I'm Annoyed

[harleygrl35]

Every now and then I can be counted on to go on a rant about the injustices I see around me. Yes, that was your fair warning.

Right now, I'm annoyed by this whole Michael Vick debacle. Seriously, I'm sick of seeing this. Now, before the animal lovers want to take me out and string me up, let me clarify that I too love dogs, cats, birds..all critters with 2 or 4 legs, claws, beaks..you get the picture.

While I am in no way condoning what Vick has already apparently been found guilty of in the public eye, I'm astonished at the same time. I think it's wonderful that so many people have compassion for those dogs. But it makes me wonder...if those dogs had been children would we see people lining the streets in protest? Everyday children are abused, whether it be physically, sexually, emotionally...where is the public outcry?

Have we as a society become so accustomed to our children being hurt that it's old news? Since when did the safety of animals become more important than the safety of the future leaders of our nation? I'm willing to bet that Vick will get more of a punishment than the perverts who sneak into our kids bedrooms, get caught and then say the kid is lying..

I think it's sad. Sad that we care more about seeing this guy punished, care more about the amount of fines, years of jail time, and oh, let's not forget that we also care more about whether the Falcon's are gonna drop him from their lineup. We care more about those things than we do about the thousands of child abusers who walk out of a courtroom free men and women everyday.

I'm not saying animals should not have rights, I'm not saying that what was done to those dogs is not horrific. I'm not saying that someone shouldn't have to pay for the cruelty dealt to them.
What I am saying is that if there were as much of a public outcry over those things done to our children I may be able to understand a hell of a lot better. I didn't realize we have come to be a society where the safety and care of an animal was more important than that of a child...

[harleygrl35]

6 views, no replies...

Chickens.....

[Juggler]

I'm a'skeered.

[jjordan]

harleygrl,
I understand your feeling on this. It does seem that in many ways we have elevated animals to a more sacred position than humans themselves. However, I don't know that just because the media seems immersed in this means that Americans don't cry over abused children as well. It just makes sensational headlines when a public figure like Vick is involved in illegal activity. I too feel that society's priorities seem imbalanced particularly with regard to animal vs. human rights. I won't even argue the merits/morality of legalized abortion. Nonetheless, please know that in many circles protecting children and their interests is esteemed much more highly than "animal rights." Of course that may not sell as many newspapers either.

[Sweetness 'n Light]

Yes I really agree with all you and think you are smart to think these kind of ways about he animals and human people. People are better since they are in God's image and the animals are only in the beasts images so they don't count and that's why it is ok to shoot and eat them. I bet even some of the liberals would be against eating people! So if some sports guy likes to do something to animals it is ok unless he puts his kids in to fight animals and they get eaten by the animals and stuff, which would be pretty bad I think.

It's funny how mainstream medias always makes things backward, huh?

- Love and kisses to all -

[jjordan]

sweetness,
First of all, what? I am not sure if I understand the point you are making, but I do sense some satire in your comments. I don't think anyone said animals don't count or that dog fighting should be legalized. If I may be so bold, the point I think harleygrl was trying to make is that there appears to be an apparent disparity between the public concern for abused children verses abused animals that she found troubling. I agreed with her assessment.

Some may argue, but many reasonable people recognize prodigious differences between humankind and the animal kingdom. This doesn't mean they endorse the wanton abuse of our four-legged friends. It does mean, however, that on anyone's scale of relativity, protecting human rights deserves more priority than that of animals. This concept appears lost in our "politically correct" culture that seems to often insinuate that abused animals are more problematic than abused children.

At least some people get that impression from media coverage like that of Michael Vick's alledged illegal activity.

[harleygrl35]

Thanks for clarifying that for me jjordon, and you were right on the mark in the clarification!

S&L, although I, admittedly, have a hard time following some of your posts, I'm hoping that I'm on the money when I say I detected a little sarcasm in your post.

Am I to be of the opinion that you are one of those people who dress your little doggies up and take them for a Sunday drive to the park?

[Anonymoose]

From a behavioral standpoint, are we really that different from animals? We are fully capable of turning on each other, and on the animals. Seems to me that anyone who would treat an animal that way would do the same to people. A shame he didn't respect himself or other people enough to preserve the gift of his career. What a dummy.

[Juggler]

I'm intrigued by this chatter over animals, annoyed myself mainly over hypocrisy.

We chow down on a multitude of tasty critters, to great collective delight. I'm fine with anybody who chooses not to eat meat and respect the reasons and emotions that underlie that choice.

But every now and then we decide to make it a CRIME to nibble on specific animals some think are either too yukky or too cute. Ridiculous.

People routinely serve up dog in Asia, but you go to the hoosegow if you do that here. Ditto for horse meat in some places in America, with federal legislation pending to criminalize horse meat nationwide. I personally love horse meat and have lived in places where were farmers had meat herds of both cattle and horses.

Some ethnic communities follow a traditional practice, established before refrigeration, of slaughtering just prior to eating an animal. Ignorant young bigots in San Francisco tried to criminalize this practice, almost succeeded, but were finally beaten back by reason.

In a free country we should be able to nibble what we like. We should not, under sanction of criminal law, impose our personal dietary preferences on others, however strongly they are held.

[harleygrl35]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21977817/?GT1=10547


So, in keeping with this topic, who wants to bet that these monsters get less time than Vick? I'm willing to lay odds that while they may get more of a sentence, it won't be by much. The only good thing I can see is that this happened in Texas, and you know they have an express lane to the death penalty. ( I know it's true, Ron White told me so)
But IMO death would be too good for these two. Nope, they should be made to endure what this child endured, every day for the rest of their worthless lives.

Oh and the kicker? Mommy dearest is pregnant. I hope they yank that baby away from her so fast her head spins.

[fangz1956]

I read about this in the Roanoke Times as my stomach turned. According to that article, this child was killed for not saying "Please" and "Thank you". Dear ole boyfriend stayed home from work because he didn't believe Mom was enforcing his plan of "discipline"........and this was the end result of that day off.

My personal opinion is that the parents/guardians need to be subjected to exactly the same things they inflicted on the child. Express lane to the death penalty would be far too kind for this pair.

[Wise One]

Want a dog from the pound? You'll get lots of questions, be interviewed, fill out many forms giving personal information, pay a fee. You'll have to consent to inspections and must surrender the dog on demand if they don't think you're up to the task. And you'll need a license.

Want a child? No problem. Go for it, whoever you are.

[resigned]

Harlygrl, I just returned from visiting relatives in NC and just read your posting. I feel exactly the same way you do. I also find alot of people who own animals inconsiderative of company. By that I mean that when I visit them they expect me to like their slobbering mutt jumping all over me and while they think he is cute I don't. I also like animals and when my children were growning up had the required cats, dogs, hamsters and rabbits. But now my husband and I choose not have have pets. Well gold fish in our outdoor pond. My youngest daughter accuses me of not loving animals. I told her I certainly like animals but in their place, having them jump on me is not their place. I believe that animals should be trained and if they can't behave......well ......

I agree a hundered percent with what you posted.

[RubyRed]

The fact that a person could treat, or let their child be treated, this way is horrible. I am a nurse and ofter wear a scrub top that has polar bears on it. Several times I have had patient (I work at a childrens psych hosp.) tell me "polar bears eat their young" when I wear that top. That may be true, but polar bears are animals. Look at what some parents do to their children and they are supposed to know better. I am a firm believer in "an eye for an eye" when it comes to cases like this one. They should have the exact same stuff done to them that the little girl had to endure. When that Smith woman drowned her children, she should have been put in a car with the doors welded shut and the car put in the lake. I generally (and I know that this sounds completely the opposite) do not believe in capital punishment, but when it comes to a child being treated like that, I can't help but change my opinion.

[Anonymoose]

Dang, I'm annoyed too, when I hear ignorant parents scream at and denigrate their young children in public and create a public nuisance and emotional distress for the children and those within earshot. Makes me wonder why people like that are allowed to have children. Is it really unreasonable in this day and age to have certain "qualified" individuals take long term birth control to prevent them from having children before they are fit to be parents? Sounds radical, but it hasn't been that long ago that we systematically neutered mental patients and anyone rounded up and deemed unfit to reproduce.

Children and animals are at the mercy of their "owners". If a child or a pet is an annoyance, what's the difference? The "parent" is to blame. Chances are good that the parent is incapable of taking care of themselves, much less a dependent, furry or otherwise. The adult is still the responsible party, ignorant or not. And, that immature parent is likely to abuse either the child or the pet. We have fostered a culture that makes it okay to have a child or own a pet, ready or not. The same parent who would kill a child over not saying "please", or peeing the bed, would likely abuse or kill a pet over not "sitting" or over peeing where they're not supposed to, nevermind the parent or owner hasn't the the intelligence to potty train either. Life is life. Either you respect it or you don't. And yes, some animals are still fit to eat. Domestic animals and wild animals are not one and the same, though both have their places in nature. Sorry, got me in a ranting mood.

[Anonymoose]

On the other hand, when my pets jump up on people, it's generally just because they love people, and want to show their affection. I try to make sure their jumping is contained, but, there are some people they just can't resist! Dogs will usually gravitate to people they know are kind, and love animals and people. Cats, on the other hand, are prone to annoy people that they KNOW don't like them. I find that amusing!

[harleygrl35]

Please don't misunderstand me Moose, I'm not of the opinion that animals shouldn't have "rights", but do I think they should be held in the same regard as my children? Nope, not even close.

My whole point for this thread was that I was pissed at all the outcry and uproar over Vick and his inhumane treatment of those dogs. But, where's the lynch mob for this little girl? I don't see the people of Texas lining the streets with signs protesting the treatment she got. Our judicial systems sets people like these monsters free everyday. Whether that be to a mental institution, or back onto our streets. Most more than likely they are set free to be a predator to any child, ours or their own. As I said, I will not be the least bit surprized if Vick gets more of a sentence than these scumbags. He will be used to set an example. So, when is the example set as to what happens if you hurt/kill a child?
Let's take John Couey for example. He's the man who kidnapped, raped, then buried 9 year old Jessica Lunsford alive. She was found wrapped in garbage bags with her little purple dolphin next to her.

His punishment? IMO he should be put in a cell with "Big Bubba", raped, then wrapped in garbage bags and buried alive, only to be dug up when he's down to his last few breaths, everyday for the rest of his miserable life.
There's setting an example for you.

Basically, anyone who takes the life of a child deserves the worst punishment possible. Along with anyone who hurts a child sexually or mentally in my opinion.

[Anonymoose]

Harley, You're right. Couey and his ilk deserve the worst. The prison system seems to have developed its own form of punishment for child killers and molesters, and he'll get his. Of course, if you want to compare one form of abuse to the other, they're not equal. But, each deserves to be covered in the media. Should we not punish Michael Vick? Should he be given a pass because of 1) the nature of his crime and 2) because of who he is? I see it more as an educational thing. We are all aware of the abuse of children, to the point that maybe we have become desensitized to it. Dog fighting and abuse is something relatively new to the public consciousness. And, for every person crying out for his punishment, there's another one claiming his innocence. So it is with criminals. But, I don't want to see everything taken away from him because of a series of stupid decisions. But, I understand that left unchecked, this dog fighting phenomenon will just grow. It's kind of like a "gateway" crime. Dogs today, kids tomorrow. Not necessarily, but you can see how the mentality is similar. Don't get me wrong. I come from a family in which one side practiced the time honored tradition of cock-fighting. All for fun, sport, grins, whatever. Presented with the opportunity, I might have attended one in my younger days just to see what it was like. Thank goodness I never had the chance. Then they got busted, and as far as I know, that was that. Pretty much the same with the moonshine. Now that's a folk art that should be protected by federal law, instead of being extinguished. Moonshiners are far too busy practicing their craft to abuse anybody!

[mistatt2]

On the other hand, when my pets jump up on people, it's generally just because they love people, and want to show their affection. I try to make sure their jumping is contained, but, there are some people they just can't resist! Dogs will usually gravitate to people they know are kind, and love animals and people. Cats, on the other hand, are prone to annoy people that they KNOW don't like them. I find that amusing!

This is so true!! I have two cats and they are my pride and joy. I have to keep them in my room if company comes over that isn't "dressed" for my house. They get enough cat hair on them from the sofa and I swear they think it's funny to jump on someone who doesn't care for cats.

I'm an animal lover. I couldn't hurt a mouse (unless it's to feed my snakes) but I come from a family of hunters. Eating what you shoot is one thing, but being cruel to animals is quite another thing. I hate what Vick did. I think he should be punished. BUT, I think we put to much emphasis on public super stars. We should be just as concerned about what our neighbor is doing. I'm also sick of hearing it. They can can that news feed along with Britney Spears. The rest of Hollywood news belongs on their own show so the people who want to hear the news don't have to sit and listen to it when they tuned in or opened the paper for real events. Instead a child murderer gets a day or two of news and is forgotten about. And we all know that when real criminal is in the public spotlight they tend to get more harsher punishment. It just doesn't appeal to the people as much as Britney shaving her head.

[resigned]

I just had to respond to the pets jumping up on people I really do find it annoying and even dangerous. My daughter has a dog that loves to jump up on people. Many times as a result of her nails she has scratched others. I was wearing shorts last summer and she jumped up on me causing a large scratch all the way down my leg. It became infected and required medical attention. When ever males come over to my daughter's house their hands all immediately go to their groin area because they too have been scratched in a very uncomfortable place. And this dog isn't always loving. She jumped on my 87 year old mother and snapped at her. Her ears were laid back and she was growling.

So I don't agree that pets jump on you because they love people. I owned several dogs when my children were growing up and when we had guests I always put the dog in the basement out of consideration for our guests, especially if they were not fond of animals.

It's just being considerate for pet owners to keep their dogs off people who don't want to have contact with them. Long hair dogs really bring my asthma on so that's another reason I don't even want to be in their presence.

Dogs as well as children need discipline.