changed my mind about michael vick, slap on wrist only

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
That's not the point of the question, and I hope you had the intelligence to realize that. The point of my question is simple. Do you value your life over the life of a dog.

You may weasel around the issue anyway you sit fit, but at the end of the day, If a burglar broke into your home, and told you he's either going to kill you, or the dog, you'd tell him to shoot the dog.

Furthermore, I take particular offense to this line:

[ QUOTE ]
I would prefer the doctors be trained on people like you instead of on dogs. I would trade your life and the lives of thousands like you if it would save my dog.

[/ QUOTE ]

First point: You don't know me. I care deeply about dogs, but I'm not some asinine emo who can't handle life in the real world. Dogs die. People die. I'd prefer dogs dying to people dying.

Humans are animals you see, and recent changes due mostly to P.C politics have made the human species the only species walking the planet to feel that the survival of some lower form of animal was more paramount than their own.

I own two dogs, they mean the world to me, but that doesn't mean I'm going to go down PeTA road and sell my soul. Michael Vick needlessly slaughtered animals. His punishment should be being handcuffed and thrown into a ring with 3 or 4 raging pitbulls.

What happened here was for the purpose of medical training.

BTW: I wouldn't put too much thought into the OP's article, I see little more than a big glass of blue kool-aid.

Furthermore, I hardly consider this Priscilla Feral an unbiased opinion, just the rantings of a lunatic who believes that her life is more important than an animals, but no one else's is.

Did it not strike anyone as odd as to why on April 2, 2007, a writer for the NY Post would decide to write an article about events that transpired concerning the job of a Republican Presidential hopeful's wife, beginning 32 years prior to publication and ending 28 years prior to publication? I don't know about you, but 30 year old news isn't news to me.



Me, I'm going to take this opportunity to call BS on this whole story.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can keep saying over and over again that what happened here was for the purposes of medical training all you want, but that doesn't make it true. What happened here was for the purpose of selling vacuum cleaners or eye makeup or medical supplies, not for medical training. I personally don't care, since I've got nothing against making a little money, but the fact that you keep trying to paint it as "medical training" is exactly the point the OP is trying to make. Why can't you just admit these people stapled some dogs and then killed them when they were done with them, to make a profit? Oh, its because if you admit it was "to make a profit" then thats not that far from "to gamble on" or "to watch for fun" and all of a sudden we start losing the moral high ground.