December 18, 2007
Let's Arrange a Marriage, Shall We?Politics
I recently posted about a man in Tamil Nadu named P. Selvakumar who was advised by his astrologer to marry a dog to atone for his past cruelty; when he was younger, he had stoned a pair of mating dogs and then hung them from a tree, to die. After his deplorable act, he apparently lost his hearing and became paralyzed.
If only he had been the son of a powerful politician in Amreeka. Then he would have blessed enough to get away with it, grow up and continue to display very disturbing behavior!
You see, once upon a time mutineers, in a state far, far away…okay, it was Arkansas, but still, there was a teen who was wicked. His name was David Huckabee and while he was leading a boy scout camp in 1998, he murdered a defenseless dog.
Do you see where I’m going with this? Of course you do, clever readers. Because while some of you impugned my decision to post about P. Selvakumar’s wedding to Selvi the canine as an “about-as-veiled-as-that-one-belly-dancer-at-Prince-Cafe” dig at Hinduism, most of you realized that what haunted me was how the whole thing occurred because two dogs had been stoned and then strung from a tree. I love dogs. I’ve had three, all of whom sadly are gone. Out of an overwhelming sense of loss, I now stop and pet every pup who will have me; that is how much I love dogs. They are fiercely loving, ever adoring, loyal, fuzzy angels with paws.
Once, when I was a senior in college and considerably angst-ridden (for very good reason), I put “Strangeways Here We Come” on my turntable, dropped the needle and then dropped myself down on the lush, odd red carpet we were infamous for having installed in our ENTIRE Home. It was time for some emotional bloodletting, though I didn’t have any Johnette nearby.
When Morrissey started keening, I went still, except for the unceasing crying, of course. A few songs in to the album, I was vaguely aware of a strange noise but I was too morose to move. My eyes were closed. I was despondent. I really didn’t care.
But my wolf-German shepherd hybrid did. He had broke through the once-sturdy patio screen door in his haste and worry to get to me. I opened my eyes because of the oddest sensation—a very concerned puppy was licking all the NaCl off my face. Torn between being utterly grossed out (it was my first pet!) and utterly in love with such love (it was my first pet!), I chose the latter and sat up, as my dog visibly relaxed at my not-being-dead.
That’s what kind of sweetness dogs contain.
And maybe, just perhaps, the dog that David Huckabee executed had licked away some other kid’s tears. Even if it hadn’t, I’m sure it would have been inclined to, if it hadn’t been hung from a tree and left to choke to death by the son of a Preacher man.
Via Newsweek:
As Mike Huckabee gains in the polls, the former Arkansas governor is finding that his record in office is getting more scrutiny. One issue likely to get attention is his handling of a sensitive family matter: allegations that one of his sons was involved in the hanging of a stray dog at a Boy Scout camp in 1998. The incident led to the dismissal of David Huckabee, then 17, from his job as a counselor at Camp Pioneer in Hatfield, Ark. It also prompted the local prosecuting attorney— bombarded with complaints generated by a national animal-rights group—to write a letter to the Arkansas state police seeking help investigating whether David and another teenager had violated state animal-cruelty laws.
That prosecutor had about the same chance the murdered dog did, not that such a fact is shocking.
The state police never granted the request, and no charges were ever filed. But John Bailey, then the director of Arkansas’s state police, tells NEWSWEEK that Governor Huckabee’s chief of staff and personal lawyer both leaned on him to write a letter officially denying the local prosecutor’s request. Bailey, a career officer who had been appointed chief by Huckabee’s Democratic predecessor, said he viewed the lawyer’s intervention as improper and terminated the conversation.
Wait— so why does India have the bad rep for “democracy which is all corrupt and isht”, again? America! Nepotism! Eff yeah!
Seven months later, he was called into Huckabee’s office and fired. “I’ve lost confidence in your ability to do your job,” Bailey says Huckabee told him. One reason Huckabee cited was “I couldn’t get you to help me with my son when I had that problem,” according to Bailey. “Without question, [Huckabee] was making a conscious attempt to keep the state police from investigating his son,” says I. C. Smith, the former FBI chief in Little Rock, who worked closely with Bailey and called him a “courageous” and “very solid” professional.
Huckabee called Bailey’s account “totally untrue” and described him as a “bitter” exemployee. “I asked him to resign because he had so alienated the entire state police,” he said. “It had nothing to do with my son.”
Come on, now Reverend. Heed those ten commandments. Thou shall not bear false witness, lest our Lord smite you! If only you were Catholic…then perhaps you would think of the legacy of St. Francis, who saw the divine in animals, including dogs.
Here’s a shocker:
David Huckabee did not respond to requests for comment.
People who harm defenseless animals are often disturbed and dangerous. Oh, look!
In April of this year, he was arrested—and paid a fine—when he forgot to remove a loaded gun from his carry-on luggage at Little Rock airport.
Why can’t politicians just own it? Enough with the excuses. And if you’re a minister, a man of faith, a man who should know better, how do you condone such behavior? How do you ruthlessly make it all go away and THEN walk in to church without it collapsing on you, as my Mother would ask?
His father told NEWSWEEK that his son did not engage in “intentional torture.” “There was a dog that apparently had mange and was absolutely, I guess, emaciated.” A campaign official says David “regrets” the incident and notes that he later made Eagle Scout.
Didn’t engage in INTENTIONAL torture? So tormenting a vulnerable creature is allowable if it is unintentional? If you’re hanging someone or something from a tree, in order to see them/it writhe in pain and then die, I’d consider that rather intentional. But wait! I forgot the dog’s appearance. Apparently since the animal was emaciated, it’s fine. Frankly, all of this is an insult to eagle scouts, who are the kindest of their kind.
So.
A few of you thought that the Selvakumar/Selvi alliance was an “elegant” bit of justice; I would agree, especially if by some miracle*, this man could be similarly “saved”. His father would appreciate that, right? Saved is good! Truth is good! NOT KILLING DOGS IS GOOD.
While most of the presidential candidates on either side of the aisle aren’t thrilling, there are a few who are extremely disturbing; children learn at home, and if this douche learned that it was okay to torture and murder from his family, then I want that family nowhere near me— I’m walking distance from the White House, after all.
*Hey, I’m Christian. I believe in tons o’ miracles, aight?
anna on December 18, 2007 10:30 PM in Animals, Musings, Politics · T·r·a·c·k·b·a·c·k address · Direct link · Email post
I think some of the animal cruelty laws can sometimes go too far. I do understand the need for (and support) animal cruelty laws but I would rather have them tied to property interest of owners. For animals in which no person holds a property interest, the sentences for cruelty should be not be as severe.
Oh abba, this is some of your best writing! Dogs are tthe sort of people who know how to make every thought known by gesture and facial expression.
Oh Anna, this is some of your best writing! Dogs are the sort of people who know how to make every thought known by gesture and facial expression.
It's true the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, but at what point shouldn't we blame the parents for the actions of their children? I suppose we might have different answers for, e.g., legal culpability and moral culpability. Since the latter is what's at issue here, I'm with you!
The horns, tail and eyebrows are OK, but the Hitler mustache is a little troubling, since it prevents me from calling him a bare-faced dog killer.
Freudian slip, Amrita. You're a dancing queen.
Hi Anna,
I enjoy your blogging but this blog post does not show your usual sound logic and sharp wit. I am concerned that this post has crossed the boundary of good taste.
I hope that this is a case of misdirected youthful energy and that you will modify the post by removing references to "lynching", "dog marriage" etc. and blog it as a case of misuse of official influence and typical politician doublespeak on values.
Please see this criticism as constructive because if you don't push the boundaries, this site won't be as much fun to lurk around ...
cheers,
ConcernedAdult
Huh? Are those words verboten?
Huh too??
I thought it was quite a smart/witty yet educational article .
the message is clear...this guy is a weasel.
I'll second the memory of having a dog comfort me when I was crying. It wasn't even my dog. It was a dog I had been petsitting and whom I had only known for a few days.
I'll never forget that experience.
Dog versus weasel? Youtube has it.
If you wait long enough, Youtube will have porn of it.
Uhh-that video was not cool.
ak--I agree.
Man o man, this is one sick post.
OOOh, how could you all forget about the other presidential scale dog abuse?
www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1638065,00.html
Thanks ever so much, Manju! I wish that I were only just seventeen, if you know what I mean....
The issue isn't about how far the apple fell from the tree, but the fact that he's trying to excuse the torture and killing of an innocent animal as some sort of mercy killing.
A person and society's worth is determined by how they treat the weakest and most vulnerable creatures... thanks for this post, Anna. I was trying to ignore Mike Huckabee in the hopes he would go away, but you've really hit this one home for me.
Al_Chutiya_for_debauchery,
There is another reason for such Animal Cruelty laws. Research has proven that most people who abuse animals are "training" to move on up to killing/torturing human beings. If a kid *repeatedly* harms an animal intentionally, then there is a very high likelyhood he will begin to exhibit criminal tendencies (think serial killer, gangs etc) as an adult/sub-adult. Even adults who engage in animal cruelty may turn out to be very anti-social. I support them not because I think animals are on an equal plane w/humans but to protect ourselves.
Didn't Sr. Huckabee say that if we didn't have abortions, we'd have all the workers we need and can avoid illegal immigration?
This family is gets more interesting by the minute.
Nice First Family, this bunch would make...
" For animals in which no person holds a property interest, the sentences for cruelty should be not be as severe."
aah yes, an animal's life has less value because some human being happens not to own it or have some sort of material interest in it. feel free to drop it from a bridge and watch as it crashes onto the rocks below or feel free to put it in a plastic bag and watch as it pops under the weight of your car. or put a bunch of stray cats into a bag, tie the bag to a tree and bash them to death with a baseball bat. what wholesome childhood fun. it's really not so bad because none of these animals were owned. because a cruel human is not really a cruel human if the thing in question doesn't have value as property.
SkepMod,
So what is it about that picture that you find amusing or objectionable?
I actually don't find David Huckabee's position of a gun problematic (indeed, this is much more common in a bunch of states, Arkansas included), but I agree with Thamizhan re: animal cruelty laws. I wish I still had stats on this, but a large % of people who go on to rape, murder, or sexually assault have previously tortured and abused animals, especially dogs. It's sick and shows, in my opinion, a fundamental lack of respect for life and living creatures. I'd love to learn more about the "cover up" angle of this, particularly Huckabee the elder trying to influence the investigation.
Anyone interested in more ridiculous antics and ideas, check out his forum. Some of the comments made by his supporters on this specific event and general issues are frightening, to say the least.
http://www.mikehuckabeeforum.com/index.php
What's wrong about Huckabee? I thought that the fact that you can crack jokes makes up for being embroiled in many ethics controversies, knowing zilch about the world outside Arkansas, believing that homosexuality, necrophilia, and sado-masochism are equivalent, demanding that AIDS patients should be quarantined, and slyly sliming other candidates by asking if they believe Jesus and Satan are brothers. Doesn't it? C'mon, he lost weight, but Hillary? She looks like a 60 year old woman! Now, that's scary!
whose god (#23) my sentiments exactly. ACD (given that he is normally a thoughtful commentator)should think more carefully about what he posits (and its wider implications)
It scares me to death that there are people out there who think like this. An animal has no value except as property?
Camille, thank you for your comment. I removed the word "lynch". I did not mean to offend anyone or somehow lessen what that word is associated with. I've got a brutal cold and I'm less articulate because of it.
I paused when I typed it, looked at google define, saw "kill without legal sanction" and thought, "okay". I am sorry. One of the reasons posts take so long to write (for me) is because I end up looking up the various definitions for words I am certain of or use normally in non-SM contexts without hesitation, to prevent precisely this situation.
.
I'd like to echo what a few of you have typed; I'm concerned about others (animals? people?) who might have been hurt by this privileged, murderous twit, especially since he was lucky enough to be born in to a family which can make it all go away. Any father who thinks it's better to cover up a sin like this than be a parent who actually PARENTS is displaying a lack of character/morality/respect for justice which is highly disturbing. We don't need another president whose actions we'll be explaining and apologizing for in two generations, when our grandchildren corral us and ask us, "WTF?"
umm, the dog in that picture looks like he is a nervous prisoner.
Anna,
I think you gave in to the "thought police" too quickly. :-(
Here's a "legal" definition of lynch, from South Carolina:
So, since the Huckabee kid was accused of killing the dog in conjunction with another kid (see original Newsweek article that's linked to), that makes the two a "mob" and they inflicted violence, so it's a lynching. You only extended the notion of lynching from crime against "person" to crime against "dogs," which seems natural in a non-legal post that's pro-dog. I think one would have to strain pretty hard to take offence at that.
Dogs lick away your tears because they need the salt.
I joke, I joke. Companion animals should have special protections that go beyond property. Humans bred dogs out of perfectly well adjusted wolves, so we do owe them in a way. This family scares me, but I don't think Jr. picked this up from Sr. Even good people whelp psychos. "Good wombs have borne bad sons" (Shakespeare's Tempest I think). At least from the crime documentaries I have watched Tamizhan has a point, this type of behavior is common in the histories of some terrifying people
cool site
You know.. Mike Huckabee may actually win not only the republic nomination, but also the presidency. ( polls suggest he could beat clinton/obama by a big margin )
And.. mike huckabee visited india like 7 times in the last ten years. ( for tribal welfare issues, for better solvency in indian state owned co-operative banks, for exhcnage programs for arkansas kida to volunteer in orissa, jharkand, and naxalite areas of india, for exhange programs of all sort )
we got a desi-centric republic presidential candidate... word? Will sepia mutiny endorse da man ?
Rahul gandhi interned for Mike Huckabee when rahul was in college.. Damn.?
If a 17 year came across a dog he believed to be suffering he just might try to end the dogs pain by killing it, especially in the south. If the dog was in a real bad condition in the middle of the woods, I can see how he might do what he did. I would never do that, I am just saying it is not unheard of, remember Old Yeller?
I dont take any of these PETA groups seriously anyway. If their was a situation were a decision had to be made where the fire department could save the life of a squirral or a little human baby and they decided to save the baby, then PETA would protest every fire department in America.
Yes, because blinding rats and rabbits for Estee Lauder's testing is equivalent to the strawman you proposed. I can see how PETA's strategies and grandstanding might be offensive (akin to the critical mass Friday bikerides), but that doesn't imply that the issues they protest are ridiculous. Specifically, they are not protesting the standard burning house/"cat or baby" caricatures.
The only thing that recommends Huckabee is that he is the only Republican candidate who actually seems to give a damn about poverty - although his rabid Christianity and lack of any international knowledge is a bigger negative in my book.
Are you telling me Old Yeller was killed? Didn't he just go to the great old farm in the sky? Now, you've ruined my Christmas. Hopefully, Santa thinks I've been nice this year and brings me goodies.
Rahul Gandhi actually *went* to college? Damn!
To be clear what I mean by Huckabee's rabid Christianity is his homophobia, which he justifies based on religion, and his strongly held view of America as a Christian nation.
Rahul the Triple Threat: he's caring, he's smart, he's funny!
How can you take PETA seriously? They have advertisments that consists of hot women in the nude and something about animals or something, I cant get passed the nude women part so I forget the message of it.
How about a "mothers against drunk driving" advertisment with Tom Brady and David Beckham pillow fighting in thongs and the ad saying "At least they dont drive drunk"
I totally knew what you meant. :D
Also, for the 69th time, SM does not endorse.
Once he gets into a debate on issues like economy and foreign policy he's clearly on thin ice. The only reason Huckabee is gaining in the polls right now is because the media is concentrating on his religious background, which being a pastor by profession he feels quite comfortable with. His Republican opponents don't want to risk attacking him for fear of losing support among the evangelicals. Someone like Hillary on the other hand will have zero problems attacking Huckabee. If Huckabee wins the Republican nomination, Hillary (assuming she wins) will breeze through the presidential polls. Someone like Huckabee just provides too much ammunation for a shrewd opponent like Hillary.
ANNA, thank you :)
rob, this is not an issue re: the "thought police." I know that you enjoy belittling people who hold vastly different opinions from yours, but your attempt to conflate the term "lynch" and apply it to the hanging of a dog is just as offensive as PETA's infamous ad campaigns in which they compared factory farming to slavery and slaugherhouses to Holocaust death camps. "Lynch" is a term defined within a VERY specific context, and that context does not include animals. It's convenient to cite South Carolina, but I would encourage you to take a look at the state statutes for any or all of the other states with anti-lynching provisions -- it is clear that this is not a law that is in any way divorced from a history of racist violence. It's only a "strain" to take offense if you believe that black people, members of the LGBT community, and ethnic/religious minorities are somehow subhuman, and thus comparable to dogs, in the application of a law whose foundations are rooted in penalizing targeted, racialized executions.
Rahul, thanks. ST, when you saw "rabid," did you knowingly use the idea of Old Yeller with Mike Huckabee? :)
this is funny
Nice!.. Mike Hucakbee can beat Hillary Clinton hands down. Hillary Clinton is the most polarizing and divisive figure in American politics today ( after bush )
Huckabee is clear on his views, he does not flip flop like hillary.. and sure you can disagree with alot of his views, but you know where he stands...
International Relations ?? this is the only guy out of all the current candidates who went to India to work on inter faith dialogue, child labor, women's empowerment, tribal welfare??
http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-1591524/Gov-Mike-Huckabee-traveled-to.html
All the other candidates, just talk about India being a partner, a great power, blah blah.
this guy as governor of arkansas, rolled up his armani suit, and waddled through the puddles of flood/drought ridden rural parts of eastern India, where even no desi babu/politican goes.
I mean what are the choices, romney ( mormon elitist ), guliani (9-11 energizer bunny ), mcain (neo-neo-con ), thompson ( poster boy for marlbaro cigars & NRA )...
or clinton ( baggage carrying power hungry flip-flopping polarizing shemale ), obama ( johnny come late/ hypocrite/flip flopper; first i will take special interest money for my campaign for senate, but now i wont for the presidency, cuz first it was ok, now i think its bad,
edwards( never seen someone who wants to be president more than this guy/ 400$ haircuts - poor man's candidate )
Well.. sorry for the long diatribe.
but wait.. he is against gay marriage.. so its all over. yep, america is gonna elect some one who openly stands for gay marriage.. yep.. thats gonna be the day in 2080.
Those sound like effective ads to me. They're trying to harness the power of our anti-slavery and anti-Holocaust givens and apply them in a different context. I don't get why you're so eager to interpret calling the hanging of the dog a lynching as implying that any group of humans is subhuman and comparable to dogs--do you really think anyone on this thread thinks that? Seriously? I also don't get why you're so quick to dismiss the extremely broad definition of lynching in the South Carolina statute -- you're the one who erroneously made the claim that there's a "very specific meaning and legal definition" of lynching when the legal definition appears to be extremely broad. I'm sorry if you felt "belittled" by my use of the term "thought police"--I actually take the notion of people making exaggerated claims to convince other people not to use certain words very seriously.
wonderful to have come across your blog and this story about marrying the dog....I am a poet always delighted by the meeting of the human and the divine and in this case the canine....I write in English, French and Spanish. Let's keep in touch.
http://indranamirthanayagam.blogspot.com
You don't know the half of it! Wait for the new ad featuring Rahul rushing out from his house with carefully disheveled hair and an artful 5 o' clock shadow to rescue a possum from a weaving pick up truck, and then turning to the camera to ask you, yes YOU, in his oh-so-husky voice, to help eliminate the spiraling roadkill problem caused by partying.
rob-
by your South Carolina definition of lynching, "Any act of violence inflicted by a mob upon the body of another person which results in the death of the person shall constitute the crime of lynching in the first degree and shall be a felony" - it seems that lynching is inflicted upon the body of another person, -ie, not a dog. So your definition does not justify using the term lynching in this case.
Anna, how does this post have anything to do with anything brown? The nano-veil (man marries dog lead in) seems to be attempting to cover up a political (dis)-endorsement (i dont heart the huckabees).
Being "half/half" and with a mail order license to marry, I would be happy to arrange a multi-religious (say Christian/Hindu) wedding between the younger Huckabee and pup from a rescue shelter.
Actually, I don't know about a puppy--maybe an older greyhound would be better.
Anyway, let me know I could probably make preparations within 10 days.
(cheers)
You have a weird baseline--why does the use of the term need to be "justified"? And, are you sure the word was "used," as opposed to "mentioned"? In a pro-dog post, I don't see what's anything other than utterly natural about extending a pro-person statute to hypothetically cover a dog. That's pro-dog, not anti-human.
rob- Thanks for word-policing my post (use of word 'justify') so that I wouldnt pander to the thought police.
I was just commenting that the SC statute you used (or mentioned?) to support the use (or the mentioning) of the word lynching is weak. Not whether the term is appropriate in a pro-dog context or not. I should have worded better, lest the long arm of the word police strike me down in fury.
Heh--good one--sorry if i seemed over-heated.
SM does not endorse or "dis-endorse".
I was struck by the similarity of "boy tortures/slaughters dog"...and the dissimilarity of the perps' fates. I blogged the original story, read this and was reminded. If anything, musings posts do not always have as explicitly a brown angle or point. Perhaps you'll excuse the "(10 -9) veil" due to that.
At least it took 50 comments before someone felt the need to question me about it, though. I thought it was a bit more veiled than one billionth. :)
didn't romney put his family dog in luggage carrier on a road trip, because it sick and puking and pissing? My gut tells me that Obama is the kindest to animals, maybe followed by Edwards.
you had a wolf-german shepherd hybrid? any pics? whats it like to train a wolf dog?
Now, THAT is a Christmas tradition I could get behind.
To ANNA or any other Indian Christian
Do Indian Christians embrace Santa Claus and other American Christmas traditions or do they view those as foreign traditions?
Do you guys sing American Christmas carols and make eggnog, etc.
Or do your families try to keep your specific traditions from the old country "pure".
I realize it probbaly differs from family to family but what is the general trend?
Im sorry anna, but it is a little hard to believe that SM does not do endorsments. What about all the attention being poured on to that Indian guy running for congress in minnesota. Also, what about the recent post spotlighting, obama's indianess to the tune of some hindi song. SM might not come out openly endorse any candidates and reveal its leftist leanings, but its more than obvious about which candidates the SM bloggers prefer.
Rob, there has been a LOT of commentary, including in the mainstream media, of why PETA's ads were offensive and ineffective. It is dehumanizing and further degrading to people who have been persecuted on the basis of an identity to compare them to animals, which is what happens, whether that is the intent, when someone makes a comparison of this nature or PETA's between gross injustices/crimes against humanity and violence towards animals. It is not a "unique and thoughtful" spin on a well-known phenomena -- it turns sympathizers off to your message and creates offense when there normally may not be any.
My comment on you "belittling" is in the context of previous comments -- when it comes to "hot button" issues, particularly issues of race/racism, you often paint people who hold opposing views as illogical and/or ignorant. Normally I don't say anything because you're also a thoughtful and good-natured guy, and I like to assume that your comments sometimes come off patronizing because the internet is an imperfect medium. That said, I wasn't quick to jump to anything. You wrote, "You only extended the notion of lynching from crime against "person" to crime against "dogs," which seems natural in a non-legal post that's pro-dog. I think one would have to strain pretty hard to take offence at that." I responded that one would not have to strain hard to take offense. I know ANNA didn't mean anything by it, but because she is thoughtful and reflective, I think it's valuable to offer feedback when the use of a term is inappropriate.
I don't know why you are loath to accept that lynching, both the term and action, have a very specific definition. South Carolina's statute is NOT broad, and neither are other comparable state statutes. If you go on to read the statute in the context of its legislative argument, I'm pretty sure you'll find that the intent of the legislation has in mind a narrow definition of lynching. Why is that so difficult for you to accept? Were other groups of people, besides blacks, ethnic white minorities (e.g. Jews, Catholics), and white supporters of civil rights murdered in a systematic and broad way in the U.S.? The answer is no. There is a reason why lynching is called lynching, not hanging or murder or execution. I know that I'm not always perfect at this, but I think it's important to use words, particularly loaded words, correctly.
I don't want to continue to pull the thread off-topic, so this is the last I'm going to post on whether it's appropriate to use "lynch" in this story. Let's discuss more interesting things, like whether this is nefarious or strange/cruel or both.
HereWeGoAgain, your comment only has merit if you ignore the slew of coverage (+ and -) that desi Republicans have received. But I suppose it's more convenient to pretend that coverage is overwhelmingly one-sided.
I detest abuse in any form, whether it is a human life or other animal (especially a kind dog or cat).
Did this guy who ended the dog's life do it in self defence, or was it an accident, or was it to euthanize a suffering soul? I am not able to tell. I am sure the Boy Scout curriculum does not include killing dogs.
(The only exception to my first statement is for spiders. Any spider that enters my abode will make a quick exit off this mortal coil. Spider bites, though rare, can be very dangerous and I have children constantly running around in the house. It's purely self defense since trying to shoo them outside is a royal pain. Besides, Mother Nature has an abundant supply of that life form. Although there may be some varieties that are endangered, I guess. I never intentionally stomp on a spider outside, though.)
I detest abuse and senseless killing in any form, whether it is directed at a human life or another animal life (especially a kind dog or cat).
Did this guy who ended the dog's life do it in self defence, or was it an accident, or was it to euthanize a suffering soul? I am not able to tell. I am sure the Boy Scout curriculum does not include killing dogs.
(The only exception to my first statement is for spiders. Any spider that enters my abode will make a quick exit off this mortal coil. Spider bites, though rare, can be very dangerous and there are young kids constantly running around in the house after school ends. It's purely self defense since trying to shoo them outside is a royal pain. Besides, Mother Nature has an abundant supply of that life form. Although there may be some varieties that are endangered, I guess. I never intentionally stomp on a spider outside, though.)
Sorry about the duplicate post - can the repeated message be deleted? thanks
Camille,
Thanks for the response--I certainly share your sentiment that we shouldn't take whatever disagreement we have on small points the wrong way. I'm tempted to leave it at that, but let me throw out one observation--you seem to be willing as an interpretive matter to stick with the legislative history of the SC anti-lynching statute (about which I'm not sure of the details, though I'd of course agree that historically speaking in the US lynching has been an overwhelmingly white-on-black crime) to conclude that it's narrowly-focussed, rather than reading it as, as it appears on its face, as applying to a broad variety of mob violence. Fair enough. But then when it comes to the PETA ads, you're not willing to go with the "intent" of PETA (I think you'd agree with me that that intent wasn't to offend any human sub-groups (even if, as you argue, the effect was to offend them)) and you instead interpret the ads as comparing groups of humans to animals in moral worth, rather than going with what I take to be the intent of the ads, which is to say "just as X is obviously wrong," so too is "Y treatment" of animals wrong. These issues of interpretation are, or course, notoriously difficult to resolve (and the inconsistency re: intent that I'm pointing out hardly proves you wrong, but does suggest that it's a complicated topic), in short (or even long, on even life-long) missives, so please interpret me as saying "it's not obvious that you're right" rather than as me saying "you're obviously wrong." If I get a little heated at times I don't mean to denigrate you (or anyone else), just to express my disagreement with a specific point. I'm certainly glad I have a couple of ABD cousins, or else I would have become convinced-- between my DBD cousins and your responses to me on SM (I'm partly, but only partly, kidding)--that my combination of pro-PETA (not that I'm adamant about it or a fully observant veg.) and pro-Jindal views render me the personification of an ABCD! But, seriously, it's all good Camille, look forward to future exchanges of views!
By the way, it's not just that torturing animals is a sign that someone may be dangerous in the sense you seem to mention as careless - it's actually a sign that the person may turn out to be a psychopath - i.e. someone who lacks empathy and the understanding that other people exist and have feelings - i.e. the sort of person who can commit murder or serial killings, or if they're very white collar, and smart, simply destroy peoples' life savings or the like. i.e. someone you *definitely* want investigated and watched if they're doing this sort of thing as a child - especially if they've done it more than once.
People who are cruel to animals should be locked up for a long time- not so much as punishment but to protect society. There is a correlation between sadism toward animals and sadism toward people.
I love this: "fuzzy angels with paws." Awwwwwwwwww!!!!!!
Thanks, rob, and the feeling is mutual :)
I agree completely. In fact, if you follow the next-to-the-last-link that's in my post, you'll find that I was trying to say exactly that vs merely "careless". It's from the Humane Society, regarding the proclivity of such people to become serial killers, etc.
1/ people need to separate the philosophy of hinduism from superstitious beliefs of uneducated folk who are doing their best to make amends with their past grevious actions
2/ killing a dog (any animal) to get our rocks off is just sick, we should all be so lucky as to marry someone as heartful as a dog, a dog is too good for these blokes.
It's interesting that hinduism considers dogs worthy of marriage, when the US (and the world in general) are still debating as to whether gay marriage is acceptable in the eye's of God. What would (s)he, the almighty, say about this domestic partnership I wonder?
I have a question... how can you possibly hang a dog in self-defense? You don't just accidentally hang someone. It's almost always premeditated, unless, of course, you're coincidentally next to a fully equipped gallows. There was some amount of thought that went into that.
While I completely agree that you can't always blame the parents for what their children do, I do think, however, that the parents are responsible for their own actions. The fact that Mike Huckabee tried to cover up what his son did, and pretend that it never happened, is, to put it frankly, damning.