Charlie Bell wrote: > >> OTOH, Pitbulls should be called a different species; they are >> "dogs" in the same way that killer whales are "whales" :-/ > > That they've been bred for viciousness says more about the people > doing the breeding than the dogs themselves. > Yes - but they corrupt the good name of the dogs.
> As for orcas, what's wrong with orcas? They're carnivores, > they're top predators, they're > smart. But they're no better or worse than lions for eating > antelope or grizzly bears for eating caribou. > I used "orcas" just because of their (wrong) name, "killer whales", since they are more dolphins than whales. >> (BTW: is it morally right to condemn a race of dogs, even >> one so degenerate that it kills children, to extinction?) > > Again - why is the breed "degenerate"? > Because they are Evil. > They were breed to fight and > kill. Yes it's a tragedy when a child is hurt or killed, but no more > or less than if a child is taken by a croc or a shark. The dog is > simply doing what dogs that are bred that way do. > The difference is that children should _not_ be afraid of dogs, but should be afraid of crocs or sharks. And pitbulls roam the streets disguised as dogs! > However, your question is a good one. My view is this: we created > them, we should reverse that. Humanely, of course. They should be > sterilised. 10 years, the problem is gone, and we haven't been cruel. > This is genocide, IMHO. Alberto Monteiro _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
