Life and common,
The best way I can categorize your positions in all of this is VINDICTIVE!
We are a civil society. The Constitution protects us all, including Post.
December 20, 2012 at 11:57 a.m.
"They don't have souls and were put here for man to use as they please after all."
Such vitriolic spouting from your trash-talking mouth.
You take a cogent argument made about the problem of "gross animal love," as it relates to the general problem of dehumanization in society - and you viciously turn it on its head.
You remind me of an unruly middle school student. Dogs are just animals. They are here, like all animals, to serve mankind. When animal rights blinds one to the rights of people, the value placed upon human life deteriorates.
Please save your shallow comments for your family and friends - rather than pollute this blog with them.
December 14, 2012 at 4:18 p.m.
Elevating abuse to animals to a felony is a problem because:
1. It overburdens the court system - which has more than enough trouble dealing with crime against people.
2. It diminishes overall respect and regard for "people crimes."
3. It elevates dogs to an almost mythical standard of treatment that eventually swatting your dog on the nose with a newspaper will result in possible prosecution.
4. It will encourage people to become "abuse hunters" and eventually interfere with a person's rights to discipline an unruly or vicious dog.
The "right thing" is to leave the statutes as they are regarding animal abuse.
December 13, 2012 at 3:50 p.m.
"How very pompous of you - a mere human to think you are so much more important than an animal...."
BINGO... an animal rights activist finally GETS IT! HOORAY!
Every human... I MEAN EVERY HUMAN... is much more important than an animal.
And to your question as to why ulistenup cares that animal abuse is or isn't a felony...Our court system is clogged up to almost a standstill now - and you want dog abuse cases to be ahead of other serious misdemeanors - is just ridiculous!
Dogs do deserve love and compassion - but not to be out on a pedestal.
December 13, 2012 at 3:22 p.m.
Amazing how an article like this brings out the atheists, Catholic-hating bigots, and every other kind of malcontent around.
Notice how bitter and negative atheists are? What a great way to view life.
December 5, 2012 at 11:37 a.m.
NoBS must stand for "no basic sense." How dare you accuse pro-lifers of "playing God" when you pro-aborts kill innocent life.
November 20, 2012 at 9:56 a.m.
I will not stoop to criticizing you as you have done above. Let me just say that I believe you are likely an intelligent person who has just been duped by our sick culture.
The arguments against same-sex marriage on this thread are faith-based on Judeo-Christian traditions. You obviously don't adhere to those beliefs. Admit it. It's a free country.
But you have no problem with your own "moral code," whatever that is; it's just outside of the historical mainstream thinking of very smart people who developed the criminal law over the centuries.
Admit it, sodomy used to be criminal, just like incestuous marriages. Yet one is now legal in Ohio and the other isn't. Don't you see the slippery slope argument coming up from behind to bite you?
But you make your exception; the GAY exception, and all the other "forms" or imitations of marriage are fair game - ripe for the legislation.
You stand aghast at the suggestion of a person marrying his dog, but the logical line of your argument leads to "anything goes," even that.
November 15, 2012 at 1:12 p.m.
You are obviously bitter. While not addressing your outrageous claims, there is only one truth. And the Catholic Church teaches those truths.
There is no such thing as a spouse of the same gender. He may be something else, but please don't misuse the term spouse.
November 13, 2012 at 9:12 a.m.
Thanks, Mr. Hope and Change!
November 13, 2012 at 8:31 a.m.
The Bishops have no choice but to "stay the course." They are defending the truth.
November 13, 2012 at 6:02 a.m.