in defense of Vick:
Not only have most of them caught a fish, they have actually eaten many more of them than they've caught. Which is weirder, killing an animal or eating its dead flesh? Most of us have never eaten dog meat, but in some countries it is a delicacy. Is there something evil going on in those countries? Are they violating the natural order of things? Should we invade them or get the UN to intervene? They are killing and eating dogs for god's sake!!!
Perhaps in the insular Hollywood vegan world eating meat is considered weird. It could also be a failed attempt by the former producer of The West Wing at humor. O'Donnell then invokes natural law:
What is the moral basis -- the natural law, if you will -- that accords special respect and protection to dogs in our written laws? And how does that same natural law allow for fish being clubbed to death on boat decks if they haven't died already from the hook-in-mouth trick we so enjoy pulling on them?
Lawrence, in the course of typing up this blog chronicling your absurdities, I noticed a couple of small insects crawling across my computer monitor. Without a moment of guilty conscience I picked up a paper towel and instantly deprived them of their mortality. This is not something I (or most people) could do to a dog. So, yeah, there is a difference depending on the animal. Keep that in mind the next time the bug exterminator pays a visit to your home.
Following these laughable assertions, O'Donnell then compares humane euthanasia of sick pets to electrocuting dogs:
Our reverence for dog life resembles our reverence for human life. Up to a point. It's okay to kill your dog if you think your dog is too sick to go on living much longer or if you just can't afford medical help for your dog. And, don't worry, no legal authority is ever going to ask you to prove that your dog was really sick enough to kill or even sick at all. If you don't have the stomach for killing your dog yourself, you contract with a dog killer -- otherwise known as a veterinarian -- to do the dirty work for you. No federal law against that yet. Our dog reverence is so shot full of loopholes that there is no describable moral order to it at all.
If you think O'Donnell couldn't get any more aburd in his defense of Vick, you would be wrong. He actually suggests that eating hamburgers is just as morally repulsive as torturing dogs to death:
Between bites at McDonald's today there will be a lot of outrage expressed about Michael Vick getting off easy. I won't understand a word of it.
Between bites of a Big Mac today, Lawrence, I will ponder if President Jed Bartlet ever electrocuted his pet dog in The West Wing.
That's because you're a moron, Larry boy. Here's your sign.
Lawrence O’Donnell isn’t stupid, he’s just a severe drunk.
This idiot’s lack of intelligence is showing.What a jerk.
The only thing that I’ve always wondered, is why anyone listens to anything that this horse’s ass has to say?
“However, none of the defenses of Vick are as bizarre as those put forward by Lawrence O’Donnell in his Huffington Post blog, What’s Wrong with Killing Dogs?”
I know people who feel the same way about liberals.
Dear Mr. O’Reilly. I was not advocating the killing of liberals or comparing it to catching fish.
“Dog fighting is illegal...fishing isn’t.”
It is if you do not have a license.
My guess is he's appealing to "people of color" that still think OJ Simpson is innocent, without which, Democrats have a really hard time at the polls.
Or trying to give the NFL some cover if they decide not to do the right thing about banning Vick.
LOL...
First of all, let me say that I find dog fight repulsive and barbaric and the descriptions of what happened to the poor animals who failed their “fighting tests”, how cruelly they were dispatched, beyond words and it’s incomprehensible to me how some people can be so vicious.
I’m no expert on this so-called “sport”, but there was a time however when dog fighting, bull baiting, cock fighting, etc. were acceptable forms of entertainment. Think back to ancient Rome when animals and even humans fought to the death for the entertainment of the crowd. We today we see it differently and of course know these things are wrong in context of how we today view our world and apply our moral standards.
The problem here today is that the animal rights wackies want us to anthropomorphize all animals to such an extent that hunting, fishing, raising animals for food and even keeping animals as pets is viewed as equally barbaric as dog fighting and gladiatorial combat, when in reality they aren’t. Then again the folks at PETA probably don’t give the proverbial fat rat’s a$$ about humans and wouldn’t care if we brought back gladiators as long as no “animals” were involved.
I used to go fishing with my dad. We threw many back and were happy to see them swim safely away. And the fish we kept (for mom to cook up for dinner), we didn’t mutilate or torture for our entertainment. I’ve never had an interest in hunting but I’ve known many hunters over the years (and received gifts of some great deer meat) and I know they strive to kill the animal with one shot as quickly and humanly as possible. I’ve known hunters who were very upset when they wounded a deer and it ran off and could not be found, and not just because they lost their quarry but because they really didn’t want the animal to suffer. The same goes for farmers, they usually care about their animals and when it comes time for slaughter, they dispatch them as quickly and painlessly as possible and they don’t take any glee in seeing them suffer.
Obviously Lawrence O’Donnell is too intellectually challenged to discern the difference.
In Florida, we have a pretty lenient license restriction for saltwater fishing. If you’re fishing from land, pier, or bridge, you don’t need one. My hubby and son go out in our boat, so they need one, but when I looked up restrictions, I was surprised to find that members of the Armed forces who are visitng the state don’t need one...that’s a good deal, IMHO. Also, Senior Citizens get one for free...wouldn’t you know it, LOL.
Recreational Saltwater Fishing License
You DO NOT need a license if you are:
· Any child under 16 years of age.
· Any resident who is a member of the United States Armed Forces and not stationed in this state, when home on leave for 30 days or less, upon submission of orders.
· Any person fishing who has been accepted as a client for developmental disabilities services by the Children and Family Services, provided the department furnishes proof thereof.
· Any resident fishing in saltwater from land or from a structure fixed to the land.
· Any resident 65 years of age or older who has in her or his possession proof of age and residency or a no-cost Florida Resident Senior Citizen license. A no-cost license may be obtained from any tax collector’s office upon proof of age and residency and must be in the possession of the resident during hunting, freshwater fishing, and saltwater fishing activities.
I’m pretty sure O’Donnell is looking for another 15 min of fame!
So, apparently Mr. O’Donnell is against killing dogs, fish, cows and any living animal. I wonder what his position is on abortion???
How would you like to be married to this heartless dolt?
Someone please tell O’Donnell the gospel. If anyone ever needed the gift of discernment it’s her.
LOL. I thought it was Rosie just because it was crazy!
5.56mm
Democrat.
LOL!!
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.