Minor disaster for our cats

On Wed, 15 Apr 2015 11:43:15 +0100, Jack Campin
wrote:

For example, we have laws about how animals should be killed for meat but
due to the some peoples' religions they are allowed to do it as they wish
and inflict suffering on the animals. I do believe that people should be
able to follow what religion they want but they should not be allowed to
inflict cruelty. I realise this may upset some people.

It's racist crap propagated by bigots who neither know nor want
to know how kosher and halal slaughter are done. This has been
a bugaboo exploited by neo-Nazis in the UK for most of my lifetime.
They don't care about animals, they just want to see Jews and Muslims
dead.

(I have worked in a Christian-style slaughterhouse and seen halal
slaughter extremely close up - I know what I'm talking about).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've always understood that religious slaughter was more humane than
the standard commercial slaughter houses but it's all pretty much
horrible. Killing and eating other creatures is pretty horrible no
matter how it's done but that's how I live. Luckily I have people who
do it for me so I don't have to see it, but I feel guilty about it.

I'd become a vegetarian if I liked vegetables.

On 4/15/2015 5:21 AM, dgk wrote:
On Wed, 15 Apr 2015 11:43:15 +0100, Jack Campin
wrote:

For example, we have laws about how animals should be killed for meat but
due to the some peoples' religions they are allowed to do it as they wish
and inflict suffering on the animals. I do believe that people should be
able to follow what religion they want but they should not be allowed to
inflict cruelty. I realise this may upset some people.

It's racist crap propagated by bigots who neither know nor want
to know how kosher and halal slaughter are done. This has been
a bugaboo exploited by neo-Nazis in the UK for most of my lifetime.
They don't care about animals, they just want to see Jews and Muslims
dead.

(I have worked in a Christian-style slaughterhouse and seen halal
slaughter extremely close up - I know what I'm talking about).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've always understood that religious slaughter was more humane than
the standard commercial slaughter houses but it's all pretty much
horrible. Killing and eating other creatures is pretty horrible no
matter how it's done but that's how I live. Luckily I have people who
do it for me so I don't have to see it, but I feel guilty about it.

I'd become a vegetarian if I liked vegetables.

I agree with your first paragraph completely. I do like most
vegetables, but I don't feel I've had a real dinner unless I've had some
kind of meat.

Joy

--
Joy Unlimited
Colorful Crocheted Critters
Photos at http://www.PictureTrail.com/joy9

Judith Latham wrote:

In article , Bastette
wrote:

In some places there are laws against having more than a certain number
of pets. In San Francisco, you can't have more than 4 pets per dwelling.
Doesn't matter whether you rent or own, and it has nothing to do with
what landlords want. It's a city law. Of course, something like that is
hard to enforce, and a lot of people have way more than 4 pets, and
nobody ever finds out.

That's horrible. I always thought that the USA was a country where there
was more freedom. I don't know if that law is to protect the animals or to
protect the neighbours, both are good motives but it does impede on
peoples' freedom.

I think it's about preventing hoarding situations as well as preventing
unsanitary and unhealthy houses and apartments. But 4 pets per household
does seem a bit draconian.

--
Joyce

Fluffy Mackerel Pudding - "Once upon a time, the world was young and the words 'mackerel' and 'pudding' existed far, far away from one another. One day, that all changed. And then, whoever was responsible somehow thought the word 'fluffy' would help." -- Hilarious recipes at: www.candyboots.com

On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 07:40:31 +0000 (UTC), Bastette
wrote:

Judith Latham wrote:

In article , Bastette
wrote:

In some places there are laws against having more than a certain number
of pets. In San Francisco, you can't have more than 4 pets per dwelling.
Doesn't matter whether you rent or own, and it has nothing to do with
what landlords want. It's a city law. Of course, something like that is
hard to enforce, and a lot of people have way more than 4 pets, and
nobody ever finds out.

That's horrible. I always thought that the USA was a country where there
was more freedom. I don't know if that law is to protect the animals or to
protect the neighbours, both are good motives but it does impede on
peoples' freedom.

I think it's about preventing hoarding situations as well as preventing
unsanitary and unhealthy houses and apartments. But 4 pets per household
does seem a bit draconian.

The rule used to be one pet per household. Then someone was elected to
the board and he had two dogs so the rule was changed to 2 pets. But
since cats are much lower maintenance than dogs, I'm pretty sure I can
get it raised for cats.

Some of the nearby retirement communities don't allow any pets and
lately they've been losing business to places like mine, so they're
thinking of changing the rules. Pets are good for older people. Dogs
force people to get out and walk, and cats just radiate sunshine.

On 4/17/2015 8:59 AM, dgk wrote:
Some of the nearby retirement communities don't allow any pets and
lately they've been losing business to places like mine, so they're
thinking of changing the rules. Pets are good for older people. Dogs
force people to get out and walk, and cats just radiate sunshine.

I like that phrase: "cats just radiate sunshine".

They also gravitate towards it. Persia was a sucker for a puddle of
sunshine.

Jill

On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 00:59:41 +0000 (UTC), Adrian
wrote:

Bastette wrote:
Judith Latham wrote:

In article , Bastette
wrote:

In some places there are laws against having more than a certain number
of pets. In San Francisco, you can't have more than 4 pets per dwelling.
Doesn't matter whether you rent or own, and it has nothing to do with
what landlords want. It's a city law. Of course, something like that is
hard to enforce, and a lot of people have way more than 4 pets, and
nobody ever finds out.

That's horrible. I always thought that the USA was a country where there
was more freedom. I don't know if that law is to protect the animals or to
protect the neighbours, both are good motives but it does impede on
peoples' freedom.

I think it's about preventing hoarding situations as well as preventing
unsanitary and unhealthy houses and apartments. But 4 pets per household
does seem a bit draconian.

I used to deliver televisions, a visit usually took about 20 minutes. One
of my deliveries was to a woman who had 23 cats, I was there nearly 3 hours
petting them all.

I know one who as 20 or so. It's always a disaster waiting to happen -
eventualy they lose the place and someone has to deal with a lot of
cats.