China Orders Mass Slaughter of Dogs

[Aaryanna]

[COLOR=SeaGreen]Okay I just had to start a thread about this after Charles mentioned it and I found out what it was really about. For more details take a look here: [URL=http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/china-orders-mass-slaughter-of-dogs/20060801000009990001?_ccc=6&cid=842]Article [/URL]

The whole thing just sickens me to hear that instead of trying to educate the people on how important it is to have their pets vaccinated, they are instead randomly killing all dogs in an area where people have died from rabies. The sheer number of people dying from this disease in this country also baffles me as rabies is treatable and here in the US deaths from the disease are rare.

Now I know that things are different over there, but it just doesn?t make any sense as I?ve always made sure my dog gets her shot to prevent rabies and in fact she has a little tag that goes on her collar that proves she has been vaccinated. It even has the year on it along with the name of the vet clinic, a phone number and another number so the vet clinic can see which animal it is for. So if for any reason she got lose and actually did bite someone they would know she was safe and could also find me through the information on the tag. Along with the one that has her name and my address on it.

I realize that they are trying to save people?s lives by killing the dogs, but honestly it just makes them look more like barbarians who would rather kill than find a long term solution. Especially since there are many wild animals that spread the disease as well. It seems like they are going after the easiest target and ignoring the fact that there are better solutions out there. [/COLOR]

[Albert Flasher]

[COLOR=Sienna]China is a 1st world economy, but the people are 3rd world. They don't have access to vaccinations like we do. They have over a billion people, which means they're going to have a lot of pets, and since they don't have access to vaccinations like we do, it's simple easier, not to mention significantly cheaper, to just kill the dogs. That's the bottom line here: less money = good, and it's the same everywhere you go. You can't get away with that **** in the West because of the freedom of the press, but if they could, they damn-well would if it would save them money.

I feel bad for the dogs, I really do, but it's the logical course of action.[/COLOR]

[Delta]

[COLOR=#656446]Well, a lot of places in this world have really inefficient dog pound, ah, systems and Shanghai's one of them. Instead of allocating funds for local dog pounds, they've probably decided that slaughter is a more cost-effective solution to the problem. And let's face it, it [i]really[/i] is. After all, a well-placed strike on the head costs dollars less than an anti-rabies shot.

However cruel it may sound and despite the ire I might educe from the most of you, I strongly concur with the Chinese government's decision. Protection of the citizens was, is, and will always be foremost among the many priorities of governments and as essentialist as it may seem, so is choosing the method where the administration can shell out less.[/COLOR]

[Albert Flasher]

[QUOTE=Delta][COLOR=#656446]Well, a lot of places in this world have really inefficient dog pound, ah, systems and Shanghai's one of them. Instead of allocating funds for local dog pounds, they've probably decided that slaughter is a more cost-effective solution to the problem. And let's face it, it [i]really[/i] is. After all, a well-placed strike on the head costs dollars less than an anti-rabies shot.

However cruel it may sound and despite the ire I might educe from the most of you, I strongly concur with the Chinese government's decision. Protection of the citizens was, is, and will always be foremost among the many priorities of governments and as essentialist as it may seem, so is choosing the method where the administration can shell out less.[/COLOR][/QUOTE]
[COLOR=Sienna]
Mmhmm, I agree. Frankly, this is a big step forward for the Chinese: their old strategy would have been to kill everyone who owns a dog to prevent them from getting rabies, just because they want to use every excuse they have to cull the population.[/COLOR]

[Derald]

[FONT=Lucida Console][SIZE=1][COLOR=DarkSlateGray]Why is this in the media?! Oh wait, that's right - people tend to see animals as other people. How could I have been so foolish?! Of course people are going feel sad for a mass slaughter of such a being...except me.

Let's see here - when it comes down to it, animals are no more than organic machines with their own individual niches in the ecosystem. Furthermore, the dog has been bred throughout the years to be 'domesticated' (another term for 'stupid') for its use as a 'companion' to the human, and, by doing so, warping its place in the ecosystem. Now, not only is this absurd, but the dog population has been rapidly rising due to its popularity as a 'pet.' Then, by acquiring infectious diseases, and by having no [I]true[/I] purpose anymore, it becomes an imminent threat to the inhabitants of the overrun area. The people merely solved an equation and executed an appropriate, if not convenient, solution.

And to the animal rights activists out there: Face it - animals do not have souls; they are not people. Animals are governed by nothing more than basic, primal instinct. If an animal appears to 'show emotion' then understand that emotions are simply responses triggered by neural synapses in the brain in accordance to the current stimuli level in a situation.

Now, I apologize if I offended anyone, but this truly is a 'pet'-peeve of mine.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[Horendithas]

[COLOR=DeepSkyBlue]Although killing the dogs is a good short-term solution. In the long run it?s a shortsighted one as well. In Asia it?s a big problem as you can see here: [URL=http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol11no12/05-0271.htm]Rabies[/URL] The occurrence of Rabies is a huge problem and killing dogs, unless you are willing to outright exterminate them is not going to solve the problem. As it says in the page I linked to:

[INDENT]Vaccinating domestic dogs in rural areas would substantially reduce the numbers of human rabies cases. For this goal to be achieved, government-funded registration and licensing for all dogs would have to be compulsory and vaccination and sterilization of owned dogs in rural areas would have to be implemented and regular vaccination of dogs in urban areas continued. If the medical infrastructure in rural areas is strengthened by educating more professional healthcare workers and improving the availability of biological products, especially vaccines and rabies immunoglobulin for human use in postexposure prophylaxis regimens, China would be able to realize the goal of the World Health Organization to reduce by half the number of human rabies cases worldwide by 2015.
[/INDENT]
The problem with simply killing the dogs is it?s a far from perfect solution. By education and working on providing the means for citizens to be able to vaccinate their pets eventually they could end up like other places, virtually rabies free. Take the US, like Aaryanna mentioned death from Rabies is relatively rare. As it also says in the page I linked too:

[INDENT]Owned dogs do not have to be registered in China, and the number of dogs has been estimated at 80?200 million. In rural areas, low vaccination coverage of dogs is widespread, largely because of poor awareness of rabies and the high cost of vaccination.[/INDENT]

So killing off 50,000 dogs isn?t much of a solution at all. It?s like making a tiny less than one percent effort in dealing with the real problem. Which in this case as I already mentioned is vaccination along with education and providing the means for spaying animals to help keep the population under control. It?s a high cost solution because it doesn?t even exist so a fair amount would be required to get it started, but once they did they would actually start to reduce the number of human deaths from this disease.

Unless they forbid people to have dogs at all they are never going to make much of a difference by killing them, as there are too many. And even then that?s ignoring the other wild sources of rabies. So it may be cheaper, it?s in essence ignoring more long-term and effective methods of ending the rabies problem over there. [/COLOR]

[TheResplendent]

The key thing here is they believe it to be the cheapest way of going about this problem. There are many other ways of going about this, and yes it costs money but because of the way dogs are seen i guess they feel it's unneccesary. Dogs do not provide us with life sustaining materials like other animals which are killed for them and still therefore considered useful and important such as cows, chickens, sheep, etc etc. So i suppose in the eyes of many that makes it ok, but it sickens me to my stomach. I'm a dog lover and it may seem biased, but it isn't devoid of logic either.

A lot has already been said in this thread about better methods, and i agree with them all but the key factor here is that this method is not only the cheapest but the easiest as well. No hassle, no harm to us, it's a win/win situation for humans regardless of how they approach it because if done right, money invested into the establishment of vaccination clinics as well as the vaccine itself whether it be through domestic means or international will ultimatley prove to solve the problem and create a drastic decrease in mortality rates due to rabies from dogs.

There is no consideration what so ever in a decision like this concerning the lives of the dogs, and people may say "so what" and not understand where i'm coming from but i see it as a big problem. Then people say that humans are more important then dogs so when i make a comment like "Well why don't we just mass murder all of the STD carriers so they can't run the risk of spreading it" people will say to me "But they are still human, and it is important that we take preventative measure that are humane"...makes sense, sure (note: i am not in favor of killing off all STD carriers for the aforementioned scenario, i am simply against both but making a comparison to a similar situation). But the reasoning most of the time for that to be acceptable is because animals are more expendable then humans are, and therefore as we have strict laws against violence and killing toward humans it seems to be fine against animals.

In response to that, if you ask me, humans deserve the violence they receive much more often than animals do. Humans commit acts which induce a justified karma in theory and give reasons for retribution. Animals aside from those needed for in order for us to live on a normal basis are arbitrarily hurt and killed for the fun of it or because they are seen as inferior...it's no different from genocide. In this case it may be a preventative measure, but it might as well be an excuse for killing 2 birds with one stone rather then taking another measure that would still benefit the human race on the other hand, minus the contraversey caused by this disgusting act.

Again, i am not devoid of seeing the purpose in this and i know many people will agree with this method and not give a second thought to the mass murder part. Again as well, i am a dog lover and that is where the motivation for this rant comes from. I couldn't disagree with what's going on here, more than i already do. My apologies if by some way, somehow...dunno how...i offended anyone.

[Retribution]

[QUOTE=Derald][FONT=Lucida Console][SIZE=1][COLOR=DarkSlateGray]Let's see here - when it comes down to it, animals are no more than organic machines with their own individual niches in the ecosystem. Furthermore, the dog has been bred throughout the years to be 'domesticated' (another term for 'stupid') for its use as a 'companion' to the human, and, by doing so, warping its place in the ecosystem.

And to the animal rights activists out there: Face it - animals do not have souls; they are not people. Animals are governed by nothing more than basic, primal instinct. If an animal appears to 'show emotion' then understand that emotions are simply responses triggered by neural synapses in the brain in accordance to the current stimuli level in a situation.

Now, I apologize if I offended anyone, but this truly is a 'pet'-peeve of mine.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT][/QUOTE]
[size=1]For your first point... that's why everyone is so heated about this. Because dogs have become our companions, we now see them as a lower-version of ourselves. Many dog owners see their dog as a part of the family, subordinate only to their children.

Your second point is somewhat funny in the respect that you're arguing that intellect gives you a soul and a lack of it means you don't. I'm not sure if you were making that claim, but that's what it seemed like, and the claim is a rather presumptuous one.

You didn't really offend me so much as remind me of how unsympathetic people can be. I mean, c'mon. [spoiler][url=http://cdn.news.aol.com/aolnews_photos/02/04/20060802125409990021][b]This[/b][/url] picture is slightly disturbing to me. Imagining a dog being beaten to a bloody pulp makes me wince.[/spoiler][/size]

[Derald]

[quote name='Retribution][size=1']Your second point is somewhat funny in the respect that you're arguing that intellect gives you a soul and a lack of it means you don't. I'm not sure if you were making that claim, but that's what it seemed like, and the claim is a rather presumptuous one.[/size][/quote]

[FONT=Lucida Console][SIZE=1][COLOR=DarkSlateGray]No, I was not making the assumed claim. As a matter of fact...I am starting to believe that people are becoming like these dogs. Look at the news - all the perversion in the world, all caused by people's inability to restrain their own primal urges...So, in that sense, I could believe that some people are on the same footing as the very animals they perceive as a threat. You see, the ability to see the difference between "good" and "bad" are what make people human. Dogs, on the other hand, can only be trained and conditioned, giving them no choice in the matter. That key word, "choice," to me, is a deciding factor in the determination of whether or not Fido has a soul. You can have all the intellect you want, but it's worthless if you cannot make choices.

Then again, one would have to be in my mind to see where I'm coming from. I simply do not have the ability to fully communicate my feelings through mere words.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[Charles]

Thanks for starting this thread, Aaryana; this topic had to come to light here.

I don't see how anyone with a heart could argue that this method of brutally slaying dogs can be justified. I mean, look at this:

[CENTER][IMG]http://cdn.news.aol.com/aolnews_photos/02/04/20060802125409990021[/IMG][/CENTER]

Look at that sick bastard having fun twirling the stick. That poor dog didn't stand a chance. The dog probably throught he was in for a grand game of fetch before the brutal clubbing ensued. Simply awful.

Some of you insist that cheaper is better, but my stance is that if China does not have a humane method of dealing with this problem, they should find one before taking such harsh action. But, I do not believe that is the case. China is fully capable of dealing with this problem in a better way, but instead they choose to take the easy, albeit cruel way out. Beating any living creature to death with a stick is one of the most savage, primal, and sadistic measures one could resort to. Also, let's not forget that "dog" spelled backwards is "god." So, in short:

[CENTER][IMG]http://www.innocentenglish.com/cute-animals/cute-moving-puppy-8.gif[/IMG][/CENTER]

[TheResplendent]

[QUOTE=Charles]Thanks for starting this thread, Aaryana; this topic had to come to light here.

I don't see how anyone with a heart could argue that this method of brutally slaying dogs can be justified. I mean, look at this:

[CENTER][IMG]http://cdn.news.aol.com/aolnews_photos/02/04/20060802125409990021[/IMG][/CENTER]

Look at that sick bastard having fun twirling the stick. That poor dog didn't stand a chance. The dog probably throught he was in for a grand game of fetch before the brutal clubbing ensued. Simply awful.

Some of you insist that cheaper is better, but my stance is that if China does not have a humane method of dealing with this problem, they should find one before taking such harsh action. But, I do not believe that is the case. China is fully capable of dealing with this problem in a better way, but instead they choose to take the easy, albeit cruel way out. Beating any living creature to death with a stick is one of the most savage, primal, and sadistic measures one could resort to. Also, let's not forget that "dog" spelled backwards is "god." So, in short:

[CENTER][IMG]http://www.innocentenglish.com/cute-animals/cute-moving-puppy-8.gif[/IMG][/CENTER][/QUOTE]

All well said. I couldn't agree more.

As for that picture it made me sick to my stomach. Another reason it's so rediculous...when dogs are put to sleep for reasons that aren't inhumane it is done discreetly and with injections to ease their pain by putting them to sleep (meaning death) BECAUSE they are extremely sick and in pain. Those choices alone are hard enough as well despite it being the best choice for the dog's well being. What the hell is with this beating the dog with a stick crap? It's completely unnceccesary and demented. This dosn't do much justice for an argument against this being for some kind of sick game.

[SunfallE]

[COLOR=RoyalBlue][quote name='Charles'] Beating any living creature to death with a stick is one of the most savage, primal, and sadistic measures one could resort to. [/quote]That?s really my whole objection to this entire mess. Not that it might have been necessary to put the dogs down, but that they are beating them to death. It?s beyond cruel and really puts the whole country in a bad light to the rest of the world. There are better solutions and they don?t want to be bothered to even try. Even if it?s more expensive they could at least make a start and work on putting long-term solutions into place instead of this indifferent and sick attitude of lets just kill them all.

This isn?t really an issue of whether dogs have souls or not but rather one of stupidity as short term measures like this isn?t going to stop rabies when there are so many dogs in China. Unless they plan on killing them all. And considering that we domesticated animals to be companions that?s just lovely that we go to that trouble only to fail to care for them medically and then not even have the compassion to kill them more humanely. No they?ve out right beaten them to death and as Charles said, beating any living creature to death is sick.

Does anyone even know if China has tried to educate people or help make vaccinating pets cheaper? Honestly it sounds to me that they doing what they often do, kill and ask questions later, only this time it?s dogs instead of people. [/COLOR]

[TheShinje]

[quote=Charles]

[img]http://www.innocentenglish.com/cute-animals/cute-moving-puppy-8.gif[/img][/quote]
[color=crimson] Aww, how could you kill something so cute?

Those cullers sure look like they're having fun. Heck, if they've got to kill a million of the suckers, might as well make it interesting, right?

How boring would lethal injecting 1 million dogs be?[/color]

[sakurasuka]

[QUOTE=Derald][FONT=Lucida Console][SIZE=1][COLOR=DarkSlateGray]

Let's see here - when it comes down to it, animals are no more than organic machines with their own individual niches in the ecosystem. [/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT][/QUOTE]

[size=1]What really does make that different from humans?

You said the abitity to differenciate from right and wrong.

Well, as far as I see it, most humans don't exactly have that definite line either. I know you're well aware of this, you basically stated it in your last post.

Humans don't know right from wrong, they know what thier parents, instincts, and thier environment teaches them. Exactly the same as dogs.



My younger dog, Juneau, we found underneath Dad's truck one morning. He was just a few weeks old, battered, dirty, tick-infested, and soaked to the bone. We were sure he was going to die.

But you know what? He's an amazing dog. He was wild. We didn't spend any time 'domesticating' him, he just was awesome from the beggining.

When I fell off the trampoline, Juneau wouldn't leave my side until I stood up and he knew I was okay.
When me and my boyfriend broke up, he sat on my lap and comforted me until I stopped crying.
And when he wakes me up in the morning, I swear he's almost smiling.

That dog has more compasion for other beings than any human I know.

If anyone were to look me in the eyes and tell me that I have mor of a right to live than my dog, I'd say they're crazy. Juneau is most definitely my very best friend, my life wouldn't be the same without him.



As for the actual topic, I personally find it disguting.

But I have no better solution, that would be cost-effeicient.

So I'll remain silent.

I mean, we're talking about a country that takes away your children if you have more than the amount you're allowed.

So dogs aren't really highest on thier priority list.

[/size]

[Gavin]

[size=1]Interesting, most interesting.

This has to be one of the most disturbing things I've heard about in a long time, and I can't help but be one of the thousands of dog owners who are outraged by this act of brutality by the Chinese. As has already been stated, having the dogs vaccinated would be, in the long run, a far better solution to China's problems with rabies, however it seems that the dark side's quicker, easier method will win out where money is concerned.

I wonder how the Chinese would have felt, when the Bird Flu epidemic started over there, if other national governments authorised the slaying of any person from that area of the world to curb any chance of the disease spreading beyond where it had. While dogs are not higher animals like humans, because for all our intelligence and sentience we're still animals, that does not excuse this brutal and barbaric act.[/size]

[Fyxe]

[size=1][color=slategray]See, the whole mother/daughter rape thing didn't disturb me. But this did. Haha.

Anyway. If I were China, I wouldn't worrying about the dogs. It's those raccoons. I blame those underground raccoon trainers. Shame on them for not giving those animals proper shots.[/color][/size]

[Retribution]

[QUOTE=Derald][FONT=Lucida Console][SIZE=1][COLOR=DarkSlateGray]You see, the ability to see the difference between "good" and "bad" are what make people human. Dogs, on the other hand, can only be trained and conditioned, giving them no choice in the matter. That key word, "choice," to me, is a deciding factor in the determination of whether or not Fido has a soul. You can have all the intellect you want, but it's worthless if you cannot make choices.

Then again, one would have to be in my mind to see where I'm coming from. I simply do not have the ability to fully communicate my feelings through mere words.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT][/QUOTE]
[size=1]You do understand that humans are "trained and conditioned" as well, right? They have as much choice to play dead when commanded to as we do when our parents ask us to do the dishes. Both are things instilled through "conditioning" (read: nuture). Humans are above dogs in the respect that we are sentient while other animals are not.

The "mere words" bit is a pretty lame excuse. People can argue and communicate effectively through words; perhaps you're lacking vocabulary or something.

[b]Edit:[/b] Whoops. Sorry, sakurasuka for rehashing one of your points.[/size]

[Horendithas]

[COLOR=DeepSkyBlue][quote name='Derald][FONT=Lucida Console][SIZE=1][COLOR=DarkSlateGray] Let's see here - when it comes down to it, animals are no more than organic machines with their own individual niches in the ecosystem.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT][/QUOTE]The exact same thing can be said of humans as well as only our ability to think has us believing that we are more than organic machines who find a niche in the ecosystem. [QUOTE=Derald][FONT=Lucida Console][SIZE=1][COLOR=DarkSlateGray]Furthermore, the dog has been bred throughout the years to be 'domesticated' (another term for 'stupid') for its use as a 'companion' to the human, and, by doing so, warping its place in the ecosystem.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT][/QUOTE]And humans have spent centuries altering the ecosystem to suit themselves and destroying other ecosystems in the process. How is that any different? Women were considered property for countless centuries. They were raised and bred to be the perfect companion to their husband. A practice that is now considered barbaric. [QUOTE=Derald][FONT=Lucida Console][SIZE=1][COLOR=DarkSlateGray]Now, not only is this absurd, but the dog population has been rapidly rising due to its popularity as a 'pet.' Then, by acquiring infectious diseases, and by having no [I]true[/I] purpose anymore, it becomes an imminent threat to the inhabitants of the overrun area. The people merely solved an equation and executed an appropriate, if not convenient, solution.[/COLOR][/SIZE'][/FONT][/quote]And so has the human population as having babies is the in thing these days. Humans carry and transmit all sorts of dangerous diseases but we get medical treatment for them. Pets are the same way, responsible owners get them spayed or neutered so they can?t needlessly breed and keep them current on their shots so they don?t spread diseases. The solution may be convenient, but it?s hardly appropriate, or rather the method to achieve it is not civilized. [QUOTE=Derald][FONT=Lucida Console][SIZE=1][COLOR=DarkSlateGray]
And to the animal rights activists out there: Face it - animals do not have souls; they are not people. Animals are governed by nothing more than basic, primal instinct. If an animal appears to 'show emotion' then understand that emotions are simply responses triggered by neural synapses in the brain in accordance to the current stimuli level in a situation.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT][/QUOTE]And to the stupid humans out there, face it, you can?t prove that you have a soul either. Being a person does not automatically mean you have a soul. Just like dogs are taught how to respond, humans are taught from a very early age to talk and behave in certain ways. The only real difference is that dogs lack the ability to speak. Our ability to reason and speak is not instinctive. If it was schooling would not be necessary. We learn our emotions from our parents and other peers. And even then it?s still nothing more than responses triggered by neural synapses in the brain in accordance to the current stimuli level in a situation.

Our very ability to reason and respond should make us better than the dogs and therefore less cruel when dealing with a problem. Beating any living thing to death is sadistic and unnecessarily cruel. How can we claim we are better than other animals if we turn around and resort to such violence? We should be the one?s not behaving like a dog when it comes down to it.[/COLOR]

[Aaryanna]

[COLOR=SeaGreen]Well I wasn?t really trying to start a debate over whether or not dogs have a soul. o_O In all honesty I think such a question is really irrelevant in relation to this issue. Unless you are talking about people. I honestly don?t see how we can claim we are the top species on the planet and then turn around and use such barbaric methods to dispose of dogs who may be infected with rabies. Even if they don?t have souls, and as indifference pointed out, we have yet to scientifically prove that a soul even exists, they still feel pain and I can?t imagine that being beaten to death feels good. Unless the dog is lucky and the person manages to kill it with one blow, it?s causing unnecessary suffering. And I can?t even imagine what it?s doing to the person who witnessed it.

Lets put it this way, say it was your dog, would you want your children to see a stranger beat their dog to death? I can only imagine the psychological trauma of viewing such an event. Even just the idea of someone doing that to my dog makes me want to cry. >_< We had a dog that my mom got before I was born, before we got the dog we have now. She was over sixteen years old and got so sick that her poor body couldn?t fight off the infection even with medications so we had to have her put down. We did it because the nature of her disease would have meant a slow and lingering death with her whimpering in pain so instead we choose to not have her suffer. It was the hardest thing we?ve ever done and I stayed with her until the very last moment.

So though I recognize that it may be necessary to reduce the number of rabies incidents, it doesn?t really solve anything in the long term sense. And by using such harsh methods they are looking like insensitive barbarians instead of a civilized country working to solve a bigger problem. It?s nothing more than a way for the government to fool themselves into thinking the problem is being solved. If they really cared about the people they would try to start educating them and making it possible for people to get their pets fixed so they don?t keep breeding. They would also make it mandatory for pet owners to have their pets get their shots. It?s required here in the US. I would do it anyway, even if it wasn?t required as I don?t want my dog to get sick.[/COLOR]

[The13thMan]

[COLOR=Orange][FONT=Century Gothic]Ok, here's what i think.

A lot of you people have said cheaper is better, but the way i see it is human life is better than canine life. The solution isn't as important as action. As long as something is done is what's most important.

I'd sacrafice a million dogs lives for the life of a single human, would you?

Now i do agree the solution itself is rather barbaric and quite disturbing, but i'm sure enough people over in China tried to decide on the best method of taking care of the problem. I trust the Chinese government made the best choice for their people even if i don't agree with it.

Later.
[/FONT][/COLOR]

[Charles]

[quote name='Aaryanna][COLOR=SeaGreen']Well I wasn?t really trying to start a debate over whether or not dogs have a soul.[/COLOR][/quote]

Why bother when it is painfully obvious that certain people (and I'm not naming names) don't have a soul?

Whether someone supports this cruelty or not is their own prerogative. Personally-all this fancy talk of souls, and dogs' place in the ecosystem cannot cloud the fact that no living animal should be beaten to death. That's barbarism, plain and simple. The Chinese are not the only ones guilty of animal cruelty in the world, and a case could be made against the way the United States slaughters cows, but to me sadism is sadism and no living being should be bludgeoned to death. Anyone that could do such a thing would probably just as easily harm a child. A cruel streak is a cruel streak.

Anyway, I'm glad that indifference rocked out with a really good reply because I probably wouldn't have been so composed.

[Derald]

[FONT=Trebuchet MS][SIZE=1][COLOR=DarkSlateGray]As much as I love being picked at by the infallible opinions of others (and don't get me wrong, I'm loving the attention), I feel the need to clear my name.

Regardless of what people might feel, the fact of the matter is that the Chinese were faced with a problem and did what they saw fit, and no one has the right to pass judgement on those people - they did what they thought to be right. In the end, do we not all act upon what we believe to be right? So, again, what right do we have to point fingers and cast stones?

Another thing - why the hell are "we" sitting here complaining about an action that has already been executed? Do you think whining about it will bring back those dogs? If you really feel you could do something about it, then why don't you all take action the next time that something like this happens? Hell, surely if we all have the time to sit here and bicker about something that we don't like, then surely we have the time to do something, anything at all, to change things.

Oh, and one more thing, as a very basic thing in this, and in many other things, I [U]am[/U] entitled to my opinion, and not once did I pick at anyone else's.

Have a friggin' good time.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[Charles]

Are you Chinese?

[Boba Fett]

[quote name='Derald][FONT=Trebuchet MS][SIZE=1][COLOR=DarkSlateGray]Regardless of what people might feel, the fact of the matter is that the Chinese were faced with a problem and did what they saw fit, and no one has the right to pass judgement on those people - they did what they thought to be right. In the end, do we not all act upon what we believe to be right? So, again, what right do we have to point fingers and cast stones?[/COLOR][/SIZE'][/FONT][/quote]

Good intentions shouldn't, and don't, excuse poor decisions.

By your pathetic logic, Nazis deciding to massacre Jews aren't open to criticism because they were doing what they thought right.

What the Chinese did was wrong. Pure and simple.

[Derald]

[QUOTE=Boba Fett]Good intentions shouldn't, and don't, excuse poor decisions.

By your pathetic logic, Nazis deciding to massacre Jews aren't open to criticism because they were doing what they thought right.[/QUOTE]

[FONT=Trebuchet MS][SIZE=1][COLOR=DarkSlateGray]It's in the past, and, if I recall properly, I didn't like History class. I just don't share your feelings on such subjects, I don't share your 'sense of humanity' as much as I used to. People are hippocrites - they may say they care, but tell me, deep within you, you still feel anger, don't you? When someone harms another you 'care' for, you do feel anger towards that individual, right? So, as long as you bear those feelings for such people, you really can't say much to others regarding the subject of 'caring'. That is my logic, and it, too, is not open for criticism. Love thine enemy, right?[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[quote name='Boba Fett']What the Chinese did was wrong. Pure and simple.[/quote]

[FONT=Trebuchet MS][SIZE=1][COLOR=DarkSlateGray]In whose eyes? Certainly not theirs.

To be honest, I really don't give a damn about what happened to the dogs - in a matter of years they will be back, so it really doesn't matter. An 'act of cruelty,' you say? Well, expect many more on the way - the world is in a downward spiral, and there doesn't seem to be much that's going to change that.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]