HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: What would *you* have done?
From: feinstei@vax.sonoma.edu
Date: 14 Aug 92 12:37:02 -0800
Reply-To: feinstei@sonoma.edu
Organization: Sonoma State University
Keywords: animal abuse
Summary: How to effectively intervene in abuse situations?

Hi, everybody.

When traveling through the South recently I had an experience that was...
ethically challenging, shall I say, and I want to post what happened and
see if any of you had ideas as to what would have been a better response
in the situation.

My SO and I were taking a road trip through the South. We pulled off into
a gas station in Tennessee. It was fairly isolated, and there were a few
other people around, but not many and not too close. I pumped the gas and
my SO went inside the gas-n-shop to get a drink. I noticed a car pulled up
next to the restrooms. Next to the car were a couple of young boys (one was
about 4, the other 5 or 6) and their father, a big burly man who was beating
the shit out of the family dog, who had foolishly taken a shit in the family
car. This man was beating the dog for all he was worth, along with yanking
him hard by the leash around his neck, et cetera. Then he went into the men's
room, came back with wet paper towels, wiped the dog's ass, then hit him some
more. All this time the two boys were standing there watching their father do
this. I was trying to figure out what to do. I ended up going over to the guy
and saying something like, "Look sir, I am not trying to stick my nose in your
business, but that dog doesn't know any better...hitting him won't help..."
and things like that. I didn't want to come on too strong because I thought
that might have escalated the situation and made it worse for the dog after
I was gone. But the guy just growled, "He'll learn" and kept cleaning off the
dog (although he didn't beat it while I was standing there).

My SO was still inside during all of this. She said to the people in there,
"*What* is this guy doing? I can't believe no one is saying anything!" and
they looked at her like *she* was the weirdo, as if to say, "Who the fuck are
you?" In other words, they didn't view this guy's behavior as even being
out of line apparently.

So that's what ended up happening. The dog is no better off than he was
before. The two boys are going to grow up and probably follow in their
father's footsteps as far as treatment of animals (in fact, when the man
was in the bathroom once the older boy slapped the dog too, which scared
me). This cycle was being perpetuated before my very eyes, from father to
sons, and I didn't know how to throw a wrench in the monkeyworks to interrupt
the cycle.

My question is: what *should* I have done that would have had a more positive
effect for the dog, the boys, and even the man himself? Was there something
I could have said or done that would have helped this man realize how fucked
up he was acting?


Josh
feinstei@sonoma.edu
From: unglenie@ford.ecn.purdue.edu (Robert J Unglenieks)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: Re: Olympics and Animal rights
Date: 13 Aug 92 23:46:20 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

Jim B. Powlesland writes:
>
>>xi@binah.cc.brandeis.edu writes:
>
>>In modern olympic games, equestrian is also very popular, but the
>>human got medal and money, what did horse get?  --Zhigan
>
>The best feed, medical attention, etc. that money can buy. And,
>if a stallion, going to stud full-time in his retirement.

..... potentially crippling injuries ......

Rob U, family raises quarter horses

--
-       Rob Unglenieks             REAL race cars DON'T wear BOWTIES       -
-     "Our task must be to free ourselves by widening our circle           -
-      of compassion to embrace all living creatures."                     -
-                           -  Albert Einstein                             -
From: dreamer@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (David Caruso II ~~~)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: An Amazing Revelation?
Date: 15 Aug 92 21:27:52 CDT
Organization: <><><><><><><><><><><>

	I have a job as a waiter, and today I was serving a family that had 
just moved into Lawrence.  During the conversation I had with the father of 
this family, we had the following exchange:

	"Is there deer-hunting in Lawrence?" the man asked.
	I didn't pause before I replied, "I don't know ... I'm not much into
hunting." I proceeded to treat him like any other customer, with some level of 
respect and a positive attitude.

	Hey, avid hunters, can you believe it?  Ol' "Dreamer" didn't even
poison his food or "rant" or "rave" about the rights of deer!  Maybe ol'
"Dreamer" isn't such a bad guy, after all. 

	I do, however, hope that someday this man sees the light.

	... And he even gave me a nice tip.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
David Caruso II                       "Great minds are the most misunderstood."
dreamer@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu						-- DAC2
From: proberts@informix.com (Paul Roberts)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: Re: Olympics and Animal rights
Date: 17 Aug 92 23:44:21 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

In article <1992Aug15.205232.3499@desire.wright.edu> sbishop@desire.wright.edu writes:
>In article <1992Aug13.184316.7193@news.cs.brandeis.edu>, xi@binah.cc.brandeis.edu writes:
>> In modern olympic games, equestrian is also very popular, but the human
>> got medal and money, what did horse get?
>> --Zhigang
>
>I don't know exactly what kind of a point you are making.  Do you ride?  
>Have you ever owned/lived around/ridden/trained/raised horses?  
>In other words, are you talking from experience or ignorance?
>
>Sue

Here we go again. Tell me Sue, was it only the slave owners who had
"experience" on the subject of slavery, and the rights and wrongs
thereof? The Abolitionists were just "ignorant" wreen't they? I mean
they must have been, they didn't personally own any slaves.

Paul
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: rigg@osnome.che.wisc.edu (Tim Rigg)
Subject: Re: Rover stares down my barrel.
Organization: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Chemical Engineering
Date: 15 Aug 92 23:56:57
In-reply-to: dreamer@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu's message of 10 Aug 92 21:30:10 GMT

In article <1992Aug10.163010.42252@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> dreamer@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (David Caruso II ~~~) writes:

	   I wonder how many hunters out there have pets.  And I
   wonder how they
   would react if I decided that the cat and dog over-population problem was 
   something I needed to take into my own hands, and shot their pets.  Oh, and 
   don't forget that I enjoyed it, too.  I enjoyed putting a bullet
   through Rover
   and knowing that I had been the direct cause of the termination of Rover's 
   life.

There are many areas of the country where wild dogs are a problem.
Please go ahead and kill as many of them as you can get.

	   But wait.  Of course, me, not being a perfect marksman, shot Rover
   first in his hind-quarters, and shattered his spine.  Or I could
   have just shot him in a non-vital area.  Of course, this is fair,
   because people have the
   right to kill animals because they enjoy it, and because there are too many
   animals. 

Killing animals quickly is quite different from intentionally causing
them to suffer excessively.  

If one is not a good marksman, one should not hunt!  I favor manditory
testing for hunting licenses, especially bowhunters.  There are too
many weekend warriors causing problems for responsible hunters.

tim
--
    ...  Then they came for me,
	   and by that time there was no one
	     left to speak up for me. (Rev. Martin Niemoller, 1945)
From: unglenie@ford.ecn.purdue.edu (Robert J Unglenieks)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: Re: They're coming for Ronald.
Date: 12 Aug 92 20:35:26 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <_h-y3_+@rpi.edu> vanetten@unix.cie.rpi.edu (John S. Van Etten) writes:
>
>         [drivel deleted]
>
>                      - Ronald McDonald, clown
>
>It seems to me I've seen scary words like these somewhere before....
>
>John

Here's one for you John.  From Realities 1989 By Earthsave:

Original actor to play Ronald McDonald:  Jeff Juliano
Diet now followed by Jeff Juliano:  Vegetarian

Not so scary...... The original clown has become a vegetarian and note that
he is no longer a clown.!?

Rob U, Hey new Ronald..... what IS hamburger? 

--
-       Rob Unglenieks             REAL race cars DON'T wear BOWTIES       -
-     "Now is the time when men work quietly in the fields and women       -
-      weep softly in the kitchen; the legislature is in session and       -
-      no man's property is safe."            -Daniel Webster-             -
Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,misc.education
From: steveh@thor.isc-br.com (Steve Hendricks)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory
Subject: Libertarian Theory and Social Tolerance
Summary: Libertarian policies undermine tolerance and individualism
Date: 22 Aug 92 18:29:35 GMT
Organization: ISC-Bunker Ramo, An Olivetti Company

I detect a basic contradiction in many of the posts to this group that
I would like to see addressed by those with a commitment to the 
libertarian viewpoint.

On the one hand, libertarians typically make a fetish of high-sounding
assertions of tolerance toward those who live or think differently
from the majority in a society.  I assume that a libertarian utopia 
would be one in which many different views would exist and cultural 
diversity would be celebrated.  So far, so good.  We conventional
liberals share the same goals.

If that is so, however, I fail to see how typical libertarian 
positions on education, housing, employment, and public accomodations
support such goals.  Worse than that, they seem designed positively
to undermine them.  Rather than promoting tolerance and cultural
diversity, they appear designed to support group isolation, intolerance,
and ultimately to promote "group think" rather than individualism.

Take education policy as one example.  I assume that the typical 
libertarian position is that religious, cultural, ethnic, and political
groups should be encouraged (not just allowed) through public policy 
to form their own schools.  Does anyone seriously believe that 
segregating children into such group-based training academies will 
lead to more tolerance for cultural diversity and individualist
values?  There is certainly little evidence for such a hope and plenty
of evidence to the contrary.

Libertarian policies in housing, employment, and public accomodations
would seem to lead in the same direction; toward isolation
of like-minded groups and an inevitable reduction in experience with
diversity and therefore less commitment to individual rights.

I suppose one might argue that this is a risk that must be borne to
promote individual choice.  But at the same time, libertarians would
agree, I believe, that commitment to individualism and social tolerance
are essential to a libertarian utopia.  So how do you propose that 
that such values be promoted as libertarian policies are implemented?
Am I missing something?

Steve
--
Steve Hendricks                        |  DOMAIN:  steveh@thor.ISC-BR.COM   
   ISC-Bunker Ramo Corp.  ms LL2-2B    |  UUCP:    ...!uunet!isc-br!thor!steveh
   E. 22425 Appleway                   |  Ma Bell: 509 927-7034
   Spokane, WA  99220-4008             |  FAX: 509 927-2499
Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,misc.legal,alt.postmodern
From: barry@netcom.com (Kenn Barry)
Subject: Re: Exploitation by Playboy and Hustler
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 92 22:51:06 GMT
Organization: QQQCLC

In article <BsIJx5.2wo@newcastle.ac.uk> Chris.Holt@newcastle.ac.uk (Chris Holt) writes:
>[nekkid women]
>A good approach, I think, is to examine the way that women are
>exploited by the advertising industry when they absorb the
>beauty myth.  Girls can tell the difference between fantasy
>(all those ideal faces and figures, that are overwhelmingly
>popular) and reality (the people they see around them in school).
>But women still absorb the desperate insecurity that makes them
>go out and buy unnecessary "beauty products" and uncomfortable
>clothes, and they're afraid of acting too clever, for fear of
>alienating the males around them.  So far, so uncontentious (I hope).

	Looks contentious to me; more assumptions than I can
shake a stick at. To wit: 1) that most women are like this; 2) that
most women would be less "brainwashed" were it not for advertising;
3) that beauty aids do _not_ aid in making women attractive.

>The male side of this is to buy into the beauty myth as well.
>Boys invite girls who are "pretty" out to the movies, and ignore
>those who are less so, or who seem too bright.

	That so? Lemme see if I got this straight: if it weren't
for advertising, men wouldn't see one woman as more physically
attractive than another, or if they did, they still wouldn't
practise romantic discrimination against the less pretty?

	You wouldn't be in the market for a bridge, would you?

>The role of
>pornographic magazines is that they tie this skin-deep kind of
>evaluation in with the full-blooded sex drive.

	Huh? Do you think you could say this in English? It sounds
like you're saying we shouldn't let the boys know that the reason
they find girls pretty has to do with (sshhh) sex. Did I miss something?

>Men have to
>accept the reality that most of them cannot sleep with these
>visions of loveliness;

	I thought you said, above, that the plain ones are getting
neglected because the guys _are_ going with these visions of
loveliness?

-  From the Crow's Nest  -                Kenn Barry
----------------------------------------------------------------
ELECTRIC AVENUE:    			barry@netcom.com
From: hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Punishment vs Restitution   was Pro-abortion's view on life
Date: 18 Aug 92 18:16:06 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: Purdue University Statistics Department

In article <1992Aug17.185253.7078@clipper.ingr.com> ald@clipper.ingr.com (Al Date) writes:
>In article <1992Aug16.042538.6698@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> c60a-zg@volga.Berkeley.EDU (Martin Guerrero-LabA) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug14.173917.4633@clipper.ingr.com> ald@clipper.ingr.com (Al Date) writes:

>>>I prefer the idea of actual monetary
>>>compensation of the victims by the criminal to the idea of punishment
>>>by society for vengeance's sake, even if we assume that the
>>>criminal is locked up.


>>What happens if the criminal has no money or has so little money?

>He will have his prison wages garnished, if he has no assets.
>I am speaking here of a violent crime which leaves victims in its wake.

A little reminder of the ancient system is in order; prisons AS PUNISHMENT
are a quite modern development.  If we lock up the criminal, we deprive
society of the value of his work.

According to our records, in ancient Israel, someone who committed a
crime not punishable by death or flogging (murder and religious crimes)
was fined.  If unable to pay, he was sold into servitude (limited to 6 years)
but could be redeemed.  

>>(perhaps lack of money is part of the cause of the crime?) 

People without money voluntarily sold themselves into this kind of servitude.
-- 
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
Phone: (317)494-6054
hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet)  
{purdue,pur-ee}!pop.stat!hrubin(UUCP)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,misc.education
From: gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch)
Subject: Re: Science fiction, literature, politics, schools
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 11:01:12 GMT
Organization: mydog in exile

I don't see any two cultures.  I see an avoidance of the hard
stuff.  The lyrics of Paul Simon and Robert Frost are pretty,
but they're easy.  Heinlein is easy.  Esperanto is easy.  Not
reading history is easy.  Well, fine; go with the flow.  But
don't call it "culture" or "education"; it's entertainment.
I can't prove that there's anything wrong with this, but it's
been my experience that difficult things strengthen the 
faculties they call upon.

Just one example.  History, as Henry Ford observed, is mostly
bunk.  That's because the winners buy or cow the writers of
history into writing their version of things.  But in between
the bunk, there's real stuff -- by accident or design.  And
it's important because we didn't just pop out of nowhere, we 
got where we are by a particular path, a path which we're
still on today.

Learing to criticize the bunk, which is everywhere, and
to dig out the real stuff, is hard work, but the reward is
an expanded consciousness.  To me, that's life, much moreso
than listening to Heinlein and Frost repeat what we have
already heard over and over again.
-- 
Gordon Fitch | gcf@panix.com | uunet!cmcl2!panix!gcf 
*       1238 Blg. Grn. Sta., N.Y., N.Y. 10274      *
Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,soc.culture.usa,alt.conspiracy,talk.politics.misc
From: labiche@crchh561.BNR.CA (Maurice LaBiche)
Subject: Re: Kulturkampf
Reply-To: labiche@crchh561.BNR.CA (Maurice LaBiche)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 15:42:42 GMT


In article <2A92F431.22667@orion.oac.uci.edu>,
cedman@714-725-3165.nts.uci.edu (Carl Edman) writes:
|> Gordon Fitch writes
|> > This proposal is clearly akin to  the fascist, Communist,
|> > and Nazi programs of subordinating culture to political
|> > -- governmental -- control, and of eliminating free
|> > expression.  The Nazis called the program
|> > _Kulturkampf_.  Is there any way in which the Buchanan
|> > proposal differs from the _Kulturkampf_?  Or are there
|> > defenders of Buchanan who would like to explain his
|> > statement otherwise? 
|> 
|> May I respectfully suggest that however erudite Mr Fitch may be, his
knowledge  
|> of Imperial and Weimar Germanys history unfortunately has at least one gap  
|> concerning the origin and meaning of the term "Kulturkampf" ?
|> 
|> 	Carl Edman
|> 

Yo Carl,
Why didn't you enlighten us Netters with a more correct historical
definition instead of simply stating that Gordon doesn't fully know
what he is talking about?  Are we just supposed to believe things 
because you say so?  If you already knew the meaning of the 'Kulturkampf'
why not simply state it than simply stating how unknowledgeable you
believe Gordon to be?

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maurice LaBiche (Mo.L.)         |   labiche@bnr.ca
Bell Northern Research          |   Part of Northern Telecom 
Richardson, Texas               |   i'm really in Texas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No opinions herein expressed have anything to do with the opinions 
of Bell Northern Research or Northern Telecom or CIA or NSA ...
These statements are mine and mine alone, well i guess my wife 
agrees with some of them?
Xref: sparky talk.politics.theory:3759 soc.culture.usa:6707 alt.conspiracy:10169 talk.politics.misc:40850
From: sichase@csa3.lbl.gov (SCOTT I CHASE)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,soc.culture.usa,alt.conspiracy,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Kulturkampf
Date: 20 Aug 92 20:18:18 GMT
Reply-To: sichase@csa3.lbl.gov
Distribution: na
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory - Berkeley, CA, USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.254.198
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4

In article <2A92F431.22667@orion.oac.uci.edu>, cedman@714-725-3165.nts.uci.edu (Carl Edman) writes...
>Gordon Fitch writes
>> expression.  The Nazis called the program
>> _Kulturkampf_.  Is there any way in which the Buchanan
>> ...
>May I respectfully suggest that however erudite Mr Fitch may be, his knowledge  
>of Imperial and Weimar Germanys history unfortunately has at least one gap  
>concerning the origin and meaning of the term "Kulturkampf" ?

No.  Not unless you would like to demonstrate your superior understanding
by actually explaining the truth to us.  Why just belittle him when you
could have enlightened us instead?

-Scott
--------------------
Scott I. Chase			"The question seems to be of such a character
SICHASE@CSA2.LBL.GOV		that if I should come to life after my death
				and some mathematician were to tell me that it
				had been definitely settled, I think I would
				immediately drop dead again."      - Vandiver
Xref: sparky talk.politics.theory:3629 alt.postmodern:2318 rec.arts.books:14491
From: crywalt@vaxc.stevens-tech.edu (Christopher Rywalt, maladjusted cartoonist)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,alt.postmodern,rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Beyond Re: Hate Speech Okay, says the Supreme Court
Date: 12 Aug 92 21:33:32 GMT
Organization: Fairleigh Dickinson University

In article <1992Aug10.141251.6286@panix.com>, gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch) writes:
> Somehow we wound up back at the old libertarian ranch:
> It's [the writing of Heinlein] particularly
> attractive to people still struggling with self-definition, which
> is what I take much of the concern with individuality evident on
> the Net to be about, but I would like to get beyond it sometime.  
> That applies to both politics and literature.
> -- 
> Gordon Fitch | gcf@panix.com | uunet!cmcl2!panix!gcf 
> *       1238 Blg. Grn. Sta., N.Y., N.Y. 10274      *

	I would hope that one would struggle with self-definition for
	one's entire life.

-- Chris
Xref: sparky talk.politics.theory:3641 misc.legal:15969
From: asylvain@felix.filenet.com (The Chipmunk)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,misc.legal
Subject: Re: "Full Employment Act" for lawyers? (was: What sorts of entities...)
Date: 13 Aug 92 00:29:45 GMT
            <1992Aug5.112717.15833@panix.com>
            <JTURNER.92Aug6162322@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu>
            <1992Aug8.154448.25564@athena.mit.edu>
Reply-To: asylvain@fritz.filenet.com (The Chipmunk)
Organization: Foundation for the Increased Wealth of Chipmunks

Written in article <1992Aug8.154448.25564@athena.mit.edu>
 by wdstarr@athena.mit.edu (William December Starr):

: A digression: there's a standard piece of "conventional wisdom" going
: around these days that the United States has too many lawyers, is too
: litiginous (is that a word?) a society, etc.

Side note: The word is "litigious."

-- 
The Chipmunk.
Opinions are mine, batteries not included, void where prohibited.
Be wary of strong drink.  It can make you shoot at tax collectors and miss.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,misc.legal