R.P. on animal cruelty?

[allyinoh]

I understand the whole state's rights and property rights, but on a moral level, animal cruelty is wrong and everyone should work towards speaking for animals who can't speak for themselves like unborn babies cannot speak for themselves.

I don't agree with PETA, I think they take it a little too far. But I will never stand by and let animal cruelty go unnoticed and I don't think anyone else should either.

We with voices should speak for those without.

 

[JPFromTally]

Isn't it obvious? The woman's pet deer got sick after eating Tide laundry detergent.

LOL!

 

[UnReconstructed]

Someone copy and paste the part of the US Constitution or even one state's constitution that grants an animal rights.

I don't care how you feel or what your personal convictions are. In the real world, animals do not have rights.

Pets and livestock are property. Under the US Constitution property owners have rights... not the property.

If RP were to take an Animal Rights stand then he would lose my vote and my support over that one issue. I would make it my personal goal to let every pet or livestock owner know where he stood from the American Kennel Club to the American Cattleman's Association.

No one wants to see animals mistreated but you cannot equate them to people.

Animals do not think... they do not reason... they do not make decisions. They act on instinct and learned behaviors.

 

[allyinoh]

Someone copy and paste the part of the US Constitution or even one state's constitution that grants an animal rights.

I don't care how you feel or what your personal convictions are. In the real world, animals do not have rights.

Pets and livestock are property. Under the US Constitution property owners have rights... not the property.

If RP were to take an Animal Rights stand then he would lose my vote and my support over that one issue. I would make it my personal goal to let every pet or livestock owner know where he stood from the American Kennel Club to the American Cattleman's Association.

No one wants to see animals mistreated but you cannot equate them to people.

Animals do not think... they do not reason... they do not make decisions. They act on instinct and learned behaviors.

I'm not saying treat them as equals to people.

You don't have to post a copy of the Constitution, I've understood every part of it since 4th grade. I know what the Constitution says, believe me, and I never said there should be special laws on the federal level, but as people we should understand that this does happen and we should try to stop it.

But hey, if you could look into a dying dog's eyes after he's been bludgeoned almost to death and see nothing wrong with it, that's you.

I am not advocating special laws or to put animals above humans, which is clear in my post, but to me, saying you don't care is heartless.

I'm just glad there are people out there in this world that take their own time and money and put efforts to speak for the speechless.

Oh, and animals do think, they feel, and they know what loyalty and love is.

 

[English Mastiff]

Freedom Maniac: I agree w/ you 100%. Animal welfare/rights are extremely important to me. I do plan to vote for RP but am concerned that I can't find anything he's written or a quote even on his stand re: animals. I am libertarian in my political views but do struggle w/ the lack of concern for animals that most independent-minded folks seem to have. I think it goes w/o saying that freedom for humans is the first priority but people that feel such indifference toward animal cruelty/neglect is disturbing.

 

[asgardshill]

I'm on the vanguard of the new political movement that's sweeping the nation:

ANIMAL RESPONSIBILITIES!

Yes, animals have rights and those who are needlessly cruel to them should be strung up with a long rope and a tall tree. But when was the last time that your Schnauzer washed a load of dishes or your Persian cat held down a job to help pay for her Little Friskies? Yes, Animal Responsibilities is the coming thing - equal treatment for ALL!

 

[Dexter_Roseville]

lol animal cruelty. Seriously? That's an issue? It's bad, done. What do you think he's going to do, endorse it? There are way bigger issues; War, the dying Economy, the worthless currency, NAU, NAFTA Super Highway, etc.

 

[noztnac]

http://blog.peta.org/archives/2007/06/mitt_romneys_cr.php

 

[snaFU]

animal rights is fucking stupid. Animals = food

 

[Xenophage]

This issue is akin to the pro-life, pro-choice debate. It is, in fact, the *same* issue when you get right down to the fundamental issue: What are rights, and who has them?

I believe Paul would support this being a state issue.

Personally, I love animals and abhor animal cruelty. I do not, however, believe that animals have rights, nor should they be legally protected entities.

 

[English Mastiff]

And you wonder why there are so few women Paul supporters?

 

[tuckessee]

I like my animals on my plate. Ron Paul, being a hunter, I'm sure he does too.

Can you verify this? I never thought of RP as a thrill killer & I doubt his financial situation is such that he would hunt out of necessity.

 

[LukeNM]

Some things are common sense and do not require explanation. Who in their right mind harms animals on purpose. You are trying to make an issue out of something that is a non-issue. No one currently gets away with this if they are caught. Gee, they even banned chicken fighting here in NM recently. I don't think President Paul needs to concern himself with this issue. How about we worry about having enough money to care for our animals. I have never heard anyone say they were in favor of animal cruelty. Get real!

 

[martinocortez]

Who in their right mind harms animals on purpose

You need to get out more. Some people are sick.

"Hi, I'm interested in Ron Paul and I'm concerned about animal rights. Somebody in my district found a feral cat who was drug behind a car for a mile before dying. What would Dr. Paul's attitude on this be?"

And I'm not kidding. This crap happens every day. Some people are sick f%cks...

 

[Lord Abaddon]

Someone copy and paste the part of the US Constitution or even one state's constitution that grants an animal rights.

It doesn't yet, but then remember it also didn't have rights for Blacks, Women, etc.

I don't care how you feel or what your personal convictions are. In the real world,

animals do not have rights.

Pets and livestock are property. Under the US Constitution property owners have rights... not the property.

I think I've heard that before too...seems some Southern states felt that way once...

If RP were to take an Animal Rights stand then he would lose my vote and my support over that one issue. I would make it my personal goal to let every pet or livestock owner know where he stood from the American Kennel Club to the American Cattleman's Association.

Sorry, but if that one issue would have you turn tail and run then you aren't much of a supporter at all.

No one wants to see animals mistreated but you cannot equate them to people.

Animals do not think... they do not reason... they do not make decisions. They act on instinct and learned behaviors.

Clearly you've never spent any time with animals at all, or you would know clearly that isn't true.

Most important though is the proven fact that mistreatment of animals by people relates directly to mistreatment of other people. Children who abuse animals will in the majority of cases abuse people when they become adults. Spousal abuse as well as child abuse have had direct links in those adults committing the act to when they were children and abused animals.

Animal cruelty, which is a very serious issue and coming to the forefront with such scum as Vick being in the press, has become an increasingly important issue for people. I don't believe Ron Paul would ever advocate or support cruelty and probably would turn it over to the states of course, but to just say "it doesn't matter" is ignorant off the majority of Americans feelings on the subject.

 

[Kade]

um animals don't have rights. Animal 'cruelty' may be disgusting but it isn't a violation of anyone's rights. (Unless of course someone is harming your animals)

There are stronger thinkers and stronger minds who would blatantly disagree with you.

I don't mean to point this out in context, but this sounds exactly like the argument against Slave's rights.

As humans approach a better understanding of the human mind and the animal mind (which surprise, are closely related) language like the type you use would seem remarkably obtuse... We don't know what it means to be human, and we shouldn't let any politicians make that decision for us, Ron Paul included.

I say better we avoid making such statements now, no? Surely there is a better avenue of discussion than claiming absolutely that certain things don't have rights....

It is in the subtraction of rights that tyranny is grown, not in the addition.

http://www.greatapeproject.org/

 

[Dexter_Roseville]

There are stronger thinkers and stronger minds who would blatantly disagree with you.

I don't mean to point this out in context, but this sounds exactly the argument against Slave's rights.

As humans approach a better understanding of the human mind and the animal mind (which surprise, are closely related) language like the type you use would seem remarkably obtuse... We don't know what it means to be human, and we shouldn't let any politicians make that decision for us, Ron Paul included.

I say better we avoid making such statements now, no? Surely there is a better avenue of discussion than claiming absolutely that certain things don't have rights....

It is in the subtraction of rights that tyranny is grown, not in the addition.

http://www.greatapeproject.org/

Leave this out of politics, but for every animal you don't eat I'm going to eat five.

 

[Kade]

Leave this out of politics, but for every animal you don't eat I'm going to eat five.

Deal. I seriously had breakfast at IHOP this morning, and it included a combination of Bacon and Sausage that must have contained some beef... and some chicken strips...

That's three different types of animals you have to tackle.. Five of each.

Nice to see other atheists supporting Ron Paul though..

 

[martinocortez]

Leave this out of politics, but for every animal you don't eat I'm going to eat five.

That is nice, but this isn't about being vegetarian. It is political because, right or wrong, people will demand our law makers to deal with "random dog is found beaten with a baseball bat in back ally".

The question is, assuming the dog has no owner and the jerk who did the beating was known, under President Paul, how will the government react? I'd argue the guy should be arrested and jailed. I hope that he would agree.

I'll also assert that you can make a strong case for government run animal shelters and remain libertarian as well. Nobody will pay to deal with random stray dogs, yet they need to be delt with somehow. The only entity that can handle such things is the government.

If you assert that random dogs should be shot by property owners, well, I disagree with you strongly because I feel that animals *do* have rights and our earth is as much their property as it is ours. Now we get to the interesting part of the debate that truly divides people...

 

[Dexter_Roseville]

Deal. I seriously had breakfast at IHOP this morning, and it included a combination of Bacon and Sausage that must have contained some beef... and some chicken strips...

That's three different types of animals you have to tackle.. Five of each.

Nice to see other atheists supporting Ron Paul though..

Yeah I really enjoy that he doesn't wear his religion on his sleeve like some other candidates *cough*. I try to tell people that America was founded as a secular nation, George Washington and John Adams basically confirmed it with the Treaty of Tripoli. Dr. Paul is a lot like the forefathers in that view, secular in my opinion.