schnauzer Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 [quote name='Black Obsession' timestamp='1317782650' Not every person who believes in Animal Rights is a "loonie" Yes they are. Sorry lovey - animals dont have Rights. Hi Raz We will have to agree to disagree with this one. I do believe that dogs as companion animals have the right to a good home, a warm bed, and a loving owner. I do not believe that they should be bred in cages for their entire lives, without exercise, proper nutrition, social interaction, vet treatment and enrichment. In my opinion, what you have outlined is animal welfare issues not animal rights and I am sure no one here would have any issues with what you have outlined. But what is actually the difference? As humans, we are enabled to provide man's best friend with a good life. Puppy farmers deny dogs this right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Black Obsession' timestamp='1317782650' Not every person who believes in Animal Rights is a "loonie" Yes they are. Sorry lovey - animals dont have Rights. Hi Raz We will have to agree to disagree with this one. I do believe that dogs as companion animals have the right to a good home, a warm bed, and a loving owner. I do not believe that they should be bred in cages for their entire lives, without exercise, proper nutrition, social interaction, vet treatment and enrichment. I dont think that is an animal rights issue I have the right to own an animal as long as I am responsible for these things - there is a difference. Edited October 5, 2011 by Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raz Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Hi Raz We will have to agree to disagree with this one. Hi Schnauz, You know I love ya mate, but animals dont have Rights. I asked my dogs to get off the lounge and come here to tell you themselves but they told me they dont have an opposable thumb so cant possibly pick up a pen to vote on whether or not they have Rights. they then said - Hey slave...go and pick up my poo, make my dinner and make my bed neat enough to get into tonight. Animals dont have Rights. If you keep telling me they do I'll just say you're an Animal Rights Loonie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mita Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 'Black Obsession' Not every person who believes in Animal Rights is a "loonie", Yes they are. Sorry lovey - animals dont have Rights. No one has rights. Rights are agreed upon & then given. Which is why they are continuously evolving, via discussion and debate. And find their way into community standards or into a legal framework. You lost me. I'd expect I would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schnauzer Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Hi Raz We will have to agree to disagree with this one. Hi Schnauz, You know I love ya mate, but animals dont have Rights. I asked my dogs to get off the lounge and come here to tell you themselves but they told me they dont have an opposable thumb so cant possibly pick up a pen to vote on whether or not they have Rights. they then said - Hey slave...go and pick up my poo, make my dinner and make my bed neat enough to get into tonight. Animals dont have Rights. If you keep telling me they do I'll just say you're an Animal Rights Loonie. Hey Raz, You know I am an animal rights loonie :D I know you think dogs are entitled to a good life too. (otherwise yours would not be on the lounge ) I think dogs have the "right" to be treated well, cared for and loved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raz Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Hey Raz, You know I am an animal rights loonie :D I know you think dogs are entitled to a good life too. (otherwise yours would not be on the lounge ) I think dogs have the "right" to be treated well, cared for and loved. You've never struck me as an Animal Rights Loonie, Schnauz. You still dont...unless you go and B&E or kill some animals in order to demonstrate that animals have Rights (which I think is even loonier than just loonie). You have never made me think you would do that kind of loonie shit, babe. Do you go out there and do loonie militant shit in order to prove that animals have Rights when they dont? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dog_fan Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Animals cannot have rights whilst they are seen as property, when they can be bought and sold. If they are ever not seen as property then how can they consent to living with us because clearly we would be unable to purchase them? Children and people with a mental impairment clearly cannot be bought and sold so that was a very silly analogy regarding their rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schnauzer Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Hey Raz, You know I am an animal rights loonie :D I know you think dogs are entitled to a good life too. (otherwise yours would not be on the lounge ) I think dogs have the "right" to be treated well, cared for and loved. You've never struck me as an Animal Rights Loonie, Schnauz. You still dont...unless you go and B&E or kill some animals in order to demonstrate that animals have Rights (which I think is even loonier than just loonie). You have never made me think you would do that kind of loonie shit, babe. Do you go out there and do loonie militant shit in order to prove that animals have Rights when they dont? I am a rescuer - that probably says it all My belief is that every dog is entitled (has the right?) to a good life with a loving owner/family - can't get more simple than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mita Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Animals cannot have rights whilst they are seen as property, when they can be bought and sold. If they are ever not seen as property then how can they consent to living with us because clearly we would be unable to purchase them? Children and people with a mental impairment clearly cannot be bought and sold so that was a very silly analogy regarding their rights. Keep your 'silly' remarks to yourself & be civil. I've pointed out that there's ongoing discussion & debate about animals rights. Just as there's always ongoing discussion & debates about the question of any rights. I am not giving a charter or a law on animal rights. The ongoing debate is because rights do not occur naturally. They arise out of debates & discussions in communities.....and can become very heated and polarised. Often critics argue that some new 'right' is at odds with some other existing 'right'. Like, the opponents of giving votes to women, pointed out that was in conflict with women being under the direction of their husbands in the law of the time. If there becomes enough support in the community, only then are particular rights given....by way of the legal framework or an agreed upon charter. My position is that the debate and discussion that go in a community around any new perspective on rights....is healthy. From all sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raz Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 I am a rescuer - that probably says it all can't get more simple than that. And my belief cant get simpler than what it is either. Animals dont have Rights anymore than a tree does. Scuse me - my animals just asked for some beluga caviar before they pee on the tree in the backyard and I have to tell them they dont have the Right to ask for the beluga Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Hey Raz, You know I am an animal rights loonie :D I know you think dogs are entitled to a good life too. (otherwise yours would not be on the lounge ) I think dogs have the "right" to be treated well, cared for and loved. You've never struck me as an Animal Rights Loonie, Schnauz. You still dont...unless you go and B&E or kill some animals in order to demonstrate that animals have Rights (which I think is even loonier than just loonie). You have never made me think you would do that kind of loonie shit, babe. Do you go out there and do loonie militant shit in order to prove that animals have Rights when they dont? I am a rescuer - that probably says it all My belief is that every dog is entitled (has the right?) to a good life with a loving owner/family - can't get more simple than that. What if they had rights and decided they didnt want a loving owner or family but would rather run free and live with a dog family instead - should they have the right to choose or should we have the right to choose for them? I think we should have the right to choose for them if we acccept the responsibilty that brings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dog_fan Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Animals cannot have rights whilst they are seen as property, when they can be bought and sold. If they are ever not seen as property then how can they consent to living with us because clearly we would be unable to purchase them? Children and people with a mental impairment clearly cannot be bought and sold so that was a very silly analogy regarding their rights. Keep your 'silly' remarks to yourself & be civil. I've pointed out that there's ongoing discussion & debate about animals rights. Just as there's always ongoing discussion & debates about the question of any rights. I am not giving a charter or a law on animal rights. The ongoing debate is because rights do not occur naturally. They arise out of debates & discussions in communities.....and can become very heated and polarised. Often critics argue that some new 'right' is at odds with some other existing 'right'. Like, the opponents of giving votes to women, pointed out that was in conflict with women being under the direction of their husbands in the law of the time. If there becomes enough support in the community, only then are particular rights given....by way of the legal framework or an agreed upon charter. My position is that the debate and discussion that go in a community around any new perspective on rights....is healthy. From all sides. Goodness me, talk about playing the man and not the ball. I have read the forum rules and personal attacks are not allowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 (edited) What if they had rights and decided they didnt want a loving owner or family but would rather run free and live with a dog family instead - should they have the right to choose or should we have the right to choose for them? I think we should have the right to choose for them if we acccept the responsibilty that brings. I agree with Steve. People who stand for "Animal Rights" bother me - many probably do without realising what these sort of things do mean and how they might impact. If an animal has rights, that means we need to *ask* them about everything we want them to do and if they don't wanna, they don't hafta. That would prove a major problem and would generally NOT be in the dog's best interests. That's a part of what I am not fond of in relation to Oscars Law. To my knowledge, the people behind that are about animal rights. I'm ready to stand corrected in that if I'm wrong, though. I think the dog is safer as being regarded by law as a chattel. Might not sound as warm and fuzzy as some might like, but you need to look past your sentimental reactions to the description to understand why and where it is better. Edited October 5, 2011 by Erny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raz Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 What if they had rights and decided they didnt want a loving owner or family but would rather run free and live with a dog family instead - should they have the right to choose or should we have the right to choose for them? Isnt it funny - if my dogs had Rights they'd probably say they dont want to have their balls chopped off, want to run around the neighbourhood barking their heads off and kill cats, eat shit out of garbage cans, drink out of open sewers and sleep wherever they feel like it. My dogs dont have Rights - they're not little humans in fur coats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 What if they had rights and decided they didnt want a loving owner or family but would rather run free and live with a dog family instead - should they have the right to choose or should we have the right to choose for them? Isnt it funny - if my dogs had Rights they'd probably say they dont want to have their balls chopped off, want to run around the neighbourhood barking their heads off and kill cats, eat shit out of garbage cans, drink out of open sewers and sleep wherever they feel like it. My dogs dont have Rights - they're not little humans in fur coats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raz Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 If some moronic Animal Rights loonie wants to come and tell me my dogs have Rights, they can cash me up with the tens of thousands of dollars I've spent on vet bills first - I'm sure my dogs didnt want to be stuck in a vet clinic being prodded with medication they didnt ask for but I forced it onto them so my bad. I could do with the dough so hand it over, loonies. Animals have Rights? *snort* Pull the other one and it'll play jingle bells. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 I dont think you can buy something that has rights - slavery, went out pretty quickly when they gave them rights, so did women being treated as property when they gave them the right to vote and own their own property. I cant buy a baby or a person in a coma either - can I? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anniek Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Genuine question : Does this mean that any dog in a shelter showing any sign of (eg) HD doesn't get a chance to be re-homed? Erny I think that is very likely - the local RSPCA fails (kills) many surrendered greyhounds that have flea allergies, even though we have offered to take them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandgrubber Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 (edited) If some moronic Animal Rights loonie wants to come and tell me my dogs have Rights, they can cash me up with the tens of thousands of dollars I've spent on vet bills first - I'm sure my dogs didnt want to be stuck in a vet clinic being prodded with medication they didnt ask for but I forced it onto them so my bad. I could do with the dough so hand it over, loonies. Animals have Rights? *snort* Pull the other one and it'll play jingle bells.&lt;br /&gt;I disagree. Anti-cruelty legislation, dating back to the 19th century, has established the concept that animals, particularly dogs, should have certain minimal standards of care, and should not be worked to death (as sometimes happened with spit dogs and cart dogs, horses, donkeys, etc.). The first child welfare laws in the USA were based on anti-cruelty legislation put in to protect work animals. When people take on an animal as a companion, that animal deserves a certain minimal standard of care. Yes, there will be disputes about what that minimum of care is, and it will vary over time and from place to place. What I don't understand is how the Loonies fail to be interested in the execution of dogs because they look wrong. I can't think of a worse violation of rights than mass execution based on suppositions with no scientific basis. As for the vet care question . . . I may not agree with where the lines are drawn: ear and tail docking and removal of dew claws are things that breeders have done for centuries, and there's no question that these things can be done in a humane fashion. I'm not convinced that a bullet is any less humane than the green dream. But I do agree to there being laws. DIY Ceasars and debarking are a step too far (I don't know about Australian kenneling laws . . . but these are practices that have recently been outlawed in some US states after finding them widespread in huge, highly commercial breeding operations).<br /><br />p.s. If anyone can explain what's going on with my posts . . . adding a bunch of /br's and >'s etc., please help. I have posted in the appropriate forum for this, but I don't think I've gotten a response yet. I removed a lot of junk from this post, but it was a real mess before I did so. I've re-edited it . . . maybe the junk will find its way back in. Edited October 5, 2011 by sandgrubber Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dogcentric Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 (edited) Here's an interesting article from the Voiceless website called "What is Animal Law?" http://www.voiceless.org.au/Law/Misc/What_is_Animal_Law_.html It explains the difference between Animal Rights Law and Animal Welfare Law. It also contains a link to the Universal Declaration of Animal Welfare (UDAW) on the WSPCA website - where you can sign their petition to have the Declaration endorsed by the UN. The UDAW is supported by the British Veterinary Association and it "received a formal vote from all EU countries in March this year." The UDAW is "notably different" from the Universal Declaration of Animal Rights (UDAR), which was created in 1972. My understanding of the difference between Animal Rights and Animal Welfare, in the context of these two documents, is that Animal Rights supporters want to end the suffering of animals while Animal Welfare supporters want to moderate it. Also, Animal Welfare supporters think it's okay for animals to be regarded as "property" while Animal Rights supporters do not. I find this subject absolutely fascinating and I could talk about it forever! And thanks for all your eye-opening posts. You've helped me to realise that I'm definitely an Animal Welfare loonie, and not an Animal Rights loonie (not that there's anything wrong with that - I respect other people's views). Oh yeah, and I've changed my username from Black Obsession to "dogcentric" because I love all dogs and not just black Labradors...and because dogs are the centre of my universe. Edited October 5, 2011 by dogcentric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now