I normally like what he has to say, but he just made a comment on his radio, just afer 12:30 p.m. my time, which I found to be (for lack of a better word) idiotic. He was talking about the Michael Vick situation, and said, in not so many words, that human suffering concerns him more than animal suffering because humans can suffer while animals can only experience pain. Really? Has he ever seen a dog react to an upraised hand? It demonstrates fear.
Here's another example. Before Mrs. BHG and I acquired Sadie and Phoebe, our younger two commando bassets, we had another female basset named Sprint. Sprint had to be put down in September of 2005 because she was diagnosed with hemangiosarcoma, a particularly insidious form of cancer. After she was put down, Flash moped around the house, and whenever we let him outside, he would invariably go to the spot where Sprint used to sit, as if to wait for her. He did this for months, and he also stopped eating. There is NO doubt in my mind that he was demonstrating sadness and suffering.
Don't tell me that animals can't or don't experience suffering.................
Post script: Prager just redeemed himself somewhat by making the correct point that when people are cruel to animals, it is generally a good indicator that someone will be cruel to other people. The converse, as he notes, is not necessarily true. There is no connection between being kind to animals and being kind to people. After all, the Nazis loved their pets.......
No comments:
Post a Comment