.
I hear SOME breeders are supporting Winograd because they think he does not oppose breeding and because of his statement that there isn’t pet overpopulation.
Only goes to prove people perceive what they want to.
I edit medical rebuttals. There is no such thing as objective fact. All “fact” depends on the motivation of the fact finder. A doctor who gets paid by an insurance company finds different “objective facts” than someone who treats the patient. So you can find whatever you want in any position anyone takes about anything. Look at the Bible. Everyone has a quote that supports any position anyone wants to take about anything; just ignore the context, such as who said it in what situation and in what era.
One can read lots of things into Winograd, and also what I say, that are not there except in the minds of some readers.
First, Nathan says there is not an overpopulation problem. This does not mean animals are not being killed in shelters. It means animals are being killed in shelters because of poor management, lack of caring and the belief that there are too many animals to be placed. The belief, the myth of overpopulation, prevents overcoming the status quo. If you think killing is inevitable, it will be.
But to take that to mean he supports breeders or that he thinks breeders can do anything they want, is ridiculous and shows the bias and lack of critical thinking that seems rampant in the animal rescue/welfare world.
He meant that there is a myth grasped with a death grip by many involved in sheltering, that there are not enough homes for all the animals brought into shelters, and therefore many animals that are not sick or injured need to die due to lack of space.
If we had good shelters across the country with a 90% save rate we would not even be discussing this. But we do not, and in the meantime we have an unnecessary death problem until no-kill becomes the prevailing practice.
Nowhere does Nathan defend professional breeders; it is some of the breeders that read a green light into Nathan—at least I think. If Nathan receives lots of money or book promotions from breeders, that is a different story.
I am not a Nathan apologist. I really don’t care what his position is about breeding. I am not his follower and he is not my guru.
I still support Hillary even though I think she is a phony and panderer, and I think her gasoline tax rebate idea stupid, because I think she has a better chance of beating McCain than Obama and we share enough of a common vision for me to want her as pres vs. McCain. This concept is apparently too complex for some of the commenters out there who continually attack Winograd (and me) because they or others misunderstand or deliberately distort what he or I say.
I oppose puppy and kitten mills, the fly by night operations where the animals are not cared for and the burnt out moms disposed of in shelters and maybe sick pups and kittens too.
But one of the most beautiful souls I ever met and who taught me more about cats than anyone at any time was formerly a breeder. Wilma loved animals and taught everyone around her who would listen about how to take care of them. Wilma spent her whole life feeding ferals, doing TNR and teaching people how to love and care for animals. I would not oppose anyone like her from breeding animals and placing them, as she did, ever so carefully in loving homes.
I strongly oppose the kind of operation I saw in Northridge and the stories on TV and on the Internet regarding the abuses committed by breeders. I find this cruelty to animals an abomination. I am talking about puppy and kitten mills.
I work in an area of mental health care that is filled with mills; the insurance mill and the provider mills. Some are much better than others. Yet, even among all this crap there are those who really care and bend over backwards to help people. I do not damn a whole class of patients who take workers comp help, nor the system as a whole. I do oppose the ground feeders who care only for a buck, which may be a larger or smaller percentage of breeders.
I do oppose those breeders who fight regulation because it hurts their business or because it increases the fees they pay, because all breeders, no matter how conscientious, as some point do cause some animals to go to shelters or put them in bad homes no matter how hard they try. They are part of the problem and also all businesses require monitoring to prevent greed that causes suffering. But good breeders leave a light foot print because they do love animals.
I also want to say I have never run into so many irrational people with no concept of truth or telling the truth outside of Workers Comp until I got involved in the animal community.
I have never run into so many people so quick to judge others as faulty. God, give Winograd a break; give Boks a break; give me a break. The only one who does not deserve a break is Marcia Mayeda, not only because she is incompetent, but because everyone in County Administration and the Supervisors are covering for her.
Some people in the animal community make the most outrageous statements and regard them as truth without providing any proof whatsoever. They just say it is so and they attack anyone who disagrees.
3 comments:
Well then, explain why his "theory" is being used to defeat the mandatory spay/neuter bill in Sacramento. Whine-ograd doesn't have to voice his support for breeding but to make the insane statement that there is not an overpopulation problem gives the breeding industry all it needs to defeat any and all things we might be able to do to bring them to their knees. After all, the left wing humane community points to him as the savior and that adds more fuel to the fire for the breeding industry. I too have read his ridiculous book and still want to know what world he lives in. His solutions are nothing new, we have known those things for decades. He fails to say how to accomplish them however. And he has even "stolen" other people's works and words such as with Mary Cummins because he is too inexperienced to get his own. It takes more than leadership to get there, it takes a social change and those are hard to come by. Yes, indeed he is the darling of the breeding industry and all he has managed to do well at this point is set the humane movement back into the dark ages.
You have many wonderful things to say here, Mr. Muzika.
I highlighted my favorite passages and tried to post them, but I guess that post didn't make it because so much of it was reiteration with comments such as Bravo, Bravisimo; Hermeneutics, Scholarship, Yippeee!
Again, my most favorite passages of this argument:
1). People perceive what they want to.
2). “Fact” depends on the motivation of the fact finder.
(No kidding, I'm thinking about the Jehova's Witnesses when you say this...ugh! Take everything out of context with their fundamentalist mindset and push you to the limit when they try to stuff you into a box with no room for critical thinking so that you can't even breathe....).
a). A doctor who gets paid by an insurance company finds different “objective facts” than someone who treats the patient.
b). ( I LOVE THIS---)
" Look at the Bible. Everyone has a quote that supports any position anyone wants to take about anything; just ignore the context, such as who said it in what situation and in what era."
YIPPEEEE! Exactly! HERMENEUTICS--and within the context of Animal Welfare, no less! Just LOVE IT!
3) "....But to take that to mean he (Winograd) supports breeders or that he thinks breeders can do anything they want, is ridiculous and shows the bias and lack of critical thinking that seems rampant in the animal rescue/welfare world."
Well, I'm taking things out of context here, myself, and I apologize, because I have not had a chance to read his material. I do like this argument, however.
4) "If we had good shelters across the country with a 90% save rate we would not even be discussing this. But we do not, and in the meantime we have an unnecessary death problem until no-kill becomes the prevailing practice."
Wouldn't it be wonderful if this could be accomplished?
I love the way you say this:
5) "I am not a Nathan apologist. I really don’t care what his position is about breeding. I am not his follower and he is not my guru."
a) "I still support Hillary even though I think she is a phony and panderer, and I think her gasoline tax rebate idea stupid, because I think she has a better chance of beating McCain than Obama and we share enough of a common vision for me to want her as pres vs. McCain."
I like Obama quite a lot. But I like your argument.
6) "This concept is apparently too complex for some of the commenters out there who continually attack...me... because they or others MISUNDERSTAND or deliberately DISTORT what...I...say."
EXCELLENT.
More of my favorite passages. Thank you for this:
7) "I oppose puppy and kitten mills, the fly by night operations where the animals are not cared for and the burnt out moms disposed of in shelters and maybe sick pups and kittens too."
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
8) "I strongly oppose the kind of operation I saw in Northridge and the stories on TV and on the Internet regarding the abuses committed by breeders. I find this cruelty to animals an abomination."
INDEED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
More Favorites:
a) I work in an area of mental health care that is filled with mills; the insurance mill and the provider mills. Some are much better than others. Yet, even among all this crap there are those who really care and bend over backwards to help people. I do not damn a whole class of patients who take workers comp help, nor the system as a whole. I do oppose the ground feeders who care only for a buck, which may be a larger or smaller percentage of breeders."
Ah, yes. Good point.
BEST OF ALL:
9) "I do oppose those breeders who fight regulation because it hurts their business or because it increases the fees they pay....
10) *****because all breeders, no matter how conscientious, as some point do cause some animals to go to shelters or put them in bad homes no matter how hard they try.*****"
11) ***** "They are part of the problem and also all businesses require monitoring to prevent greed that causes suffering."
EXCELLENT! ***************
a) "But good breeders do not leave a light foot print because they do love animals."
Good point.
12) "I also want to say I have never run into so many irrational people with no concept of truth or telling the truth outside of Workers Comp until I got involved in the animal community."
No kidding. I understand.
13) "I have never run into so many people so quick to judge others as faulty."
Indeed, Mr. Muzika.
14) "God, give Winograd a break; give Boks a break; give me a break."
Yes, I see....My heart goes out to you.
"The only one who does not deserve a break is Marcia Mayeda, not only because she is incompetent, but because everyone in County Administration and the Supervisors are covering for her."
Wow, no kidding.....I haven't the slightest idea who she is...and need to go back and read up.
I tell you, the chunk of passages here are just superb.
I kind of feel like Thomas Jefferson who just took his favorite parts out of the New Testament (I think it was), and left the Bible ripped up into pieces.
I don't mean to do that here, but I did want to tell you how much I love some of these passages! They are really superb!
Thank you.
Dear Friends...In my support of your arguments:
"...statement that there is not an overpopulation problem gives the breeding industry all it needs to defeat any and all things we might be able to do to bring them to their knees."
Yes. I have a friend here too.
Yes, I would love to see this:
"bring these people to their knees" because it gives room for this:
"fly by night operations where the animals are not cared for and the burnt out moms disposed of in shelters and maybe sick pups and kittens too."
"abuses committed by breeders."
"I find this cruelty to animals an abomination."
(Yes, me too, dear friend....).
If we give the abusers room for this, we defeat ourselves, and the babies and moms continue to become abused at the hands of those that are "in it for the buck."
Most especially, we leave room for crimminals such as this:
"breeders who fight regulation because it hurts their business or because it increases the fees they pay...."
Moreover, some excellent arguments in favor of this---one of your most superb arguments, Mr. Muzika:
10) *****because all breeders, no matter how conscientious, as some point do cause some animals to go to shelters or put them in bad homes no matter how hard they try.*****"
Lastly, why we cannot leave room for neglect, abuse, or crimminal acts toward these helpless little beings who need all the help from law enforcement that they can get:
11) ***** "They are part of the problem and also all businesses require monitoring to prevent greed that causes suffering."
This is why I support not leaving any room for Greedy behavior that hurts animals (and also children, and the elderly.
Buddhism:
"Greed causes suffering."
Greed causes crimminal behavior. Covetousness, and Spite are in the same categories.
Attachment to things causes suffering....
If we Stop the greed; We Stop the suffering.
We can't change the world, or the lack of conscience that causes greed and crimminal behavior, but if we can create laws that prevent these people from attaching themselves to loopholes they can run away with, while laughing in the face of law enforcement and animal suffering, we might just be one step ahead in protecting the innocent from this:
" Unnecessary Death...caused by greed."
The above statement, in and of itself, is a genuinely beautiful and true Buddhist Statement.
Lets not "attack [our mother]" now...
Dialectic is a wonderful thing. Let's not lose it.
Dialectic brought about by "Together Consciousness" brings synthesis, and with synthesis, there is change, revolution, Evolution, ephiphany, Revelation, room for Wisdom, Room for Growth....
Post a Comment