Re: declawing

[kaeli]

In article >, 1234
@org.com.net shared the illuminating thought...
> Is there anyone her that this that declawing is something that I should not
> have done?
>

Only pretty much everyone who posts to this group. *G*

http://www.stopdeclaw.com

----------------------------------------
~kaeli~
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
Kill one man and you are a murderer.
Kill millions and you are a conqueror.
Kill everyone and you are God.
----------------------------------------

[kaeli]

In article >, 1234
@org.com.net shared the illuminating thought...
> Is there anyone her that this that declawing is something that I should not
> have done?
>

Only pretty much everyone who posts to this group. *G*

http://www.stopdeclaw.com

----------------------------------------
~kaeli~
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
Kill one man and you are a murderer.
Kill millions and you are a conqueror.
Kill everyone and you are God.
----------------------------------------

[Joe]

wrote:

> My poor little timid cat would be really freaked. She doesn't like any
> surface she can't get a good grip on (she hates slippery floors) and
> without her claws it would make the carpet that much more slippery for
> her (she likes to dig her claws in and run when some new person is
> coming in, you can hear her run frmo the claws being dug in).

Sometimes when Kiki is in a certain mood, she will grip the carpet with
her claws as she walks. I can hear her claws releasing with each step.

[Joe]

wrote:

> My poor little timid cat would be really freaked. She doesn't like any
> surface she can't get a good grip on (she hates slippery floors) and
> without her claws it would make the carpet that much more slippery for
> her (she likes to dig her claws in and run when some new person is
> coming in, you can hear her run frmo the claws being dug in).

Sometimes when Kiki is in a certain mood, she will grip the carpet with
her claws as she walks. I can hear her claws releasing with each step.

[Devlin Tay]

"Linda Terrell" > wrote in message
news:epxRkhlUwRo0-pn2-

> Have several scratching posts around -- the kind with the rope
> works best.

Yeah, they work really well. And kitty's claws will peel off regularly (the
old outer surface just sorta moulds as the younger tissue grows and pushes
out from underneath) when she uses the scratching posts, so clipping isn't
usually a problem when the kitty has, and regularly uses, a suitable
scratching post.

Devlin
Perth, Australia

[Devlin Tay]

"Linda Terrell" > wrote in message
news:epxRkhlUwRo0-pn2-

> Have several scratching posts around -- the kind with the rope
> works best.

Yeah, they work really well. And kitty's claws will peel off regularly (the
old outer surface just sorta moulds as the younger tissue grows and pushes
out from underneath) when she uses the scratching posts, so clipping isn't
usually a problem when the kitty has, and regularly uses, a suitable
scratching post.

Devlin
Perth, Australia

[kaeli]

In article >,
enlightened us with...
>
> Yeah, they work really well. And kitty's claws will peel off regularly (the
> old outer surface just sorta moulds as the younger tissue grows and pushes
> out from underneath) when she uses the scratching posts, so clipping isn't
> usually a problem when the kitty has, and regularly uses, a suitable
> scratching post.
>

My cats love the sisal posts.

I do clip their nails though so when they run around chasing each other
like maniacs, their claws don't catch on the carpet or the couch. If I
don't clip, the claws are quite sharp and I've seen them catch on the
more plush materials. Gives me a fright that one time they'll hurt their
little fingers or toes. They are used to clipping and I've never nicked
the quick, so they all tolerate it well and two of them purr while I'm
doing it.


-------------------------------------------------
~kaeli~
Found God? If nobody claims Him in 30 days,
He's yours to keep.
Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any
more than standing in a garage makes you a car.
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
-------------------------------------------------

[kaeli]

In article >,
enlightened us with...
>
> Yeah, they work really well. And kitty's claws will peel off regularly (the
> old outer surface just sorta moulds as the younger tissue grows and pushes
> out from underneath) when she uses the scratching posts, so clipping isn't
> usually a problem when the kitty has, and regularly uses, a suitable
> scratching post.
>

My cats love the sisal posts.

I do clip their nails though so when they run around chasing each other
like maniacs, their claws don't catch on the carpet or the couch. If I
don't clip, the claws are quite sharp and I've seen them catch on the
more plush materials. Gives me a fright that one time they'll hurt their
little fingers or toes. They are used to clipping and I've never nicked
the quick, so they all tolerate it well and two of them purr while I'm
doing it.


-------------------------------------------------
~kaeli~
Found God? If nobody claims Him in 30 days,
He's yours to keep.
Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any
more than standing in a garage makes you a car.
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
-------------------------------------------------

[PawsForThought]

>From: (---MIKE---)

>Lauren, I am just a "collector"! I also keep any whiskers I find in a
>different jar. During the summer, I work at a water park. I go in
>early and collect the coins (and occasional bills) I find in the various
>pools. Looking for claws and whiskers keeps me in practice!.
>

ROFL!! Nothing like practice makes perfect, eh Mike?
I heard from somewhere that collecting whiskers brings good luck. Maybe I
should start collecting them too :)

I wonder if you added colored sand to the jar of claw pieces what it would look
like. I bet it would look neat and a real work of art.

Lauren
________
See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe
Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html
http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html
Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm

[PawsForThought]

>From: (---MIKE---)

>Lauren, I am just a "collector"! I also keep any whiskers I find in a
>different jar. During the summer, I work at a water park. I go in
>early and collect the coins (and occasional bills) I find in the various
>pools. Looking for claws and whiskers keeps me in practice!.
>

ROFL!! Nothing like practice makes perfect, eh Mike?
I heard from somewhere that collecting whiskers brings good luck. Maybe I
should start collecting them too :)

I wonder if you added colored sand to the jar of claw pieces what it would look
like. I bet it would look neat and a real work of art.

Lauren
________
See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe
Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html
http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html
Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm

[Linda E]

I keep my cats' whiskers..... (don't really know why...)

Linda

[Linda E]

I keep my cats' whiskers..... (don't really know why...)

Linda

[Bill Henderson]

> I am not a cat lover but their would have to be some bloody good reason to
> make me to maltreat a it.

Doesn't make sense. It should have said:

I am not a cat lover but there would have to be a bloody good reason to make
me maltreat it.

Sorry

Bill

[Bill Henderson]

> I am not a cat lover but their would have to be some bloody good reason to
> make me to maltreat a it.

Doesn't make sense. It should have said:

I am not a cat lover but there would have to be a bloody good reason to make
me maltreat it.

Sorry

Bill

[Bill Henderson]

>
> She said she *clips* their claws. You know, trims them - clips off the
> needle-sharp points.
>
> Cathy
>
> --

Cathy
You are absolutely correct. Linda -SORRY!!!!!!!!!!

Off like a bull at a gate. Must stop and think. My only feeble excuse is
that I do tend to see red when I come across de-clawing. Again sorry.

Okay the claws can be out but not in an attack mode. They are still safe.

I think that kneading is used by kittens to encourage the mother to turn on
the taps for feeding. Perhaps it's a submissive signal when older?

Bill

[Bill Henderson]

>
> She said she *clips* their claws. You know, trims them - clips off the
> needle-sharp points.
>
> Cathy
>
> --

Cathy
You are absolutely correct. Linda -SORRY!!!!!!!!!!

Off like a bull at a gate. Must stop and think. My only feeble excuse is
that I do tend to see red when I come across de-clawing. Again sorry.

Okay the claws can be out but not in an attack mode. They are still safe.

I think that kneading is used by kittens to encourage the mother to turn on
the taps for feeding. Perhaps it's a submissive signal when older?

Bill

[Sherry]

>I've always declawed my cats because they are always indoors and if I
>don't, they will claw the furniture and me. Since I have expensive
>furniture and don't want scars on me, I've found the declawing a cat
>is the best way to accomplish our mutual goals.

Are you a person of diminished mental capacity? Because I have four cats, and
have neither shredded furniture, nor skin. In fact, most of the entire
continent of Europe also lives with clawed cats. We've managed to train them
not to scratch innappropriately. Why can't you?
Pity your cats.

Sherry

[Sherry]

>I've always declawed my cats because they are always indoors and if I
>don't, they will claw the furniture and me. Since I have expensive
>furniture and don't want scars on me, I've found the declawing a cat
>is the best way to accomplish our mutual goals.

Are you a person of diminished mental capacity? Because I have four cats, and
have neither shredded furniture, nor skin. In fact, most of the entire
continent of Europe also lives with clawed cats. We've managed to train them
not to scratch innappropriately. Why can't you?
Pity your cats.

Sherry

[Relish]

D. Stephen Heersink wrote:
> I've always declawed my cats because they are always indoors and if I
> don't, they will claw the furniture and me. Since I have expensive
> furniture and don't want scars on me, I've found the declawing a cat
> is the best way to accomplish our mutual goals. Some extremists think
> those of us who do such things are savages, but I don't care. I love
> my cats, and my cats love me, declawed and all. But of course, they
> are NEVER allowed out doors.

Surely, you're not serious.

[Relish]

D. Stephen Heersink wrote:
> I've always declawed my cats because they are always indoors and if I
> don't, they will claw the furniture and me. Since I have expensive
> furniture and don't want scars on me, I've found the declawing a cat
> is the best way to accomplish our mutual goals. Some extremists think
> those of us who do such things are savages, but I don't care. I love
> my cats, and my cats love me, declawed and all. But of course, they
> are NEVER allowed out doors.

Surely, you're not serious.

[Relish]

Karen Chuplis wrote:
> in article , D. Stephen Heersink at
> wrote on 8/10/03 3:45 PM:
>
>
>>I've always declawed my cats because they are always indoors and if I
>>don't, they will claw the furniture and me. Since I have expensive
>>furniture and don't want scars on me, I've found the declawing a cat
>>is the best way to accomplish our mutual goals. Some extremists think
>>those of us who do such things are savages, but I don't care. I love
>>my cats, and my cats love me, declawed and all. But of course, they
>>are NEVER allowed out doors.
>>
>>
>>Kind regards,
>>___________________
>>D. Stephen Heersink
>>San Francisco

>
>
> I've had cats all my life. I do not have scars. My furniture is fine. Learn
> to train the cats. Or use Soft Paws.

Ditto. There is NO excuse for declawing cats. A caring,
compassionate person will make the comparitively small effort to learn
how to train the cats and invest the couple months needed to do so.

Scratching posts and sticky pawa are all you need, along with a small
bnit of intlligence and some patience.

Anything else is simply a lazy, arrogant cop out.

If you feel your cats need declawing, find another pet.

[Relish]

Karen Chuplis wrote:
> in article , D. Stephen Heersink at
> wrote on 8/10/03 3:45 PM:
>
>
>>I've always declawed my cats because they are always indoors and if I
>>don't, they will claw the furniture and me. Since I have expensive
>>furniture and don't want scars on me, I've found the declawing a cat
>>is the best way to accomplish our mutual goals. Some extremists think
>>those of us who do such things are savages, but I don't care. I love
>>my cats, and my cats love me, declawed and all. But of course, they
>>are NEVER allowed out doors.
>>
>>
>>Kind regards,
>>___________________
>>D. Stephen Heersink
>>San Francisco

>
>
> I've had cats all my life. I do not have scars. My furniture is fine. Learn
> to train the cats. Or use Soft Paws.

Ditto. There is NO excuse for declawing cats. A caring,
compassionate person will make the comparitively small effort to learn
how to train the cats and invest the couple months needed to do so.

Scratching posts and sticky pawa are all you need, along with a small
bnit of intlligence and some patience.

Anything else is simply a lazy, arrogant cop out.

If you feel your cats need declawing, find another pet.

[Gary]

"Brandy Alexandre" wrote:

> Gary > wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> > Cruel jerks like you always
> > *assume* that cats can't be trained (or, you just don't want to
> > invest the time in it), but, they can.
>
> You'll never convince anyone that way. Sure way to make people shut
> you out and not listen to your argument. Yeah, name-calling ALWAYS
> influences people.
>
> --
> Brandy Alexandre®
> http://www.swydm.com/?refer=BrandyAlx
> Well, would you?

What's the difference between "name calling" and accurate descriptive
phrases?

Gary




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

[Gary]

"Brandy Alexandre" wrote:

> Gary > wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> > Cruel jerks like you always
> > *assume* that cats can't be trained (or, you just don't want to
> > invest the time in it), but, they can.
>
> You'll never convince anyone that way. Sure way to make people shut
> you out and not listen to your argument. Yeah, name-calling ALWAYS
> influences people.
>
> --
> Brandy Alexandre®
> http://www.swydm.com/?refer=BrandyAlx
> Well, would you?

What's the difference between "name calling" and accurate descriptive
phrases?

Gary




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

[bewtifulfreak]

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
...

> Good luck with that statement. This group is nothing but extremists
> who like to flame away people who are not of like mind or who they
> cannot convert.

I'm not an extremist, but the fact is, most countries have banned declawing
for a reason, and many vets have expressed their professional opinion that
declawing is harmful to a cat, that it can cause a lot of pain, and often
psychological and/or behavior problems. I don't see why they would do this
if it was just a matter of personal preference. Considering how rarely
governments consider animal rights, the fact that so many have considered
declawing harmful enough to ban it sends a very strong message, and there
are certainly a number of fact-laden articles all over the 'Net (many by
vets) supporting that viewpoint. There is also a great deal of anecdotal
evidence regarding the aforementioned psychological and behavior problems,
much of it from shelters dealing with the fallout of this proceedure.

That is the reason it's very difficult for most people here not to get
angry, extreme or resort to name calling when they hear of people trying to
justify the proceedure; it is unneccessary, and there is a lot of evidence
which supports the idea that it can cause a cat a lot of misery. And as
this group is full of animal lovers, it angers them to hear people trying to
justify an unecessary procedure that makes innocent animals suffer....that's
only natural.

Ann

[bewtifulfreak]

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
...

> Good luck with that statement. This group is nothing but extremists
> who like to flame away people who are not of like mind or who they
> cannot convert.

I'm not an extremist, but the fact is, most countries have banned declawing
for a reason, and many vets have expressed their professional opinion that
declawing is harmful to a cat, that it can cause a lot of pain, and often
psychological and/or behavior problems. I don't see why they would do this
if it was just a matter of personal preference. Considering how rarely
governments consider animal rights, the fact that so many have considered
declawing harmful enough to ban it sends a very strong message, and there
are certainly a number of fact-laden articles all over the 'Net (many by
vets) supporting that viewpoint. There is also a great deal of anecdotal
evidence regarding the aforementioned psychological and behavior problems,
much of it from shelters dealing with the fallout of this proceedure.

That is the reason it's very difficult for most people here not to get
angry, extreme or resort to name calling when they hear of people trying to
justify the proceedure; it is unneccessary, and there is a lot of evidence
which supports the idea that it can cause a cat a lot of misery. And as
this group is full of animal lovers, it angers them to hear people trying to
justify an unecessary procedure that makes innocent animals suffer....that's
only natural.

Ann

[Gary]

"Brandy Alexandre" wrote:

> Gary > wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> > What's the difference between "name calling" and accurate descriptive
> > phrases?
> >
>
> You mean like close-minded, self-absorbed, "everyone should think the
> way I do" purists like you? That's dead on, but saying so would never
> get you to even consider anything I say seriusly. I'm just saying you
> do the issue much more harm than good with you PERSONAL OPINION of
> someone thrown in.
>
> --
> Brandy Alexandre®
> http://www.swydm.com/?refer=BrandyAlx
> Well, would you?

That's what usenet is about - PERSONAL OPINION. Deal with it.

Gary




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

[Gary]

"Brandy Alexandre" wrote:

> Gary > wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> > What's the difference between "name calling" and accurate descriptive
> > phrases?
> >
>
> You mean like close-minded, self-absorbed, "everyone should think the
> way I do" purists like you? That's dead on, but saying so would never
> get you to even consider anything I say seriusly. I'm just saying you
> do the issue much more harm than good with you PERSONAL OPINION of
> someone thrown in.
>
> --
> Brandy Alexandre®
> http://www.swydm.com/?refer=BrandyAlx
> Well, would you?

That's what usenet is about - PERSONAL OPINION. Deal with it.

Gary




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

[Mike]

> There are regional and cultural issues surrounding everything we do and
> one country will be in line with it while another will not. Glom on to
> whatever fits within your ideal, but don't discount everything that
> does not as "just wrong." Because by and large it isn't. It's just an
> opinion. How many industrialized nations are there in the world
> anyway? Twenty of them have banned declawing. Half of them admit
> there's still an underground for it and the results have been similar
> to the banning of abortion--disfigurement and death. If that's what
> you want to happen to cats, fine. I think you're cruel.

But if the cat died "as a result of a countries laws", wouldn't that then
mean the person who took the cat to be declawed in the first place was
indeed the "cruel" one?

Mike

[Mike]

> There are regional and cultural issues surrounding everything we do and
> one country will be in line with it while another will not. Glom on to
> whatever fits within your ideal, but don't discount everything that
> does not as "just wrong." Because by and large it isn't. It's just an
> opinion. How many industrialized nations are there in the world
> anyway? Twenty of them have banned declawing. Half of them admit
> there's still an underground for it and the results have been similar
> to the banning of abortion--disfigurement and death. If that's what
> you want to happen to cats, fine. I think you're cruel.

But if the cat died "as a result of a countries laws", wouldn't that then
mean the person who took the cat to be declawed in the first place was
indeed the "cruel" one?

Mike

[Mike]

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> "Brandy Alexandre" wrote:
>
> > I think you're cruel.
>
> Now who's name calling, two-faced hypocrite?!?

From a different angle he brings up a somewhat good point, relative to the
vast majority of the world where cats are eaten as often as beef, de-clawing
isn't that cruel.
That just means the rest of the world is a bit messed up. Mutilating an
animal for personal gain is wrong in my opinion.
Why not take a needle and sow up its ass if it craps outside the litter
tray?

Mike

[Mike]

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> "Brandy Alexandre" wrote:
>
> > I think you're cruel.
>
> Now who's name calling, two-faced hypocrite?!?

From a different angle he brings up a somewhat good point, relative to the
vast majority of the world where cats are eaten as often as beef, de-clawing
isn't that cruel.
That just means the rest of the world is a bit messed up. Mutilating an
animal for personal gain is wrong in my opinion.
Why not take a needle and sow up its ass if it craps outside the litter
tray?

Mike

[Mike]

> From a different angle he brings up a somewhat good point, relative to the
> vast majority of the world where cats are eaten as often as beef,
de-clawing
> isn't that cruel.
> That just means the rest of the world is a bit messed up. Mutilating an
> animal for personal gain is wrong in my opinion.
> Why not take a needle and sow up its ass if it craps outside the litter
> tray?

Excuse the poor English but its getting late :)

Mike

[Mike]

> From a different angle he brings up a somewhat good point, relative to the
> vast majority of the world where cats are eaten as often as beef,
de-clawing
> isn't that cruel.
> That just means the rest of the world is a bit messed up. Mutilating an
> animal for personal gain is wrong in my opinion.
> Why not take a needle and sow up its ass if it craps outside the litter
> tray?

Excuse the poor English but its getting late :)

Mike

[bewtifulfreak]

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
...
> bewtifulfreak > wrote in

> There are regional and cultural issues surrounding everything we do and
> one country will be in line with it while another will not. Glom on to
> whatever fits within your ideal, but don't discount everything that
> does not as "just wrong." Because by and large it isn't. It's just an
> opinion.

As I said, there is anecdotal evidence and professional information
indicating that it's not just opinion that declawing can and often does harm
cats: it's fact. That's not hystrionic and overzelous, that's just plain
fact. I support you in living your life in whatever way you see fit that
doesn't harm another being: I don't care about your religious preference,
your sexual preference, what you wear, what you eat, if you smoke (as long
as you do so considerately), or anything else. I don't care if you belive
in God or whether the moon is made of green cheese. *That's* all a matter
of opinion and personal preference, or, in the case of believing the moon is
made of green cheese, harmless ignorance. Causing injury to another being -
particularly for your own convenience, but for any reason whatsoever - is
certainly *not* harmless, and thus, not merely a matter of personal
preference, unless you are the type of person who believes that someone
should be allowed to exercise their preference for things such as wife
beating.


How many industrialized nations are there in the world
> anyway? Twenty of them have banned declawing.

Twenty different nations agreeing on the same thing seems like far more than
"opinion" to me, and certainly argues against it being a matter of regional
and cultural preference, unless we are to believe all twenty of those
nations have the same regional and cultural bias, which seems highly
unlikely. The only two countries that haven't banned it are much more
likely to share a cultural and regional bias, that most likely being the
bias of putting the love of money above all else.


Half of them admit
> there's still an underground for it and the results have been similar
> to the banning of abortion--disfigurement and death. If that's what
> you want to happen to cats, fine. I think you're cruel.

I don't want that to happen. I don't want murder to happen either, but it
does. But does that mean we should make it legal? I'm not comparing
declawing to murder, but the fact that something happens illegally doesn't
justify making it legal. And for someone who encourages people to discuss
things rationally in order to make their opinions more accesible, accusing
me of wanting cats to suffer and calling me cruel because I'm against
declawing is not only irrational, but hypocritical as well.

Ann

--

For more information on the anti-declawing issue I would recommend The
Declawing Information Site:

http://stopdeclaw.com

[bewtifulfreak]

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
...
> bewtifulfreak > wrote in

> There are regional and cultural issues surrounding everything we do and
> one country will be in line with it while another will not. Glom on to
> whatever fits within your ideal, but don't discount everything that
> does not as "just wrong." Because by and large it isn't. It's just an
> opinion.

As I said, there is anecdotal evidence and professional information
indicating that it's not just opinion that declawing can and often does harm
cats: it's fact. That's not hystrionic and overzelous, that's just plain
fact. I support you in living your life in whatever way you see fit that
doesn't harm another being: I don't care about your religious preference,
your sexual preference, what you wear, what you eat, if you smoke (as long
as you do so considerately), or anything else. I don't care if you belive
in God or whether the moon is made of green cheese. *That's* all a matter
of opinion and personal preference, or, in the case of believing the moon is
made of green cheese, harmless ignorance. Causing injury to another being -
particularly for your own convenience, but for any reason whatsoever - is
certainly *not* harmless, and thus, not merely a matter of personal
preference, unless you are the type of person who believes that someone
should be allowed to exercise their preference for things such as wife
beating.


How many industrialized nations are there in the world
> anyway? Twenty of them have banned declawing.

Twenty different nations agreeing on the same thing seems like far more than
"opinion" to me, and certainly argues against it being a matter of regional
and cultural preference, unless we are to believe all twenty of those
nations have the same regional and cultural bias, which seems highly
unlikely. The only two countries that haven't banned it are much more
likely to share a cultural and regional bias, that most likely being the
bias of putting the love of money above all else.


Half of them admit
> there's still an underground for it and the results have been similar
> to the banning of abortion--disfigurement and death. If that's what
> you want to happen to cats, fine. I think you're cruel.

I don't want that to happen. I don't want murder to happen either, but it
does. But does that mean we should make it legal? I'm not comparing
declawing to murder, but the fact that something happens illegally doesn't
justify making it legal. And for someone who encourages people to discuss
things rationally in order to make their opinions more accesible, accusing
me of wanting cats to suffer and calling me cruel because I'm against
declawing is not only irrational, but hypocritical as well.

Ann

--

For more information on the anti-declawing issue I would recommend The
Declawing Information Site:

http://stopdeclaw.com

[Cheryl]

(D. Stephen Heersink) wrote in
:

> I've always declawed my cats because they are always indoors and if I
> don't, they will claw the furniture and me. Since I have expensive
> furniture and don't want scars on me, I've found the declawing a cat
> is the best way to accomplish our mutual goals.

You appear to think forums such as this are only read by people in N
America. That is not the case and everywhere else declawing is considered
barbaric. Get a clue. Scars on you; what a wuss. Furniture is more
important? Get a fish. ****head.

--
Cheryl

"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough."
-Mario Andretti.

[Cheryl]

(D. Stephen Heersink) wrote in
:

> I've always declawed my cats because they are always indoors and if I
> don't, they will claw the furniture and me. Since I have expensive
> furniture and don't want scars on me, I've found the declawing a cat
> is the best way to accomplish our mutual goals.

You appear to think forums such as this are only read by people in N
America. That is not the case and everywhere else declawing is considered
barbaric. Get a clue. Scars on you; what a wuss. Furniture is more
important? Get a fish. ****head.

--
Cheryl

"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough."
-Mario Andretti.

[Cheryl]

"BrandyÂ*Alexandre" Â*> wrote in
:

>> I'm not an extremist, but the fact is, most countries have banned
>> declawing for a reason, and many vets have expressed their
>> professional opinion that declawing is harmful to a cat, that it
>> can cause a lot of pain, and often psychological and/or behavior
>> problems. I don't see why they would do this if it was just a
>> matter of personal preference. Considering how rarely governments
>> consider animal rights, the fact that so many have considered
>> declawing harmful enough to ban it sends a very strong message,
>> and there are certainly a number of fact-laden articles all over
>> the 'Net (many by vets) supporting that viewpoint. There is also
>> a great deal of anecdotal evidence regarding the aforementioned
>> psychological and behavior problems, much of it from shelters
>> dealing with the fallout of this proceedure.
>>
>> That is the reason it's very difficult for most people here not to
>> get angry, extreme or resort to name calling when they hear of
>> people trying to justify the proceedure; it is unneccessary, and
>> there is a lot of evidence which supports the idea that it can
>> cause a cat a lot of misery. And as this group is full of animal
>> lovers, it angers them to hear people trying to justify an
>> unecessary procedure that makes innocent animals suffer....that's
>> only natural.
>>
>> Ann
>>
>>
>
> Some European countries banned the use of nickel in their coins.

Did you just compare cats with nickels? Uh huh. This speaks volumns about
you.

--
Cheryl

"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough."
-Mario Andretti.

[Cheryl]

"BrandyÂ*Alexandre" Â*> wrote in
:

>> I'm not an extremist, but the fact is, most countries have banned
>> declawing for a reason, and many vets have expressed their
>> professional opinion that declawing is harmful to a cat, that it
>> can cause a lot of pain, and often psychological and/or behavior
>> problems. I don't see why they would do this if it was just a
>> matter of personal preference. Considering how rarely governments
>> consider animal rights, the fact that so many have considered
>> declawing harmful enough to ban it sends a very strong message,
>> and there are certainly a number of fact-laden articles all over
>> the 'Net (many by vets) supporting that viewpoint. There is also
>> a great deal of anecdotal evidence regarding the aforementioned
>> psychological and behavior problems, much of it from shelters
>> dealing with the fallout of this proceedure.
>>
>> That is the reason it's very difficult for most people here not to
>> get angry, extreme or resort to name calling when they hear of
>> people trying to justify the proceedure; it is unneccessary, and
>> there is a lot of evidence which supports the idea that it can
>> cause a cat a lot of misery. And as this group is full of animal
>> lovers, it angers them to hear people trying to justify an
>> unecessary procedure that makes innocent animals suffer....that's
>> only natural.
>>
>> Ann
>>
>>
>
> Some European countries banned the use of nickel in their coins.

Did you just compare cats with nickels? Uh huh. This speaks volumns about
you.

--
Cheryl

"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough."
-Mario Andretti.

[Relish]

bewtifulfreak wrote:
> "Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>
>>Good luck with that statement. This group is nothing but extremists
>>who like to flame away people who are not of like mind or who they
>>cannot convert.
>
>
> I'm not an extremist, but the fact is, most countries have banned declawing
> for a reason,

Extremist: One is winning an argument with a declawer.

I'm not an extremist either. In fact, I detest protests and
agenda-driven bull**** activism.

But this is a simple case of people choosing to maim their pets for
their own convenience. There is no gray area here. It's just wrong.
THAT is why people like Brandy like to resort to the E word. It
creates a fantasy that maybe they're not horrible people. But they are.

[Relish]

bewtifulfreak wrote:
> "Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>
>>Good luck with that statement. This group is nothing but extremists
>>who like to flame away people who are not of like mind or who they
>>cannot convert.
>
>
> I'm not an extremist, but the fact is, most countries have banned declawing
> for a reason,

Extremist: One is winning an argument with a declawer.

I'm not an extremist either. In fact, I detest protests and
agenda-driven bull**** activism.

But this is a simple case of people choosing to maim their pets for
their own convenience. There is no gray area here. It's just wrong.
THAT is why people like Brandy like to resort to the E word. It
creates a fantasy that maybe they're not horrible people. But they are.

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/10/03 7:34 PM:

> bewtifulfreak > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> I'm not an extremist, but the fact is, most countries have banned
>> declawing for a reason, and many vets have expressed their
>> professional opinion that declawing is harmful to a cat, that it
>> can cause a lot of pain, and often psychological and/or behavior
>> problems. I don't see why they would do this if it was just a
>> matter of personal preference. Considering how rarely governments
>> consider animal rights, the fact that so many have considered
>> declawing harmful enough to ban it sends a very strong message,
>> and there are certainly a number of fact-laden articles all over
>> the 'Net (many by vets) supporting that viewpoint. There is also
>> a great deal of anecdotal evidence regarding the aforementioned
>> psychological and behavior problems, much of it from shelters
>> dealing with the fallout of this proceedure.
>>
>> That is the reason it's very difficult for most people here not to
>> get angry, extreme or resort to name calling when they hear of
>> people trying to justify the proceedure; it is unneccessary, and
>> there is a lot of evidence which supports the idea that it can
>> cause a cat a lot of misery. And as this group is full of animal
>> lovers, it angers them to hear people trying to justify an
>> unecessary procedure that makes innocent animals suffer....that's
>> only natural.
>>
>> Ann
>>
>>
>
> Some European countries banned the use of nickel in their coins. You
> cannot take a Vicks inhaler to Japan, nor can you take nail glue (krazy
> glue). Every country has its forbidden things that simply do not make
> sense to the rest of the world. Some countries EAT cats and dogs.
> Some countries are starving and won't eat cattle, for heavens sake.
> Some Asian countries think it's insane that we drink milk because their
> bodies are complely intolerant of lactose.
>
> There are regional and cultural issues surrounding everything we do and
> one country will be in line with it while another will not. Glom on to
> whatever fits within your ideal, but don't discount everything that
> does not as "just wrong." Because by and large it isn't. It's just an
> opinion. How many industrialized nations are there in the world
> anyway? Twenty of them have banned declawing. Half of them admit
> there's still an underground for it and the results have been similar
> to the banning of abortion--disfigurement and death. If that's what
> you want to happen to cats, fine. I think you're cruel.

We aren't talking abut ONE country but rather every country except the US
and Canada.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/10/03 7:34 PM:

> bewtifulfreak > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> I'm not an extremist, but the fact is, most countries have banned
>> declawing for a reason, and many vets have expressed their
>> professional opinion that declawing is harmful to a cat, that it
>> can cause a lot of pain, and often psychological and/or behavior
>> problems. I don't see why they would do this if it was just a
>> matter of personal preference. Considering how rarely governments
>> consider animal rights, the fact that so many have considered
>> declawing harmful enough to ban it sends a very strong message,
>> and there are certainly a number of fact-laden articles all over
>> the 'Net (many by vets) supporting that viewpoint. There is also
>> a great deal of anecdotal evidence regarding the aforementioned
>> psychological and behavior problems, much of it from shelters
>> dealing with the fallout of this proceedure.
>>
>> That is the reason it's very difficult for most people here not to
>> get angry, extreme or resort to name calling when they hear of
>> people trying to justify the proceedure; it is unneccessary, and
>> there is a lot of evidence which supports the idea that it can
>> cause a cat a lot of misery. And as this group is full of animal
>> lovers, it angers them to hear people trying to justify an
>> unecessary procedure that makes innocent animals suffer....that's
>> only natural.
>>
>> Ann
>>
>>
>
> Some European countries banned the use of nickel in their coins. You
> cannot take a Vicks inhaler to Japan, nor can you take nail glue (krazy
> glue). Every country has its forbidden things that simply do not make
> sense to the rest of the world. Some countries EAT cats and dogs.
> Some countries are starving and won't eat cattle, for heavens sake.
> Some Asian countries think it's insane that we drink milk because their
> bodies are complely intolerant of lactose.
>
> There are regional and cultural issues surrounding everything we do and
> one country will be in line with it while another will not. Glom on to
> whatever fits within your ideal, but don't discount everything that
> does not as "just wrong." Because by and large it isn't. It's just an
> opinion. How many industrialized nations are there in the world
> anyway? Twenty of them have banned declawing. Half of them admit
> there's still an underground for it and the results have been similar
> to the banning of abortion--disfigurement and death. If that's what
> you want to happen to cats, fine. I think you're cruel.

We aren't talking abut ONE country but rather every country except the US
and Canada.

Karen

[Cheryl]

Gary > wrote in :

> I have trained mine to sharpen their
> claws on rubber flip-flops ("shower shoes"), and I buy a sacrificial pair
> every year just for them. I actually got down and showed them how to use
> them (repeatedly); it didn't take long till they had the idea.
>
> Figure it out! (My cats did)
>
>

LOL I remember you.

To the unbelievers, cats can be trained. I have a new feral cat and she is
already learning from the others where to scratch and I haven't even had to
show her. Her first months were in the wild. This pic with her near a
very scratched up post is part of what teaches her. The others had to
learn before her so she has an advantage. My furniture is intact. My skin,
well, we like to play rough sometimes.
<http://community.webshots.com/photo/75552731/85147301OptGat>


--
Cheryl

"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough."
-Mario Andretti.

[Cheryl]

Gary > wrote in :

> I have trained mine to sharpen their
> claws on rubber flip-flops ("shower shoes"), and I buy a sacrificial pair
> every year just for them. I actually got down and showed them how to use
> them (repeatedly); it didn't take long till they had the idea.
>
> Figure it out! (My cats did)
>
>

LOL I remember you.

To the unbelievers, cats can be trained. I have a new feral cat and she is
already learning from the others where to scratch and I haven't even had to
show her. Her first months were in the wild. This pic with her near a
very scratched up post is part of what teaches her. The others had to
learn before her so she has an advantage. My furniture is intact. My skin,
well, we like to play rough sometimes.
<http://community.webshots.com/photo/75552731/85147301OptGat>


--
Cheryl

"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough."
-Mario Andretti.

[PawsForThought]

>From: "bewtifulfreak"

>"Relish" > wrote in message
...
>
>> Ditto. There is NO excuse for declawing cats. A caring,
>> compassionate person will make the comparitively small effort to learn
>> how to train the cats and invest the couple months needed to do so.
>>
>> Scratching posts and sticky pawa are all you need, along with a small
>> bnit of intlligence and some patience.
>>
>> Anything else is simply a lazy, arrogant cop out.
>>
>> If you feel your cats need declawing, find another pet.
>
>Amen. It really is a cop out, when you just can't be bothered. If you
>train them to the scratching post, and keep their claws trimmed, that covers
>both the furniture and you. And if you're still getting scratched, well
>then maybe that tells you something about your animal skills. Otherwise, a
>bit of time and effort are all that's required. People only declaw because
>they're thinking of their own convenience over the cat's; yes, maybe the cat
>does still love you, but that doesn't mean it didn't suffer, and that
>doesn't mean what you did was necessary. It just means you couldn't be
>bothered, in which case, as was indicated above, you shouldn't bother having
>a cat.
>
>Ann

I agree. At the very least they could have adopted an already declawed cat.
People that declaw don't deserve to have cats.

Lauren
________
See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe
Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html
http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html
Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm

[PawsForThought]

>From: "bewtifulfreak"

>"Relish" > wrote in message
...
>
>> Ditto. There is NO excuse for declawing cats. A caring,
>> compassionate person will make the comparitively small effort to learn
>> how to train the cats and invest the couple months needed to do so.
>>
>> Scratching posts and sticky pawa are all you need, along with a small
>> bnit of intlligence and some patience.
>>
>> Anything else is simply a lazy, arrogant cop out.
>>
>> If you feel your cats need declawing, find another pet.
>
>Amen. It really is a cop out, when you just can't be bothered. If you
>train them to the scratching post, and keep their claws trimmed, that covers
>both the furniture and you. And if you're still getting scratched, well
>then maybe that tells you something about your animal skills. Otherwise, a
>bit of time and effort are all that's required. People only declaw because
>they're thinking of their own convenience over the cat's; yes, maybe the cat
>does still love you, but that doesn't mean it didn't suffer, and that
>doesn't mean what you did was necessary. It just means you couldn't be
>bothered, in which case, as was indicated above, you shouldn't bother having
>a cat.
>
>Ann

I agree. At the very least they could have adopted an already declawed cat.
People that declaw don't deserve to have cats.

Lauren
________
See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe
Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html
http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html
Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm

[Chris Jones]

barbaric is prince william hunting for deer with a bow and arrow


"Cheryl" > wrote in message
...
> (D. Stephen Heersink) wrote in
> :
>
> > I've always declawed my cats because they are always indoors and if I
> > don't, they will claw the furniture and me. Since I have expensive
> > furniture and don't want scars on me, I've found the declawing a cat
> > is the best way to accomplish our mutual goals.
>
> You appear to think forums such as this are only read by people in N
> America. That is not the case and everywhere else declawing is considered
> barbaric. Get a clue. Scars on you; what a wuss. Furniture is more
> important? Get a fish. ****head.
>
> --
> Cheryl
>
> "If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough."
> -Mario Andretti.
>


---

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.505 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 30/07/2003

[Chris Jones]

barbaric is prince william hunting for deer with a bow and arrow


"Cheryl" > wrote in message
...
> (D. Stephen Heersink) wrote in
> :
>
> > I've always declawed my cats because they are always indoors and if I
> > don't, they will claw the furniture and me. Since I have expensive
> > furniture and don't want scars on me, I've found the declawing a cat
> > is the best way to accomplish our mutual goals.
>
> You appear to think forums such as this are only read by people in N
> America. That is not the case and everywhere else declawing is considered
> barbaric. Get a clue. Scars on you; what a wuss. Furniture is more
> important? Get a fish. ****head.
>
> --
> Cheryl
>
> "If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough."
> -Mario Andretti.
>


---

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.505 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 30/07/2003

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/10/03 9:45 PM:

> Given that there are a HUGE number of people in THIS country who
> opposed a nationwide ban, it wouldn't be surprising that the same is
> true for any other country.

There has never been a call yet for a nation wide ban, more's the pity.
Would you care to post specifics. And numbers of the HUGE number of people.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/10/03 9:45 PM:

> Given that there are a HUGE number of people in THIS country who
> opposed a nationwide ban, it wouldn't be surprising that the same is
> true for any other country.

There has never been a call yet for a nation wide ban, more's the pity.
Would you care to post specifics. And numbers of the HUGE number of people.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/10/03 9:47 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> We aren't talking abut ONE country but rather every country except
>> the US and Canada.
>>
>
> Please list them. I'm absolutely certain you're wrong.
England
Scotland
Wales
Italy
France
Germany
Austria
Switzerland
Norway
Sweden
Netherlands
Northern Ireland
Ireland
Denmark
Finland
Slovenia
Portugal
Belgium
Spain
Brazil
Australia
New Zealand

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/10/03 9:47 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> We aren't talking abut ONE country but rather every country except
>> the US and Canada.
>>
>
> Please list them. I'm absolutely certain you're wrong.
England
Scotland
Wales
Italy
France
Germany
Austria
Switzerland
Norway
Sweden
Netherlands
Northern Ireland
Ireland
Denmark
Finland
Slovenia
Portugal
Belgium
Spain
Brazil
Australia
New Zealand

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/10/03 9:49 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> It's really extreme to say train the cat or use Soft Paws. Gasp.
>> You might have to put some work into having a cat.
>>
>> Karen
>>
>
> You don't know me or what goes on in my house. We've had this
> "conversation" before, but all you did was slect word and write your
> own sentences. You aren't capable of a rational discussion on
> anything. That much is clear by your twisting and argument on your
> personally distorted contexts.

Not rational discussion. Show me where I have been irrational.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/10/03 9:49 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> It's really extreme to say train the cat or use Soft Paws. Gasp.
>> You might have to put some work into having a cat.
>>
>> Karen
>>
>
> You don't know me or what goes on in my house. We've had this
> "conversation" before, but all you did was slect word and write your
> own sentences. You aren't capable of a rational discussion on
> anything. That much is clear by your twisting and argument on your
> personally distorted contexts.

Not rational discussion. Show me where I have been irrational.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , Cheryl at
wrote on 8/10/03 9:56 PM:

> "BrandyÂ*Alexandre" Â*> wrote in
> :
>
>> I suppose it also speaks volumes about you that you cut one single line
>> of my post out of context to common on and attack me with.
>
> Boo hoo. I guess that is all that was worth archiving. You x-no-archive
> that is the price you pay.
>
> Seems
>> you're too weak-minded to hold up a real argument. Let the grownups
>> talk, honey. It's past your bedtime.
>>
>
> The only come-back of an old washed up porn star who keeps posting to cat
> groups and doesn't give a **** about what happens to them. You don't
> deserve an argument. You deserve flames. Nothing more.

Did you ever notice there are maybe TWO posters defending declawing and at
least ten listing rational reasons not to do it and how cats can be trained,
WITH examples? Huh. Interesting, isn't it?

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , Cheryl at
wrote on 8/10/03 9:56 PM:

> "BrandyÂ*Alexandre" Â*> wrote in
> :
>
>> I suppose it also speaks volumes about you that you cut one single line
>> of my post out of context to common on and attack me with.
>
> Boo hoo. I guess that is all that was worth archiving. You x-no-archive
> that is the price you pay.
>
> Seems
>> you're too weak-minded to hold up a real argument. Let the grownups
>> talk, honey. It's past your bedtime.
>>
>
> The only come-back of an old washed up porn star who keeps posting to cat
> groups and doesn't give a **** about what happens to them. You don't
> deserve an argument. You deserve flames. Nothing more.

Did you ever notice there are maybe TWO posters defending declawing and at
least ten listing rational reasons not to do it and how cats can be trained,
WITH examples? Huh. Interesting, isn't it?

Karen

[Sherry]

>> Are you a person of diminished mental capacity?
>
>Exactly the way to get people to licten to you and consider your point
>of view. You just set back the movement against declawing. Congrats.
>
>--
>BrandyÂ*Â*Alexandre®

Not at all. It's simply amazing to me that some people, like you for instance,
are totally unable to have nice furniture, a cat, and unshredded skin. Most of
Europe manages it. Most of this newsgroup manages. I'm simply curious what you
are lacking that you cannot.

Sherry

[Sherry]

>> Are you a person of diminished mental capacity?
>
>Exactly the way to get people to licten to you and consider your point
>of view. You just set back the movement against declawing. Congrats.
>
>--
>BrandyÂ*Â*Alexandre®

Not at all. It's simply amazing to me that some people, like you for instance,
are totally unable to have nice furniture, a cat, and unshredded skin. Most of
Europe manages it. Most of this newsgroup manages. I'm simply curious what you
are lacking that you cannot.

Sherry

[[email protected]]

Is it me or does Brandy remind people of a certain three letter poster
(who will remain nameless cause I heard rumorst hat if she hears her name
she comes back) who used to troll this group a long time back? Would come
around maybe twice a year and defend declawing and such.

And I love whatever she does that makes her posts unrespondable to by my
newsreader (tin).

Alice

--
The root cause of problems is simple overpopulation. People just aren't
worth very much any more, and they know it. Makes 'em testy. ...Bev
|\ _,,,---,,_ Tigress
/,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ http://havoc.gtf.gatech.edu/tigress
|,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-'
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) Cat by Felix Lee.

[[email protected]]

Is it me or does Brandy remind people of a certain three letter poster
(who will remain nameless cause I heard rumorst hat if she hears her name
she comes back) who used to troll this group a long time back? Would come
around maybe twice a year and defend declawing and such.

And I love whatever she does that makes her posts unrespondable to by my
newsreader (tin).

Alice

--
The root cause of problems is simple overpopulation. People just aren't
worth very much any more, and they know it. Makes 'em testy. ...Bev
|\ _,,,---,,_ Tigress
/,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ http://havoc.gtf.gatech.edu/tigress
|,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-'
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) Cat by Felix Lee.

[Mike]

> Your analogy doesn't work, Mike. Try again.

I must disagree - my point was mutilation for personal gain or convenience
is wrong. Sowing up a cats ass is the same thing, and just as twisted.

Mike

[Mike]

> Your analogy doesn't work, Mike. Try again.

I must disagree - my point was mutilation for personal gain or convenience
is wrong. Sowing up a cats ass is the same thing, and just as twisted.

Mike

[Sherry]

>Sherry > wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> Not at all. It's simply amazing to me that some people, like you
>> for instance, are totally unable to have nice furniture, a cat,
>> and unshredded skin. Most of Europe manages it. Most of this
>> newsgroup manages. I'm simply curious what you are lacking that
>> you cannot.
>>
>> Sherry
>>
>
>Still out ripping off pet owners, Sherry?
>
>--
>BrandyÂ*Â*Alexandre®

You answered my question very well, thank you. Thanks for letting me live
rent-free in your head. Now, onto the next question...where are the statistics
for the "Nationwide declaw ban"??

Sherry

[Sherry]

>Sherry > wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> Not at all. It's simply amazing to me that some people, like you
>> for instance, are totally unable to have nice furniture, a cat,
>> and unshredded skin. Most of Europe manages it. Most of this
>> newsgroup manages. I'm simply curious what you are lacking that
>> you cannot.
>>
>> Sherry
>>
>
>Still out ripping off pet owners, Sherry?
>
>--
>BrandyÂ*Â*Alexandre®

You answered my question very well, thank you. Thanks for letting me live
rent-free in your head. Now, onto the next question...where are the statistics
for the "Nationwide declaw ban"??

Sherry

[[email protected]]

Sherry > wrote:
> Pity the person who has enough status and money to artificially create *any*
> fantasy he desires, yet the one he chooses is killing animals like a caveman.

Actually, if he eats his kill, he's probably being more humane. Why do i
say this? Because he's eating less cows and other animals raised in most
likely not all that great conditions to have a pretty painful death that
doesn't always kill the animal right away and instead giving an animal
that was allowed its freedom for its life to live in environments that
were suitable for it to give it a quick death.

Yes, I eat meat and even eat the store bought kind, but I do think hunting
is probably kinder than buying store bought meat. I also realize though
with how many people there are today we cannot expect the wild populations
of food animals to be able to withstand everyone hunting for their food
instead of the more efficient farming.

But, I'm not a vegetarian and I do fish so I have no right condemning some
one for hunting (as long as he eats his kill. I will condemn killing an
animal just for fun and not actually doing anything useful like using it
for food with the body). In fact I feel hunting for your food is kinder
than supporting slaughterhouses. But, I also feel environmentally, wild
populations cannot sustain everyione hunting, therefore the
slaughterhouses are necessary.

And, this really didn't have anyting to do with the threat at hand ;).
But, I just thought I'd mention that.

Alice

--
The root cause of problems is simple overpopulation. People just aren't
worth very much any more, and they know it. Makes 'em testy. ...Bev
|\ _,,,---,,_ Tigress
/,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ http://havoc.gtf.gatech.edu/tigress
|,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-'
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) Cat by Felix Lee.

[[email protected]]

Sherry > wrote:
> Pity the person who has enough status and money to artificially create *any*
> fantasy he desires, yet the one he chooses is killing animals like a caveman.

Actually, if he eats his kill, he's probably being more humane. Why do i
say this? Because he's eating less cows and other animals raised in most
likely not all that great conditions to have a pretty painful death that
doesn't always kill the animal right away and instead giving an animal
that was allowed its freedom for its life to live in environments that
were suitable for it to give it a quick death.

Yes, I eat meat and even eat the store bought kind, but I do think hunting
is probably kinder than buying store bought meat. I also realize though
with how many people there are today we cannot expect the wild populations
of food animals to be able to withstand everyone hunting for their food
instead of the more efficient farming.

But, I'm not a vegetarian and I do fish so I have no right condemning some
one for hunting (as long as he eats his kill. I will condemn killing an
animal just for fun and not actually doing anything useful like using it
for food with the body). In fact I feel hunting for your food is kinder
than supporting slaughterhouses. But, I also feel environmentally, wild
populations cannot sustain everyione hunting, therefore the
slaughterhouses are necessary.

And, this really didn't have anyting to do with the threat at hand ;).
But, I just thought I'd mention that.

Alice

--
The root cause of problems is simple overpopulation. People just aren't
worth very much any more, and they know it. Makes 'em testy. ...Bev
|\ _,,,---,,_ Tigress
/,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ http://havoc.gtf.gatech.edu/tigress
|,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-'
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) Cat by Felix Lee.

[-L.]

Cheryl > wrote in message >...
> "BrandyÂ*Alexandre" Â*> wrote in
> :
>
> > I suppose it also speaks volumes about you that you cut one single line
> > of my post out of context to common on and attack me with.
>
> Boo hoo. I guess that is all that was worth archiving. You x-no-archive
> that is the price you pay.
>
> Seems
> > you're too weak-minded to hold up a real argument. Let the grownups
> > talk, honey. It's past your bedtime.
> >
>
> The only come-back of an old washed up porn star who keeps posting to cat
> groups and doesn't give a **** about what happens to them. You don't
> deserve an argument. You deserve flames. Nothing more.

Please. Don't tell me that cow is back. I was hoping she had
succumed to syphilis or something...

-L.

[-L.]

Cheryl > wrote in message >...
> "BrandyÂ*Alexandre" Â*> wrote in
> :
>
> > I suppose it also speaks volumes about you that you cut one single line
> > of my post out of context to common on and attack me with.
>
> Boo hoo. I guess that is all that was worth archiving. You x-no-archive
> that is the price you pay.
>
> Seems
> > you're too weak-minded to hold up a real argument. Let the grownups
> > talk, honey. It's past your bedtime.
> >
>
> The only come-back of an old washed up porn star who keeps posting to cat
> groups and doesn't give a **** about what happens to them. You don't
> deserve an argument. You deserve flames. Nothing more.

Please. Don't tell me that cow is back. I was hoping she had
succumed to syphilis or something...

-L.

[Bill Henderson]

"Bill Henderson" > wrote in message
...
>

>except for a few exceptions.
>

Did I really type that? Sorry - too much "water of life" last night.

Bill

[Bill Henderson]

"Bill Henderson" > wrote in message
...
>

>except for a few exceptions.
>

Did I really type that? Sorry - too much "water of life" last night.

Bill

[bewtifulfreak]

"Bill Henderson" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Bill Henderson" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
>
> >except for a few exceptions.
> >
>
> Did I really type that? Sorry - too much "water of life" last night.

LOL....I'm glad I'm not the only one who reads back over my posts and
ocassionally cringes....I mean, I must have misspelled "procedure" about
three or four times in one of my recent posts! Thank goodness most of the
people in these groups are generally very forgiving and don't hold it
against us.... :)

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[bewtifulfreak]

"Bill Henderson" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Bill Henderson" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
>
> >except for a few exceptions.
> >
>
> Did I really type that? Sorry - too much "water of life" last night.

LOL....I'm glad I'm not the only one who reads back over my posts and
ocassionally cringes....I mean, I must have misspelled "procedure" about
three or four times in one of my recent posts! Thank goodness most of the
people in these groups are generally very forgiving and don't hold it
against us.... :)

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[Gary]

Cheryl wrote:

> LOL I remember you.
>
> To the unbelievers, cats can be trained. I have a new feral cat and she is
> already learning from the others where to scratch and I haven't even had to
> show her. Her first months were in the wild. This pic with her near a
> very scratched up post is part of what teaches her. The others had to
> learn before her so she has an advantage. My furniture is intact. My skin,
> well, we like to play rough sometimes.
> <http://community.webshots.com/photo/75552731/85147301OptGat>
>
> --
> Cheryl

Yep, that's why I didn't mention anything about scratches, as there's one on my
wrist that's healing right now. We play a little rough, too, sometimes (and
it's from the back claws, not the front :o)

Gary



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

[Gary]

Cheryl wrote:

> LOL I remember you.
>
> To the unbelievers, cats can be trained. I have a new feral cat and she is
> already learning from the others where to scratch and I haven't even had to
> show her. Her first months were in the wild. This pic with her near a
> very scratched up post is part of what teaches her. The others had to
> learn before her so she has an advantage. My furniture is intact. My skin,
> well, we like to play rough sometimes.
> <http://community.webshots.com/photo/75552731/85147301OptGat>
>
> --
> Cheryl

Yep, that's why I didn't mention anything about scratches, as there's one on my
wrist that's healing right now. We play a little rough, too, sometimes (and
it's from the back claws, not the front :o)

Gary



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

[Gary]

"Brandy Alexandre" wrote:

> Gary > wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> > That's what usenet is about - PERSONAL OPINION. Deal with it.
>
> I deal with it just fine when it's evident others posting understand
> that as well. I didn't get that impression from you.
>
> --
> Brandy Alexandre®
> http://www.swydm.com/?refer=BrandyAlx
> Well, would you?

Bend over - I'll give you an "impression"!

Gary




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

[Gary]

"Brandy Alexandre" wrote:

> Gary > wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> > That's what usenet is about - PERSONAL OPINION. Deal with it.
>
> I deal with it just fine when it's evident others posting understand
> that as well. I didn't get that impression from you.
>
> --
> Brandy Alexandre®
> http://www.swydm.com/?refer=BrandyAlx
> Well, would you?

Bend over - I'll give you an "impression"!

Gary




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

[Mike]

"PawsForThought" > wrote in message
...
> >From: (---MIKE---)
>
> >Lauren, I am just a "collector"! I also keep any whiskers I find in a
> >different jar. During the summer, I work at a water park. I go in
> >early and collect the coins (and occasional bills) I find in the various
> >pools. Looking for claws and whiskers keeps me in practice!.
> >
>
> ROFL!! Nothing like practice makes perfect, eh Mike?
> I heard from somewhere that collecting whiskers brings good luck. Maybe
I
> should start collecting them too :)
>
> I wonder if you added colored sand to the jar of claw pieces what it would
look
> like. I bet it would look neat and a real work of art.

This thread is getting so big I don't really know where to respond!

I do try and see the argument from all sides before I make up my mind. I'm
deeply against de-clawing cats, but if being declawed gives it a home and
saves it from being put down from an over-crowded shelter, I guess its a
necessary loss (even though it is only necessary through the ignorance of
the new owner). One could then argue the cat is better off being dead, but I
guess this is a personal preference that not everyone would agree on. I
personally would rather live life without the tips of my fingers than have
no life at all.


Mike
(Different Mike to the thread starter)

[Mike]

"PawsForThought" > wrote in message
...
> >From: (---MIKE---)
>
> >Lauren, I am just a "collector"! I also keep any whiskers I find in a
> >different jar. During the summer, I work at a water park. I go in
> >early and collect the coins (and occasional bills) I find in the various
> >pools. Looking for claws and whiskers keeps me in practice!.
> >
>
> ROFL!! Nothing like practice makes perfect, eh Mike?
> I heard from somewhere that collecting whiskers brings good luck. Maybe
I
> should start collecting them too :)
>
> I wonder if you added colored sand to the jar of claw pieces what it would
look
> like. I bet it would look neat and a real work of art.

This thread is getting so big I don't really know where to respond!

I do try and see the argument from all sides before I make up my mind. I'm
deeply against de-clawing cats, but if being declawed gives it a home and
saves it from being put down from an over-crowded shelter, I guess its a
necessary loss (even though it is only necessary through the ignorance of
the new owner). One could then argue the cat is better off being dead, but I
guess this is a personal preference that not everyone would agree on. I
personally would rather live life without the tips of my fingers than have
no life at all.


Mike
(Different Mike to the thread starter)

[PawsForThought]

>From: "Mike"

>I'm
>deeply against de-clawing cats, but if being declawed gives it a home and
>saves it from being put down from an over-crowded shelter, I guess its a
>necessary loss (even though it is only necessary through the ignorance of
>the new owner).

But the problem is that declawing does NOT save cats their homes. There are
lots and lots of declawed cats that are dumped in shelters every day once they
start exhibiting declaw related behaviors such as litterbox avoidance and/or
biting and aggression.

Lauren
________
See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe
Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html
http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html
Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm

[PawsForThought]

>From: "Mike"

>I'm
>deeply against de-clawing cats, but if being declawed gives it a home and
>saves it from being put down from an over-crowded shelter, I guess its a
>necessary loss (even though it is only necessary through the ignorance of
>the new owner).

But the problem is that declawing does NOT save cats their homes. There are
lots and lots of declawed cats that are dumped in shelters every day once they
start exhibiting declaw related behaviors such as litterbox avoidance and/or
biting and aggression.

Lauren
________
See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe
Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html
http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html
Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm

[PawsForThought]

>From: (Sherry )

>>> Are you a person of diminished mental capacity?
>>
>>Exactly the way to get people to licten to you and consider your point
>>of view. You just set back the movement against declawing. Congrats.
>>
>>--
>>BrandyÂ*Â*Alexandre®
>
>Not at all. It's simply amazing to me that some people, like you for
>instance,
>are totally unable to have nice furniture, a cat, and unshredded skin. Most
>of
>Europe manages it. Most of this newsgroup manages. I'm simply curious what
>you
>are lacking that you cannot.
>
>Sherry

I've had cats for over 40 years and have always had nice furniture, and I don't
get scratched. Amazing, isn't it what training can do?

Lauren
________
See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe
Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html
http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html
Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm

[PawsForThought]

>From: (Sherry )

>>> Are you a person of diminished mental capacity?
>>
>>Exactly the way to get people to licten to you and consider your point
>>of view. You just set back the movement against declawing. Congrats.
>>
>>--
>>BrandyÂ*Â*Alexandre®
>
>Not at all. It's simply amazing to me that some people, like you for
>instance,
>are totally unable to have nice furniture, a cat, and unshredded skin. Most
>of
>Europe manages it. Most of this newsgroup manages. I'm simply curious what
>you
>are lacking that you cannot.
>
>Sherry

I've had cats for over 40 years and have always had nice furniture, and I don't
get scratched. Amazing, isn't it what training can do?

Lauren
________
See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe
Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html
http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html
Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/10/03 10:39 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> There has never been a call yet for a nation wide ban, more's the
>> pity. Would you care to post specifics. And numbers of the HUGE
>> number of people.
>>
>
> You seem to rely heavily on anecdotal evidence, so here's an anecdote:
> It's still widely done and widely requested. Attempts to ban it have
> caused a great deal of controversy. One need only look at WQest
> Hollywood. That's supportive enough of my assumption. I think it
> supports my argument more than you little anecdotes support yours.

I've given proof and statistics in other threads and Lauren posted the
studies again here last night. Get your glasses out.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/10/03 10:39 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> There has never been a call yet for a nation wide ban, more's the
>> pity. Would you care to post specifics. And numbers of the HUGE
>> number of people.
>>
>
> You seem to rely heavily on anecdotal evidence, so here's an anecdote:
> It's still widely done and widely requested. Attempts to ban it have
> caused a great deal of controversy. One need only look at WQest
> Hollywood. That's supportive enough of my assumption. I think it
> supports my argument more than you little anecdotes support yours.

I've given proof and statistics in other threads and Lauren posted the
studies again here last night. Get your glasses out.

Karen

[Sherry]

>>>> Are you a person of diminished mental capacity?
>>>
>>>Exactly the way to get people to licten to you and consider your point
>>>of view. You just set back the movement against declawing. Congrats.
>>>
>>>--
>>>BrandyÂ*Â*Alexandre®
>>
>>Not at all. It's simply amazing to me that some people, like you for
>>instance,
>>are totally unable to have nice furniture, a cat, and unshredded skin. Most
>>of
>>Europe manages it. Most of this newsgroup manages. I'm simply curious what
>>you
>>are lacking that you cannot.
>>
>>Sherry
>
>I've had cats for over 40 years and have always had nice furniture, and I
>don't
>get scratched. Amazing, isn't it what training can do?
>
>Lauren
>________

Absolutely. The only thing in my house that gets scratched are the windowsills.
They're a foot wide, and the cats use them for perches, and over time they get
scrached from constantly being jumped on & off. . We re-varnish every five
years or so. Big deal. The upholstered furniture is fine, as is carpet,
wallpaper, everything else. As for mee, the only time I ever get scratched is
when I'm trying to medicate them.

Sherry

[Sherry]

>>>> Are you a person of diminished mental capacity?
>>>
>>>Exactly the way to get people to licten to you and consider your point
>>>of view. You just set back the movement against declawing. Congrats.
>>>
>>>--
>>>BrandyÂ*Â*Alexandre®
>>
>>Not at all. It's simply amazing to me that some people, like you for
>>instance,
>>are totally unable to have nice furniture, a cat, and unshredded skin. Most
>>of
>>Europe manages it. Most of this newsgroup manages. I'm simply curious what
>>you
>>are lacking that you cannot.
>>
>>Sherry
>
>I've had cats for over 40 years and have always had nice furniture, and I
>don't
>get scratched. Amazing, isn't it what training can do?
>
>Lauren
>________

Absolutely. The only thing in my house that gets scratched are the windowsills.
They're a foot wide, and the cats use them for perches, and over time they get
scrached from constantly being jumped on & off. . We re-varnish every five
years or so. Big deal. The upholstered furniture is fine, as is carpet,
wallpaper, everything else. As for mee, the only time I ever get scratched is
when I'm trying to medicate them.

Sherry

[Sherry]

>I agree with you that there *is* no argument pro-declaw. It's a practice that
>has no benefit to the cat, none, zilch. But it isn't "only in America"
>either.
>
>Sherry

Woops, on second thought, you may be right. I was thinking about Canada and
Mexico, but they, too are part of America, (duh). I read your post as if it
said, "USA". Sorry.
Does anybody know about this? Which countries actually *do* routinely declaw
besides us?

S

[Sherry]

>I agree with you that there *is* no argument pro-declaw. It's a practice that
>has no benefit to the cat, none, zilch. But it isn't "only in America"
>either.
>
>Sherry

Woops, on second thought, you may be right. I was thinking about Canada and
Mexico, but they, too are part of America, (duh). I read your post as if it
said, "USA". Sorry.
Does anybody know about this? Which countries actually *do* routinely declaw
besides us?

S

[Relish]

Brandy Alexandre wrote:
> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>
>>Not rational discussion. Show me where I have been irrational.
>>
>
>
> I have over and over. Simply the fact that you're irrational is why
> you don't remember and it has never sunk in.
>

Cop out.

[Relish]

Brandy Alexandre wrote:
> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>
>>Not rational discussion. Show me where I have been irrational.
>>
>
>
> I have over and over. Simply the fact that you're irrational is why
> you don't remember and it has never sunk in.
>

Cop out.

[Arjun Ray]

In >, Karen Chuplis
> wrote:

| in article , Cathouse

% nslookup 207.14.113.17

Name: pita.alt.net
Address: 207.14.113.17
%

(And dosa.alt.net is 207.14.113.18)

Just note that the chance of a non-troll post from Alt.net is
vanishingly small.

[Arjun Ray]

In >, Karen Chuplis
> wrote:

| in article , Cathouse

% nslookup 207.14.113.17

Name: pita.alt.net
Address: 207.14.113.17
%

(And dosa.alt.net is 207.14.113.18)

Just note that the chance of a non-troll post from Alt.net is
vanishingly small.

[Sherry]

><where are the statistics
>for the "Nationwide declaw ban"??
>
>in the same place as your fascist European gun ban. Your government
>says you people just can't be trusted with guns.
>

Idiot child, you presume to know an awful lot about "my government." Pity you
don't know as much about reading headers. **** off.

Sherry

[Sherry]

><where are the statistics
>for the "Nationwide declaw ban"??
>
>in the same place as your fascist European gun ban. Your government
>says you people just can't be trusted with guns.
>

Idiot child, you presume to know an awful lot about "my government." Pity you
don't know as much about reading headers. **** off.

Sherry

[Arjun Ray]

In >, "BrandyÂ*Alexandre"
Â*> wrote:

| How many industrialized nations are there in the world anyway?
| Twenty of them have banned declawing. Half of them admit there's
| still an underground for it

Cite your source, please.

[Arjun Ray]

In >, "BrandyÂ*Alexandre"
Â*> wrote:

| How many industrialized nations are there in the world anyway?
| Twenty of them have banned declawing. Half of them admit there's
| still an underground for it

Cite your source, please.

[bewtifulfreak]

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
...

> You forgot:

<list of countries snipped>

That's your argument? Nothing to say on the article I shared? No sources
for your claims? I'm still not convinced.


"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
...

> No one is arguing for declawing cats as a matter of course in the
> keeping of them. It's an argument about access to professional, safe,
> and legal procedure when other efforts fail or cannot be undertaken.
> It these sweeping generalizations that turn people off to your point of
> view.

Ur, Brandy darling....you were *indeed* arguing for declawing cats as a
matter of course for keeping them. Say you:

"This is the first time i've declawed a cat and for our relationship is was
necessary."

I highly doubt other efforts had failed and could not be undertaken, unless
you mean you tried to train your cat to use the scratching post and couldn't
do it the first day. However, if you'd have taken even a cursory look at
the links I provided, you will see that even in the countries declawing is
banned, there *is* still access to a professional safe and legal procedure
when other efforts fail or cannot be undertaken, so no one who's cat has a
medically necessary reason for being declawed need resort to a back alley
chop job.

Feel better now?

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[bewtifulfreak]

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
...

> You forgot:

<list of countries snipped>

That's your argument? Nothing to say on the article I shared? No sources
for your claims? I'm still not convinced.


"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
...

> No one is arguing for declawing cats as a matter of course in the
> keeping of them. It's an argument about access to professional, safe,
> and legal procedure when other efforts fail or cannot be undertaken.
> It these sweeping generalizations that turn people off to your point of
> view.

Ur, Brandy darling....you were *indeed* arguing for declawing cats as a
matter of course for keeping them. Say you:

"This is the first time i've declawed a cat and for our relationship is was
necessary."

I highly doubt other efforts had failed and could not be undertaken, unless
you mean you tried to train your cat to use the scratching post and couldn't
do it the first day. However, if you'd have taken even a cursory look at
the links I provided, you will see that even in the countries declawing is
banned, there *is* still access to a professional safe and legal procedure
when other efforts fail or cannot be undertaken, so no one who's cat has a
medically necessary reason for being declawed need resort to a back alley
chop job.

Feel better now?

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[Relish]

Brandy Alexandre wrote:
> Relish > wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>
>>>I have over and over. Simply the fact that you're irrational is
>>>why you don't remember and it has never sunk in.
>>>
>>
>>Cop out.
>>
>
>
> Says you, but it's still the truth.
>

Yup, "says me." Now go inside and have your milk and cookies.

[Relish]

Brandy Alexandre wrote:
> Relish > wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>
>>>I have over and over. Simply the fact that you're irrational is
>>>why you don't remember and it has never sunk in.
>>>
>>
>>Cop out.
>>
>
>
> Says you, but it's still the truth.
>

Yup, "says me." Now go inside and have your milk and cookies.

[Mike]

> Actually, no. Sewing up a cat's anus would kill it. Declawing, if
> done right, isn't fatal.

True it would kill it, but this is not the point. Altering animals for
conveniance isnt right.

Mike

[Mike]

> Actually, no. Sewing up a cat's anus would kill it. Declawing, if
> done right, isn't fatal.

True it would kill it, but this is not the point. Altering animals for
conveniance isnt right.

Mike

[bewtifulfreak]

"Arjun Ray" > wrote in message
...
> In >, "bewtifulfreak"
> > wrote:

> Just a note: fingernails and claws are *not* the same. Our nails are
> actually hardened (keratinized) skin, and do not grow out of a bone.
> Removing a fingernail does not require amputation of any bones.
>
> A claw is an integral part of the distal phalanx (the third, outermost
> bone of the finger), and grows directly out of it.

Thank you for this detailed explaination.


Thus, declawing
> requires amputation of the distal phalanx. The problem with partial
> amputation (yes, sawing through rather than disjointing) is that claw
> regrowth can happen - almost always in misshapen form.

You mean with the laser declawing? This sounds at *least* as bad as having
the toe taken completely off!

Again, thank you for broadening my declawing knowledge. The more I hear,
the more I know it's just something I could never consider. I still feel
bad for declawing one of our kitties way back when before I realized the
reality of the procedure, and we would never have considered it then, except
that we were told we couldn't have her in the apartment we wanted to rent
unless we did it. Knowing then what I know now, I would have given up the
nice apartment and found another.

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[bewtifulfreak]

"Arjun Ray" > wrote in message
...
> In >, "bewtifulfreak"
> > wrote:

> Just a note: fingernails and claws are *not* the same. Our nails are
> actually hardened (keratinized) skin, and do not grow out of a bone.
> Removing a fingernail does not require amputation of any bones.
>
> A claw is an integral part of the distal phalanx (the third, outermost
> bone of the finger), and grows directly out of it.

Thank you for this detailed explaination.


Thus, declawing
> requires amputation of the distal phalanx. The problem with partial
> amputation (yes, sawing through rather than disjointing) is that claw
> regrowth can happen - almost always in misshapen form.

You mean with the laser declawing? This sounds at *least* as bad as having
the toe taken completely off!

Again, thank you for broadening my declawing knowledge. The more I hear,
the more I know it's just something I could never consider. I still feel
bad for declawing one of our kitties way back when before I realized the
reality of the procedure, and we would never have considered it then, except
that we were told we couldn't have her in the apartment we wanted to rent
unless we did it. Knowing then what I know now, I would have given up the
nice apartment and found another.

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , Mike at
wrote on 8/11/03 6:03 AM:

> "PawsForThought" > wrote in message
> ...
>>> From: (---MIKE---)
>>
>>> Lauren, I am just a "collector"! I also keep any whiskers I find in a
>>> different jar. During the summer, I work at a water park. I go in
>>> early and collect the coins (and occasional bills) I find in the various
>>> pools. Looking for claws and whiskers keeps me in practice!.
>>>
>>
>> ROFL!! Nothing like practice makes perfect, eh Mike?
>> I heard from somewhere that collecting whiskers brings good luck. Maybe
> I
>> should start collecting them too :)
>>
>> I wonder if you added colored sand to the jar of claw pieces what it would
> look
>> like. I bet it would look neat and a real work of art.
>
> This thread is getting so big I don't really know where to respond!
>
> I do try and see the argument from all sides before I make up my mind. I'm
> deeply against de-clawing cats, but if being declawed gives it a home and
> saves it from being put down from an over-crowded shelter, I guess its a
> necessary loss (even though it is only necessary through the ignorance of
> the new owner). One could then argue the cat is better off being dead, but I
> guess this is a personal preference that not everyone would agree on. I
> personally would rather live life without the tips of my fingers than have
> no life at all.
>
>
> Mike
> (Different Mike to the thread starter)
>
>
The problem is that it does NOT save them from the shelter. Look at this
study (which does show some dichotomy and admits it is difficult to factor,
but you can also call up your local shelter and ask about declawed cats.
They are usually available).

Patronek et al., 1996

476

Behavior problems, risk of relinquishment

Case-control study of owned and relinquished cats involving a random digit
dial survey of cat owners. Prevalence of declawing was 45%(476/1056) in the
owned cat population. In the univariate analysis, declawed cats were at
decreased risk of relinquishment compared to non-declawed cats (OR=0.63; 95%
CI 0.45-0.87). After adjustment in a multivariate model, declawed cats were
at an increased risk of relinquishment (OR=1.89;1.00-3.58); this reversal
made the effect of declawing difficult to interpret. Among 218 cats
relinquished to a shelter, more (44/84; 52.4%) declawed cats than
non-declawed cats (39/134; 29.1%) were reported by owners to have
inappropriate elimination (p=0.022).

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , Mike at
wrote on 8/11/03 6:03 AM:

> "PawsForThought" > wrote in message
> ...
>>> From: (---MIKE---)
>>
>>> Lauren, I am just a "collector"! I also keep any whiskers I find in a
>>> different jar. During the summer, I work at a water park. I go in
>>> early and collect the coins (and occasional bills) I find in the various
>>> pools. Looking for claws and whiskers keeps me in practice!.
>>>
>>
>> ROFL!! Nothing like practice makes perfect, eh Mike?
>> I heard from somewhere that collecting whiskers brings good luck. Maybe
> I
>> should start collecting them too :)
>>
>> I wonder if you added colored sand to the jar of claw pieces what it would
> look
>> like. I bet it would look neat and a real work of art.
>
> This thread is getting so big I don't really know where to respond!
>
> I do try and see the argument from all sides before I make up my mind. I'm
> deeply against de-clawing cats, but if being declawed gives it a home and
> saves it from being put down from an over-crowded shelter, I guess its a
> necessary loss (even though it is only necessary through the ignorance of
> the new owner). One could then argue the cat is better off being dead, but I
> guess this is a personal preference that not everyone would agree on. I
> personally would rather live life without the tips of my fingers than have
> no life at all.
>
>
> Mike
> (Different Mike to the thread starter)
>
>
The problem is that it does NOT save them from the shelter. Look at this
study (which does show some dichotomy and admits it is difficult to factor,
but you can also call up your local shelter and ask about declawed cats.
They are usually available).

Patronek et al., 1996

476

Behavior problems, risk of relinquishment

Case-control study of owned and relinquished cats involving a random digit
dial survey of cat owners. Prevalence of declawing was 45%(476/1056) in the
owned cat population. In the univariate analysis, declawed cats were at
decreased risk of relinquishment compared to non-declawed cats (OR=0.63; 95%
CI 0.45-0.87). After adjustment in a multivariate model, declawed cats were
at an increased risk of relinquishment (OR=1.89;1.00-3.58); this reversal
made the effect of declawing difficult to interpret. Among 218 cats
relinquished to a shelter, more (44/84; 52.4%) declawed cats than
non-declawed cats (39/134; 29.1%) were reported by owners to have
inappropriate elimination (p=0.022).

[Arjun Ray]

In >, "Mike"
> wrote:

| I'm asking if its more humane to kill a cat than to give it to owners
| who would look after it but get it declawed first.

There's no answer for this question because, as posed, it's actually not
well formed. Specifically, why is death the alternative?

If we explain that part by appealing to the overpopulation problem (i.e.
general lack of enough homes), then we need to see these alternatives in
proper context. We don't go around offing cats at random. The cats put
to sleep are typically those *surrendered* to animal control facilities.

Thus, the argument behind your question is that declawing vouchsafes a
home for the cat.

But this is very likely untrue. Declawed cats are a sizeable proportion
of the intake at kill shelters. Call one up and, if they'll give you
any numbers at all (many won't - simply because euthanizing healthy
animals is very much on the embarrassing underbelly of public policy),
it'll be like 10-20% or more.

Then, look at all the vets falling over themsleves to deny that they
declaw routinely, that it's a marginal or insignificant part of their
practice, it's done only as a last resort, etc. etc. etc. etc.

If they're right, then the proportion of declawed cats among all homed
cats should be small - and at any rate substantially less than the
proportions seen in kill shelters.

The statistical conclusion is obvious. (Or, vets as a whole are lying.)

[Arjun Ray]

In >, "Mike"
> wrote:

| I'm asking if its more humane to kill a cat than to give it to owners
| who would look after it but get it declawed first.

There's no answer for this question because, as posed, it's actually not
well formed. Specifically, why is death the alternative?

If we explain that part by appealing to the overpopulation problem (i.e.
general lack of enough homes), then we need to see these alternatives in
proper context. We don't go around offing cats at random. The cats put
to sleep are typically those *surrendered* to animal control facilities.

Thus, the argument behind your question is that declawing vouchsafes a
home for the cat.

But this is very likely untrue. Declawed cats are a sizeable proportion
of the intake at kill shelters. Call one up and, if they'll give you
any numbers at all (many won't - simply because euthanizing healthy
animals is very much on the embarrassing underbelly of public policy),
it'll be like 10-20% or more.

Then, look at all the vets falling over themsleves to deny that they
declaw routinely, that it's a marginal or insignificant part of their
practice, it's done only as a last resort, etc. etc. etc. etc.

If they're right, then the proportion of declawed cats among all homed
cats should be small - and at any rate substantially less than the
proportions seen in kill shelters.

The statistical conclusion is obvious. (Or, vets as a whole are lying.)

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , Cathouse at
wrote on 8/11/03 7:05 AM:

> "Mike" > wrote in
>
>
>>> Your analogy doesn't work, Mike. Try again.
>>
>> I must disagree - my point was mutilation for personal gain or
>> convenience is wrong. Sowing up a cats ass is the same thing, and
>> just as twisted.
>>
>
> Actually, no. Sewing up a cat's anus would kill it. Declawing, if
> done right, isn't fatal.

No, just miserable.<irony> That's OH so MUCH better.</irony>

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , Cathouse at
wrote on 8/11/03 7:05 AM:

> "Mike" > wrote in
>
>
>>> Your analogy doesn't work, Mike. Try again.
>>
>> I must disagree - my point was mutilation for personal gain or
>> convenience is wrong. Sowing up a cats ass is the same thing, and
>> just as twisted.
>>
>
> Actually, no. Sewing up a cat's anus would kill it. Declawing, if
> done right, isn't fatal.

No, just miserable.<irony> That's OH so MUCH better.</irony>

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article
am9obmNvbGQ=.0cbce4bfd3b2f3df6a0f6b0729210eb9@1060 610174.cotse.net, Lou
Gehrig fan at wrote on 8/11/03 8:56 AM:

> <We've managed to train them
> not to scratch innappropriately.
>
> You're full of cat ****. When you're asleep they'll claw your
> furniture. Since you live in Europe, your furniture is probably made
> out of cardboard.
>
I don't live in Europe, my furniture is not cardboard, my cat's do not
scratch it. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article
am9obmNvbGQ=.0cbce4bfd3b2f3df6a0f6b0729210eb9@1060 610174.cotse.net, Lou
Gehrig fan at wrote on 8/11/03 8:56 AM:

> <We've managed to train them
> not to scratch innappropriately.
>
> You're full of cat ****. When you're asleep they'll claw your
> furniture. Since you live in Europe, your furniture is probably made
> out of cardboard.
>
I don't live in Europe, my furniture is not cardboard, my cat's do not
scratch it. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , Arjun Ray at
wrote on 8/11/03 10:42 AM:

> In >, "BrandyÂ*Alexandre"
> Â*> wrote:
>
> | How many industrialized nations are there in the world anyway?
> | Twenty of them have banned declawing. Half of them admit there's
> | still an underground for it
>
> Cite your source, please.
>

Like Brandy can "cite" anything. <snort>

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , Arjun Ray at
wrote on 8/11/03 10:42 AM:

> In >, "BrandyÂ*Alexandre"
> Â*> wrote:
>
> | How many industrialized nations are there in the world anyway?
> | Twenty of them have banned declawing. Half of them admit there's
> | still an underground for it
>
> Cite your source, please.
>

Like Brandy can "cite" anything. <snort>

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 11:10 AM:

> bewtifulfreak > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> England
>> Scotland
>> Wales
>> Italy
>> France
>> Germany
>> Austria
>> Switzerland
>> Norway
>> Sweden
>> Netherlands
>> Northern Ireland
>> Ireland
>> Denmark
>> Finland
>> Slovenia
>> Portugal
>> Belgium
>> Spain
>> Brazil
>> Australia
>> New Zealand
>>
>>
>> Countries where it is not:
>>
>> U.S.
>> Canada
>>
>
> You forgot:
>
I'd lay you BIG odds that declawing is not done in those countries either.
Especially poor nations. Declawing is a "luxury" item just as it is
"unnecessary". You *really* think that Nigerians haul their cats off to the
vet for declawing? More fantasy.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 11:10 AM:

> bewtifulfreak > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> England
>> Scotland
>> Wales
>> Italy
>> France
>> Germany
>> Austria
>> Switzerland
>> Norway
>> Sweden
>> Netherlands
>> Northern Ireland
>> Ireland
>> Denmark
>> Finland
>> Slovenia
>> Portugal
>> Belgium
>> Spain
>> Brazil
>> Australia
>> New Zealand
>>
>>
>> Countries where it is not:
>>
>> U.S.
>> Canada
>>
>
> You forgot:
>
I'd lay you BIG odds that declawing is not done in those countries either.
Especially poor nations. Declawing is a "luxury" item just as it is
"unnecessary". You *really* think that Nigerians haul their cats off to the
vet for declawing? More fantasy.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 11:14 AM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> I've given proof and statistics in other threads and Lauren posted
>> the studies again here last night. Get your glasses out.
>>
>> Karen
>>
>
> You haven't provided your sources. You seem to go out of your way to
> track down web sites that support your argument and do nothing to
> verify the information or the credentials of the person providing it.
> You're like the victim of a religious cult. It's quite sad.

Articles from the JAVMA are solid evidence. I notice you give none to the
contrary.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 11:14 AM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> I've given proof and statistics in other threads and Lauren posted
>> the studies again here last night. Get your glasses out.
>>
>> Karen
>>
>
> You haven't provided your sources. You seem to go out of your way to
> track down web sites that support your argument and do nothing to
> verify the information or the credentials of the person providing it.
> You're like the victim of a religious cult. It's quite sad.

Articles from the JAVMA are solid evidence. I notice you give none to the
contrary.

Karen

[Arjun Ray]

In >, "bewtifulfreak"
> wrote:
| "Arjun Ray" > wrote in message
|

|> Thus, declawing requires amputation of the distal phalanx. The
|> problem with partial amputation (yes, sawing through rather than
|> disjointing) is that claw regrowth can happen - almost always in
| misshapen form.
|
| You mean with the laser declawing?

It's my understanding that the laser is only doing what used to be done
with guillotine-like scissors (i.e. cut through the tendons, cartilage,
etc, connecting the distal phalanx to the rest of the finger/toe, to
disjoint it). I suppose it's more "surgical" in that sense.

Declawing has had evolution in its procedures: things like "scraping out
the claw root" and "sawing off enough of the bone" are older approaches
which have failed - due to unacceptable incidence of claw regrowth - and
have been abandoned in favor of complete disjointing, which is actually
a "simpler" procedure overall. Whether it's done with a knife-edge or a
light beam is a quiddity.

| This sounds at *least* as bad as having the toe taken completely off!

Well, for a cat, that's basically what it is. We walk on our feet,
distributing the load from toes to heel. A cat walks on its distal
phalanges. The bone is at an angle to the second phalanx, not end on as
in our fingers or toes, sort of like a shoe, and lies flat along its
length when the cat walks, with the other bones arranged upward in an
arc.

Removing that bone transfers the entire pressure onto the point of the
now exposed second phalanx. The adaptation is to the increase the arc
from the wrist downward to make as much of the second (and even the
third) phalanx lie flat along the ground. In heavier cats (such as the
big cats) this can lead to collapse all the way up to the wrist. See
this before-after video of a lion whose suffering was alleviated by
reconstructive surgery:

http://www.gt.net/~pproject/naala/kona.mov

(It's referenced from http://www.pawproject.com/html/default.asp )

[Arjun Ray]

In >, "bewtifulfreak"
> wrote:
| "Arjun Ray" > wrote in message
|

|> Thus, declawing requires amputation of the distal phalanx. The
|> problem with partial amputation (yes, sawing through rather than
|> disjointing) is that claw regrowth can happen - almost always in
| misshapen form.
|
| You mean with the laser declawing?

It's my understanding that the laser is only doing what used to be done
with guillotine-like scissors (i.e. cut through the tendons, cartilage,
etc, connecting the distal phalanx to the rest of the finger/toe, to
disjoint it). I suppose it's more "surgical" in that sense.

Declawing has had evolution in its procedures: things like "scraping out
the claw root" and "sawing off enough of the bone" are older approaches
which have failed - due to unacceptable incidence of claw regrowth - and
have been abandoned in favor of complete disjointing, which is actually
a "simpler" procedure overall. Whether it's done with a knife-edge or a
light beam is a quiddity.

| This sounds at *least* as bad as having the toe taken completely off!

Well, for a cat, that's basically what it is. We walk on our feet,
distributing the load from toes to heel. A cat walks on its distal
phalanges. The bone is at an angle to the second phalanx, not end on as
in our fingers or toes, sort of like a shoe, and lies flat along its
length when the cat walks, with the other bones arranged upward in an
arc.

Removing that bone transfers the entire pressure onto the point of the
now exposed second phalanx. The adaptation is to the increase the arc
from the wrist downward to make as much of the second (and even the
third) phalanx lie flat along the ground. In heavier cats (such as the
big cats) this can lead to collapse all the way up to the wrist. See
this before-after video of a lion whose suffering was alleviated by
reconstructive surgery:

http://www.gt.net/~pproject/naala/kona.mov

(It's referenced from http://www.pawproject.com/html/default.asp )

[PawsForThought]

>From: Karen Chuplis

>BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 11:10 AM:
>
>> bewtifulfreak > wrote in
>> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>>
>>> England
>>> Scotland
>>> Wales
>>> Italy
>>> France
>>> Germany
>>> Austria
>>> Switzerland
>>> Norway
>>> Sweden
>>> Netherlands
>>> Northern Ireland
>>> Ireland
>>> Denmark
>>> Finland
>>> Slovenia
>>> Portugal
>>> Belgium
>>> Spain
>>> Brazil
>>> Australia
>>> New Zealand
>>>
>>>
>>> Countries where it is not:
>>>
>>> U.S.
>>> Canada
>>>
>>
>> You forgot:
>>
>I'd lay you BIG odds that declawing is not done in those countries either.
>Especially poor nations. Declawing is a "luxury" item just as it is
>"unnecessary". You *really* think that Nigerians haul their cats off to the
>vet for declawing? More fantasy.
>
>Karen

LMAO! The more Brandy posts, the stupider she becomes.

Lauren
________
See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe
Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html
http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html
Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm

[PawsForThought]

>From: Karen Chuplis

>BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 11:10 AM:
>
>> bewtifulfreak > wrote in
>> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>>
>>> England
>>> Scotland
>>> Wales
>>> Italy
>>> France
>>> Germany
>>> Austria
>>> Switzerland
>>> Norway
>>> Sweden
>>> Netherlands
>>> Northern Ireland
>>> Ireland
>>> Denmark
>>> Finland
>>> Slovenia
>>> Portugal
>>> Belgium
>>> Spain
>>> Brazil
>>> Australia
>>> New Zealand
>>>
>>>
>>> Countries where it is not:
>>>
>>> U.S.
>>> Canada
>>>
>>
>> You forgot:
>>
>I'd lay you BIG odds that declawing is not done in those countries either.
>Especially poor nations. Declawing is a "luxury" item just as it is
>"unnecessary". You *really* think that Nigerians haul their cats off to the
>vet for declawing? More fantasy.
>
>Karen

LMAO! The more Brandy posts, the stupider she becomes.

Lauren
________
See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe
Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html
http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html
Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm

[bewtifulfreak]

"Karen Chuplis" > wrote in message
...

> > You forgot:
> >
> I'd lay you BIG odds that declawing is not done in those countries either.
> Especially poor nations. Declawing is a "luxury" item just as it is
> "unnecessary". You *really* think that Nigerians haul their cats off to
the
> vet for declawing? More fantasy.

Thank you, Karen, for saying what I was thinking but couldn't quite put into
words.

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[bewtifulfreak]

"Karen Chuplis" > wrote in message
...

> > You forgot:
> >
> I'd lay you BIG odds that declawing is not done in those countries either.
> Especially poor nations. Declawing is a "luxury" item just as it is
> "unnecessary". You *really* think that Nigerians haul their cats off to
the
> vet for declawing? More fantasy.

Thank you, Karen, for saying what I was thinking but couldn't quite put into
words.

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[PawsForThought]

>From:

>You might want to check out this article as well:
>
>http://www.listnow.com/helpingpaws/articles/article_175.html
>

That is just so sad :(

Lauren
________
See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe
Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html
http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html
Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm

[PawsForThought]

>From:

>You might want to check out this article as well:
>
>http://www.listnow.com/helpingpaws/articles/article_175.html
>

That is just so sad :(

Lauren
________
See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe
Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html
http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html
Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm

[bewtifulfreak]

"Arjun Ray" > wrote in message
...
> In >, "bewtifulfreak"
> > wrote:

> | This sounds at *least* as bad as having the toe taken completely off!
>
> Well, for a cat, that's basically what it is.

Of course. :) What I meant is that having the claw removed only at the base
and then having it grow back all skewed and deformed sounds just as, if not
more, painful than having the whole toe removed. But no matter how it's
done, besides the surgical pain, it can clearly cause a lot of discomfort in
making the cat walk in ways it's muscles weren't made to. The example's
been used before, but if we had to walk without our toes, not only would we
be off balance, but it would put undue pressure on the front of the foot.


See
> this before-after video of a lion whose suffering was alleviated by
> reconstructive surgery:

I'm not able to access it at the moment for some reason, but will try again
later.

Thank you again for explaining things in such detail.

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[bewtifulfreak]

"Arjun Ray" > wrote in message
...
> In >, "bewtifulfreak"
> > wrote:

> | This sounds at *least* as bad as having the toe taken completely off!
>
> Well, for a cat, that's basically what it is.

Of course. :) What I meant is that having the claw removed only at the base
and then having it grow back all skewed and deformed sounds just as, if not
more, painful than having the whole toe removed. But no matter how it's
done, besides the surgical pain, it can clearly cause a lot of discomfort in
making the cat walk in ways it's muscles weren't made to. The example's
been used before, but if we had to walk without our toes, not only would we
be off balance, but it would put undue pressure on the front of the foot.


See
> this before-after video of a lion whose suffering was alleviated by
> reconstructive surgery:

I'm not able to access it at the moment for some reason, but will try again
later.

Thank you again for explaining things in such detail.

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[Sherry]

>Albania
>Algeria
>Andorra
>Angola
>Antigua and Barbuda
>Argentina
>Armenia

snipped

Wow I'm impressed. But, take away the countries where declaw is legal because
declaw is not practiced anyway, and probably unheard of. Take away "England"
because it doesn't belong on your "list." What's left?

Sherry

[Sherry]

>Albania
>Algeria
>Andorra
>Angola
>Antigua and Barbuda
>Argentina
>Armenia

snipped

Wow I'm impressed. But, take away the countries where declaw is legal because
declaw is not practiced anyway, and probably unheard of. Take away "England"
because it doesn't belong on your "list." What's left?

Sherry

[bewtifulfreak]

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
...
> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> > I'd lay you BIG odds that declawing is not done in those countries
> > either. Especially poor nations. Declawing is a "luxury" item just
> > as it is "unnecessary". You *really* think that Nigerians haul
> > their cats off to the vet for declawing? More fantasy.
> >
> > Karen
> >
>
> I've never heard such an ugly American speak as you have.

That was *totally* unwarrented; she just made a simple comment. And this is
the hypocrite that goes on about not using insults in their postings,
*ha*!!!

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[bewtifulfreak]

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
...
> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> > I'd lay you BIG odds that declawing is not done in those countries
> > either. Especially poor nations. Declawing is a "luxury" item just
> > as it is "unnecessary". You *really* think that Nigerians haul
> > their cats off to the vet for declawing? More fantasy.
> >
> > Karen
> >
>
> I've never heard such an ugly American speak as you have.

That was *totally* unwarrented; she just made a simple comment. And this is
the hypocrite that goes on about not using insults in their postings,
*ha*!!!

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[bewtifulfreak]

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
...
> bewtifulfreak > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> > So now you've realized you don't have a valid argument, you've
> > resorted to base insults? You sad, sad woman....
> >
> > Ann
> >
>
> I'm not the one who edited off the list of United Nations members and
> implied their ignorant and dirt poor.

I never said that. You are diverting from the real issue, which was
declawing, and trying to make this into a political argument, to distract
from the fact that you are losing the argument. And even implying some
countries are poorer than others is not making a comment on them as people;
some of the nicest people are those who aren't consumed with possesions.
I've no doubt many people from the nations you mentioned are lovely,
wonderful people, but that doesn't detract from the fact that declawing is
cruel and unnecessary, which is what we were talking about before you tried
to change the subject.

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[bewtifulfreak]

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
...
> bewtifulfreak > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> > So now you've realized you don't have a valid argument, you've
> > resorted to base insults? You sad, sad woman....
> >
> > Ann
> >
>
> I'm not the one who edited off the list of United Nations members and
> implied their ignorant and dirt poor.

I never said that. You are diverting from the real issue, which was
declawing, and trying to make this into a political argument, to distract
from the fact that you are losing the argument. And even implying some
countries are poorer than others is not making a comment on them as people;
some of the nicest people are those who aren't consumed with possesions.
I've no doubt many people from the nations you mentioned are lovely,
wonderful people, but that doesn't detract from the fact that declawing is
cruel and unnecessary, which is what we were talking about before you tried
to change the subject.

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 9:11 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> Like Brandy can "cite" anything. <snort>
>
> I don't know how you expect me to provide verifiable statistics for an
> underground. I do know people around the world and on a lark asked
> them to call and ask about declawing a cat. Just like most places,
> there are laws on the books, but some people just don't follow them and
> law enforcement doesn't find them important enough to enforce them.
> Not one got a "no."

Well you must have *some* vague source.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 9:11 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> Like Brandy can "cite" anything. <snort>
>
> I don't know how you expect me to provide verifiable statistics for an
> underground. I do know people around the world and on a lark asked
> them to call and ask about declawing a cat. Just like most places,
> there are laws on the books, but some people just don't follow them and
> law enforcement doesn't find them important enough to enforce them.
> Not one got a "no."

Well you must have *some* vague source.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 9:13 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> I'd lay you BIG odds that declawing is not done in those countries
>> either. Especially poor nations. Declawing is a "luxury" item just
>> as it is "unnecessary". You *really* think that Nigerians haul
>> their cats off to the vet for declawing? More fantasy.
>>
>> Karen
>>
>
> I've never heard such an ugly American speak as you have.

Oh please. It's just a truth.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 9:13 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> I'd lay you BIG odds that declawing is not done in those countries
>> either. Especially poor nations. Declawing is a "luxury" item just
>> as it is "unnecessary". You *really* think that Nigerians haul
>> their cats off to the vet for declawing? More fantasy.
>>
>> Karen
>>
>
> I've never heard such an ugly American speak as you have.

Oh please. It's just a truth.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 9:14 PM:

> bewtifulfreak > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> Thank you, Karen, for saying what I was thinking but couldn't
>> quite put into words.
>>
>> Ann
>>
>
> Two ugly Americans. Go ahead, offend a few more countries. You
> obviously know nothing about the world you live in. Just your little
> house, on your little street, with your little internet connection
> enabling your little fixation.

As you sit in the middle of the richest country in the world. It's not ugly,
it's the truth. Other countries aren't as fortunate as we are to be able to
indulge selfish whims.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 9:14 PM:

> bewtifulfreak > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> Thank you, Karen, for saying what I was thinking but couldn't
>> quite put into words.
>>
>> Ann
>>
>
> Two ugly Americans. Go ahead, offend a few more countries. You
> obviously know nothing about the world you live in. Just your little
> house, on your little street, with your little internet connection
> enabling your little fixation.

As you sit in the middle of the richest country in the world. It's not ugly,
it's the truth. Other countries aren't as fortunate as we are to be able to
indulge selfish whims.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 9:20 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> The problem is that it does NOT save them from the shelter. Look
>> at this study (which does show some dichotomy and admits it is
>> difficult to factor, but you can also call up your local shelter
>> and ask about declawed cats. They are usually available).
>>
>
> Yeah, you thump that survey about shelters, but there is nothing
> valuable in those statistics since there is no survey as to whether or
> not the cat had behavioral problems before the surgery that was thought
> might be corrected or mitigated by the surgery. Of course a behavioral
> problem is just that and with or without being declawed, chances are
> the cat would still end up in a shelter. You just don't know and you
> simply cannot argue against such a cold hard fact. It's like saying
> women with breast implants are more likely to commit suicide. Guess
> what? It's not getting implants that cause the problem, it was the
> problem that made them get implants thinking it would be a cure, and it
> wasn't.
>
> A study is only valid if done by a completely unrelated and
> uninterested party. The will always, always, always lean to the favor
> of those who funded it or requested it be done.

Well, since most vets DO declaw and it's part of their income, I'd say that
it should be more inclined to be skewed the other direction. C'mon, Brandy,
you're just jealous because we've got something TO thump. Where are your
numbers? Your source on a nationwide ban? Your articles regarding how
declawing is fun for the cat.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 9:20 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> The problem is that it does NOT save them from the shelter. Look
>> at this study (which does show some dichotomy and admits it is
>> difficult to factor, but you can also call up your local shelter
>> and ask about declawed cats. They are usually available).
>>
>
> Yeah, you thump that survey about shelters, but there is nothing
> valuable in those statistics since there is no survey as to whether or
> not the cat had behavioral problems before the surgery that was thought
> might be corrected or mitigated by the surgery. Of course a behavioral
> problem is just that and with or without being declawed, chances are
> the cat would still end up in a shelter. You just don't know and you
> simply cannot argue against such a cold hard fact. It's like saying
> women with breast implants are more likely to commit suicide. Guess
> what? It's not getting implants that cause the problem, it was the
> problem that made them get implants thinking it would be a cure, and it
> wasn't.
>
> A study is only valid if done by a completely unrelated and
> uninterested party. The will always, always, always lean to the favor
> of those who funded it or requested it be done.

Well, since most vets DO declaw and it's part of their income, I'd say that
it should be more inclined to be skewed the other direction. C'mon, Brandy,
you're just jealous because we've got something TO thump. Where are your
numbers? Your source on a nationwide ban? Your articles regarding how
declawing is fun for the cat.

Karen

[bewtifulfreak]

"Karen Chuplis" > wrote in message
...

<snip>

> > I've no doubt many people from the nations you mentioned are lovely,
> > wonderful people, but that doesn't detract from the fact that declawing
is
> > cruel and unnecessary, which is what we were talking about before you
tried
> > to change the subject.

> It's the Brandy Sidestep.

Yes, and she really works at it....first she tried changing her tack from
"There is nothing wrong with declawing," to "I just don't think it should be
illegal because then it won't be available to those who need it." Which is
a ridiculous argument for keeping it legal, because how often is it
medically necessary? Besides, as I pointed out, even the countries that
have banned it will allow it to be done legally when it is medically
necessary, so her little ploy didn't work there.

Now that she realizes that, she has simply resorted to blatent insults,
after wisely pointing out in an earlier post, "You'll never convince anyone
that way. Sure way to make people shut you out and not listen to your
argument. Yeah, name-calling ALWAYS influences people." Too bad she
doesn't take her own advice. It's just sad that when people realize they're
wrong, they don't have the integrity and good grace to simply admit it,
instead of stooping to distractionary tactics and outright aggression.

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[bewtifulfreak]

"Karen Chuplis" > wrote in message
...

<snip>

> > I've no doubt many people from the nations you mentioned are lovely,
> > wonderful people, but that doesn't detract from the fact that declawing
is
> > cruel and unnecessary, which is what we were talking about before you
tried
> > to change the subject.

> It's the Brandy Sidestep.

Yes, and she really works at it....first she tried changing her tack from
"There is nothing wrong with declawing," to "I just don't think it should be
illegal because then it won't be available to those who need it." Which is
a ridiculous argument for keeping it legal, because how often is it
medically necessary? Besides, as I pointed out, even the countries that
have banned it will allow it to be done legally when it is medically
necessary, so her little ploy didn't work there.

Now that she realizes that, she has simply resorted to blatent insults,
after wisely pointing out in an earlier post, "You'll never convince anyone
that way. Sure way to make people shut you out and not listen to your
argument. Yeah, name-calling ALWAYS influences people." Too bad she
doesn't take her own advice. It's just sad that when people realize they're
wrong, they don't have the integrity and good grace to simply admit it,
instead of stooping to distractionary tactics and outright aggression.

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , bewtifulfreak at
wrote on 8/11/03 9:29 PM:

> "Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
> ...
>> bewtifulfreak > wrote in
>> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>>
>>> So now you've realized you don't have a valid argument, you've
>>> resorted to base insults? You sad, sad woman....
>>>
>>> Ann
>>>
>>
>> I'm not the one who edited off the list of United Nations members and
>> implied their ignorant and dirt poor.
>
> I never said that. You are diverting from the real issue, which was
> declawing, and trying to make this into a political argument, to distract
> from the fact that you are losing the argument. And even implying some
> countries are poorer than others is not making a comment on them as people;
> some of the nicest people are those who aren't consumed with possesions.
> I've no doubt many people from the nations you mentioned are lovely,
> wonderful people, but that doesn't detract from the fact that declawing is
> cruel and unnecessary, which is what we were talking about before you tried
> to change the subject.
>
> Ann
>
> --
>
> http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak
>
>
>
>
>
It's the Brandy Sidestep.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , bewtifulfreak at
wrote on 8/11/03 9:29 PM:

> "Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
> ...
>> bewtifulfreak > wrote in
>> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>>
>>> So now you've realized you don't have a valid argument, you've
>>> resorted to base insults? You sad, sad woman....
>>>
>>> Ann
>>>
>>
>> I'm not the one who edited off the list of United Nations members and
>> implied their ignorant and dirt poor.
>
> I never said that. You are diverting from the real issue, which was
> declawing, and trying to make this into a political argument, to distract
> from the fact that you are losing the argument. And even implying some
> countries are poorer than others is not making a comment on them as people;
> some of the nicest people are those who aren't consumed with possesions.
> I've no doubt many people from the nations you mentioned are lovely,
> wonderful people, but that doesn't detract from the fact that declawing is
> cruel and unnecessary, which is what we were talking about before you tried
> to change the subject.
>
> Ann
>
> --
>
> http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak
>
>
>
>
>
It's the Brandy Sidestep.

Karen

[MacCandace]

<< Is it me or does Brandy remind people of a certain three letter poster
(who will remain nameless cause I heard rumorst hat if she hears her name
she comes back) who used to troll this group a long time back? >>

She wasn't a porno queen, though. They do have similar, obstinate views,
though.

Candace
(take the litter out before replying by e-mail)

See my cats:
http://photos.yahoo.com/maccandace

[MacCandace]

<< Is it me or does Brandy remind people of a certain three letter poster
(who will remain nameless cause I heard rumorst hat if she hears her name
she comes back) who used to troll this group a long time back? >>

She wasn't a porno queen, though. They do have similar, obstinate views,
though.

Candace
(take the litter out before replying by e-mail)

See my cats:
http://photos.yahoo.com/maccandace

[MacCandace]

<< I have only very, very rarely come across anyone who has even heard of
Usenet. >>

That's the only statement you have ever made with which I agree. Wow.

<< Usenet is most definitely a fringe that attracts a certain
type of person. >>

I don't think I would say "fringe." It might just be people who are curious
enough to look around on the internet a little and find stuff like this instead
of just going to every dotcom they hear about on TV.



Candace
(take the litter out before replying by e-mail)

See my cats:
http://photos.yahoo.com/maccandace

[MacCandace]

<< I have only very, very rarely come across anyone who has even heard of
Usenet. >>

That's the only statement you have ever made with which I agree. Wow.

<< Usenet is most definitely a fringe that attracts a certain
type of person. >>

I don't think I would say "fringe." It might just be people who are curious
enough to look around on the internet a little and find stuff like this instead
of just going to every dotcom they hear about on TV.



Candace
(take the litter out before replying by e-mail)

See my cats:
http://photos.yahoo.com/maccandace

[Kalyahna]

> wrote in message
...
> You can't be "deeply against" declawing if you justify in the same
> breath, which you just did. It is not "necessary" to mutilate a cat and
> cause it irreversible harm, especially when there are numerous humane
> alternatives. I'm also surprised that you think a declawed cat has some
> higher status that prevents it from being killed in a shelter. They are
> killed in shelters on a regular basis. 80% of the declawed cats (300)
> abandoned at the shelter in the following article were killed last year
> because of behavior problems. That also means that 375 declawed cats
> were abandoned there. That's just *one* shelter. You do the math:
>
> http://www.southjerseynews.com/issues/february/m020103h.htm

"There's preventatives. Why a cat scratches is to sharpen its nails."
Clipping nails deters scratching, he said.

A quote from the above article, and one I have a problem with, unless I'm
terribly misinformed. I know that cats DO scratch to sharpen their nails,
but isn't it also a means of marking territory and also a means of
stretching? The man who said the above is actually the shelter director,
which is a little frightening. He makes it sound like the -only- reason a
cat would scratch is for sharpening (and for me, the logic doesn't work, as
clipping the nails makes them -less- sharp, so wouldn't a cat want to
scratch -more- after the clipping than less?).

And no, I'm not supporting declawing. Arjun's postings of articles and
whatnot did a great deal to convince me. I don't have any statistics, but I
could hazard a guess that more than half of the declawed cats we currently
have were surrendered for 'litterbox issues.' I've fostered ((*thinking*))
four declawed 'litterbox issues' cats and had all of two incidences, one
with an absolutely petrified boy who I think just didn't want to come out
from his hiding place to use the box, and the other because I apparently
didn't get the smell out from the first time. Only one of the four shows any
tendency to bite, and that so far has been more my not giving him as much
attention as he wants and right when he wants it than any result of the
declawing.

[Kalyahna]

> wrote in message
...
> You can't be "deeply against" declawing if you justify in the same
> breath, which you just did. It is not "necessary" to mutilate a cat and
> cause it irreversible harm, especially when there are numerous humane
> alternatives. I'm also surprised that you think a declawed cat has some
> higher status that prevents it from being killed in a shelter. They are
> killed in shelters on a regular basis. 80% of the declawed cats (300)
> abandoned at the shelter in the following article were killed last year
> because of behavior problems. That also means that 375 declawed cats
> were abandoned there. That's just *one* shelter. You do the math:
>
> http://www.southjerseynews.com/issues/february/m020103h.htm

"There's preventatives. Why a cat scratches is to sharpen its nails."
Clipping nails deters scratching, he said.

A quote from the above article, and one I have a problem with, unless I'm
terribly misinformed. I know that cats DO scratch to sharpen their nails,
but isn't it also a means of marking territory and also a means of
stretching? The man who said the above is actually the shelter director,
which is a little frightening. He makes it sound like the -only- reason a
cat would scratch is for sharpening (and for me, the logic doesn't work, as
clipping the nails makes them -less- sharp, so wouldn't a cat want to
scratch -more- after the clipping than less?).

And no, I'm not supporting declawing. Arjun's postings of articles and
whatnot did a great deal to convince me. I don't have any statistics, but I
could hazard a guess that more than half of the declawed cats we currently
have were surrendered for 'litterbox issues.' I've fostered ((*thinking*))
four declawed 'litterbox issues' cats and had all of two incidences, one
with an absolutely petrified boy who I think just didn't want to come out
from his hiding place to use the box, and the other because I apparently
didn't get the smell out from the first time. Only one of the four shows any
tendency to bite, and that so far has been more my not giving him as much
attention as he wants and right when he wants it than any result of the
declawing.

[bewtifulfreak]

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
...

> Why don't you girls get a room.

Wow, that's really convincing, Brandy, what a way to get your point across
<*yawn*>....

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[bewtifulfreak]

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
...

> Why don't you girls get a room.

Wow, that's really convincing, Brandy, what a way to get your point across
<*yawn*>....

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[Sherry]

>Where are your numbers? Your source on a
>> nationwide ban? Your articles regarding how declawing is fun for
>> the cat.
>>
>> Karen
>
>I can't come up with the things you asked because I don't know anything
>about them.

Sorry, Brandy, but you *did* spout off about the alleged great numbers of
people who opposed this "nationwide ban''. Now you've refused to elaborate. No
one else ever heard of a nationwide ban, and doubt your statement. You seem
oddly hesitant to defend that statement now.

You've conjured garbage up in your own head and are trying
>to sell it as words from me. Get a life already. You have never done
>anything--ever--to warrant anyone giving you the time of day

You seem to be giving her *very much* of your day.

much less
>what you keen, gibber and accuse. Jealous of YOU??? Don't make me
>laugh. No... don't make me sick. I'm not the one obsessed with it.

But you can't seem to just go away.

>know what I know and I'm comfortable with.

Your dearth of knowledge just continues to amaze and astound.

It's your insecurities that
>you can't have the world your way that keeps these ridiculous flames
>alive.

Actually, they are not ridiculous flames. Karen continues to offer a very good
argument and back it up. You don't.

Sherry
>
>--
>BrandyÂ*Â*Alexandre®

[Sherry]

>Where are your numbers? Your source on a
>> nationwide ban? Your articles regarding how declawing is fun for
>> the cat.
>>
>> Karen
>
>I can't come up with the things you asked because I don't know anything
>about them.

Sorry, Brandy, but you *did* spout off about the alleged great numbers of
people who opposed this "nationwide ban''. Now you've refused to elaborate. No
one else ever heard of a nationwide ban, and doubt your statement. You seem
oddly hesitant to defend that statement now.

You've conjured garbage up in your own head and are trying
>to sell it as words from me. Get a life already. You have never done
>anything--ever--to warrant anyone giving you the time of day

You seem to be giving her *very much* of your day.

much less
>what you keen, gibber and accuse. Jealous of YOU??? Don't make me
>laugh. No... don't make me sick. I'm not the one obsessed with it.

But you can't seem to just go away.

>know what I know and I'm comfortable with.

Your dearth of knowledge just continues to amaze and astound.

It's your insecurities that
>you can't have the world your way that keeps these ridiculous flames
>alive.

Actually, they are not ridiculous flames. Karen continues to offer a very good
argument and back it up. You don't.

Sherry
>
>--
>BrandyÂ*Â*Alexandre®

[Arjun Ray]

In >, "Mike"
> wrote:
| "Arjun Ray" > wrote in message
| ...
|> In >, "Mike"
|> > wrote:
|>
|>| I'm asking if its more humane to kill a cat than to give it to owners
|>| who would look after it but get it declawed first.

|> There's no answer for this question because, as posed, it's actually
|> not well formed. Specifically, why is death the alternative?
|
| Over crowded shelters. There aren't enough homes for the cats; so unless
| they want to spend the rest of their lives in a cage at a rescue centre,
| death is the only realistic alternative.

I went over this in my previous followup. Let me try again.

The point is that 'declaw or death', applied to individual cats, is an
instance of the fallacy known as "false dilemma". Merely because an
adopter who intends to declaw is turned away, does not in and of itself
imply that the particular cat will therefore spend the rest of its life
in a cage if it isn't put down. For all we know a non-declawing adopter
could walk in the door in the next five minutes.

Furthermore, it need not be "will declaw" that happens to be the reason
to reject an adopter - the *same* logic, if valid, could be applied to
any other criterion. E.g. 'convicted of animal abuse', or 'financially
incapable'. That is, rejecting a potential adopter for *any reason
whatsoever* would, by the essential structure of this argument, condemn
the cat. It will be a sad day indeed when rescuers and fosterers are
the ones held to blame for the deaths of cats, by failing to adopt them
out simply because they had standards!

The reality is that we are not dealing with certainties for *individual*
cats. We are dealing with statistical likelihoods, based on aggregates.
And once we start talking about numbers, there are two critical ones:
the proportion of declawed cats among all cats homed, and the proportion
of declawed cats among all cats surrendered to kill shelters (and, at a
first approximation, put down.)

Maybe an explicit numerical example will help explain the considerations
involved. Lest they be confused for fact, I'll stress that the numbers
are illustrative, *not* representative.

Let's assume that 10,000 cats are adopted out in some area in some year,
and of them, 10% or 1000 are declawed. Further, let 500 cats wind up
surrendered to the area's animal control facility over the same period;
and of them, let 20% turn out to be declawed. The incidence matrix will
look like this (use a fixed-width font for readability):

Surrendered:
Total No Yes
Total 10000 9500 500
Declawed: No 9000 8600 400
Yes 1000 900 100

The two critical percentages are represented in the first and third
columns (10% of all cats declawed, 20% of surrendered cats declawed).

Now, read across the rows. The percentage of non-declawed cats
surrendered is 400/9000 = 2.2%. The percentage of declawed cats
surrendered is 100/1000 = 10%. That is, declawed cats have a much
greater likelihood of being surrendered.

If we take being *surrendered* as a practically sure death sentence,
then this disparity (2.2% versus 10%) is an inevitable mathematical
consequence whenever the first critical percentage (total incidence,
e.g. 10%) is less than the second (incidence among surrenders, e.g.
20%).

There is no kill shelter I know of that does not report a substantial
proportion of declawed cats in their intake. There is no evidence that
the proportion of cats declawed in the population at large is anywhere
as large as those percentages. In other words, the real percentages,
whatever they are, are *like* the numbers above in the sense that one
proportion (total declawed) is smaller than the other (declawed among
surrenders). It necessarily follows that declawed cats suffer a greater
incidence of being surrendered than cats who are not. The mathematics
is inescapable.

Now why would you, as a responsible rescuer, subject a cat to a greater
than average chance of not *keeping* a home?

Which brings out the essence of the false dilemma above. On aggregate,
the issue is not *finding* a home. It's *keeping* a home.

[Arjun Ray]

In >, "Mike"
> wrote:
| "Arjun Ray" > wrote in message
| ...
|> In >, "Mike"
|> > wrote:
|>
|>| I'm asking if its more humane to kill a cat than to give it to owners
|>| who would look after it but get it declawed first.

|> There's no answer for this question because, as posed, it's actually
|> not well formed. Specifically, why is death the alternative?
|
| Over crowded shelters. There aren't enough homes for the cats; so unless
| they want to spend the rest of their lives in a cage at a rescue centre,
| death is the only realistic alternative.

I went over this in my previous followup. Let me try again.

The point is that 'declaw or death', applied to individual cats, is an
instance of the fallacy known as "false dilemma". Merely because an
adopter who intends to declaw is turned away, does not in and of itself
imply that the particular cat will therefore spend the rest of its life
in a cage if it isn't put down. For all we know a non-declawing adopter
could walk in the door in the next five minutes.

Furthermore, it need not be "will declaw" that happens to be the reason
to reject an adopter - the *same* logic, if valid, could be applied to
any other criterion. E.g. 'convicted of animal abuse', or 'financially
incapable'. That is, rejecting a potential adopter for *any reason
whatsoever* would, by the essential structure of this argument, condemn
the cat. It will be a sad day indeed when rescuers and fosterers are
the ones held to blame for the deaths of cats, by failing to adopt them
out simply because they had standards!

The reality is that we are not dealing with certainties for *individual*
cats. We are dealing with statistical likelihoods, based on aggregates.
And once we start talking about numbers, there are two critical ones:
the proportion of declawed cats among all cats homed, and the proportion
of declawed cats among all cats surrendered to kill shelters (and, at a
first approximation, put down.)

Maybe an explicit numerical example will help explain the considerations
involved. Lest they be confused for fact, I'll stress that the numbers
are illustrative, *not* representative.

Let's assume that 10,000 cats are adopted out in some area in some year,
and of them, 10% or 1000 are declawed. Further, let 500 cats wind up
surrendered to the area's animal control facility over the same period;
and of them, let 20% turn out to be declawed. The incidence matrix will
look like this (use a fixed-width font for readability):

Surrendered:
Total No Yes
Total 10000 9500 500
Declawed: No 9000 8600 400
Yes 1000 900 100

The two critical percentages are represented in the first and third
columns (10% of all cats declawed, 20% of surrendered cats declawed).

Now, read across the rows. The percentage of non-declawed cats
surrendered is 400/9000 = 2.2%. The percentage of declawed cats
surrendered is 100/1000 = 10%. That is, declawed cats have a much
greater likelihood of being surrendered.

If we take being *surrendered* as a practically sure death sentence,
then this disparity (2.2% versus 10%) is an inevitable mathematical
consequence whenever the first critical percentage (total incidence,
e.g. 10%) is less than the second (incidence among surrenders, e.g.
20%).

There is no kill shelter I know of that does not report a substantial
proportion of declawed cats in their intake. There is no evidence that
the proportion of cats declawed in the population at large is anywhere
as large as those percentages. In other words, the real percentages,
whatever they are, are *like* the numbers above in the sense that one
proportion (total declawed) is smaller than the other (declawed among
surrenders). It necessarily follows that declawed cats suffer a greater
incidence of being surrendered than cats who are not. The mathematics
is inescapable.

Now why would you, as a responsible rescuer, subject a cat to a greater
than average chance of not *keeping* a home?

Which brings out the essence of the false dilemma above. On aggregate,
the issue is not *finding* a home. It's *keeping* a home.

[kaeli]

In article >,
enlightened us with...

<snip awesome stuff>
> Which brings out the essence of the false dilemma above. On aggregate,
> the issue is not *finding* a home. It's *keeping* a home.
>

That has to be one of the best illustrations of the falsity of the
declaw or death argument I've ever read.

If I give you credit, may I use it on Wild At Heart?

-------------------------------------------------
~kaeli~
The secret of the universe is @*&^^^ NO CARRIER
The more ridiculous a belief system, the higher
the probability of its success.
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
-------------------------------------------------

[kaeli]

In article >,
enlightened us with...

<snip awesome stuff>
> Which brings out the essence of the false dilemma above. On aggregate,
> the issue is not *finding* a home. It's *keeping* a home.
>

That has to be one of the best illustrations of the falsity of the
declaw or death argument I've ever read.

If I give you credit, may I use it on Wild At Heart?

-------------------------------------------------
~kaeli~
The secret of the universe is @*&^^^ NO CARRIER
The more ridiculous a belief system, the higher
the probability of its success.
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
-------------------------------------------------

[Arjun Ray]

In >, kaeli
> wrote:

| If I give you credit, may I use it on Wild At Heart?

Sure, use it. No credit needed: the refutation didn't originate with
me, AFAIK.

[Arjun Ray]

In >, kaeli
> wrote:

| If I give you credit, may I use it on Wild At Heart?

Sure, use it. No credit needed: the refutation didn't originate with
me, AFAIK.

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 11:35 PM:

> bewtifulfreak > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> "Karen Chuplis" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>> I've no doubt many people from the nations you mentioned are
>>>> lovely, wonderful people, but that doesn't detract from the
>>>> fact that declawing
>> is
>>>> cruel and unnecessary, which is what we were talking about
>>>> before you
>> tried
>>>> to change the subject.
>>
>>> It's the Brandy Sidestep.
>>
>> Yes, and she really works at it....first she tried changing her
>> tack from "There is nothing wrong with declawing," to "I just
>> don't think it should be illegal because then it won't be
>> available to those who need it." Which is a ridiculous argument
>> for keeping it legal, because how often is it medically necessary?
>> Besides, as I pointed out, even the countries that have banned it
>> will allow it to be done legally when it is medically necessary,
>> so her little ploy didn't work there.
>>
>> Now that she realizes that, she has simply resorted to blatent
>> insults, after wisely pointing out in an earlier post, "You'll
>> never convince anyone that way. Sure way to make people shut you
>> out and not listen to your argument. Yeah, name-calling ALWAYS
>> influences people." Too bad she doesn't take her own advice.
>> It's just sad that when people realize they're wrong, they don't
>> have the integrity and good grace to simply admit it, instead of
>> stooping to distractionary tactics and outright aggression.
>>
>> Ann
>>
>
> Why don't you girls get a room.
>

It's official. She *knows* she's wrong.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 11:35 PM:

> bewtifulfreak > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> "Karen Chuplis" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>> I've no doubt many people from the nations you mentioned are
>>>> lovely, wonderful people, but that doesn't detract from the
>>>> fact that declawing
>> is
>>>> cruel and unnecessary, which is what we were talking about
>>>> before you
>> tried
>>>> to change the subject.
>>
>>> It's the Brandy Sidestep.
>>
>> Yes, and she really works at it....first she tried changing her
>> tack from "There is nothing wrong with declawing," to "I just
>> don't think it should be illegal because then it won't be
>> available to those who need it." Which is a ridiculous argument
>> for keeping it legal, because how often is it medically necessary?
>> Besides, as I pointed out, even the countries that have banned it
>> will allow it to be done legally when it is medically necessary,
>> so her little ploy didn't work there.
>>
>> Now that she realizes that, she has simply resorted to blatent
>> insults, after wisely pointing out in an earlier post, "You'll
>> never convince anyone that way. Sure way to make people shut you
>> out and not listen to your argument. Yeah, name-calling ALWAYS
>> influences people." Too bad she doesn't take her own advice.
>> It's just sad that when people realize they're wrong, they don't
>> have the integrity and good grace to simply admit it, instead of
>> stooping to distractionary tactics and outright aggression.
>>
>> Ann
>>
>
> Why don't you girls get a room.
>

It's official. She *knows* she's wrong.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 11:39 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> Well, since most vets DO declaw and it's part of their income, I'd
>> say that it should be more inclined to be skewed the other
>> direction. C'mon, Brandy, you're just jealous because we've got
>> something TO thump. Where are your numbers? Your source on a
>> nationwide ban? Your articles regarding how declawing is fun for
>> the cat.
>>
>> Karen
>>
>
> I can't come up with the things you asked because I don't know anything
> about them.

Yes, we know you don't know. Thank you for admitting it.

>You've conjured garbage up in your own head and are trying
> to sell it as words from me. Get a life already. You have never done
> anything--ever--to warrant anyone giving you the time of day much less
> what you keen, gibber and accuse. Jealous of YOU??? Don't make me
> laugh. No... don't make me sick. I'm not the one obsessed with it. I
> know what I know and I'm comfortable with. It's your insecurities that
> you can't have the world your way that keeps these ridiculous flames
> alive.

Hmm. Where did I say you were jealous of me? I've "conjured" up facts. I'm
not obsessed and the more you post the more it is obvious you are *not*
comfortable with it. Kami's surgery is done. Nothing fixes it. You made a
mistake. Just don't encourage others.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 11:39 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> Well, since most vets DO declaw and it's part of their income, I'd
>> say that it should be more inclined to be skewed the other
>> direction. C'mon, Brandy, you're just jealous because we've got
>> something TO thump. Where are your numbers? Your source on a
>> nationwide ban? Your articles regarding how declawing is fun for
>> the cat.
>>
>> Karen
>>
>
> I can't come up with the things you asked because I don't know anything
> about them.

Yes, we know you don't know. Thank you for admitting it.

>You've conjured garbage up in your own head and are trying
> to sell it as words from me. Get a life already. You have never done
> anything--ever--to warrant anyone giving you the time of day much less
> what you keen, gibber and accuse. Jealous of YOU??? Don't make me
> laugh. No... don't make me sick. I'm not the one obsessed with it. I
> know what I know and I'm comfortable with. It's your insecurities that
> you can't have the world your way that keeps these ridiculous flames
> alive.

Hmm. Where did I say you were jealous of me? I've "conjured" up facts. I'm
not obsessed and the more you post the more it is obvious you are *not*
comfortable with it. Kami's surgery is done. Nothing fixes it. You made a
mistake. Just don't encourage others.

Karen

[Arjun Ray]

In >, kaeli
> wrote:
| In article >,
| enlightened us with...

|> No credit needed: the refutation didn't originate with me, AFAIK.

| I meant use your post as an example

Oh, okay - I think the fair use laws cover it just fine anyway :-)

[Arjun Ray]

In >, kaeli
> wrote:
| In article >,
| enlightened us with...

|> No credit needed: the refutation didn't originate with me, AFAIK.

| I meant use your post as an example

Oh, okay - I think the fair use laws cover it just fine anyway :-)

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 11:40 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> Please CITE where I said they were IGNORANT? I said, you can't
>> tell me that they cart their cats off to a vet to indulge in the
>> luxury and unnecessary act of declawing a cat. You will try
>> anything to hide your guilt, won't you.
>>
>> Karen
>>
>
> You implied that the whole country is dirt poor and it's not. Maybe
> you didn't say the word, but you definitely implied proving it applies
> to you more than anything else.

How does poor equal ignorant?? It does not. I never said dirt poor either.
But the FACT is, they aren't in the habit of frittering their money on
declaws. Find me someone from Nigeria who does and I'll retract.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 11:40 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> Please CITE where I said they were IGNORANT? I said, you can't
>> tell me that they cart their cats off to a vet to indulge in the
>> luxury and unnecessary act of declawing a cat. You will try
>> anything to hide your guilt, won't you.
>>
>> Karen
>>
>
> You implied that the whole country is dirt poor and it's not. Maybe
> you didn't say the word, but you definitely implied proving it applies
> to you more than anything else.

How does poor equal ignorant?? It does not. I never said dirt poor either.
But the FACT is, they aren't in the habit of frittering their money on
declaws. Find me someone from Nigeria who does and I'll retract.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 11:42 PM:

> Kalyahna > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> And no, I'm not supporting declawing. Arjun's postings of articles
>> and whatnot did a great deal to convince me. I don't have any
>> statistics, but I could hazard a guess that more than half of the
>> declawed cats we currently have were surrendered for 'litterbox
>> issues.' I've fostered ((*thinking*)) four declawed 'litterbox
>> issues' cats and had all of two incidences, one with an absolutely
>> petrified boy who I think just didn't want to come out from his
>> hiding place to use the box, and the other because I apparently
>> didn't get the smell out from the first time. Only one of the four
>> shows any tendency to bite, and that so far has been more my not
>> giving him as much attention as he wants and right when he wants
>> it than any result of the declawing.
>>
>
> I agree with you. Given the number of posts here about perfectly
> "normal" cats and their litterbox issues, one has to wonder why these
> fanatics have glommed onto an unverifiable statistics from an
> unverifiable source and continue to wave it around like it proves
> everything about bad behavior and its relation to declawing. It
> doesn't. This newsgroup is "statistic" enough to disprove it.

Unverifiable? It's perfectly verifiable throught the World Small Animal
Veterinary Association. The Survey authors and date are included. Getting a
little desparate aren't you?

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/11/03 11:42 PM:

> Kalyahna > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> And no, I'm not supporting declawing. Arjun's postings of articles
>> and whatnot did a great deal to convince me. I don't have any
>> statistics, but I could hazard a guess that more than half of the
>> declawed cats we currently have were surrendered for 'litterbox
>> issues.' I've fostered ((*thinking*)) four declawed 'litterbox
>> issues' cats and had all of two incidences, one with an absolutely
>> petrified boy who I think just didn't want to come out from his
>> hiding place to use the box, and the other because I apparently
>> didn't get the smell out from the first time. Only one of the four
>> shows any tendency to bite, and that so far has been more my not
>> giving him as much attention as he wants and right when he wants
>> it than any result of the declawing.
>>
>
> I agree with you. Given the number of posts here about perfectly
> "normal" cats and their litterbox issues, one has to wonder why these
> fanatics have glommed onto an unverifiable statistics from an
> unverifiable source and continue to wave it around like it proves
> everything about bad behavior and its relation to declawing. It
> doesn't. This newsgroup is "statistic" enough to disprove it.

Unverifiable? It's perfectly verifiable throught the World Small Animal
Veterinary Association. The Survey authors and date are included. Getting a
little desparate aren't you?

Karen

[kaeli]

In article >,
enlightened us with...
> In >, kaeli
> > wrote:
> | In article >,
> | enlightened us with...
>
> |> No credit needed: the refutation didn't originate with me, AFAIK.
>
> | I meant use your post as an example
>
> Oh, okay - I think the fair use laws cover it just fine anyway :-)
>
>

Maybe, but I like to ask about quoting people. :)

Thanks!

--
-------------------------------------------------
~kaeli~
The secret of the universe is @*&^^^ NO CARRIER
The more ridiculous a belief system, the higher
the probability of its success.
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
-------------------------------------------------

[kaeli]

In article >,
enlightened us with...
> In >, kaeli
> > wrote:
> | In article >,
> | enlightened us with...
>
> |> No credit needed: the refutation didn't originate with me, AFAIK.
>
> | I meant use your post as an example
>
> Oh, okay - I think the fair use laws cover it just fine anyway :-)
>
>

Maybe, but I like to ask about quoting people. :)

Thanks!

--
-------------------------------------------------
~kaeli~
The secret of the universe is @*&^^^ NO CARRIER
The more ridiculous a belief system, the higher
the probability of its success.
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
-------------------------------------------------

[bewtifulfreak]

"kaeli" > wrote in message
...

> The point was that most other *industrialized* nations with *similar*
> norms and values as our own have seen fit to ban the procedure. Saying
> that other nations where it is legal to cut off human body parts (human
> clitorectomy) against their wishes allow declawing and having that be
> one's argument isn't exactly convincing.

Point well made, Kaeli, dear. :)

Hugs,
Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[bewtifulfreak]

"kaeli" > wrote in message
...

> The point was that most other *industrialized* nations with *similar*
> norms and values as our own have seen fit to ban the procedure. Saying
> that other nations where it is legal to cut off human body parts (human
> clitorectomy) against their wishes allow declawing and having that be
> one's argument isn't exactly convincing.

Point well made, Kaeli, dear. :)

Hugs,
Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[Cheryl]

"bewtifulfreak" > wrote in
:

> "kaeli" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> The point was that most other *industrialized* nations with *similar*
>> norms and values as our own have seen fit to ban the procedure. Saying
>> that other nations where it is legal to cut off human body parts (human
>> clitorectomy) against their wishes allow declawing and having that be
>> one's argument isn't exactly convincing.
>
> Point well made, Kaeli, dear. :)
>
Yes it was but it still won't be comprehended by the intended audience.

--
Cheryl

"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough."
-Mario Andretti.

[Cheryl]

"bewtifulfreak" > wrote in
:

> "kaeli" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> The point was that most other *industrialized* nations with *similar*
>> norms and values as our own have seen fit to ban the procedure. Saying
>> that other nations where it is legal to cut off human body parts (human
>> clitorectomy) against their wishes allow declawing and having that be
>> one's argument isn't exactly convincing.
>
> Point well made, Kaeli, dear. :)
>
Yes it was but it still won't be comprehended by the intended audience.

--
Cheryl

"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough."
-Mario Andretti.

[-L.]

"bewtifulfreak" > wrote in message >...
> "Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
> ...
> > bewtifulfreak > wrote in
> > rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
> >
> > > Twenty different nations agreeing on the same thing seems like far
> > > more than "opinion" to me, and certainly argues against it being a
> > > matter of regional and cultural preference, unless we are to
> > > believe all twenty of those nations have the same regional and
> > > cultural bias, which seems highly unlikely. The only two
> > > countries that haven't banned it are much more likely to share a
> > > cultural and regional bias, that most likely being the bias of
> > > putting the love of money above all else.
> >
> > Only two? Which two are you talking about and which hundreds are you
> > not?
>
> Countries where declawing is banned/illegal:
>
> (as per veterinarian Dr. Christianne Schelling's site,
> http://www.declawing.com/ , as accessed through http://stopdeclaw.com )
>
> England
> Scotland
> Wales
> Italy
> France
> Germany
> Austria
> Switzerland
> Norway
> Sweden
> Netherlands
> Northern Ireland
> Ireland
> Denmark
> Finland
> Slovenia
> Portugal
> Belgium
> Spain
> Brazil
> Australia
> New Zealand
>
>
> Countries where it is not:
>
> U.S.
> Canada
>
>

Countries not listed most likely do not engage in the practice of
declawing, because those that are listed have public, published
policies, whether or not it is umbrellaed under the guise of animal
ownership. You cannot ban something or make a legal policy about it,
if it does not exist.

Furthermore, most localities in West Africa do not have laws
pertaining to animals. For those working against the primate trade
industry, it is very difficult to get African countries to abide by
international treaties against the trade in exotic species because
local laws do not exist, and many of the locals do not see the
international treaties as enforcable, especially when the exchange of
money is involved.

If they do not have local laws regarding exotic species, which are
worth tens of thousands of dollars a piece, they are unlikely to have
laws governing common household pets.

-L.

[-L.]

"bewtifulfreak" > wrote in message >...
> "Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
> ...
> > bewtifulfreak > wrote in
> > rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
> >
> > > Twenty different nations agreeing on the same thing seems like far
> > > more than "opinion" to me, and certainly argues against it being a
> > > matter of regional and cultural preference, unless we are to
> > > believe all twenty of those nations have the same regional and
> > > cultural bias, which seems highly unlikely. The only two
> > > countries that haven't banned it are much more likely to share a
> > > cultural and regional bias, that most likely being the bias of
> > > putting the love of money above all else.
> >
> > Only two? Which two are you talking about and which hundreds are you
> > not?
>
> Countries where declawing is banned/illegal:
>
> (as per veterinarian Dr. Christianne Schelling's site,
> http://www.declawing.com/ , as accessed through http://stopdeclaw.com )
>
> England
> Scotland
> Wales
> Italy
> France
> Germany
> Austria
> Switzerland
> Norway
> Sweden
> Netherlands
> Northern Ireland
> Ireland
> Denmark
> Finland
> Slovenia
> Portugal
> Belgium
> Spain
> Brazil
> Australia
> New Zealand
>
>
> Countries where it is not:
>
> U.S.
> Canada
>
>

Countries not listed most likely do not engage in the practice of
declawing, because those that are listed have public, published
policies, whether or not it is umbrellaed under the guise of animal
ownership. You cannot ban something or make a legal policy about it,
if it does not exist.

Furthermore, most localities in West Africa do not have laws
pertaining to animals. For those working against the primate trade
industry, it is very difficult to get African countries to abide by
international treaties against the trade in exotic species because
local laws do not exist, and many of the locals do not see the
international treaties as enforcable, especially when the exchange of
money is involved.

If they do not have local laws regarding exotic species, which are
worth tens of thousands of dollars a piece, they are unlikely to have
laws governing common household pets.

-L.

[Arjun Ray]

In >, kaeli
> wrote:

| Maybe, but I like to ask about quoting people. :)

Very thoughtful and considerate, cool.

| Thanks!

And my thanks to you if you emend the math error (i.e. 2.2 to 4.4) :-)

[Arjun Ray]

In >, kaeli
> wrote:

| Maybe, but I like to ask about quoting people. :)

Very thoughtful and considerate, cool.

| Thanks!

And my thanks to you if you emend the math error (i.e. 2.2 to 4.4) :-)

[Brandy Alexandre]

kaeli > wrote in
rec.pets.cats.health+behav:

> I don't know that countries that don't view cats like pets so much
> as a possible alternative food source count in this argument...
>

You ignorant louts are disgusting. I was researching pet importation,
available of veterinary services in several countries for a web site I
put together, along with average living standards, not the 1950s
National Geographic you apparently read. When places like England and
Canada say Americans are poorly educated and nearly ignorant of the
world around them, I have to agree.

No, they do not eat cats in Nigeria, as you imply, just in case you
wanted to know. But some how I doubt you wanted to know because you're
too self-involved in your little obsessions.

--
BrandyÂ*Â*Alexandre®
http://www.swydm.com/?refer=BrandyAlx
Well, would you?

[Brandy Alexandre]

kaeli > wrote in
rec.pets.cats.health+behav:

> I don't know that countries that don't view cats like pets so much
> as a possible alternative food source count in this argument...
>

You ignorant louts are disgusting. I was researching pet importation,
available of veterinary services in several countries for a web site I
put together, along with average living standards, not the 1950s
National Geographic you apparently read. When places like England and
Canada say Americans are poorly educated and nearly ignorant of the
world around them, I have to agree.

No, they do not eat cats in Nigeria, as you imply, just in case you
wanted to know. But some how I doubt you wanted to know because you're
too self-involved in your little obsessions.

--
BrandyÂ*Â*Alexandre®
http://www.swydm.com/?refer=BrandyAlx
Well, would you?

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/12/03 9:02 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> Unverifiable? It's perfectly verifiable throught the World Small
>> Animal Veterinary Association. The Survey authors and date are
>> included. Getting a little desparate aren't you?
>>
>> Karen
>>
>
> Never heard of them. Who are they, what is the education of those
> involved in it. Who funds them?

Look it up.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/12/03 9:02 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> Unverifiable? It's perfectly verifiable throught the World Small
>> Animal Veterinary Association. The Survey authors and date are
>> included. Getting a little desparate aren't you?
>>
>> Karen
>>
>
> Never heard of them. Who are they, what is the education of those
> involved in it. Who funds them?

Look it up.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/12/03 9:00 PM:

> kaeli > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> I don't know that countries that don't view cats like pets so much
>> as a possible alternative food source count in this argument...
>>
>
> You ignorant louts are disgusting.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!



>I was researching pet importation,
> available of veterinary services in several countries for a web site I
> put together, along with average living standards, not the 1950s
> National Geographic you apparently read. When places like England and
> Canada say Americans are poorly educated and nearly ignorant of the
> world around them, I have to agree.
>
> No, they do not eat cats in Nigeria, as you imply, just in case you
> wanted to know. But some how I doubt you wanted to know because you're
> too self-involved in your little obsessions.

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/12/03 9:00 PM:

> kaeli > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> I don't know that countries that don't view cats like pets so much
>> as a possible alternative food source count in this argument...
>>
>
> You ignorant louts are disgusting.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!



>I was researching pet importation,
> available of veterinary services in several countries for a web site I
> put together, along with average living standards, not the 1950s
> National Geographic you apparently read. When places like England and
> Canada say Americans are poorly educated and nearly ignorant of the
> world around them, I have to agree.
>
> No, they do not eat cats in Nigeria, as you imply, just in case you
> wanted to know. But some how I doubt you wanted to know because you're
> too self-involved in your little obsessions.

[-L.]

Arjun Ray > wrote in message >...
> In >, "BrandyÂ*Alexandre"
> Â*> wrote:
>
> | Cite your source.
>
> You first, O Brandywhine.
>
> | You're famous for making that request and getting bent out of shape
> | when people don't answer you, so set an example.
>
> Wow.
>
> Pot. Kettle. Black.

Um, who is she frothing about now?

-L.

[-L.]

Arjun Ray > wrote in message >...
> In >, "BrandyÂ*Alexandre"
> Â*> wrote:
>
> | Cite your source.
>
> You first, O Brandywhine.
>
> | You're famous for making that request and getting bent out of shape
> | when people don't answer you, so set an example.
>
> Wow.
>
> Pot. Kettle. Black.

Um, who is she frothing about now?

-L.

[bewtifulfreak]

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
...

> I'm not the one desperate to make a point. You are the ones trumpeting
> about declawing and behaving like idiots. I don't care if you get your
> message out there or not, but just trying to tell you that you cannot
> influence people with 4th grade behavior.

"Get a room," is not 4th grade behavior? Name-calling is not 4th grade
behavior? If anyone has been immature in this, it's you; I've been very
level-handed about presenting facts to support my beliefs, and not stooping
to the nastiness you have. And you are the one who is always on about
getting points across, not me....obviously, you think mutilating a cat is
fine, and I don't expect to convince you otherwise. But when you make
stupid claims or insults trying to divert from the subject, I'm going to
mention it. This is a discussion group, and we were having a discussion on
the subject of declawing, at least until you changed the subject because you
realized you had no basis to support your point of view. If we are
trumpeting, it is because we care about animals, and hate to see ignorant
people harming them for their own convenience. But I've wasted enough of my
time interacting with the likes of you already. Clearly, you have nothing
more to say to defend your weak point of view, and I've said my piece, so
really there is nothing more to be said.

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[bewtifulfreak]

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
...

> I'm not the one desperate to make a point. You are the ones trumpeting
> about declawing and behaving like idiots. I don't care if you get your
> message out there or not, but just trying to tell you that you cannot
> influence people with 4th grade behavior.

"Get a room," is not 4th grade behavior? Name-calling is not 4th grade
behavior? If anyone has been immature in this, it's you; I've been very
level-handed about presenting facts to support my beliefs, and not stooping
to the nastiness you have. And you are the one who is always on about
getting points across, not me....obviously, you think mutilating a cat is
fine, and I don't expect to convince you otherwise. But when you make
stupid claims or insults trying to divert from the subject, I'm going to
mention it. This is a discussion group, and we were having a discussion on
the subject of declawing, at least until you changed the subject because you
realized you had no basis to support your point of view. If we are
trumpeting, it is because we care about animals, and hate to see ignorant
people harming them for their own convenience. But I've wasted enough of my
time interacting with the likes of you already. Clearly, you have nothing
more to say to defend your weak point of view, and I've said my piece, so
really there is nothing more to be said.

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[bewtifulfreak]

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
...

> Obviously your didn't like being confronting with your racism and
> nationalistic biases. I learned all I needed to about you and your
> beliefs from your attack on the list of countries I posted. It's
> disgusting. You're a bigot. That's not name-calling; that's a fact.
> It's ugly and I'm ashamed to be American if you represent us.

Brandy, you're just talking sh*t. What I didn't like was you twisting the
facts and making things up, nor defending a cruel and senseless practice
against innocent animals. I did not attack any countries you posted, and I
am nowhere *near* a bigot; I have friends in all different countries, of
varying races, creeds, and sexual preferences. So your calling me a bigot
and an ugly American is just plain name-calling, which you resorted to
merely because you couldn't find any valid argument to defend your bogus
point of view.

Oh, and by the way, the feeling is mutual; ignorant people like you make
*me* ashamed to be an American.

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[bewtifulfreak]

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
...

> Obviously your didn't like being confronting with your racism and
> nationalistic biases. I learned all I needed to about you and your
> beliefs from your attack on the list of countries I posted. It's
> disgusting. You're a bigot. That's not name-calling; that's a fact.
> It's ugly and I'm ashamed to be American if you represent us.

Brandy, you're just talking sh*t. What I didn't like was you twisting the
facts and making things up, nor defending a cruel and senseless practice
against innocent animals. I did not attack any countries you posted, and I
am nowhere *near* a bigot; I have friends in all different countries, of
varying races, creeds, and sexual preferences. So your calling me a bigot
and an ugly American is just plain name-calling, which you resorted to
merely because you couldn't find any valid argument to defend your bogus
point of view.

Oh, and by the way, the feeling is mutual; ignorant people like you make
*me* ashamed to be an American.

Ann

--

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak

[Mike]

> Which brings out the essence of the false dilemma above. On aggregate,
> the issue is not *finding* a home. It's *keeping* a home.
>

In your example, there are still 900 de-clawed cats who got a home.
900 spaces more in the shelter.
900 less needing killing because of no space.

The 100 de-clawed returns have a higher chance of getting re-adopted, as
they appeal to people who would get their cat de-clawed anyway as well as
everyone else. This doesn't of course take into account any possible
emotional or physical changes that got the cat returned in the first place.

Id rather risk a 9/10 chance of getting a home than a 100% chance id be put
to sleep because they didn't have any space for me.


Mike

[Mike]

> Which brings out the essence of the false dilemma above. On aggregate,
> the issue is not *finding* a home. It's *keeping* a home.
>

In your example, there are still 900 de-clawed cats who got a home.
900 spaces more in the shelter.
900 less needing killing because of no space.

The 100 de-clawed returns have a higher chance of getting re-adopted, as
they appeal to people who would get their cat de-clawed anyway as well as
everyone else. This doesn't of course take into account any possible
emotional or physical changes that got the cat returned in the first place.

Id rather risk a 9/10 chance of getting a home than a 100% chance id be put
to sleep because they didn't have any space for me.


Mike

[-L.]

"bewtifulfreak" > wrote in message >...
> "Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > Obviously your didn't like being confronting with your racism and
> > nationalistic biases. I learned all I needed to about you and your
> > beliefs from your attack on the list of countries I posted. It's
> > disgusting. You're a bigot. That's not name-calling; that's a fact.
> > It's ugly and I'm ashamed to be American if you represent us.
>
> Brandy, you're just talking sh*t. What I didn't like was you twisting the
> facts and making things up, nor defending a cruel and senseless practice
> against innocent animals. I did not attack any countries you posted, and I
> am nowhere *near* a bigot; I have friends in all different countries, of
> varying races, creeds, and sexual preferences. So your calling me a bigot
> and an ugly American is just plain name-calling, which you resorted to
> merely because you couldn't find any valid argument to defend your bogus
> point of view.
>
> Oh, and by the way, the feeling is mutual; ignorant people like you make
> *me* ashamed to be an American.

No doubt. Besides, she knows *nothing* about the countries she
posted, other than the fact that they aren't on the list of countries
wherein declaw law has been determined. She's just blowing hot air
out that over-reamed butthole of hers again.

-L.

[-L.]

"bewtifulfreak" > wrote in message >...
> "Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > Obviously your didn't like being confronting with your racism and
> > nationalistic biases. I learned all I needed to about you and your
> > beliefs from your attack on the list of countries I posted. It's
> > disgusting. You're a bigot. That's not name-calling; that's a fact.
> > It's ugly and I'm ashamed to be American if you represent us.
>
> Brandy, you're just talking sh*t. What I didn't like was you twisting the
> facts and making things up, nor defending a cruel and senseless practice
> against innocent animals. I did not attack any countries you posted, and I
> am nowhere *near* a bigot; I have friends in all different countries, of
> varying races, creeds, and sexual preferences. So your calling me a bigot
> and an ugly American is just plain name-calling, which you resorted to
> merely because you couldn't find any valid argument to defend your bogus
> point of view.
>
> Oh, and by the way, the feeling is mutual; ignorant people like you make
> *me* ashamed to be an American.

No doubt. Besides, she knows *nothing* about the countries she
posted, other than the fact that they aren't on the list of countries
wherein declaw law has been determined. She's just blowing hot air
out that over-reamed butthole of hers again.

-L.

[-L.]

"BrandyÂ*Alexandre" Â*> wrote in message >...
> kaeli > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> > I don't know that countries that don't view cats like pets so much
> > as a possible alternative food source count in this argument...
> >
>
> You ignorant louts are disgusting. I was researching pet importation,
> available of veterinary services in several countries for a web site I
> put together

read: Animal exploitation site.

-L.

[-L.]

"BrandyÂ*Alexandre" Â*> wrote in message >...
> kaeli > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> > I don't know that countries that don't view cats like pets so much
> > as a possible alternative food source count in this argument...
> >
>
> You ignorant louts are disgusting. I was researching pet importation,
> available of veterinary services in several countries for a web site I
> put together

read: Animal exploitation site.

-L.

[-L.]

wrote in message >...
> Is it me or does Brandy remind people of a certain three letter poster
> (who will remain nameless cause I heard rumorst hat if she hears her name
> she comes back) who used to troll this group a long time back? Would come
> around maybe twice a year and defend declawing and such.

She who shall not be named. AKA, the SUCUBUS.

Nah, not one and the same, but the MO is similar. Never any data.

-L.

[-L.]

wrote in message >...
> Is it me or does Brandy remind people of a certain three letter poster
> (who will remain nameless cause I heard rumorst hat if she hears her name
> she comes back) who used to troll this group a long time back? Would come
> around maybe twice a year and defend declawing and such.

She who shall not be named. AKA, the SUCUBUS.

Nah, not one and the same, but the MO is similar. Never any data.

-L.

[-L.]

Cheryl > wrote in message >...
> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> :
>
> > How many industrialized nations are there in the world
> >> anyway? Twenty of them have banned declawing. Half of them admit
> >> there's still an underground for it and the results have been similar
> >> to the banning of abortion--disfigurement and death. If that's what
> >> you want to happen to cats, fine. I think you're cruel.
> >
> > We aren't talking abut ONE country but rather every country except the US
> > and Canada.
> >
>
> She's a goofy broad. I'd love to see the proof that some countries do
> declaw a la old-day-abortion-style. According to the people in these
> groups, not only is it barbaric, but some don't even know what it is. I
> don't buy it. I think the ones that don't read here or care about how to
> care for their cat (in other countries) have never considered removing
> parts of it.

Indoor-only cats is primarily an American thing. You'd be
hard-pressed to find any Brit, even, who keeps their cat indoors-only.
And obviously, indoor-only cats are the ones being declawed, not the
free-roamers.

-L.

[-L.]

Cheryl > wrote in message >...
> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> :
>
> > How many industrialized nations are there in the world
> >> anyway? Twenty of them have banned declawing. Half of them admit
> >> there's still an underground for it and the results have been similar
> >> to the banning of abortion--disfigurement and death. If that's what
> >> you want to happen to cats, fine. I think you're cruel.
> >
> > We aren't talking abut ONE country but rather every country except the US
> > and Canada.
> >
>
> She's a goofy broad. I'd love to see the proof that some countries do
> declaw a la old-day-abortion-style. According to the people in these
> groups, not only is it barbaric, but some don't even know what it is. I
> don't buy it. I think the ones that don't read here or care about how to
> care for their cat (in other countries) have never considered removing
> parts of it.

Indoor-only cats is primarily an American thing. You'd be
hard-pressed to find any Brit, even, who keeps their cat indoors-only.
And obviously, indoor-only cats are the ones being declawed, not the
free-roamers.

-L.

[Sherry]

>> You ignorant louts are disgusting. I was researching pet importation,
>> available of veterinary services in several countries for a web site I
>> put together
>
>read: Animal exploitation site.
>
>-L.

Exactly my thoughts.

Sherry

[Sherry]

>> You ignorant louts are disgusting. I was researching pet importation,
>> available of veterinary services in several countries for a web site I
>> put together
>
>read: Animal exploitation site.
>
>-L.

Exactly my thoughts.

Sherry

[kaeli]

In article >,
Â* enlightened us with...
>
> You ignorant louts are disgusting. I was researching pet importation,
> available of veterinary services in several countries for a web site I
> put together, along with average living standards, not the 1950s
> National Geographic you apparently read. When places like England and
> Canada say Americans are poorly educated and nearly ignorant of the
> world around them, I have to agree.
>
> No, they do not eat cats in Nigeria, as you imply, just in case you
> wanted to know. But some how I doubt you wanted to know because you're
> too self-involved in your little obsessions.
>
>

Responding with insults is just ever so convincing.
How would you know they don't eat cats in Nigeria? Do you know whether
they eat cats in any of the other multitudes of countries you listed? Of
course you don't, and neither do I.

Trying to make a point with you is like trying to tell something to a
wall.

Never mind. YOU are the one who has no understanding at all of culture
and its impact. Trying to explain that was a waste of my time. I'm done.

-------------------------------------------------
~kaeli~
The secret of the universe is @*&^^^ NO CARRIER
The more ridiculous a belief system, the higher
the probability of its success.
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
-------------------------------------------------

[kaeli]

In article >,
Â* enlightened us with...
>
> You ignorant louts are disgusting. I was researching pet importation,
> available of veterinary services in several countries for a web site I
> put together, along with average living standards, not the 1950s
> National Geographic you apparently read. When places like England and
> Canada say Americans are poorly educated and nearly ignorant of the
> world around them, I have to agree.
>
> No, they do not eat cats in Nigeria, as you imply, just in case you
> wanted to know. But some how I doubt you wanted to know because you're
> too self-involved in your little obsessions.
>
>

Responding with insults is just ever so convincing.
How would you know they don't eat cats in Nigeria? Do you know whether
they eat cats in any of the other multitudes of countries you listed? Of
course you don't, and neither do I.

Trying to make a point with you is like trying to tell something to a
wall.

Never mind. YOU are the one who has no understanding at all of culture
and its impact. Trying to explain that was a waste of my time. I'm done.

-------------------------------------------------
~kaeli~
The secret of the universe is @*&^^^ NO CARRIER
The more ridiculous a belief system, the higher
the probability of its success.
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
-------------------------------------------------

[kaeli]

In article >,
enlightened us with...
> In >, kaeli
> > wrote:
>
> | Maybe, but I like to ask about quoting people. :)
>
> Very thoughtful and considerate, cool.
>
> | Thanks!
>
> And my thanks to you if you emend the math error (i.e. 2.2 to 4.4) :-)
>

LOL
You got it. :)

--
-------------------------------------------------
~kaeli~
The secret of the universe is @*&^^^ NO CARRIER
The more ridiculous a belief system, the higher
the probability of its success.
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
-------------------------------------------------

[kaeli]

In article >,
enlightened us with...
> In >, kaeli
> > wrote:
>
> | Maybe, but I like to ask about quoting people. :)
>
> Very thoughtful and considerate, cool.
>
> | Thanks!
>
> And my thanks to you if you emend the math error (i.e. 2.2 to 4.4) :-)
>

LOL
You got it. :)

--
-------------------------------------------------
~kaeli~
The secret of the universe is @*&^^^ NO CARRIER
The more ridiculous a belief system, the higher
the probability of its success.
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
-------------------------------------------------

[Relish]

Brandy Alexandre wrote:
> bewtifulfreak > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>
>>"Get a room," is not 4th grade behavior? Name-calling is not 4th
>>grade behavior? If anyone has been immature in this, it's you;
>>I've been very level-handed about presenting facts to support my
>>beliefs, and not stooping to the nastiness you have. And you are
>>the one who is always on about getting points across, not
>>me....obviously, you think mutilating a cat is fine, and I don't
>>expect to convince you otherwise. But when you make stupid claims
>>or insults trying to divert from the subject, I'm going to mention
>>it. This is a discussion group, and we were having a discussion
>>on the subject of declawing, at least until you changed the
>>subject because you realized you had no basis to support your
>>point of view. If we are trumpeting, it is because we care about
>>animals, and hate to see ignorant people harming them for their
>>own convenience. But I've wasted enough of my time interacting
>>with the likes of you already. Clearly, you have nothing more to
>>say to defend your weak point of view, and I've said my piece, so
>>really there is nothing more to be said.
>>
>>Ann
>>
>
>
> Obviously your didn't like being confronting with your racism and
> nationalistic biases. I learned all I needed to about you and your
> beliefs from your attack on the list of countries I posted. It's
> disgusting. You're a bigot. That's not name-calling; that's a fact.
> It's ugly and I'm ashamed to be American if you represent us.
>

Ans the sanctimonious award goes to...

[Relish]

Brandy Alexandre wrote:
> bewtifulfreak > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>
>>"Get a room," is not 4th grade behavior? Name-calling is not 4th
>>grade behavior? If anyone has been immature in this, it's you;
>>I've been very level-handed about presenting facts to support my
>>beliefs, and not stooping to the nastiness you have. And you are
>>the one who is always on about getting points across, not
>>me....obviously, you think mutilating a cat is fine, and I don't
>>expect to convince you otherwise. But when you make stupid claims
>>or insults trying to divert from the subject, I'm going to mention
>>it. This is a discussion group, and we were having a discussion
>>on the subject of declawing, at least until you changed the
>>subject because you realized you had no basis to support your
>>point of view. If we are trumpeting, it is because we care about
>>animals, and hate to see ignorant people harming them for their
>>own convenience. But I've wasted enough of my time interacting
>>with the likes of you already. Clearly, you have nothing more to
>>say to defend your weak point of view, and I've said my piece, so
>>really there is nothing more to be said.
>>
>>Ann
>>
>
>
> Obviously your didn't like being confronting with your racism and
> nationalistic biases. I learned all I needed to about you and your
> beliefs from your attack on the list of countries I posted. It's
> disgusting. You're a bigot. That's not name-calling; that's a fact.
> It's ugly and I'm ashamed to be American if you represent us.
>

Ans the sanctimonious award goes to...

[Sherry]

>> Obviously your didn't like being confronting with your racism and
>> nationalistic biases. I learned all I needed to about you and your
>> beliefs from your attack on the list of countries I posted. It's
>> disgusting. You're a bigot. That's not name-calling; that's a fact.
>> It's ugly and I'm ashamed to be American if you represent us.

A video prostitute is ashamed to be American because someone said some
non-industrialized countries are poor and probably don't throw their money away
declawing cats. I've heard it all. A case of selective scruples.

Sherry

[Sherry]

>> Obviously your didn't like being confronting with your racism and
>> nationalistic biases. I learned all I needed to about you and your
>> beliefs from your attack on the list of countries I posted. It's
>> disgusting. You're a bigot. That's not name-calling; that's a fact.
>> It's ugly and I'm ashamed to be American if you represent us.

A video prostitute is ashamed to be American because someone said some
non-industrialized countries are poor and probably don't throw their money away
declawing cats. I've heard it all. A case of selective scruples.

Sherry

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/13/03 8:31 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> The point is there is *no* reassurance that it would stop the cat
>> from eventually being turned over to a shelter. That's teh
>> "excuse" given by vets. It is a fallacy.
>>
>>
>
> Where do you get that info?

If you would actually read the posts you might find out.

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/13/03 8:31 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> The point is there is *no* reassurance that it would stop the cat
>> from eventually being turned over to a shelter. That's teh
>> "excuse" given by vets. It is a fallacy.
>>
>>
>
> Where do you get that info?

If you would actually read the posts you might find out.

[Relish]

wrote:
> Brandy wrote:
>
>
>>Karen Chuplis >
>>wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>
>>>The point is there is *no* reassurance
>>>that it would stop the cat from eventually
>>>being turned over to a shelter. That's the
>>>"excuse" given by vets. It is a fallacy.
>>
>
>>Where do you get that info?
>
>
> Real life:
>
> http://www.southjerseynews.com/issues/february/m020103h.htm
>
> http://www.listnow.com/helpingpaws/articles/article_175.html

Thanks for posting these but don't expect her to do anything but come
up with some lame reason why they are invalid for her. Facts are not
welcome nor understood by delusional people.

[Relish]

wrote:
> Brandy wrote:
>
>
>>Karen Chuplis >
>>wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>
>>>The point is there is *no* reassurance
>>>that it would stop the cat from eventually
>>>being turned over to a shelter. That's the
>>>"excuse" given by vets. It is a fallacy.
>>
>
>>Where do you get that info?
>
>
> Real life:
>
> http://www.southjerseynews.com/issues/february/m020103h.htm
>
> http://www.listnow.com/helpingpaws/articles/article_175.html

Thanks for posting these but don't expect her to do anything but come
up with some lame reason why they are invalid for her. Facts are not
welcome nor understood by delusional people.

[[email protected]]

Brandy wrote:

>Plus, everyone seems to try to deflect
>the argument every single time I bring up
>the point that the problems existed
>BEFORE declawing that it was thought
>declawing would help with.

Such as?

First off, only a clueless vet with ZERO knowledge of cat behavior would
recommend declawing as a solution for *any* behavior problem.

Second, the main behavior problems that are reported in declawed cats
and ultimately result in their being surrendered are litterbox
avoidance, increased biting/aggression, and anti-social behavior. A vet
that would recommend declawing as a solution to any of these particular
problems should be relieved of his license to practice.


Megan



"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing."

-Edmund Burke

Learn The TRUTH About Declawing
http://www.stopdeclaw.com

Zuzu's Cats Photo Album:
http://www.PictureTrail.com/zuzu22

"Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation), there is one
elementary truth the ignorance of which kills countless ideas and
splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then
providence moves too. A whole stream of events issues from the decision,
raising in one's favor all manner of unforeseen incidents, meetings and
material assistance, which no man could have dreamt would have come his
way."

- W.H. Murray

[[email protected]]

Brandy wrote:

>Plus, everyone seems to try to deflect
>the argument every single time I bring up
>the point that the problems existed
>BEFORE declawing that it was thought
>declawing would help with.

Such as?

First off, only a clueless vet with ZERO knowledge of cat behavior would
recommend declawing as a solution for *any* behavior problem.

Second, the main behavior problems that are reported in declawed cats
and ultimately result in their being surrendered are litterbox
avoidance, increased biting/aggression, and anti-social behavior. A vet
that would recommend declawing as a solution to any of these particular
problems should be relieved of his license to practice.


Megan



"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing."

-Edmund Burke

Learn The TRUTH About Declawing
http://www.stopdeclaw.com

Zuzu's Cats Photo Album:
http://www.PictureTrail.com/zuzu22

"Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation), there is one
elementary truth the ignorance of which kills countless ideas and
splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then
providence moves too. A whole stream of events issues from the decision,
raising in one's favor all manner of unforeseen incidents, meetings and
material assistance, which no man could have dreamt would have come his
way."

- W.H. Murray

[PawsForThought]

>From:

>
>Real life:
>
>http://www.southjerseynews.com/issues/february/m020103h.htm

This is great. I wish all shelters had this policy. I only wish the article
had actually told what declawing is since so many people think it's just
removing the claw and not an amputation of the last digit.

Lauren
________
See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe
Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html
http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html
Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm

[PawsForThought]

>From:

>
>Real life:
>
>http://www.southjerseynews.com/issues/february/m020103h.htm

This is great. I wish all shelters had this policy. I only wish the article
had actually told what declawing is since so many people think it's just
removing the claw and not an amputation of the last digit.

Lauren
________
See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe
Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html
http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html
Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm

[PawsForThought]

>From: "Kalyahna"

>I've had a lot of luck with my fosters, Brandy, but there IS enough evidence
>out there to show that declawing CAN have a great many negative
>after-effects. Not every declawed cat will become a biter, or start
>urinating inappropriately, or have complications, but the numbers are high
>enough in the various articles and publications that have been posted from
>very reliable sources to make it clear that a lot of declawed cats DO have
>these after-effects.

Here is one example. Please read this:

http://hometown.aol.com/gcan746texas/index.html

Lauren
________
See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe
Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html
http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html
Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm

[PawsForThought]

>From: "Kalyahna"

>I've had a lot of luck with my fosters, Brandy, but there IS enough evidence
>out there to show that declawing CAN have a great many negative
>after-effects. Not every declawed cat will become a biter, or start
>urinating inappropriately, or have complications, but the numbers are high
>enough in the various articles and publications that have been posted from
>very reliable sources to make it clear that a lot of declawed cats DO have
>these after-effects.

Here is one example. Please read this:

http://hometown.aol.com/gcan746texas/index.html

Lauren
________
See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe
Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html
http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html
Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm

[kaeli]

In article >,
Â* enlightened us with...
> kaeli > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> > Never mind. YOU are the one who has no understanding at all of
> > culture and its impact. Trying to explain that was a waste of my
> > time. I'm done.
> >
>
> You were done back when you tried to put words in my mouth and then
> attack me with them to sell an idea. That's stupid, you were called on
> it, you can keep trying if you like, but I agree it's best that you sit
> down now.
>
>

If it makes you feel better to think it, dear, by all means.

*sigh*

-------------------------------------------------
~kaeli~
Why do people who know the least know it the loudest?
If that cell phone was up your a$$, maybe you could
drive a little better!
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
-------------------------------------------------

[kaeli]

In article >,
Â* enlightened us with...
> kaeli > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> > Never mind. YOU are the one who has no understanding at all of
> > culture and its impact. Trying to explain that was a waste of my
> > time. I'm done.
> >
>
> You were done back when you tried to put words in my mouth and then
> attack me with them to sell an idea. That's stupid, you were called on
> it, you can keep trying if you like, but I agree it's best that you sit
> down now.
>
>

If it makes you feel better to think it, dear, by all means.

*sigh*

-------------------------------------------------
~kaeli~
Why do people who know the least know it the loudest?
If that cell phone was up your a$$, maybe you could
drive a little better!
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
-------------------------------------------------

[[email protected]]

Brandy wrote:

>Plus, everyone seems to try to deflect
>the argument every single time I bring up
>the point that the problems existed
>BEFORE declawing that it was thought
>declawing would help with.

Any vet that considers declawing an appropriate treatment for a behavior
problem is an idiot with ZERO knowledge of cat behavior.

The main behavior issues that arise in declawed cats and ultimately
result in their being surrendered are litterbox avoidance, increased
biting/aggression and anti-social behavior. None of these issues could
even be remotely considered to be curable by declawing. Any vet that
would recommend it for these problems should lose his license to
practice.

Megan



"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing."

-Edmund Burke

Learn The TRUTH About Declawing
http://www.stopdeclaw.com

Zuzu's Cats Photo Album:
http://www.PictureTrail.com/zuzu22

"Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation), there is one
elementary truth the ignorance of which kills countless ideas and
splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then
providence moves too. A whole stream of events issues from the decision,
raising in one's favor all manner of unforeseen incidents, meetings and
material assistance, which no man could have dreamt would have come his
way."

- W.H. Murray

[[email protected]]

Brandy wrote:

>Plus, everyone seems to try to deflect
>the argument every single time I bring up
>the point that the problems existed
>BEFORE declawing that it was thought
>declawing would help with.

Any vet that considers declawing an appropriate treatment for a behavior
problem is an idiot with ZERO knowledge of cat behavior.

The main behavior issues that arise in declawed cats and ultimately
result in their being surrendered are litterbox avoidance, increased
biting/aggression and anti-social behavior. None of these issues could
even be remotely considered to be curable by declawing. Any vet that
would recommend it for these problems should lose his license to
practice.

Megan



"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing."

-Edmund Burke

Learn The TRUTH About Declawing
http://www.stopdeclaw.com

Zuzu's Cats Photo Album:
http://www.PictureTrail.com/zuzu22

"Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation), there is one
elementary truth the ignorance of which kills countless ideas and
splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then
providence moves too. A whole stream of events issues from the decision,
raising in one's favor all manner of unforeseen incidents, meetings and
material assistance, which no man could have dreamt would have come his
way."

- W.H. Murray

[kaeli]

In article >,
enlightened us with...
>
> Personally, I hate declawing and don't think it should be done for no
> valid reason, but I agree with the above. Sometimes it's necessary. See
> here for a valid reason to declaw. With this cat, it was a choice
> between declawing him or getting rid of him:
>
> http://www-personal.umich.edu/~bleys/Dyson1yScrtch.jpg
>
> It was not his first offense, but it was the one that nearly did some
> serious damage.
>
> What would *you* do????
>

Well, if my dog nipped my kid, I wouldn't remove her teeth, I can tell
you that. I would wonder what piece of anatomy my child grabbed to
deserve it. And I wouldn't remove my dog's nails if she accidentally
scratched my kid while playing.

Cats don't scratch for no reason at all. They are even less likely to
harm your child than your dog. But we don't remove a dog's nails and
teeth to protect our kids.

Supervise kids and pets ALWAYS.
Trim kitty's nails for less damage.
SoftPaws if necessary.

Very last resort: rehome to a home with no children.

Declawing is not a viable solution. Whole countries do just fine with
cats and kids without the need for it. Why would we need to?

-------------------------------------------------
~kaeli~
Why do people who know the least know it the loudest?
If that cell phone was up your a$$, maybe you could
drive a little better!
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
-------------------------------------------------

[kaeli]

In article >,
enlightened us with...
>
> Personally, I hate declawing and don't think it should be done for no
> valid reason, but I agree with the above. Sometimes it's necessary. See
> here for a valid reason to declaw. With this cat, it was a choice
> between declawing him or getting rid of him:
>
> http://www-personal.umich.edu/~bleys/Dyson1yScrtch.jpg
>
> It was not his first offense, but it was the one that nearly did some
> serious damage.
>
> What would *you* do????
>

Well, if my dog nipped my kid, I wouldn't remove her teeth, I can tell
you that. I would wonder what piece of anatomy my child grabbed to
deserve it. And I wouldn't remove my dog's nails if she accidentally
scratched my kid while playing.

Cats don't scratch for no reason at all. They are even less likely to
harm your child than your dog. But we don't remove a dog's nails and
teeth to protect our kids.

Supervise kids and pets ALWAYS.
Trim kitty's nails for less damage.
SoftPaws if necessary.

Very last resort: rehome to a home with no children.

Declawing is not a viable solution. Whole countries do just fine with
cats and kids without the need for it. Why would we need to?

-------------------------------------------------
~kaeli~
Why do people who know the least know it the loudest?
If that cell phone was up your a$$, maybe you could
drive a little better!
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
-------------------------------------------------

[Sherry]

I would *bet* the baby did something to the cat. And under the
almost-unbelievable circumstances that the cat attacked the baby for no reason,
while under supervision, I'd re-home the cat to a home without children. There
is *no* excuse good enough to mutilate a cat's paws.

Sherry

[Sherry]

I would *bet* the baby did something to the cat. And under the
almost-unbelievable circumstances that the cat attacked the baby for no reason,
while under supervision, I'd re-home the cat to a home without children. There
is *no* excuse good enough to mutilate a cat's paws.

Sherry

[*~*SooZy*~*]

"Sherry " > wrote in message
...
> I would *bet* the baby did something to the cat. And under the
> almost-unbelievable circumstances that the cat attacked the baby for no
reason,
> while under supervision, I'd re-home the cat to a home without children.
There
> is *no* excuse good enough to mutilate a cat's paws.
>
> Sherry
yes I agree Sherry
small children are sometimes heavy handed they have to learn to stroke the
cats/dogs nicely, ok sometimes means a scratch or a nip but they soon learn
to be gentle towards animals.... as for babies keep them away from the poor
pets!

My 4 yr old know the cats have to be treated really nicely cos they too are
mummies babies

[*~*SooZy*~*]

"Sherry " > wrote in message
...
> I would *bet* the baby did something to the cat. And under the
> almost-unbelievable circumstances that the cat attacked the baby for no
reason,
> while under supervision, I'd re-home the cat to a home without children.
There
> is *no* excuse good enough to mutilate a cat's paws.
>
> Sherry
yes I agree Sherry
small children are sometimes heavy handed they have to learn to stroke the
cats/dogs nicely, ok sometimes means a scratch or a nip but they soon learn
to be gentle towards animals.... as for babies keep them away from the poor
pets!

My 4 yr old know the cats have to be treated really nicely cos they too are
mummies babies

[Kalyahna]

"Katra" > wrote in message
...
> Personally, I hate declawing and don't think it should be done for no
> valid reason, but I agree with the above. Sometimes it's necessary. See
> here for a valid reason to declaw. With this cat, it was a choice
> between declawing him or getting rid of him:
>
> http://www-personal.umich.edu/~bleys/Dyson1yScrtch.jpg
>
> It was not his first offense, but it was the one that nearly did some
> serious damage.
>
> What would *you* do????

I don't know about anyone else, but that looks awfully wide and blunt to be
cat claws. I get scratches like those at work all the time, and the ones
that look like those in the picture are from dogs, not cats. *shrugs* Just
doesn't look cat-like, to me. It's always possible that I'm wrong.

[Kalyahna]

"Katra" > wrote in message
...
> Personally, I hate declawing and don't think it should be done for no
> valid reason, but I agree with the above. Sometimes it's necessary. See
> here for a valid reason to declaw. With this cat, it was a choice
> between declawing him or getting rid of him:
>
> http://www-personal.umich.edu/~bleys/Dyson1yScrtch.jpg
>
> It was not his first offense, but it was the one that nearly did some
> serious damage.
>
> What would *you* do????

I don't know about anyone else, but that looks awfully wide and blunt to be
cat claws. I get scratches like those at work all the time, and the ones
that look like those in the picture are from dogs, not cats. *shrugs* Just
doesn't look cat-like, to me. It's always possible that I'm wrong.

[Kalyahna]

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
...
> Kalyahna > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> > I've had a lot of luck with my fosters, Brandy, but there IS
> > enough evidence out there to show that declawing CAN have a great
> > many negative after-effects. Not every declawed cat will become a
> > biter, or start urinating inappropriately, or have complications,
> > but the numbers are high enough in the various articles and
> > publications that have been posted from very reliable sources to
> > make it clear that a lot of declawed cats DO have these
> > after-effects.
> >
>
> Are you sure it has nothing to do with being booted out of a home and
> landed in a shelter? Please. Sounds like signs of emotional upset
> that would probably exist with or without declawing. Plus, everyone
> seems to try to deflect the argument every single time I bring up the
> point that the problems existed BEFORE declawing that it was thought
> declawing would help with. Unless you know these cats' histories from
> birth and honestly from day one until now, you cannot state positively
> that it's because of, not in spite of, being declawed.

Actually, if the person surrendering the animal mentions behavioral issues,
we have separate forms for them to fill out. Those forms are gone through to
look for anything we can give the owner to help them keep that animal and
solve the problem. We have the ages of the cat, how long the person's had
the cat, how old the cat was when it was declawed, when the problems
started, any changes in the animal's environment. We have access to all of
that. We can say, "Look. The cat was declawed a year ago. The cat started
[insert behavioral issue here] a year ago."

I've seen the profiles on the animals I'm talking about, so I CAN draw those
conclusions with close to absolute certainty. But it works both ways, here.
I've seen the profiles. I can draw the conclusions to as close to
"positively" as possible with the information we're given on surrender. How
many surrenders have you taken, Brandy? How many shelters have you worked at
where you've had access to privileged information? I know I'm not the most
experienced shelter-worker or cat behaviorist (working on it) that scrolls
through this group, but I'm sure as hell willing and able to say that I've
had declawed cats in the past, and from what I've learned in the present,
I'll never have one of my own suffer that again.

/End Rant.

-Kal

[Kalyahna]

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
...
> Kalyahna > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> > I've had a lot of luck with my fosters, Brandy, but there IS
> > enough evidence out there to show that declawing CAN have a great
> > many negative after-effects. Not every declawed cat will become a
> > biter, or start urinating inappropriately, or have complications,
> > but the numbers are high enough in the various articles and
> > publications that have been posted from very reliable sources to
> > make it clear that a lot of declawed cats DO have these
> > after-effects.
> >
>
> Are you sure it has nothing to do with being booted out of a home and
> landed in a shelter? Please. Sounds like signs of emotional upset
> that would probably exist with or without declawing. Plus, everyone
> seems to try to deflect the argument every single time I bring up the
> point that the problems existed BEFORE declawing that it was thought
> declawing would help with. Unless you know these cats' histories from
> birth and honestly from day one until now, you cannot state positively
> that it's because of, not in spite of, being declawed.

Actually, if the person surrendering the animal mentions behavioral issues,
we have separate forms for them to fill out. Those forms are gone through to
look for anything we can give the owner to help them keep that animal and
solve the problem. We have the ages of the cat, how long the person's had
the cat, how old the cat was when it was declawed, when the problems
started, any changes in the animal's environment. We have access to all of
that. We can say, "Look. The cat was declawed a year ago. The cat started
[insert behavioral issue here] a year ago."

I've seen the profiles on the animals I'm talking about, so I CAN draw those
conclusions with close to absolute certainty. But it works both ways, here.
I've seen the profiles. I can draw the conclusions to as close to
"positively" as possible with the information we're given on surrender. How
many surrenders have you taken, Brandy? How many shelters have you worked at
where you've had access to privileged information? I know I'm not the most
experienced shelter-worker or cat behaviorist (working on it) that scrolls
through this group, but I'm sure as hell willing and able to say that I've
had declawed cats in the past, and from what I've learned in the present,
I'll never have one of my own suffer that again.

/End Rant.

-Kal

[-L.]

wrote in message >...
> Brandy wrote:
>
> >Plus, everyone seems to try to deflect
> >the argument every single time I bring up
> >the point that the problems existed
> >BEFORE declawing that it was thought
> >declawing would help with.
>
> Such as?
>
> First off, only a clueless vet with ZERO knowledge of cat behavior would
> recommend declawing as a solution for *any* behavior problem.

Hell, Karleen self-reported her own behaviors that created the
problems - she allowed biting behavior when the cat was a kitten and
then continued to inappropriately stimulate the cat and incessantly
squirt the cat with a water bottle. Then she wonders why the
behaviors don't cease. Geez!

Not to mention the fact that DECLAWING was the last thing this cat
needed.

-L.

[-L.]

wrote in message >...
> Brandy wrote:
>
> >Plus, everyone seems to try to deflect
> >the argument every single time I bring up
> >the point that the problems existed
> >BEFORE declawing that it was thought
> >declawing would help with.
>
> Such as?
>
> First off, only a clueless vet with ZERO knowledge of cat behavior would
> recommend declawing as a solution for *any* behavior problem.

Hell, Karleen self-reported her own behaviors that created the
problems - she allowed biting behavior when the cat was a kitten and
then continued to inappropriately stimulate the cat and incessantly
squirt the cat with a water bottle. Then she wonders why the
behaviors don't cease. Geez!

Not to mention the fact that DECLAWING was the last thing this cat
needed.

-L.

[[email protected]]

Brandy wrote:

>Dish it out but can't take it. Typical.

OK, people. I am really beginning to believe that Brandy has some sort
of mental illness. She's now created a sock in the form of

and is talking to herself. This is apparently something she seems to do
with regularity. What a sad, pathetic life she must lead that she feels
the need to spend her time trolling newsgroups, defending her abuse of
her cat, and creating a sock to talk to because she doesn't have a
single friend here.
I think she also has a lot of self hatred, and it's a damn shame that
she uses her precious time here on earth being bitter and spreading
lies. I would admire her getting away from her former life if she had
gone on to improve and really work at making a positive difference, but
it seems that instead she is on a descent into madness. There's nothing
worse than a wasted life.

Megan



"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing."

-Edmund Burke

Learn The TRUTH About Declawing
http://www.stopdeclaw.com

Zuzu's Cats Photo Album:
http://www.PictureTrail.com/zuzu22

"Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation), there is one
elementary truth the ignorance of which kills countless ideas and
splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then
providence moves too. A whole stream of events issues from the decision,
raising in one's favor all manner of unforeseen incidents, meetings and
material assistance, which no man could have dreamt would have come his
way."

- W.H. Murray

[[email protected]]

Brandy wrote:

>Dish it out but can't take it. Typical.

OK, people. I am really beginning to believe that Brandy has some sort
of mental illness. She's now created a sock in the form of

and is talking to herself. This is apparently something she seems to do
with regularity. What a sad, pathetic life she must lead that she feels
the need to spend her time trolling newsgroups, defending her abuse of
her cat, and creating a sock to talk to because she doesn't have a
single friend here.
I think she also has a lot of self hatred, and it's a damn shame that
she uses her precious time here on earth being bitter and spreading
lies. I would admire her getting away from her former life if she had
gone on to improve and really work at making a positive difference, but
it seems that instead she is on a descent into madness. There's nothing
worse than a wasted life.

Megan



"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing."

-Edmund Burke

Learn The TRUTH About Declawing
http://www.stopdeclaw.com

Zuzu's Cats Photo Album:
http://www.PictureTrail.com/zuzu22

"Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation), there is one
elementary truth the ignorance of which kills countless ideas and
splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then
providence moves too. A whole stream of events issues from the decision,
raising in one's favor all manner of unforeseen incidents, meetings and
material assistance, which no man could have dreamt would have come his
way."

- W.H. Murray

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/14/03 11:25 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> Now you can't even come up with your own rejoinders.
>>
>> Karen
>>
>
> Dish it out but can't take it. Typical.

Oh, honey, I can take it. What I can't take is people who are too lazy to
train their cats and too dishonest to own up to their mistakes.

Karen

[Karen Chuplis]

in article , BrandyÂ*Alexandre at
? wrote on 8/14/03 11:25 PM:

> Karen Chuplis > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
>> Now you can't even come up with your own rejoinders.
>>
>> Karen
>>
>
> Dish it out but can't take it. Typical.

Oh, honey, I can take it. What I can't take is people who are too lazy to
train their cats and too dishonest to own up to their mistakes.

Karen

[*~*SooZy*~*]

"Kalyahna" > wrote in message
...
> "Katra" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Personally, I hate declawing and don't think it should be done for no
> > valid reason, but I agree with the above. Sometimes it's necessary. See
> > here for a valid reason to declaw. With this cat, it was a choice
> > between declawing him or getting rid of him:
> >
> > http://www-personal.umich.edu/~bleys/Dyson1yScrtch.jpg
> >
> > It was not his first offense, but it was the one that nearly did some
> > serious damage.
> >
> > What would *you* do????
>
> I don't know about anyone else, but that looks awfully wide and blunt to
be
> cat claws. I get scratches like those at work all the time, and the ones
> that look like those in the picture are from dogs, not cats. *shrugs* Just
> doesn't look cat-like, to me. It's always possible that I'm wrong.
>
>

yes just looked again... see what you mean, did the parent see the cat do
it?

[*~*SooZy*~*]

"Kalyahna" > wrote in message
...
> "Katra" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Personally, I hate declawing and don't think it should be done for no
> > valid reason, but I agree with the above. Sometimes it's necessary. See
> > here for a valid reason to declaw. With this cat, it was a choice
> > between declawing him or getting rid of him:
> >
> > http://www-personal.umich.edu/~bleys/Dyson1yScrtch.jpg
> >
> > It was not his first offense, but it was the one that nearly did some
> > serious damage.
> >
> > What would *you* do????
>
> I don't know about anyone else, but that looks awfully wide and blunt to
be
> cat claws. I get scratches like those at work all the time, and the ones
> that look like those in the picture are from dogs, not cats. *shrugs* Just
> doesn't look cat-like, to me. It's always possible that I'm wrong.
>
>

yes just looked again... see what you mean, did the parent see the cat do
it?

[J1Boss]

>From: "bewtifulfreak"

>And there is generally the option in a
>case like this of taking the cat to a no-kill shelter if it isn't compatible
>with your family life; they are out there.

And they take non-behavioral problem animals and turn away others, so some
other shelter can kill them. You really think they'd take a cat who was known
to be aggressive towards a human being (baby or not)?

>And if there isn't one near you,
>there are often cat lovers who will take in a problem cat rather than have
>it abandoned in a shelter.

Oh yeah - millions of people who want a cat who rips someone apart. Just like
the millions who want one who doesn't use the litter box, etc. That's why the
shelters are so void of cats - the cat lovers are taking them all in,
regardless of problem. Sounds the horns - no shelter needs to make room for
cats - there are plenty of homes ready to take them all in!



>I'm still not convinced they're aren't better ways of handling even a
>problem of this sort without resorting to amputation.
>
>Ann
>
>--
>
>http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

>From: "bewtifulfreak"


Janet Boss
Best Friends Dog Obedience
"Nice Manners for the Family Pet"
Voted "Best of Baltimore 2001" - Baltimore Magazine
www.bestfriendsdogobedience.com

[J1Boss]

>From: "bewtifulfreak"

>And there is generally the option in a
>case like this of taking the cat to a no-kill shelter if it isn't compatible
>with your family life; they are out there.

And they take non-behavioral problem animals and turn away others, so some
other shelter can kill them. You really think they'd take a cat who was known
to be aggressive towards a human being (baby or not)?

>And if there isn't one near you,
>there are often cat lovers who will take in a problem cat rather than have
>it abandoned in a shelter.

Oh yeah - millions of people who want a cat who rips someone apart. Just like
the millions who want one who doesn't use the litter box, etc. That's why the
shelters are so void of cats - the cat lovers are taking them all in,
regardless of problem. Sounds the horns - no shelter needs to make room for
cats - there are plenty of homes ready to take them all in!



>I'm still not convinced they're aren't better ways of handling even a
>problem of this sort without resorting to amputation.
>
>Ann
>
>--
>
>http://www.angelfire.com/ca/bewtifulfreak
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

>From: "bewtifulfreak"


Janet Boss
Best Friends Dog Obedience
"Nice Manners for the Family Pet"
Voted "Best of Baltimore 2001" - Baltimore Magazine
www.bestfriendsdogobedience.com