Why Animals Don't Have Right's

Is animal property or is it Free. And if it's free should we not make trees free and shouldnt we all just die right now from starvation.

Noble cause below... How long before local tree ordinances become federal law. No matter if it crush your house or not.

How To Make A Difference - Wildlife - Enshrining legal rights for the planet - The Ecologist

Tree rights
But trees remain largely unprotected; they do not have rights. We accord rights to abstract entities such as corporations, churches, universities, councils, governments – yet, unlike trees or any plant matter they are intangible. They are abstract concepts that we, humans have created. We have created the legal rights for a corporation to stake its claim on a piece of land, call it property and then use or abuse that land in whichever manner it sees fit.
The entities that exist on that land - the trees, the birds, the water, the fish - have no rights at all. But a corporation is not tangible in the way a tree is. It is an artificial concept that we have created for our benefit. It is a fiction, but it has standing in court. The tree, the river, the deer does not.


Give me the argument for where it stops. I've already told you where freedom stops.
Public Health infringment on neighbor. Where does infringement on property rights stop, where? You cant tell me...

We have to accept the good the bad and the ugly in America. We have to!! (Free Speech)

We are afforded personal morality... You cannot legislate Morality!! It's wrong and we have to stop lieing to our children America is not a Democracy

Democracies lead to communism and death of rights and freedom

 

your argument is getting progressively worse lol.

 

It doesnt matter...
your personal opinion is that it shouldnt be in compairison... but they can be compared because they are both property. Thats like saying, Hey you can't cut down that tree its my property in my yard... Well don't compare that tree to your car, because that tree is alive! Doesn't matter... both property and no 1 person can draw the line for the rest of us.

 

I like to use RATS as an example when having this discussion...<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
At what points do rats gain they're rights? I can stomp on a rat that's in my barn; I can run over a rat on the road, I can kill a rat with poison.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
BUT does that rat gain rights once I take it in and keep it in a cage? Is it now a "pet" with the same "rights" as a dog or cat? They are all warm blooded social animals. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
If he gains his rights then, when he's brought in and kept in a cage, does he LOSE those rights if I go buy a snake and decide to feed the rat to him???<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Or what if my cat kills my roommate’s pet rat? Is that animal cruelty or a crime since I didn't take the proper precautions to insure the rats well being? Why are cat owners not under scrutiny when they're cats kill field mice, squirrels, birds, etc? <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
WHO decided what animals belong where on the scale? Dogs and cats are above all others..? WHY?<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
It's hypocritical and makes ABSOLUTLEY no sense. Should I be able to beat my dog to death with a baseball bat with out worry from the law...? YES, just like I can kill a rat with that same baseball bat. Just like I can smash a bee's nest with it.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
And if the animals ARE going to have rights, HOW can I go to the vet and get an animal put to sleep. WHO decides at what point it's "ok" to euthanize an animal? If the veterinary treatment is too expensive, I'm allowed to euthanize. If I feel the animal is too aggressive, no vet will argue with euthanasia. If the animal is born deaf, blind or with another physical abnormality, I'm allowed. BUT if I show up with a terrier and tell my vet he won’t kill varmint, will they allow me? Where are the "rights"?<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
It's a hypocritical made up value system unenforceable by true law, and only by INDIVIDUALS perceptions of it.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
My daughter has an ANT farm. Can she let them loose and burn them with a Magnifying glass... or are they "pets" with rights now?<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
I don't understand the difficulty in seeing this hypocrisy. But people feel the need to anthropomorphize they're animals and give them cute lil names and a set of rights...<o:p></o:p>
As long as the animal is "cute"... Ugly animals don't get the same rights, bugs, rats, etc...<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
In closing I take the animal husbandry to highest level I can personally. THAT is my right, but it should not be law.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
A more important "issue" that’s ignored is what I would consider CHILD abuse in having an over weight unhealthily fed child. I would never care for my child in a manner that she would not be getting what is considered by me (and probably most others) a healthy diet. So should laws exist to put parents in jail for not providing a healthy balanced diet? It DOES cause PHYSICAL harm to a child, yet this is over looked and how I feed my CHICKENS or COWS is law... Backcrack asswards as can be...<o:p></o:p>

 

it's not my opinion...

I am asking?? But you are whining.

Personal Property is??? I am asking???

and when can you infringe on personal property... So your saying there are classes of property. ??

Thats silly (now thats my opinion)... Break down classes of property and tell me where thats legal or right.

 

Lol... I want to know where it's legal or right to legislate a mans personal property outside of public health.

Show me the public health argument for not allowing a man to beat his own cow; that he's going to eat and no one else.

 

Agreed a child has welfare and right's:

But try to legislate that child's diet, you could feed your child McDonalds everyday if you wanted. But you can legislate what my pig eats...
(Happens often in rural Miami counties and rural Houston counties I know from personal friends)

these are societal questions...

Show me where it's legal to tell a man how to use his property... I love my animals wouldnt abuse them thats my morality...not necessarily someone else's

 

Hmmm.

Gotta think here.

 

I am in agreement with you. My point is that there is no line... property is property, there are no classes. My response was to the guy i quoted.

 

By the way, the language is exactly the same for a deed of land as for marriage - "to have and to hold" - marriage was created as a property agreement. Should we be able to beat our wives and our dogs because both are contractually speaking 'property'? No animate being should be treated the same as a fence, a car, a piece of lumber.

 

You could, if it wasnt for HUMAN RIGHTS lol
Your wive has human rights, your car, dog, tree, plant, bike, and home do not.

 

Didn;t start out that way my friend - women only got rights in the 20th century- before that it was up to the man's discretion whether or not he beat his wife

 

thats not relevent to your question... your question was does it make it okay to beat your wife. No, because of the rights she holds... almost everything that is illegal today was previously legal. Your dog holds no rights, and shouldnt. For those who feel otherwise, i hope yall dont own bulldogs...

 

I do feel otherwise and do own a bulldog... (!!)

but I don't think we're going to agree, so as long as you treat yours well it's all good man.

 

Best reply in the whole damn thread!!!!

Where I come from we mind our damn business about what a man does with his property, My dogs, chickens, & goats are all my PROPERTY, and this property is protected by the good Lord and a gun, and you will definitely meet them both if you come near them unwelcome son!!!!

 

Marriage is an agreement between two human beings... The agreement is property, that is why you dont go to jail if you cheat o your wife.

A woman is a human... You are infringing on her human rights if you beat her...

Tell me why animals have rights??? welfare... if their property,... Your contract of marriage is property(protected property), that is why divorce and contracts have courts to settle dispute on property rights

There is no jail time involved.

Why not protect my property rights and allow all to do as they see fit... NJPit don't just give in on the argument and say it is how it is??? Tell me why it's ok to infringe on another mans property rights

 

thanks for the clarification

 

ADM anyone who eats usda product support AW like it or not. see my point about being like the crazy's.

 

No, I can't see how USDA meat (public health) has anything to do with the animal welfare agenda.

Reason being you can keep the USDA and keep the emotions out of it. A man/company not being able to poison the meat they are selling to others (infringement on anothers personal right to harm a human being); has nothing to do with the emotional or physical well being of an animal not for commercial consumption.

The word welfare by definition is
the good fortune, health, happiness, prosperity, etc., of a person, group, or organization; well-being:
to look after a child's welfare; the physical or moral welfare of society

Social welfare
is organized public or private social services for the assistance of disadvantaged groups; specifically : social work

Animal welfare
is the physical and psychological state of non-human animals

Animal welfare is the physical and psychological state of non-human animals. The term animal welfare can also mean human concern for animal welfare or a position in a debate on animal ethics and animal rights

the viewpoint that it is morally acceptable for humans to use animals (for food, in animal research, as clothing, as entertainment, etc.), as long as the people using the animals avoid causing the animals suffering deemed "unnecessary"; The movement supporting this viewpoint

Seems pretty fluid... I dont debate the USDA has adopted the animal welfare agenda and the AWA (animal Welfare act)...

How is it legal for them to regulate Personal property...

The USDA panders as well as the local and federal governments: that doesn't mean it's legal for them to legislate our personal property.

I want to know the argument based in our founding and constitution that allows the government to reach into personal property. Animal Welfare is not legal (Animals dont have welfare or we would be dead) it's progressivism (my word) it's progressive speak (speech: to be used as the tool of progressives) to say that they do without a legal basis.

 

ADM if you would dig a little deeper other them wikipeda ( not a creadible scorce) you would see just how your worng.personal property has two different classifications. the AWA covers a broad spectrum not just "cruelty" is covered. there's really nothing to debate the USDA because you support them only you don't realise it. so when you buy that porterhouse or chicken your supporting them. so it's really the pot calling the kettle black. so like i told you big different between AR & AW.