Vick to begin workouts

[moochman]

I have to side with Art somewhat on this. We think that because we love our pets that they deserve rights for humane treatment not accorded to other animals. I see this as a blissful, suspension of disbelief by most of us. We chose to think that this cruel treatment of animals is something we don’t condone (or we rationalize it away with a pets vs food arguments) and that doesn’t happen except in those rare cases like the Vick case.
The tragic fact of the matter is that most of us could find a dogfight to watch within 25 miles of our homes. There are a lot more people out there who don’t share our enlightened views on animal cruelty than we choose to acknowledge. Though I wouldn’t go as far as to call someone hypocritical, naïve, or complicit, few of us here are pure as the driven snow.
In Vick’s case I will hope that the pets vs. livestock argument is the case and he has learned that dogs are pets and as such rely on owners for protection and safe treatment. However, I think many of those involved in dog fighting (or grayhound racing for that matter) don’t consider dogs to be pets, so if we remove that label from them, should they be any more or less protected than Bulls? What Vick did was scary-wrong, but how wrong was it if he didn’t feel any affinity towards fighting dogs? Hopefully he has changed and maybe others will learn from his example.
So don’t let Art Vandelay’s hatred of dogs (and probably butterflies, children, and America ) blind you to his point, because he is right. We have a tier system for ethical treatment of animals and choose to turn a comfortably blind eye to the ills that befall the animals we exploit in our daily life. So before you go running off to the Vandelay stoning take a moment to realize how little we know about how the animal cruelty that takes place to bring us some of the things we enjoy.

And no, I do not eat, nor condone the unethical treatment of tofu.

[Art Vandelay]

I can see both sides of this but the one difference that Art glosses over is that the brutality to dogs is gratuitous. The pigs, chickens and livestock are all food animals and are slaughtered to feed us. Their suffering could certainly be lessened but not ended. The suffering of the dogs though is completely unwarranted and deserving of criminal sanction. We are probably going overboard with Vick though.

That's a good point about the suffering, which is why I have no problem with the punishment that Vick has already gone through. I suspect, however, that even if he would have killed those dogs in a way that would not have caused them to suffer much, people would still be up in arms.

I'm guessing you never had a dog as a pet, Art?

I did when I was a kid. I won't ever own one again (unless I need a service dog at some point). I'm not anti-dog. I'm anti-treating dogs like they are somehow better and more important than other animals. And while I'm making friends here, I may as well add that I'm anti-unresponsible dog owners, which in my experience, is well over 50%.

[joejlitz]

Vick's rights are owned by Orlando of the UFL. Should he remain free of legal issues, the commissioner of the UFL has said he could play for them:

Vick Non-Story (for now?)