It was my Dad's killing the cat that put me over the edge, I'm sure. Though -- like I said -- I'd eaten game at that table and perfectly cool with the notion of killing animals every bit as "sentient" as house cats (save for their brains being even all the more keen for their living in the wild on their own as opposed to conniving off of humans ... how easy is that? =)
I've always wondered if -- had I been a member of the Donner party -- whether I'd have been so hungry as to eat the corpse of a human I knew who'd died a natural death.
I'm almost certain that despite my dog's being the center of my universe in many respects, had he been on the trip I'd have been hard pressed to admit his life was more precious than that of the humans who might find some sustenance from sucking his bones.
Those all are hypotheticals, though. And hypotheticals -- particularly worst case scenarios and extreme circumstances -- are a terrible way to decide on what is True and the right thing to do.
I guess what bothers me is the way an Extreme Circumstance like this -- particularly the Extraordinary Measures taken to save the kitten's life until the State stepped in and did the Right Thing by Killing it -- rings odd for me.
One ... I don't like stories where the State does the right thing by requiring the killing anything or anybody. (Rabid dogs perhaps being the exception if there be no Atticus's around to take care of their own.)
Two ... it's particularly galling that they'd "force feed" a cat when the vogue in courtrooms in Britain and the US these days is to argue that Food and Water (a/k/a ANH or Artificial Nutrition and Hydration) are somehow an extraordinary measure to keep a comatose patient alive.
In Basil's thread yesterday, she told us of how "her mind played tricks on her" and despite her being in complete cardiac arrest, she Knew she was screaming, convulsing and getting no help whatsoever from the doctors she saw around her.
This cat was alert and badly burnt and requiring Forced feeding. Compassion would have meant killing it on the spot ... the tale circulating locally, perhaps, of the horrible deed and unsettling aftermath.
But this makes the wires somehow (at FR, anyway), and "send the wrong message". We know about "sending a message" here, don't we?
I'm sorry for upsetting anyone's feelings, if not sensibilities, by complaining. But I'm sorely tempted just once to come on a thread like this and mock those with a fixation about kitten Persons as opposed Human persons.
One might think that SPECIES, even, would somehow connote the greater difference of degree in Singer-style Personhood (as entitled to Respect and Right to Life free from purposefully inflicted suffering for whatever reason) than having cleared the birth canal is for BOTH cats and humans.
(Laz quite rightly observed most would draw the same difference in degree between unborn and 7-week old kittens as they would unborn and 7-week old humans).
But is that Bright Line that is the birth canal (as opposed to Specie or Class or Reason or Conscience) something we as humans have always known or something that's been imposed on us by stories like these where Extraordinary Measures for unwanted stray kittens are more understandable than a respirator and feeding tube for one's unconscious kin?
That's my problem. I don't like the transference that's going on.
For water finds a level. If we entitle animals to Extraordinary Measures (besides the ones you're damned right I'll go to for my dog as long as he's happy and painfree), it seems humans may end up end up enjoying in turn some of the ethics of breeders (where drowning puppies is concerned) or the Humane Society (where putting the unwated to sleep) are concerned, that's all.
I stand by all my points (oblique as they may be), but it's the manipulation and redirection of our feelings that offends me with this article.
Surely this sort of violence is as matter-of-fact daily occurence as death in the womb. (or is it?) Surely it's gone on as long as man's been alive. (like abortion)
Why is The One Kitten such a big deal?
Cruelty to a born creature.
Lots of people have a hard time even envisioning cruelty to an unborn creature; thusly, abortion in America.
However, everyone can understand cruelty to a born creature; thusly, child-abuse laws and animal-abuse laws.
Pretty simple to understand, Askel, no matter if you agree with the concept or not.
I don't think the One Kitten is the big deal. The Big Deal is inflicting pain for entertainment. I think the "extrordinary measures" and seeming disproportionate amount of sympathy for the cat is a measure of embarassment that one of our own (human) is capable of it. IMHO.
Speaking only for myself, it was the wanton act of torture that's a big deal.
BTW...you went to pieces over a cat that was mercy killed thirty years before? THAT I've never done. I hope that was a typo, or my tired eyes read it wrong.
It isn't about this kitten. Today it is this kitten. Tomorrow it will be some other example of cruelty committed by people. I grieve them because I love mine and consider animals to be absolutely innocent. That is the benefit animals have in not being human. They always have my sympathy, where humans can blow it.
We are being jerked around... First, by the reporter who printed it. Why is the reporter wrong? - Because it is a freaky occurance, not a news story, and all of us would be better off if we did not know about it at all. I grant you that. This is no different than the national media jerking us around with stories and photos of children abducted on the other side of the country. Tragedies that we can do nothing about but gape in horror at the thought, and wait for the inevitable news of a small battered body found in a swamp.
They all can't break my heart. Not all the kittens and puppies, and not all murdered children. Our collective hearts should not be yanked around like this... I do not have enough blood in me to bleed for every tragedy. I grant you that.
Then we get yanked around by the poster who put it here, knowing that it will inspire a toxic collision between us softies that are horrifed, and those that think being horrified over the suffering of an animal makes you a liberal and an animal rights freak. They say ugly things just to set everyone else off, and away we go on the thread just like a thousand times before. Most people who have a tortured kitten thrown in front of them would find it sad. If you don't agree, then have the courtesy to leave people alone that do. There is no good conservative cause to be argued over a tortured kitten. This one is for the heart.
I often avoid these threads because I hate being reminded of the evil blackness in people, both the perpetrators in the article, who I am helpless to attack, and in the posters who say callous things... Those, I can fire back at. And sometimes I do when the posters piss me off with their callousness.
and back to your grandma, she forgot that she had 30 years to deal with the incident. You had a few minutes. For you to hear the story and feel nothing would be to not value its life at all... Doing the right thing to end it does not erase the sadness for the situation. The situation is still sad. My step-dad and I had to kill a cat that was hit by someone else and left wiggling in the road. Of course killing it was the right thing to do, but it left me sad. Less sad now than then. That is what time does. Time is in the mind... for you, it had just happened... 30 years had not passed.