cat is a bully

Mary wrote:
"bigbadbarry" wrote in message
ups.com...


Catnipped wrote:
Violence is *NEVER* a solution to problems, but it's the first resort of
the
unintelligent or those who don't have other resources to bring to bear
in
solving a problem.

Would this include the way Phil has been acting in humping all my
posts?

This does not even follow, Barry.

Sure it does, he attacked me with as violent words he could find,
insults.

Phil is upset at what you are
recommending, and so am I. He genuinely cares about cats and
has seen the results of abuse. Phil has forgotten more than you
have time to learn about cats. You are dead wrong here, and
you ought to be person enough to admit it.

Ah, well so long as ya'll "genuinley" care about cats, then to hell
with how you treat people. I got news for you and Phil, I love cats as
much as I love myself. You can never treat any animal no better than
you treat yourself. Because we treat others out of our own resiviour of
self esteem. However a man views himself, this is really how he is. If
a man thinks he is a looser, he really is a looser.


Again, those we are trying to teach *always* learn by
example and *never* by the words coming out of our mouths (that are
contradicted by the actions we perform).

This is how I know you ain't reading what I am writing

I said: A swat is worthless where there is hypocrisy. Still haven't
figured that out uh? so since you don't understand we'll just burn the
whole ****ing thing, and then I don't have to feel intimidated.

This says the same ****ing thing your trying to quote to me. Your
preaching to the choir! Jesus! (This is also how I know this is over
your head)

All of your heads!, nobodies feeling Barry tonight.

It wouldn't matter if Phil understood me or not, he's just scared
someone is going to steal his fire. It's not just animals I understand,
it's people too.

Don't hand me that we love cats and you don't bullcrap, it's called
moral superiority, but it's front! I'm tellin ya.

Why does everybody love me? Cause Im an ignorant redneck backwood
inbred...

nah...preachers, deacons, old folk, young folk, curazy about Barry.

Black folk, chinese, well, if it's warm blooded and good can be done
for them...they love me. Everybody but this old club. hahahahaha

YO BARTENDER, FIX ME UP ONE OF THEM RUSTY NAILS, AND BRING MY WIFE A
GRASSHOPPER. I think I know where I am now.

My Lord. I can't get no intellectual stimulation up in here.


I tell ya the truth, I get frustated because I am not allowed to talk
freely. I have to dress down my meanings, continually explain myself,
Kelly has been the only one who is mature enough to give benefit, and
not force me to explain myself or re-explain myself.

If you think for one minute that I am a violent man, then you are
confusing backbone with the character you describe.

Catnipped wrote:

Barry, I am not accusing you of being an ogre, and I'm not accusing you of
being abusive. But I think that spanking, or any other type of hitting or
pain- (and especially fear-) inducing behavior is never a good thing. All
it teaches is fear. Avoiding behavior that results in being spanked is a
short-term solution. Teaching good behavior and positive social skills
lasts a lifetime and reaps its own rewards. I don't know about you, but I
don't want my children to behave well because they're afraid of what I'll do
to them, I want them to behave well because it results in good things
happening to them (as it does in real life - e.g. work hard = earn money and
promotions, socialize well (or "play nicely") = become popular and make
friends. If you don't steal because you're afraid of jail, then will you
steal if you think you won't get caught??? I want my children to know that
if they don't steal, even if they *KNOW* they won't get caught, it will make
them feel proud of themselves and feel good. *THAT'S* the difference in
teaching by good example / rewards versus teaching fear.

I like the stuff you write, I agree with you, you just don't agree
about that one part I believe in.

That last remark above, about stealing, it looks like your saying
someone who corrects a child by a spanking has children who will do
morally but only from fear of consequence, but, a thief can *not* spank
his child, and still have a thief for a son. Wether someone teaches
fear or not (as you put it), this has nothing to do with morals. I had
the hell beat out of me, and I had it coming. I really did. I am moral,
I do good not because I am afriad of Jail, but right is right. I serve
God, but this is out of love and respect for him, he is not a fire
escape.


Basically it's called behaviorism. Have you ever read any of B. F.
Skinner's research results? It's real and it's well documented.

No, I've never heard of this author. Thanks for the reccomendation.

Try this sometimes...

You know that since you were a baby you were "taught" (by the example of the
adults you loved and emulated) to smile when you felt good or happy. In
fact every time you felt good or were happy you smiled. That behavior
(smiling) got so closely associated with the feeling of wellness and
happiness that the behavior can *precede* the feeling and the association
still works.

The next time you feel sad or down, *FORCE* yourself to smile and keep
smiling for at least 5 or 10 minutes. You'll notice that despite whatever
is going on that has made you unhappy, at the end of that 15 minutes you
*will* feel happier. Just the physical act of contracting the muscles you
use when you smile will cause your brain to release endorphins that will
make you feel better.

That's what's behind the "reward" method of discipline. You make good
behavior so closely associated with rewards that just the act of good
behavior becomes its own reward.

By using the pain, or punishment method, all you're doing is teaching the
avoidance of pain
and the person you're teaching starts to associate pain
and fear with the person causing the pain and fear. I don't know about you,
but I *NEVER* want someone I love to associate me with pain and fear - not
*EVER*!


In a nutshell, see if I'm thinking right. I believe we agree on
everything except for the actual method of discipline. Incidently, I
have no children, no one in my care but Ruprecht and myself. I swatted
him 2wice. I broke him from electrical chord chewing. done. He never
did it again. It took me all of 2 seconds. and the other was when he
sliced my ear-lobe. I got him then, and it was never repeated. I doubt
CN, that he is fearful of me. He lays all over me in the bed, he's
recently taken to kneeding my legs for some reason. I have never seen
such a super sweet cat, but I think he could just as easily be a
nusiance if I treated him bad. I think cats are mostly a reflection of
how they themselves get treated. I am extremely patient with him. But
he don't chew no electrical chords no more.

I think people should seek a higher level of discipline than a
spanking. I do.
A higher level would require (which I wrote earlier) mutual respect,
genunine love, honesty, trust, and so forth, all them good things.
Patience, understanding, spending time with that child, sacrificing,
and by ALL means, setting the example. It is sooo much easier to expect
from someone else, what we ourselves are willing to live, (a
disciplinary, should not be a hypocite) children can spot a hypocrite a
mile away.

When the hypocrite spanks his child, that child associates pain and
fear with the giver of that pain. The hypocrite is building a time
bomb. I could go on....I could repeat your writings right here by
memory. I just think there are times when a swat says it all.

Anger/Love
Respect/Fear

Mary wrote:

Then they are even worse than the people who choose violence
against those who are smaller and dependent upon them due to
losing their temper. Much worse because it is intentional intimidation.
Such behavior is beneath good people. It is that simple.

The real meaning of that is the old fashioned meaning. It is not the
desire of the parent to do this. It is not thier desire. It is that
simple.

You suggest, that I suggest, they take delight in this. How dare you.

To make it more complicated than that is to simply keep mouthing
off belligerantly because you want to "win."

It takes two...woo woo woo

Do what you do if you have to. But please do not advocate
that others do things that hurt OR frighten the creatures that
depend upon them.

Im a monster.

"bigbadbarry" wrote in message
ups.com...


Mary wrote:

Then they are even worse than the people who choose violence
against those who are smaller and dependent upon them due to
losing their temper. Much worse because it is intentional intimidation.
Such behavior is beneath good people. It is that simple.

The real meaning of that is the old fashioned meaning. It is not the
desire of the parent to do this. It is not thier desire. It is that
simple.

You suggest, that I suggest, they take delight in this. How dare you.

To make it more complicated than that is to simply keep mouthing
off belligerantly because you want to "win."

It takes two...woo woo woo

Do what you do if you have to. But please do not advocate
that others do things that hurt OR frighten the creatures that
depend upon them.

Im a monster.


I am beginning to think you are stupid. Overcomplicating everything
does not equal intelligence.

On Fri 10 Jun 2005 10:46:13p, bigbadbarry wrote in
rec.pets.cats.health+behav
roups.com):



Catnipped wrote:

Barry, I am not accusing you of being an ogre, and I'm not
accusing you of being abusive. But I think that spanking, or
any other type of hitting or pain- (and especially fear-)
inducing behavior is never a good thing. All it teaches is
fear. Avoiding behavior that results in being spanked is a
short-term solution. Teaching good behavior and positive
social skills lasts a lifetime and reaps its own rewards. I
don't know about you, but I don't want my children to behave
well because they're afraid of what I'll do to them, I want
them to behave well because it results in good things happening
to them (as it does in real life - e.g. work hard = earn money
and promotions, socialize well (or "play nicely") = become
popular and make friends. If you don't steal because you're
afraid of jail, then will you steal if you think you won't get
caught??? I want my children to know that if they don't steal,
even if they *KNOW* they won't get caught, it will make them
feel proud of themselves and feel good. *THAT'S* the
difference in teaching by good example / rewards versus
teaching fear.

I like the stuff you write, I agree with you, you just don't
agree about that one part I believe in.

That last remark above, about stealing, it looks like your
saying someone who corrects a child by a spanking has children
who will do morally but only from fear of consequence, but, a
thief can *not* spank his child, and still have a thief for a
son. Wether someone teaches fear or not (as you put it), this
has nothing to do with morals. I had the hell beat out of me,
and I had it coming. I really did. I am moral, I do good not
because I am afriad of Jail, but right is right. I serve God,
but this is out of love and respect for him, he is not a fire
escape.


Basically it's called behaviorism. Have you ever read any of
B. F. Skinner's research results? It's real and it's well
documented.

No, I've never heard of this author. Thanks for the
reccomendation.

Try this sometimes...

You know that since you were a baby you were "taught" (by the
example of the adults you loved and emulated) to smile when you
felt good or happy. In fact every time you felt good or were
happy you smiled. That behavior (smiling) got so closely
associated with the feeling of wellness and happiness that the
behavior can *precede* the feeling and the association still
works.

The next time you feel sad or down, *FORCE* yourself to smile
and keep smiling for at least 5 or 10 minutes. You'll notice
that despite whatever is going on that has made you unhappy, at
the end of that 15 minutes you *will* feel happier. Just the
physical act of contracting the muscles you use when you smile
will cause your brain to release endorphins that will make you
feel better.

That's what's behind the "reward" method of discipline. You
make good behavior so closely associated with rewards that just
the act of good behavior becomes its own reward.

By using the pain, or punishment method, all you're doing is
teaching the avoidance of pain
and the person you're teaching starts to associate pain
and fear with the person causing the pain and fear. I don't
know about you, but I *NEVER* want someone I love to associate
me with pain and fear - not *EVER*!


In a nutshell, see if I'm thinking right. I believe we agree on
everything except for the actual method of discipline.
Incidently, I have no children, no one in my care but Ruprecht
and myself. I swatted him 2wice. I broke him from electrical
chord chewing. done. He never did it again. It took me all of 2
seconds. and the other was when he sliced my ear-lobe. I got him
then, and it was never repeated. I doubt CN, that he is fearful
of me. He lays all over me in the bed, he's recently taken to
kneeding my legs for some reason. I have never seen such a super
sweet cat, but I think he could just as easily be a nusiance if
I treated him bad. I think cats are mostly a reflection of how
they themselves get treated. I am extremely patient with him.
But he don't chew no electrical chords no more.

I think people should seek a higher level of discipline than a
spanking. I do.
A higher level would require (which I wrote earlier) mutual
respect, genunine love, honesty, trust, and so forth, all them
good things. Patience, understanding, spending time with that
child, sacrificing, and by ALL means, setting the example. It is
sooo much easier to expect from someone else, what we ourselves
are willing to live, (a disciplinary, should not be a hypocite)
children can spot a hypocrite a mile away.

When the hypocrite spanks his child, that child associates pain
and fear with the giver of that pain. The hypocrite is building
a time bomb. I could go on....I could repeat your writings right
here by memory. I just think there are times when a swat says it
all.

Anger/Love
Respect/Fear



Cats aren't human, and don't possess human emotions. Therefor,
human behavior that include punishments that are designed to
penetrate human emotion, or try to modify human behavior, do not
work on cats. It only succeeds in creating fear. Cats only react
positvely to positive reinforcement. Reward desired behavior with
pleasant memories for the cat. Anything negative is going to scar
their version of emotions.

--
Cheryl

"The clever cat eats cheese and breathes down rat holes with baited
breath."
- W.C. Fields

"bigbadbarry" wrote in message
oups.com...


Catnipped wrote:

Barry, I am not accusing you of being an ogre, and I'm not accusing you
of
being abusive. But I think that spanking, or any other type of hitting
or
pain- (and especially fear-) inducing behavior is never a good thing.
All
it teaches is fear. Avoiding behavior that results in being spanked is
a
short-term solution. Teaching good behavior and positive social skills
lasts a lifetime and reaps its own rewards. I don't know about you, but
I
don't want my children to behave well because they're afraid of what
I'll do
to them, I want them to behave well because it results in good things
happening to them (as it does in real life - e.g. work hard = earn money
and
promotions, socialize well (or "play nicely") = become popular and make
friends. If you don't steal because you're afraid of jail, then will
you
steal if you think you won't get caught??? I want my children to know
that
if they don't steal, even if they *KNOW* they won't get caught, it will
make
them feel proud of themselves and feel good. *THAT'S* the difference in
teaching by good example / rewards versus teaching fear.

I like the stuff you write, I agree with you, you just don't agree
about that one part I believe in.

That last remark above, about stealing, it looks like your saying
someone who corrects a child by a spanking has children who will do
morally but only from fear of consequence, but, a thief can *not* spank
his child, and still have a thief for a son. Wether someone teaches
fear or not (as you put it), this has nothing to do with morals. I had
the hell beat out of me, and I had it coming. I really did. I am moral,
I do good not because I am afriad of Jail, but right is right. I serve
God, but this is out of love and respect for him, he is not a fire
escape.

But Barry, how does causing pain create morality? And yes, the thief will
have a child who is a thief because that is what the child has been taught
by emulating his father? So if a thief will have a child who is a thief,
then won't a person who causes pain have a child who causes pain? And isn't
there enough pain in this life without us adding to it? What does causing
pain really teach? Avoidance of the behavior that results in that pain?
Yes, but again I'm saying it's better to run *toward* something than it is
to run away from something. You run towards the person who makes you feel
good (especially if they can make you feel good about yourself), you run
away from what or who hurts or frightens you.

Basically it's called behaviorism. Have you ever read any of B. F.
Skinner's research results? It's real and it's well documented.

No, I've never heard of this author. Thanks for the reccomendation.

B. F Skinner was a psychologist. Here's a quote from one of the web sites
about his work...

"B. F. Skinner's entire system is based on operant conditioning. The
organism is in the process of "operating" on the environment, which in
ordinary terms means it is bouncing around it world, doing what it does.
During this "operating," the organism encounters a special kind of stimulus,
called a reinforcing stimulus, or simply a reinforcer. This special
stimulus has the effect of increasing the operant -- that is, the behavior
occurring just before the reinforcer. This is operant conditioning: "the
behavior is followed by a consequence, and the nature of the consequence
modifies the organisms tendency to repeat the behavior in the future."

Imagine a rat in a cage. This is a special cage (called, in fact, a "Skinner
box") that has a bar or pedal on one wall that, when pressed, causes a
little mechanism to release a foot pellet into the cage. The rat is
bouncing around the cage, doing whatever it is rats do, when he accidentally
presses the bar and -- hey, presto! -- a food pellet falls into the cage!
The operant is the behavior just prior to the reinforcer, which is the food
pellet, of course. In no time at all, the rat is furiously peddling away at
the bar, hoarding his pile of pellets in the corner of the cage.

A behavior followed by a reinforcing stimulus results in an increased
probability of that behavior occurring in the future. "

Try this sometimes...

You know that since you were a baby you were "taught" (by the example of
the
adults you loved and emulated) to smile when you felt good or happy. In
fact every time you felt good or were happy you smiled. That behavior
(smiling) got so closely associated with the feeling of wellness and
happiness that the behavior can *precede* the feeling and the
association
still works.

The next time you feel sad or down, *FORCE* yourself to smile and keep
smiling for at least 5 or 10 minutes. You'll notice that despite
whatever
is going on that has made you unhappy, at the end of that 15 minutes you
*will* feel happier. Just the physical act of contracting the muscles
you
use when you smile will cause your brain to release endorphins that will
make you feel better.

That's what's behind the "reward" method of discipline. You make good
behavior so closely associated with rewards that just the act of good
behavior becomes its own reward.

By using the pain, or punishment method, all you're doing is teaching
the
avoidance of pain
and the person you're teaching starts to associate pain
and fear with the person causing the pain and fear. I don't know about
you,
but I *NEVER* want someone I love to associate me with pain and fear -
not
*EVER*!


In a nutshell, see if I'm thinking right. I believe we agree on
everything except for the actual method of discipline. Incidently, I
have no children, no one in my care but Ruprecht and myself. I swatted
him 2wice. I broke him from electrical chord chewing. done. He never
did it again. It took me all of 2 seconds. and the other was when he
sliced my ear-lobe. I got him then, and it was never repeated. I doubt
CN, that he is fearful of me. He lays all over me in the bed, he's
recently taken to kneeding my legs for some reason. I have never seen
such a super sweet cat, but I think he could just as easily be a
nusiance if I treated him bad. I think cats are mostly a reflection of
how they themselves get treated. I am extremely patient with him. But
he don't chew no electrical chords no more.

I never said that pain or punishment doesn't work, but I did say that it
only works as a short-term (or partial) solution. How do you know that
Ruprecht doesn't continue the behavior when you're not there. If he only
discontinues the behavior because he knows it will result in a slap from
you, what will keep him from doing it when you're not there.

I don't think that an animal, or a child, will turn away from a parent who
spanks them - and that makes it even more sad. In fact the absolute most
heart-breaking thing I ever saw was this... a mother and child was walking
out of WalMart and apparently the child had done something she wasn't
supposed to because the mother stopped and spanked her. In her pain and
tears the child turned towards her mother and held up her arms to be held
and comforted. I started to cry when I realized that the one person that
little girl had to console and comfort her was the one person who caused her
to need to be consoled and comforted. Who do you turn to when the person
who is meant to protect you from fear and pain is the person who causes you
fear and pain?

I think people should seek a higher level of discipline than a
spanking. I do.
A higher level would require (which I wrote earlier) mutual respect,
genunine love, honesty, trust, and so forth, all them good things.
Patience, understanding, spending time with that child, sacrificing,
and by ALL means, setting the example. It is sooo much easier to expect
from someone else, what we ourselves are willing to live, (a
disciplinary, should not be a hypocite) children can spot a hypocrite a
mile away.

Exactly. And a hypocrite is a person who tells a child to play nice and not
hit his sister and then hits the child for hitting his sister.

When the hypocrite spanks his child, that child associates pain and
fear with the giver of that pain. The hypocrite is building a time
bomb. I could go on....I could repeat your writings right here by
memory. I just think there are times when a swat says it all.

A swat says that you think violence is the answer to a problem.

Anger/Love

Love should be the reason to control your anger.

Respect/Fear

Fear is not the same as respect.

"Cheryl" wrote in message
...
On Fri 10 Jun 2005 10:46:13p, bigbadbarry wrote in
rec.pets.cats.health+behav
roups.com):



Catnipped wrote:

Barry, I am not accusing you of being an ogre, and I'm not
accusing you of being abusive. But I think that spanking, or
any other type of hitting or pain- (and especially fear-)
inducing behavior is never a good thing. All it teaches is
fear. Avoiding behavior that results in being spanked is a
short-term solution. Teaching good behavior and positive
social skills lasts a lifetime and reaps its own rewards. I
don't know about you, but I don't want my children to behave
well because they're afraid of what I'll do to them, I want
them to behave well because it results in good things happening
to them (as it does in real life - e.g. work hard = earn money
and promotions, socialize well (or "play nicely") = become
popular and make friends. If you don't steal because you're
afraid of jail, then will you steal if you think you won't get
caught??? I want my children to know that if they don't steal,
even if they *KNOW* they won't get caught, it will make them
feel proud of themselves and feel good. *THAT'S* the
difference in teaching by good example / rewards versus
teaching fear.

I like the stuff you write, I agree with you, you just don't
agree about that one part I believe in.

That last remark above, about stealing, it looks like your
saying someone who corrects a child by a spanking has children
who will do morally but only from fear of consequence, but, a
thief can *not* spank his child, and still have a thief for a
son. Wether someone teaches fear or not (as you put it), this
has nothing to do with morals. I had the hell beat out of me,
and I had it coming. I really did. I am moral, I do good not
because I am afriad of Jail, but right is right. I serve God,
but this is out of love and respect for him, he is not a fire
escape.


Basically it's called behaviorism. Have you ever read any of
B. F. Skinner's research results? It's real and it's well
documented.

No, I've never heard of this author. Thanks for the
reccomendation.

Try this sometimes...

You know that since you were a baby you were "taught" (by the
example of the adults you loved and emulated) to smile when you
felt good or happy. In fact every time you felt good or were
happy you smiled. That behavior (smiling) got so closely
associated with the feeling of wellness and happiness that the
behavior can *precede* the feeling and the association still
works.

The next time you feel sad or down, *FORCE* yourself to smile
and keep smiling for at least 5 or 10 minutes. You'll notice
that despite whatever is going on that has made you unhappy, at
the end of that 15 minutes you *will* feel happier. Just the
physical act of contracting the muscles you use when you smile
will cause your brain to release endorphins that will make you
feel better.

That's what's behind the "reward" method of discipline. You
make good behavior so closely associated with rewards that just
the act of good behavior becomes its own reward.

By using the pain, or punishment method, all you're doing is
teaching the avoidance of pain
and the person you're teaching starts to associate pain
and fear with the person causing the pain and fear. I don't
know about you, but I *NEVER* want someone I love to associate
me with pain and fear - not *EVER*!


In a nutshell, see if I'm thinking right. I believe we agree on
everything except for the actual method of discipline.
Incidently, I have no children, no one in my care but Ruprecht
and myself. I swatted him 2wice. I broke him from electrical
chord chewing. done. He never did it again. It took me all of 2
seconds. and the other was when he sliced my ear-lobe. I got him
then, and it was never repeated. I doubt CN, that he is fearful
of me. He lays all over me in the bed, he's recently taken to
kneeding my legs for some reason. I have never seen such a super
sweet cat, but I think he could just as easily be a nusiance if
I treated him bad. I think cats are mostly a reflection of how
they themselves get treated. I am extremely patient with him.
But he don't chew no electrical chords no more.

I think people should seek a higher level of discipline than a
spanking. I do.
A higher level would require (which I wrote earlier) mutual
respect, genunine love, honesty, trust, and so forth, all them
good things. Patience, understanding, spending time with that
child, sacrificing, and by ALL means, setting the example. It is
sooo much easier to expect from someone else, what we ourselves
are willing to live, (a disciplinary, should not be a hypocite)
children can spot a hypocrite a mile away.

When the hypocrite spanks his child, that child associates pain
and fear with the giver of that pain. The hypocrite is building
a time bomb. I could go on....I could repeat your writings right
here by memory. I just think there are times when a swat says it
all.

Anger/Love
Respect/Fear



Cats aren't human, and don't possess human emotions. Therefor,
human behavior that include punishments that are designed to
penetrate human emotion, or try to modify human behavior, do not
work on cats. It only succeeds in creating fear. Cats only react
positvely to positive reinforcement. Reward desired behavior with
pleasant memories for the cat. Anything negative is going to scar
their version of emotions.

Actually, the same holds true for humans. Just because we can rationalize
anger and violence doesn't mean it doesn't scar us just as badly.

--
Cheryl

"The clever cat eats cheese and breathes down rat holes with baited
breath."
- W.C. Fields

Mary wrote:
I am beginning to think you are stupid. Overcomplicating everything
does not equal intelligence.


lol

I am Mary.
a big hairy dumb man.
You should know this by now.
Seeing that we got no life! what would we have done without a cause
tonight.
eeeeeewwwwiee!

It's the wounded duck syndrome
Hep me hep me...fix my broken wing!

Where's Phillip when you need him.

I think I could stand little moral superiority.

I man how often is it you can slather yourself in rude comments, like
inbred or uh...uni-brow. I laughed to myself for days about that one.
All I could picture was burt and ernie. for some reason.

My heavens this cat won't leave me alone, he is so clingy. I need to
get him a girlfriend.

I'm sorry for using the f word on you. I feel really bad, I don't like
this.
I don't do violence Mary, I just think a swat can fix some things you
maybe do not agree. A swat is not on the other end of the violence
spectrum.

I am terrificly sorry for any body that has been abused. Husbands
slapping thier wives and children around, drunk parents cussing the
kids, emotional abuses, these things ought not be.

On Fri 10 Jun 2005 11:20:52p, Catnipped wrote in
rec.pets.cats.health+behav ):

Actually, the same holds true for humans. Just because we can
rationalize anger and violence doesn't mean it doesn't scar us
just as badly.

And, since this is a cat group, who gives a ****?

--
Cheryl

"The clever cat eats cheese and breathes down rat holes with baited
breath."
- W.C. Fields

"Cheryl" wrote in message
...
On Fri 10 Jun 2005 11:20:52p, Catnipped wrote in
rec.pets.cats.health+behav ):

Actually, the same holds true for humans. Just because we can
rationalize anger and violence doesn't mean it doesn't scar us
just as badly.

And, since this is a cat group, who gives a ****?

Me. And if a person is hit as a child they are more likely to abuse
animals, so advocating the abolishment of corporal punishment to humans is
also advocating for the better treatment of cats. Or does the logic of this
escape you???

--
Cheryl

"The clever cat eats cheese and breathes down rat holes with baited
breath."
- W.C. Fields