For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
I have no response to your nonsense.Walker wrote:You're playing with the lives of innocents with your conceptual theories.
How arrogant.
How utterly, completely, obnoxiously, arrogant.
We realize that for whatever reason, you must be this way.
And on this side of the table ... spontaneous, effortless compassion ... ahhhh
And to that sir, what is your insult?
Sad.Hobbes' Choice wrote:I have no response to your nonsense.Walker wrote:You're playing with the lives of innocents with your conceptual theories.
How arrogant.
How utterly, completely, obnoxiously, arrogant.
We realize that for whatever reason, you must be this way.
And on this side of the table ... spontaneous, effortless compassion ... ahhhh
And to that sir, what is your insult?
That's what I keep saying but you just won't listen.Walker wrote:Sad.Hobbes' Choice wrote:I have no response to your nonsense.Walker wrote:You're playing with the lives of innocents with your conceptual theories.
How arrogant.
How utterly, completely, obnoxiously, arrogant.
We realize that for whatever reason, you must be this way.
And on this side of the table ... spontaneous, effortless compassion ... ahhhh
And to that sir, what is your insult?
The Believers and The Faithful often are confused by rationality..
Anyone who understands dogs and packs.Walker wrote:...
Who can truly know the mind of any dog. ...
Anyone who understands what being the pack leader entails.For that reason, who can morally trust a beast without morality, and without fear of repercussions upon its own being, caused by its own actions? ...
Nothing to do with faith but leadership.Only the Faithful can.
Pretty much any human can kill themselves?vegetariantaxidermy wrote:Dogs have more rights. They have the right to euthanasia.
How did he deserve it? There's nothing about him being cruel to the dog. It's not exactly normal behaviour for a dog. I suppose they can be insane too.ForCruxSake wrote:Here's another story of a man being mauled by his own dog, only this time it was whilst he was being interviewed by the BBC, who caught it on film. Did he deserve it? Makes you wonder...
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... ll-terrier
Well, judging from everything I've read, staffs, and similar dogs, can be well behaved dogs. It's how they are trained and treated. This has come up several times on this thread. We actually know nothing of this man save a bit of press print and the BBC interview cut short... and the fact his dog seemed to be an attack dog.vegetariantaxidermy wrote:How did he deserve it? There's nothing about him being cruel to the dog. It's not exactly normal behaviour for a dog. I suppose they can be insane too.ForCruxSake wrote:Here's another story of a man being mauled by his own dog, only this time it was whilst he was being interviewed by the BBC, who caught it on film. Did he deserve it? Makes you wonder...
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... ll-terrier
The story is gutter 'journalism' at its worst. To die like that and then have your character assassinated. Very low.
Odd. I don't see any 'attack'. I didn't say you were assassinating his character. I said the hack journalist was. Staffies are usually lovely dogs--those smallish dogs that are often brindle. I think there are a lot of misconceptions about what they actually are, no thanks to Americans adopting the 'suitably macho' and offensive name 'pit bull'.ForCruxSake wrote:Well, judging from everything I've read, staffs, and similar dogs, can be well behaved dogs. It's how they are trained and treated. This has come up several times on this thread. We actually know nothing of this man save a bit of press print and the BBC interview cut short... and the fact his dog seemed to be an attack dog.vegetariantaxidermy wrote:How did he deserve it? There's nothing about him being cruel to the dog. It's not exactly normal behaviour for a dog. I suppose they can be insane too.ForCruxSake wrote:Here's another story of a man being mauled by his own dog, only this time it was whilst he was being interviewed by the BBC, who caught it on film. Did he deserve it? Makes you wonder...
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... ll-terrier
The story is gutter 'journalism' at its worst. To die like that and then have your character assassinated. Very low.
I actually posed it as a question: "Did he deserve it?" It wasn't rhetorical. I don't know. It makes me wonder.
Maybe you can calm your misdirected outrage (at me) now and perhaps give yourself a little time to ponder, before you too decide on another hasty attack.
Apologies. Totally misread what you were saying, It was a staff that bit my son (as mentioned earlier) and I was more put out by the dog's owner than the dog. Totally agree with you and grateful for the extra detailed knowledge.vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Odd. I don't see any 'attack'. I didn't say you were assassinating his character. I said the hack journalist was. Staffies are usually lovely dogs--those smallish dogs that are often brindle. I think there are a lot of misconceptions about what they actually are, no thanks to Americans adopting the 'suitably macho' and offensive name 'pit bull'.
''The term pit bull does not refer to a single breed of dog but possibly two and as many as five. The two breeds unanimously accepted by dog experts are the American Bull Terrier and the American Staffordshire Terrier. Pit bulls began earning their violent reputations in colonial times when they were trained to participate in a sport called "bainting" in which the dogs were placed into pens with other dogs and animals and forced to fight them.''
