Michael Vick indicted on dog fighting charges

[pinky]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/17/AR2007071701393.html

He could be facing some serious jail time if he's convicted. If he's guilty, I'd probably rather see him in a pen with some fighting dogs.

People who do that are scum.

[Annoyedlistner]

i personally think Vick has played his last game in the NFL.

what a scum bag if he's convicted.

[pinky]

That's hard to say. If he's not convicted, or manages to avoid jail time, I think it's possible that some team would be willing to take him on, simply because of his talent. Unfortunately, that's the nature of professional sports....buy whatever talent you think can get you over the top, and the hell with ethics. I know the NFL in particular is trying to clean up its image, and that will work against "Ookie" if he tries to come back. But I can already hear the "He's paid his price, and learned his lesson" from some stupid owner.

[Stopanimalabuse]

Along with the NBA ref who gambled on some of the games, it's a shame to see some people in sports acting the way they do. I can't really say much until I have any reason to believe one way or the other, but I don't see dog-fighting as much different than many of the other activities humans do as it relates to animals. It's good to see PETA getting involved in this.

[pinky]

I'm not sure what other activities you mean, but it seems to me that using dogs as fighters, just for entertainment, then executing the losing animals, not to put them out of their misery humanely, but to punish them for losing, is radically different from just about anything else done to animals.

[Stopanimalabuse]

I'm not sure what other activities you mean, but it seems to me that using dogs as fighters, just for entertainment, then executing the losing animals, not to put them out of their misery humanely, but to punish them for losing, is radically different from just about anything else done to animals.
**** fighting is very similar. The slaughterhouse is not necessary at this point, so I'd say that's similar. We could use criminals(murder, rape, etc.) for testing products and the human body is much more similar rather than a rat's, so I'd say laboratory testing is similar. My view point is, if it's necessary it's one thing, but unnecessary violence towards any animals(including humans) is similar. I'm not saying they're the same, so I hope people aren't interpreting it that way. Foie gras(where they purposely give animals a disease) could be the worst of them all IMO.

[pinky]

Rooster fighting (you know, that word that got censored out) is just as bad as dog fighting. It's still using defensless animals for "sport."

I'm not sure why you would say that a slaughterhouse is not necessary. I know you are a vegetarian (or vegan, I'm not sure which), but most of us are not. Our bodies were designed to be omnivores, and most choose to eat meat as well as vegetables. How would you propose ensuring a sufficient food supply, if not slaughterhouses? I'll agree that the way some animals are bred is inhumane, and the issue of foie gras is valid, but I'm not sure how you would see us maintaining the food supply for the majority of us.

As for animal testing, I disagree completely with the practice for cosmetics; however, I wouldn't limit the practice when it involves medical testing. The idea of using prisoners for medical testing is too Josef Mengele for me.

[Stopanimalabuse]

Rooster fighting (you know, that word that got censored out) is just as bad as dog fighting. It's still using defensless animals for "sport."

I'm not sure why you would say that a slaughterhouse is not necessary. I know you are a vegetarian (or vegan, I'm not sure which), but most of us are not. Our bodies were designed to be omnivores, and most choose to eat meat as well as vegetables. How would you propose ensuring a sufficient food supply, if not slaughterhouses? I'll agree that the way some animals are bred is inhumane, and the issue of foie gras is valid, but I'm not sure how you would see us maintaining the food supply for the majority of us.

As for animal testing, I disagree completely with the practice for cosmetics; however, I wouldn't limit the practice when it involves medical testing. The idea of using prisoners for medical testing is too Josef Mengele for me.
To be honest, I have little reason to think Mengele even existed. You'd have to have either admission or DNA evidence that the crime happened, and it would only be for the major criminals like rape or murder. I think it would reduce crime, and you wouldn't have to kill some innocent rat, mouse, or whatever. A lot of companies use human cells today, so I see no reason why that can't be in more abundance.

The term I meant was c o c k fighting. The human teeth are similar to an omnivore, but the digestive system is more like an herbivore. I hear these stories about people who become vegans and their body odor is gone, so I think that's telling us that this is not natural. If you had a one child per family rule, the human population could reach below 2 billion by the end of the century. Feeding 2 billion herbivores would be very easy. The effect the slaughterhouse has had on the land, on oceans, on our fossil fuels, and on our water supply is very troublesome. A crisis will occur at some point if this continues, so humans will be forced to change. It's best that we at least start reducing the meat consumed now, but trends show just the opposite. The least we can do is give the animals room to roam in as far as the slaughterhouse goes to avoid the torture, but that's not happening. Even the seals in Canada today are suffering horrendous torture. Horseracing and maybe a few other actions don't apply, but pretty much every other act humans do to animals is unnecessary torture and therefore should be condemned just as harshly as dog fighting.

[pinky]

You will never be able to put a "one child per family" rule in any democracy. China has had that rule for some time, and what they've found is that there is a huge imbalance between males and females there, because families much prefer boys, and leave their daughters abandoned or killed. You will also not be able to enforce a vegetarian diet in a democracy. So if you want to live in a totalitarian state, be my guest. My family will stay here, where such personal decisions are, indeed, personal.

And I don't understand why you would doubt the existence of Josef Mengele. His existence has been clearly documented. Unless you want to claim that the Holocaust never happened, you have to acknowledge Mengele.

[Stopanimalabuse]

You will never be able to put a "one child per family" rule in any democracy. China has had that rule for some time, and what they've found is that there is a huge imbalance between males and females there, because families much prefer boys, and leave their daughters abandoned or killed. You will also not be able to enforce a vegetarian diet in a democracy. So if you want to live in a totalitarian state, be my guest. My family will stay here, where such personal decisions are, indeed, personal.

And I don't understand why you would doubt the existence of Josef Mengele. His existence has been clearly documented. Unless you want to claim that the Holocaust never happened, you have to acknowledge Mengele.
We've had multiple discussions about that specific event. I've tried to discuss and debate it, while you'd rather resort to name-calling and smears and not debate. There's no reason to discuss that specific event any further.

I certainly don't see this as a democracy/totalitarian issue. I'm a big believer in free speech and that people should have rights to dress the way they want. I'll never associate freedom and democracy together, as that's a complete myth. Anyways, you could have everybody recycle and even be vegan, but as long as the human population remains big, you'll always have problems. Some scientists think 50% of the species will be extinct by the end of the century, and the large human population is by far the largest factor. Here's how the meat industry plays a role: 50% of the rainforests have been destroyed, and using that land for cattle grazing(and then sending them to slaughter) is one of the biggest factors here. Reports vary as to the impact rainforests have on oxygen, so that could be very troublesome in the future. I'm not sure the exact story, but the belt shutting down in the oceans could put Europe in an ice age. Sending manure constantly into the oceans will be one of the big factors here. It takes maybe 8,000 gallons of water for one pound of beef, while stuff like vegetables and bread are around 100-200 gallons. Oil is also a huge problem, but I'm not sure about the figures. Water is expected to be a major problem in two decades and the oil problem could have horrible, horrible results maybe 5 or 6 decades from now. We owe it to the non-human world and future generations that we change or billions of people and potentially millions of species will suffer.

[pinky]

There isn't anything to debate about the Holocaust. It happened. I've met survivors of the camps.

I don't disagree that we need to change what we're doing in order to protect and save the biosphere. However, to suggest a one child per (vegan only) family rule is impractical, and an unacceptable infringement of freedom and personal choice.

[Stopanimalabuse]

There isn't anything to debate about the Holocaust. It happened. I've met survivors of the camps.

I don't disagree that we need to change what we're doing in order to protect and save the biosphere. However, to suggest a one child per (vegan only) family rule is impractical, and an unacceptable infringement of freedom and personal choice.
First, survivors at Nuremberg made claims that they know are lies, and people will very frequently lie in court. It's amazing that every site I go on about crematoriums says it takes 1 hr. 15 min. to maybe 4 hours to cremate one body, while we're told 10-20 minutes. Society moves forward so the crematoriums used today are more efficient than those used in the past. If you can find even 2 sites about cremating which claim you can cremate a person with a crematorium in 10-20 minutes, I'd love to see it. With pyres, it's very possible, but that's not what the claim is. Second, about the only thing you've ever said about animals having their habitat destroyed is it's sad. I know that if aliens came down and started to over-populate, destroy our habitats, and basically torture us the same way we do to animals, there would be a huge out-cry from people like yourself. Could you say what you feel about this, or does it not bother you much? Just curious.

[pinky]

Where did you get the information that people claimed that cremations took only 20 minutes? I don't recall ever hearing that. However, even if that mistaken/false claim was made at Nuremburg, that doesn't invalidate all the other evidence of mass exterminations, including the testimonies of the soldiers who liberated the death camps, the testimonies of survivors (do you think they all just decided to tattoo numbers on their arms as part of a conspiracy?), and the words of the Nazi leaders.

As for your scenario about aliens, I don't see that happening, but if it did, it would represent a species totally alien to the planet; it's possible that anything they did would be detrimental to us; it's also possible that it would not be. I can't even speculate a reaction to that, because it's too far-fetched a concept.

[Stopanimalabuse]

Where did you get the information that people claimed that cremations took only 20 minutes? I don't recall ever hearing that. However, even if that mistaken/false claim was made at Nuremburg, that doesn't invalidate all the other evidence of mass exterminations, including the testimonies of the soldiers who liberated the death camps, the testimonies of survivors (do you think they all just decided to tattoo numbers on their arms as part of a conspiracy?), and the words of the Nazi leaders.

As for your scenario about aliens, I don't see that happening, but if it did, it would represent a species totally alien to the planet; it's possible that anything they did would be detrimental to us; it's also possible that it would not be. I can't even speculate a reaction to that, because it's too far-fetched a concept.
No, I've never denied the tatoo's. All claims I've read say 10-20 minutes. If it was 1.5 hours per person and you figure crematoriums can only be used for 12 hours per day and you figure the small number of crematoriums they had, a million may not even be possible. The Allied Powers destroyed the railroad systems. Even the Germans were starving at the end of the war because they couldn't get the food in. The soldiers did see people starving, but it's a question of what the circumstances were. I'd have to see what you're reading about claims made by the survivors, as the individual made different statements and I can't comment as a whole. The only German leaders I've heard "admit" to it are Eichmann and Rudolph Hoess. We all know how easy it is to torture a person behind the scenes and get them to confess. Maybe a dozen German leaders(including Albert Speer, well-known for his anti-Hitler rhetoric by the end of the war) have denied any knowledge of this, so German leaders actually favor it not happening rather than happening. On another hand, you're still not criticizing humans for our actions towards other creatures. We've also had discussions about war crimes done by Churchill and Roosevelt which includes the signing of the Morgenthau Plan(a plan to kill maybe 20-30 million Germans;estimates say about 9-15 million died), the bombing of Dresden, Operation Keelhaul, and the ethnic cleansing of millions of Germans. You have made every effort not to criticize these actions, just as you've made no effort yet to criticize our actions towards animals. Hopefully that will change some day.

[pinky]

You repeatedly cite the Morgenthau Plan as though it had unanimous support within the Allies and had actually been fully implemented. In fact, very little of it was implemented, and it was abandoned rather quickly as both immoral and counterproductive. There were numerous important opponents of the plan in both the US and Britain, and it was discredited even before it could be implemented.

[Stopanimalabuse]

You repeatedly cite the Morgenthau Plan as though it had unanimous support within the Allies and had actually been fully implemented. In fact, very little of it was implemented, and it was abandoned rather quickly as both immoral and counterproductive. There were numerous important opponents of the plan in both the US and Britain, and it was discredited even before it could be implemented.
Actually there are questions as to how much of it was carried out, and my point was that Churchill and Roosevelt(two people who are treated as heroes today) both signed it. Nothing else. I'm getting bored of this subject. What are the expectations for the Giants this year? I may be seeing them in Albany for training camp, but we'll see whether my family thinks it's worth the $35. I'm a much bigger fan of basketball than football, but I am curious to see what they have to go through in a game like this. They lost Barber, so I'm thinking they may not be too good this year.

[pinky]

Strahan is also talking about retirement, isn't he? All of us who are Eagles fans like that idea very much.

While I admit he's good, his record is also tainted, since Favre let himself be sacked on the record-breaker.

[Stopanimalabuse]

Strahan is also talking about retirement, isn't he? All of us who are Eagles fans like that idea very much.

While I admit he's good, his record is also tainted, since Favre let himself be sacked on the record-breaker.
Maybe his record, but that's only one sack in a career which has had more than 100 of them. I used to watch football a lot more when Jerry Rice and Steve Young were leading the 49ers to greatness, so I'd actually say I spend more time arguing with my brother over whether John Elway or Steve Young was the better quarterback(Young all the way) than I do talking about today's football. I follow it enough to know what's going on. I definitely think there will be more pressure on Eli Manning than ever, and I can't see the Giants interested in him much longer unless he can have a stand-out season. I can see him becoming the back-up to his brother. That would be funny. He has to show he can do well in the big games or there's no reason they should keep him considering his salary. Football should definitely do it more like basketball:a rookie can't make much more than a few million dollars. Though at least football doesn't have the draft lottery.

[pinky]

I agree that Eli needs to step up if he wants a long career with the Giants. Of course, I'm perfectly happy with the Giants having a weak quarterback. :D

[Stopanimalabuse]

Have you ever been to any training camp, pinky? There's maybe a 50/50 chance that I'm going, but I should definitely be going next year if I don't go this year.

[pinky]

Actually, I'm going to the Eagles' camp on Monday. My husand and son went a few times, and wanted to go again this year, so I'm taggin along.

It's going to be crazy though. Yesterday they had about 18,000 people there! :blueeek: