Human Rights Are For Human Beings

[Terri]

By Doug Patton
January 22, 2007

It seems that judges are now in the business of attributing rights to animals of the two legged and the four legged variety. They release child rapists on probation and give constitutional rights to terrorists, while meting out prison sentences for animal owners and parents who discipline their children.

The San Francisco based Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals just overturned the 22-year sentence of Ahmed Ressam, the so-called "Millennium Bomber." Ressam, you will recall, was convicted of trying to cross into the United States from Canada with 125 pounds of explosives in the trunk of his car. Seems he wanted to give us a little Y2K surprise on New Years Eve 1999 until an alert customs agent stopped him.

More

[Charie]

Someone had to say it and Doug said it just fine.

[Cynical Pete]

To secure happiness, I often wish I were a little poodle dog in the arms of a matron.

[aadd210]

I AGREE WITH YOU COMPLETELY. I suppose that I am an animal lover since I have 7 dogs, 2 cats, and 3 pet goats (I live in the country) my animals are well cared for and none of them get mistreated. (Dogs will not get near the highway because they know that they will get a good whipping; only time they ever get punished, so they know exactly what they did wrong).
People who deliberately abuse animals should have their animal(s) confiscated and the animal placed in animal shelters where they are either adopted or put to sleep. The owner should have to pay the cost of disposal (not thrown in jail and their lives and/or their family lives destroyed).
I remember reading about an incident that happened a few years ago in South Carolina, i.e., two female college students drove from Maine to South Carolina to buy a German Shepard. They paid the owner for the dog and then checked into a local motel, through ignorance they left the dog in the car while they slept. The dog died from heat exhaustion. The law locked the girls up for animal abuse. I do not remember the exact time and date, but I have thought about this incident quite often and about how stupid the law is. These girls drove over a 1000 plus miles to buy a dog and then let it die due to ignorance. Lost of the dog (and cleaning out the inside of their car) should have been punishment enough. (Hope the animal right law "nuts" don’t come after me for teaching my dogs to stay out of the highway)

[sherman]

For what it's worth...
The San Francisco based, (That alone should tell you something ), 9th circuit court of appeals, is the most overturned appeals court in the U.S.
( My apologies and sympathy to the straight and God fearing ones, who live there.)

It's my hope,(and prayer), that someone with commonsense, steps in and blocks the 9th circus, (er, I mean circuits), order from happening.

The second headline to catch my attention read, "California Lawmaker Seeks Ban on Spanking." It seems that Democrat Sally Lieber, a California State Assemblywoman, plans to introduce a bill that would ban parents from spanking their children. The proposed measure would make it a crime in California to spank a child under the age of four

Since when has child "rearing", been a State or Federal matter?
I can understand things such as child abuse, child porn, and things of this nature being a State or Federal matter; Or for that matter, even animal abuse, to an extent; However, when it comes to how one disciplines their children, I don't see that as being a State or Federal matter.

Law or not, there will always be those that believe that there is nothing wrong with beating a child or animal.
I couldn't disagree more

IMHO, when it comes to the children, this as just another attempt, by those who wish to squash parental rights, to turn the thoughts of the children against their parents.

Lets look at this from a childs view for just a moment shall we....

Lets see....
A law that allows me to get away with nearly anything I want, and not have to worry about being spanked?
Hmmm. Yup. Sounds good to me!

Personally, I find it hard to tell any difference between this, and a child kidnapper/molester/murderer trying to lure a child into their trap.

Jesus confronted the religious leaders of His time about this very thing, .
The circumstances were a little different, but the underlieing principle, (or lack thereof), is the same.

[myownthinker]

I say anyone who beats an animal to death just for the sake of it should also be beaten nearly to death, not quite, but close, and then left in the street. Do something to them so they hurt for the rest of their lives, and I would gladly be the one to do it.
That would fix those problems. I admit I love my dogs, and treat them with the respect and love they deserve. I believe the author could have left the beating of the dog out of it and simply said we are way too lenient on people who hurt children which I totally agree with. We recently had two kids, 15 and 16, who took a bunch of kittens and lit them on fire and watched them burn to death. They talked about the screeching the cats did. They got a fine that is it. I wrote an editorial asking that something physically happen to them so they would feel physical pain the rest of their lives. My letter made the local paper. I shall see if I can find it. They werent even their cats. They got a fine, a lousy fine. They should have paid alot more dearly.

[Luckyme]

My thought is, anyone who deliberately mistreats an animal should have to do community service, pay a hefty fine, and be banned from ever owning an animal of any kind for the rest of their lives.

Those college girls, and anyone else who is ignorant of the proper care of animals, but harms them anyway, should have to take a course on how to take care of an animal and perhaps pay a small fine to cover the cost of the course. If the facts are correct, it was a mistake through ignorance and nothing more.

As far as laws concerning children, I think we have enough on the books right now. Actually, we have too many and children have more rights than parents do, but that's another topic. Parents have to have a means of discipling their children in order to teach them, and keep them from harm. If there are bruises after discipline has been administered, the punishment was too harsh, and we have laws against that. So, stay out of my home and let me handle things the best way I know how! I know my little ones best and know what works and what doesn't!

[Ande]

I believe that anyone who deliberatly hurts an animal should have to do jail time...preferably served with animal "Lovers" and they deserver whatever they get. There is a very thin line between hurting an animal and hurting a human...It is time society realizes that.

I also feel a law against spanking is nuts!!

[Cyndif]

Sorry guys!
You need to go to jail if you beat your child or your dog! Anyone who would beat an animal to death would have no trouble doing the same to a child or their wife or husband for that matter!
I agree that we are giving too many rights to animals and being too liberal in our court sentences to people !! And women teachers who have sex with their students (as compared to a man teacher having sex with his student - the double standard) rapists of little children, trying to microwave your baby, and other violent acts that seem to be 'not so bad' in this politically correct rehab therapy age.
Pedifiles and people who kill their children need to be under the jail in my opinion!! As do people who beat their dogs to death. What heinous acts to perpetrate on ANY living thing. God gave us dominion over the animals. That term in its original was not what it means today. It meant to nurture and take care of as a woman would nurse and care for her own baby! Beating a dog to death is not exactly what God had in mind. Don't let me see anyone hurting a child or an animal. I will act and that person will not only go to jail, I will see to it that they no longer have the little one they are hurting.
You dog beaters need to watch the Dog Whisperer and learn how to teach your dog the right way! Get a grip! No wonder the liberals have such a bad opinion of Republicans!! I've always been one, voted Repub the last time, and will next time (unless the one running is a child or dog beater!!)
But this dog beating stuff needs to stay with the hate mongers! Ones that I am not of! And how was it that you thought that to win an election and sway the voters to your side - that this was the way to go!!?? Like I said people --GET A GRIP! Watch your tongue and change your ways!! Like the Bible says in James 3:6
And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell.
Doug, I only read the first few paragraphs, because it was so offensive to me that I could not respect any opinion that you had! I probably agree with the gist of the whole thing, but there are MANY other ways to get it across. You have taken the Republican party back decades in your one diatribe! Try again, and this time try to put down evil with good and not evil for evil!
Thank you anyone that reads this. We have got to get together for the good of this nation and this was no way to think to win any election or sway any voters!! Except maybe those who beat their dogs and I do not and will not be associated with those uncivilized
barbarians and their way of thinking!
Am I the only one on GOPUSA that thinks this way? I hope not - or God help us we have lost already!

[Terri]

I think some of the posts here tend to prove the point Doug was trying to make.

He's not an animal abuser and here's what he said about animals.

The first headline, "Man Who Beat Dog Dies in Prison," from the Omaha World-Herald, tells the story of the Nebraska man who died in prison while serving time for beating his dog to death. Now before I get myself too deeply in trouble here, let me state that I think people who mistreat animals are cruel cowards. That said, I do not believe that any human being should be incarcerated for killing an animal. Severe civil penalties, such as stiff monetary fines, yes, but prison? I don't think so. The only exception, in my opinion, should be if the animal is the property of someone else, and the value of the loss is such that the crime rises to the level of a felony.

It is important to remember that animals are property; they are not people. Animals, unless they live in the wilderness, belong to human beings, and therefore should not be endowed with human civil rights. Otherwise, what are the limits to which our courts should be allowed to incarcerate human beings for destroying them? If beating one dog to death is worthy of a two year prison sentence, what should be the sentence for killing five dogs? Ten years? And are all animals created equal? What about fifteen cats? Fifty-three parakeets? Would the destruction of two hundred gerbils justify a life sentence? If we continue down this ridiculous path, is there a point at which we should execute a human being for killing animals?

His point is that we are incarcerating people for beating animals while our courts are turning predators loose to prey on children and turning terrorists loose to strike again.

Here is the question he asked:

Can you imagine a scenario whereby a terrorist and a child molester are on their way out of prison as a dog owner and a father who dared to spank his three-year-old child are on their way in?

Yes, I can imagine this. Can you?