trapping
kids

pcsoutdoors


Print Thread
Hop To
Animals innocent then ,humans must be guilty. #726594
05/20/08 06:42 PM
05/20/08 06:42 PM
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,777
Cape Breton Island Nova Scotia
Mira Trapper Offline OP
trapper
Mira Trapper  Offline OP
trapper

Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,777
Cape Breton Island Nova Scotia
Easy to claim all your clients are innocent if you know they have no sense of morals to begin with. But that would mean that the innocence of animals always means that man is guilty for having morals even though our omnivore bodies, require animals to live and our society needs animals to survive. It would even mean that you are guilty of killing a cougar but the cougar could never be guilty of killing you. Don't you just hate dealing with illogical people that attain a law degree??

The Daily (U. of WA)
Animal law for "least protected" and "most innocent"
By Chaitra Sriram
May 20, 2008
http://thedaily.washington.edu/2008/5/20/animal-law-least-protected-and-most-innocent/

"We are the only lawyers whose clients are all innocent," read a sign
at the "Animal Law: Working with the Grassroots" conference.

Friday's event brought together about 30 activists and lawyers to
develop ways to further the cause of animal rights through their own
lives and practices. The Student Animal Legal Defense Fund (SALDF)
hosted the conference at the Marian Gould Gallagher Law Library.

Animal law deals with the treatment of animals, whether they are pets,
farm animals or wild animals.

Cases range from one in North Carolina about the first-ever cougar
hunt, to cases of animal hoarding, where people kept too many animals
in their homes and couldn't feed or care for all of them, to cases
about regulations for the keeping of farm animals.

Throughout the presentations, both the presenters and the audience
displayed their passion and conviction about this issue. They talked
with fervor about their mission to protect animal rights.

"There's a whole lot to do when you consider the horrors," said Adam
Karp, of the Animal Law Offices of Adam P. Karp.

Protecting animals from those who would do them harm was also discussed.

"They are the least protected and the most innocent," said Bruce
Wagman, of the Animal Legal Defense Fund.

SALDF President Jennifer Kaplan explained that one of the goals of the
conference was to start a dialogue between animal rights lawyers and
grassroots activists.

The lawyers who attended expressed opinions that the law is not fair
to animals. Their job, they said, and the purpose of the work they do,
is to set a precedent to change that.

"The law doesn't value them," Karp said. "They're invisible. And if
you can't be seen and you can't be heard, then you have no rights."

Most of the people in the room were optimistic. They believed their
cause would ultimately win and quoted people like Gandhi, who said,
"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the
way its animals are treated."

The attendees also believe there is already pressure from the
community and the law will eventually reflect that.

"People are spending a lot of money on animal companions, and the law
needs to catch up with that," Karp said.


[Linked Image]
Mac Leod Motto
Re: Animals innocent then ,humans must be guilty. [Re: Mira Trapper] #726597
05/20/08 06:44 PM
05/20/08 06:44 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 41,592
Northern Maine
Bruce T Offline
trapper
Bruce T  Offline
trapper

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 41,592
Northern Maine
Only one problem.Animals will never be equal with people as people have souls.Animals don't.


Nevada bound
Re: Animals innocent then ,humans must be guilty. [Re: Bruce T] #726615
05/20/08 06:54 PM
05/20/08 06:54 PM
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,777
Cape Breton Island Nova Scotia
Mira Trapper Offline OP
trapper
Mira Trapper  Offline OP
trapper

Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,777
Cape Breton Island Nova Scotia
 Originally Posted By: brucet
Only one problem.Animals will never be equal with people as people have souls.Animals don't.



Do you think having a Soul bothers Animal Rights Lawyers?? Trivial matter to those sanctimonious self righteous twits that wouldn't know God if they kissed Him on the cheek before they crucified Him for feeding fish to the hungry.


[Linked Image]
Mac Leod Motto
Re: Animals innocent then ,humans must be guilty. [Re: Mira Trapper] #726715
05/20/08 07:46 PM
05/20/08 07:46 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,550
Rodney,Ohio
SNIPERBBB Offline
trapper
SNIPERBBB  Offline
trapper

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,550
Rodney,Ohio
Ok, I will bring in the next coyote/fox/cat I see that kills a mouse and have it charged with murder.

Re: Animals innocent then ,humans must be guilty. [Re: Mira Trapper] #726740
05/20/08 07:59 PM
05/20/08 07:59 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 41,592
Northern Maine
Bruce T Offline
trapper
Bruce T  Offline
trapper

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 41,592
Northern Maine
 Originally Posted By: Mira Trapper
 Originally Posted By: brucet
Only one problem.Animals will never be equal with people as people have souls.Animals don't.



Do you think having a Soul bothers Animal Rights Lawyers?? Trivial matter to those sanctimonious self righteous twits that wouldn't know God if they kissed Him on the cheek before they crucified Him for feeding fish to the hungry.

Sadly isn't that the truth.They will have to answer for it some day.


Nevada bound
Re: Animals innocent then ,humans must be guilty. [Re: Bruce T] #726853
05/20/08 09:03 PM
05/20/08 09:03 PM
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 376
Western Pa
S
Snuffy Offline
trapper
Snuffy  Offline
trapper
S

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 376
Western Pa
I'm about convinced that my dog has a soul. Sadly, I can't say the same about most trial lawyers


Hard was the journey
dark was the way...
Re: Animals innocent then ,humans must be guilty. [Re: Bruce T] #726887
05/20/08 09:22 PM
05/20/08 09:22 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 188
Dearborn County, IN
J
Jack Turner Offline
trapper
Jack Turner  Offline
trapper
J

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 188
Dearborn County, IN
We have become the biggest panty-as_ed country in the world.

Fruits and vegetables have feelings, animals cannot be used for any reason, spanking children is abuse and degrades them, etc.

It's funny, since I was a kid, psychiatrists, government officials, schools officials, business executives, etc. have come up with better ways to make us more sensitive, more understanding, less "abusive", more productive, less harrassing, etc. As a result, people lose jobs, crime is up, more than 50% of the country's population is on anti-depressants/anti-anxiety drugs, unemployment is up, and our politicians are athiests, check bouncers, having extra-marital affairs, DUI offenders and drug users.

Shame on us for allowing this to happen. But I'm not one da-- bitter American.

Re: Animals innocent then ,humans must be guilty. [Re: Jack Turner] #727179
05/21/08 01:49 AM
05/21/08 01:49 AM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,379
Coeur d' Alene, Idaho
J
James Offline
"Minka"
James  Offline
"Minka"
J

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,379
Coeur d' Alene, Idaho
"And if you can't be seen and you can't be heard, then you have no rights."

I'm sorry, but this is not lawyering, so let's please not impugn the profession. These "lawyers" are either frauds or just lining their pockets out of animal-sympathizers' donations. They make no attempt to answer some fundamental questions that must be answered before the assertion of animal rights.

Who decides what rights animals have? Are these people the Appointed Ones? Who appointed them? God? The animals? Did they hold a general election first, or are only certain animals presuming to vote for them all?

What rights do animals have? The right to vote? The right to bear arms? (You can see how silly this is getting already.)

Even if they have rights to begin with, which ones would they wish to assert? These decisions sometimes involve choices. For instance, an animal making a rational choice might well choose to die a quick death at the gun of a hunter in lieu of the inevitable death by starvation, disease, or predation. (Ever see a wolves eat a caribou alive?)

But can animals make a rational choice? If they can, how do they communicate their choice of rights to the Appointed Ones? Telepathy?

These opportunists are too transparent for words.

Jim


Forum Infidel since 2001

"And that troll bs is something triggered snowflakes say when they dont like what someone posts." - Boco
Re: Animals innocent then ,humans must be guilty. [Re: James] #727228
05/21/08 07:36 AM
05/21/08 07:36 AM
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,777
Cape Breton Island Nova Scotia
Mira Trapper Offline OP
trapper
Mira Trapper  Offline OP
trapper

Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,777
Cape Breton Island Nova Scotia
 Originally Posted By: James
"And if you can't be seen and you can't be heard, then you have no rights."

I'm sorry, but this is not lawyering, so let's please not impugn the profession. These "lawyers" are either frauds or just lining their pockets out of animal-sympathizers' donations. They make no attempt to answer some fundamental questions that must be answered before the assertion of animal rights.

Who decides what rights animals have? Are these people the Appointed Ones? Who appointed them? God? The animals? Did they hold a general election first, or are only certain animals presuming to vote for them all?

What rights do animals have? The right to vote? The right to bear arms? (You can see how silly this is getting already.)

Even if they have rights to begin with, which ones would they wish to assert? These decisions sometimes involve choices. For instance, an animal making a rational choice might well choose to die a quick death at the gun of a hunter in lieu of the inevitable death by starvation, disease, or predation. (Ever see a wolves eat a caribou alive?)

But can animals make a rational choice? If they can, how do they communicate their choice of rights to the Appointed Ones? Telepathy?

These opportunists are too transparent for words.

Jim



Which was why I stressed the article the way I did James. The bottom line for me matches your defense of Lawyers and the Law when I noted these things.




 Quote:
Easy to claim all your clients are innocent if you know they have no sense of morals to begin with. But that would mean that the innocence of animals always means that man is guilty for having morals even though our omnivore bodies, require animals to live and our society needs animals to survive. It would even mean that you are guilty of killing a cougar but the cougar could never be guilty of killing you. Don't you just hate dealing with illogical people that attain a law degree??


Some of these lawyers actually are so philosophical that they don't understand cognizant reasoning involves REALITY to. Others are real life criminals, bilking society by defending abstract objects (animals with Souls and morality)and cloaking them in innocence when any thinking person would know animals are not moralistic driven and thus can not be INNOCENT. Unfortunately it is Lawyering to James because it is now taught in LAW Schools under the guise of Animal Law.


[Linked Image]
Mac Leod Motto
Re: Animals innocent then ,humans must be guilty. [Re: James] #727234
05/21/08 07:53 AM
05/21/08 07:53 AM
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,777
Cape Breton Island Nova Scotia
Mira Trapper Offline OP
trapper
Mira Trapper  Offline OP
trapper

Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,777
Cape Breton Island Nova Scotia
 Originally Posted By: James
"And if you can't be seen and you can't be heard, then you have no rights."

I'm sorry, but this is not lawyering, so let's please not impugn the profession. These "lawyers" are either frauds or just lining their pockets out of animal-sympathizers' donations. They make no attempt to answer some fundamental questions that must be answered before the assertion of animal rights.

Who decides what rights animals have? Are these people the Appointed Ones? Who appointed them? God? The animals? Did they hold a general election first, or are only certain animals presuming to vote for them all?

What rights do animals have? The right to vote? The right to bear arms? (You can see how silly this is getting already.)

Even if they have rights to begin with, which ones would they wish to assert? These decisions sometimes involve choices. For instance, an animal making a rational choice might well choose to die a quick death at the gun of a hunter in lieu of the inevitable death by starvation, disease, or predation. (Ever see a wolves eat a caribou alive?)

But can animals make a rational choice? If they can, how do they communicate their choice of rights to the Appointed Ones? Telepathy?

These opportunists are too transparent for words.

Jim



By the way. Good points James. You have the right sense of the issue but the legal ramifications exist proving your common sense is being over ruled by nonsense. Folks are actually losing in court to such legal philosophers who place emotionalism above facts of what animals truly are. Animals are not MORAL agents.Thus can not be declared innocent, if we amorally kill them as food to feed our omnivore bodies or use their natural renewable resource of fur,leather, wool, silk and oils for our lifestyles and existence. Yet those same legal minds will declare animals innocent when they kill us or infringe on our food crops for example or kill our pets and livestock. They are classed as innocent because they have no communication skills and no moral choices in their repertoire to begin with. The dichotomy is quite evident. Yet Law Schools are becoming more involved in teaching these mutually exclusive false premises such as man guilty of, while the animal is innocent of. However there is only one moral agent involved, who must use animals in an amoral fashion to SURVIVE and the other animal is amoral in all it's life skills because it has no morality and sense for innocence to begin with..

Last edited by Mira Trapper; 05/21/08 07:56 AM.

[Linked Image]
Mac Leod Motto
Re: Animals innocent then ,humans must be guilty. [Re: Mira Trapper] #727530
05/21/08 03:01 PM
05/21/08 03:01 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,557
White Sulphur Springs, MT
T
Terry Offline
trapper
Terry  Offline
trapper
T

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,557
White Sulphur Springs, MT
There have always been people who think that they were born to tell you how to live, and there have always been people who will do about anything for money.
No surprises here.


A soft answer turneth away wrath.
Re: Animals innocent then ,humans must be guilty. [Re: Terry] #728604
05/22/08 03:52 PM
05/22/08 03:52 PM
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,777
Cape Breton Island Nova Scotia
Mira Trapper Offline OP
trapper
Mira Trapper  Offline OP
trapper

Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,777
Cape Breton Island Nova Scotia
Hey JAMES : Got a new client for you!!!!!!!!


International Herald Tribune
Austria: Activists ask European human rights court to declare
chimpanzee a 'person'
The Associated Press
Published: May 21, 2008
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/05/21/europe/EU-GEN-Austria-Chimp-Challenge.php

VIENNA, Austria: Matthew Hiasl Pan isn't even a human, but that hasn't
stopped his supporters from taking his case to Europe's top human
rights court.

Austrian animal rights activists are fighting to get Pan — a
26-year-old chimpanzee — legally declared a "person" and they said
Wednesday they have filed an appeal with the European Court of Human
Rights in Strasbourg, France.

The Vienna-based Association Against Animal Factories insists the
chimp needs that legal standing so a guardian can be appointed to look
out for his interests — especially if the bankrupt animal shelter
caring for him shuts down.

"We appeal to the European Court of Human Rights, because everybody is
entitled to a fair trial, even chimps," said Martin Balluch, the
group's president.

In January, Austria's Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling that
had rejected the activists' request to have a trustee appointed for
Pan. The high court ruled that under Austrian law, only people are
entitled to have guardians.

Pan's supporters, who gave him a human-sounding name last year as part
of their campaign to win him "personhood," argue that if the chimp is
not a person, he must be a thing.

But that can't be, they say — not when chimps and humans have so much
DNA in common.

"This question is of paramount importance," said Balluch, whose team
claims to have obtained expert opinions supporting its stance from
prominent scientists, anthropologists, lawyers and philosophers.

The legal tussle began in February 2007, when the shelter where Pan
and another chimp, Rosi, have lived filed for bankruptcy protection.

Activists want to ensure the apes don't wind up homeless. Both were
captured as babies in Sierra Leone in 1982 and smuggled to Austria for
use in pharmaceutical experiments. Customs officers intercepted the
shipment and turned the chimps over to the shelter.

Their upkeep costs €5,000 (US$7,800) a month. Donors have offered to
help, but under Austrian law, only a person can receive personal
gifts.

Organizers could set up a foundation to collect cash for Pan, whose
life expectancy in captivity is about 60 years. But they argue that
only personhood would ensure he isn't sold to someone outside Austria,
where he's protected by strict animal cruelty laws.

In dismissing the activists' request to get a guardian for Pan, a
lower court ruled that the chimp was neither mentally impaired nor in
danger — the legal grounds required for a guardian to be appointed.

It did not directly address the issue of whether a chimpanzee can be
considered a "person." Pan's supporters stress that they are not
trying to get the chimp declared a human, just a person.

Eberhart Theuer, the animal rights group's chief legal adviser, said
Wednesday there is legal precedent to appoint a guardian for an
individual incapable of expressing himself.

"As long as Matthew Pan is not recognized as a person, he could be
sold abroad or killed for economic reasons," Theuer said. "His life
depends on this decision. This case is about the fundamental question:
Who is the bearer of human rights? Who is a person according to the
European Human Rights Charter?"

Paula Stibbe, a British expatriate in Vienna who helps care for Pan
and has petitioned the courts to be his guardian, said anyone who
spends time with the chimp "will see him as a person."

"In his home in the African jungle, he would have been well able to
look after himself without a guardian," Stibbe said.

"But since he was abducted into an alien environment, traumatized and
locked up in an enclosure, it did become necessary for me to act on
his behalf," she said. "Since he has no close relatives, I am doing
this as the person closest to him."


[Linked Image]
Mac Leod Motto
Re: Animals innocent then ,humans must be guilty. [Re: Mira Trapper] #728894
05/22/08 07:24 PM
05/22/08 07:24 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,379
Coeur d' Alene, Idaho
J
James Offline
"Minka"
James  Offline
"Minka"
J

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,379
Coeur d' Alene, Idaho
I think these people are being awfully presumptious. How do they know a chimp would even want to be a person?

Jim


Forum Infidel since 2001

"And that troll bs is something triggered snowflakes say when they dont like what someone posts." - Boco
Re: Animals innocent then ,humans must be guilty. [Re: James] #728958
05/22/08 07:43 PM
05/22/08 07:43 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,379
Coeur d' Alene, Idaho
J
James Offline
"Minka"
James  Offline
"Minka"
J

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,379
Coeur d' Alene, Idaho
If they're so worried about what happens to this chimp after his shelter closes, why doesn't one of them adopt him?

After all, if they're really convinced he's a person, they shouldn't have any problem taking him into their home.

Jim


Forum Infidel since 2001

"And that troll bs is something triggered snowflakes say when they dont like what someone posts." - Boco
Re: Animals innocent then ,humans must be guilty. [Re: James] #729029
05/22/08 08:23 PM
05/22/08 08:23 PM
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,777
Cape Breton Island Nova Scotia
Mira Trapper Offline OP
trapper
Mira Trapper  Offline OP
trapper

Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,777
Cape Breton Island Nova Scotia
 Originally Posted By: James
If they're so worried about what happens to this chimp after his shelter closes, why doesn't one of them adopt him?

After all, if they're really convinced he's a person, they shouldn't have any problem taking him into their home.

Jim



Diapers James, DIAPERS buddy but the Lawyers will make sure those Diapers are lined with gold. .


[Linked Image]
Mac Leod Motto
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1