Mike,
I can’t Thank You enough for posting K’s well thought out response to my observations and satirical proposal. It has truly made getting out of bed before noon worth with effort.
If you’d be so kind, I would like to make a comment or two.
K writes:
I can’t believe that you believe animals” DO NOT THINK or have the ability to Rationalize and use Logic.”
Frank responds:
As Mike pointed out, Frank was signed at the bottom of the article as well as a disclaimer (Frank writes) inserted into the title. K missed this point entirely, demonstrating her lack of attention from the start. ( I assume K is a her, based solely on the wild illogic and complete lack of reason. IF I am mistaken on this account I apologize. However, I do find myself wondering if your name ends with an “ i “.)
Make NO Mistake. I DO NOT BELIEVE, any animal other than humans have the ability to Think, Rationalize or use Logic. That does not mean however they are incapable of instinctively knowing to eat a banana –vs- a stone. When a parrot speaks, does it know what it is saying or is it simply mimicking what it has heard? Animals survive solely on instinctive behavior. They are able to perform various tasks given them, these tasks being taught on a Pleasure-Pain (reward basis, if that term makes you “feel” better) level. IF, the said animal could in fact “think, reason or use logic” they would not stop at pushing the swimmer around in a pool to get a single fish. THEY would “understand” the basis of the reward and devise other similar tricks in order to procure more of their desired object. This is not done. They simply do what they have “learned” without any reasoning into how they received their reward or how to obtain more. When given the signal again, they repeat the task.
K writes:
And just because something is OWNED doesn’t mean it should be abused, no matter what kind of animal it is!!!!!
Frank responds:
No mention was made as to My Approval or Disapproval of animal abuse. I simply pointed out the inconsistency in the argument being made. Although, I did suggest using a different species and provided what I deem as benefits from doing so.
K writes:
These animals are taught and bread [bred] for fighting they do not Choose it!
Frank responds:
As for them “not choosing to fight”. If, as you propose, animals have the ability to reason and use logic, they MUST be choosing to fight. Otherwise, they would see the destructiveness in it and refuse. Unless, however, they enjoy the competitive nature in the sport and rewards associated with winning. Much like the “Ultimate Fighters” of our own species.
K writes:
So, who do you pro posse [propose] protect us from those “dumbass jock” that bread [breed] these Killing Machines?
Frank responds:
Self preservation is, or should be, your primary defense. Neither the Federal nor State Governments are purposed with protecting the citizens from mean dogs. Your local police are not able to protect you from every mishap that may come your way. If you believe by passing more laws they will, you are going to be sorely disappointed. I suggest you lock yourself in a secure closet wearing a helmet and pads and arrange for provisions to be brought to you.
K writes:
As much as I hate the government sticking their nose where it doesn’t belong, we do need laws to protect us from people that don’t feel or think of anyone but themselves!
Frank responds:
Based on your previous statements, it would seem you DO believe the government should “stick its nose” into every aspect of our personal lives. How else is it going to Protect Us?
K writes:
What about a married couple, is a spouse entitled to abuse the other just because the other chooses to stay? We need laws to protect those (human & animal) who can’t protect themselves!
Frank responds:
Self preservation is again required here. One must make choices and take responsibility for oneself. That in NO WAY gives one individual the right to abuse (physically or mentally) another. However, it does not excuse one from their personal responsibly to depart from an abusive situation. Yes, there are times when a third party is needed to assist in that departure. Many times however, the abused return to abusive situations because of their lack of good choices. Neither the Government, the Church nor Good Intentioned Friends can force someone else to make good choices.
K writes:
I personally think animals are more intelligent then [than] some humans!
Frank responds:
Here in lies part of K’s frustration. Although I may agree I enjoy the company of some animals over the company or some individuals, I certainly could not agree that an animal is more intelligent than a human. K espouses great love and caring for animals yet displays a low regard for humanity. Thus elevating the lower life form above the higher. This is an act of self deprecation and if carried to its fruition, is ultimately destructive.
As much as K would like to believe otherwise, Lassie will not be capable of licking the wounds of this destructive belief.
Frank
