• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

18-year old charged in Florida cat mutilations

jallman said:
Uh...because these pets belonged to other people and deserved consideration based on their worth to those families. I dunno, maybe that's it.
Click to expand...

Then if it's just a matter of property rights, why is there any more outrage here than in the case of other property damage?
 
Agnapostate said:
Then if it's just a matter of property rights, why is there any more outrage here than in the case of other property damage?
Click to expand...

I dunno, because we are a people of compassion and civility. At least most of us are.

And I don't really see outrage. I see concern that a young person has some serious emotional disturbances. I also see a newer concern cropping up that there seems to be a wish to mitigate his transgressions by comparing it to food consumption or some such nonsense.
 
Agnapostate said:
Then it seems that we should return back to the prior question of why there is not similar concern over painful slaughter of livestock and such animals.
Click to expand...

Because we eat them.

Cat fillet has never been on any menu I've ever seen, at least not the ones in English.
 
Agnapostate said:
Then it seems that we should return back to the prior question of why there is not similar concern over painful slaughter of livestock and such animals.
Click to expand...

There are regulations concerning the slaughter of livestock animals. There is no question concerning livestock animals that relates to the sadistic killing of all a neighborhood's pets by a boy.
 
jallman said:
There are regulations concerning the slaughter of livestock animals. There is no question concerning livestock animals that relates to the sadistic killing of all a neighborhood's pets by a boy.
Click to expand...

Of course there are. But there's a significant amount of pain and suffering inflicted on said livestock during the process of slaughter nonetheless.
 
Agnapostate said:
Of course there are. But there's a significant amount of pain and suffering inflicted on said livestock during the process of slaughter nonetheless.
Click to expand...

OK. That still has nothing to do with a disturbed young boy killing all the neighborhood's pets in a display of sadism and disregard for life.
 
jallman said:
OK. That still has nothing to do with a disturbed young boy killing all the neighborhood's pets in a display of sadism and disregard for life.
Click to expand...

No, but there is cause to question why there would be exceptional outrage in such an instance when none exists in the case of livestock or other such animals slaughtered for the purpose of consumption.
 
Agnapostate said:
No, but there is cause to question why there would be exceptional outrage in such an instance when none exists in the case of livestock or other such animals slaughtered for the purpose of consumption.
Click to expand...

No, there is no such cause except on a purely pseudo-intellectual level. It has nothing to do with this boy's emotional disturbances.
 
jallman said:
I have no interest in arguing the relationship between apples and hubcaps.
Click to expand...

On what specific ground do you argue there is no legitimate comparison? My reference is merely to other nonhuman animals that are at times capable of feeling greater pain and to suffering to a greater extent than cats are. Why is it not appropriate to compare them to cats? Therein lies the premise that you must defeat through argumentation.
 
Agnapostate said:
On what specific ground do you argue there is no legitimate comparison?
Click to expand...

That an industry and accepted establisment of both human ecology and society is not comparable to a singular act of barbarity by a disturbed child.

There was no purpose in this child's actions save to bring harm and to sate some unnatural desire. The same cannot be said of our diets.
 
Last edited:
Agnapostate said:
This is certainly an unpleasant spectacle, but why is the reality that other animals continue to be brutally slaughtered on a daily basis for the purpose of human consumption ignored if this is criticized? Such animals often possess sensory capacities similar to those of a cat, and thus an equivalent or greater capacity to suffer from their own imprisonments and eventual deaths. Do cats deserve some greater consideration because of their domestication and emotional partiality towards them on the part of humans? It seems far more ethically sound to make such determinations on the basis of the ability to suffer.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's darwinism at its finest.

If a cow could run and jump in the air to catch a frisbee, they might live longer.

If a chicken could kill a bird or a mouse and leave it on your door step as an offering of his loyalty, he might keep his head.

A pig can snuggle up with us at night, but not nearly as good as dog and cats can. Sorry, pig. Can't make a BLT without you.

I recommend pigs get themselves a spider that can spell if they want to live longer.
 
hazlnut said:
Yes, it's darwinism at its finest.

If a cow could run and jump in the air to catch a frisbee, they might live longer.

If a chicken could kill a bird or a mouse and leave it on your door step as an offering of his loyalty, he might keep his head.

A pig can snuggle up with us at night, but not nearly as good as dog and cats can. Sorry, pig. Can't make a BLT without you.

I recommend pigs get themselves a spider that can spell if they want to live longer.
Click to expand...

I think it is more about our social norms than it is about darwinism. I have owned cattle that I didn't want to see go.

The lack of empathy this young man felt toward an animal and his emotional distance from norms makes me immediately suspicious of some kind of sociopathy if not psychopathy.
 
jallman said:
I think it is more about our social norms than it is about darwinism. I have owned cattle that I didn't want to see go.

The lack of empathy this young man felt toward an animal and his emotional distance from norms makes me immediately suspicious of some kind of sociopathy if not psychopathy.
Click to expand...

If cat meat tasted like Kobe Beef -- It's darwin.;)

Yes, the kid has issues.
 
bub said:
How much will he get?

I hope as much as possible, what he did is not forgiveable.
Just think about the families...

What about a castration?
Click to expand...

In Florida, aminal crulety is a felony that can draw up to 10 years in prison per offense. So he is potentially facing a life sentence; however, I doubt it will go that far.
 
jallman said:
That an industry and accepted establisment of both human ecology and society is not comparable to a singular act of barbarity by a disturbed child.

There was no purpose in this child's actions save to bring harm and to sate some unnatural desire. The same cannot be said of our diets.
Click to expand...

So the brutal mutilation of cats would be acceptable to you if it were a widespread element of their preparation for human consumption? I do have to see that argumentum ad populum emerging again. ;)
 
hazlnut said:
Yes, it's darwinism at its finest.

If a cow could run and jump in the air to catch a frisbee, they might live longer.

If a chicken could kill a bird or a mouse and leave it on your door step as an offering of his loyalty, he might keep his head.

A pig can snuggle up with us at night, but not nearly as good as dog and cats can. Sorry, pig. Can't make a BLT without you.

I recommend pigs get themselves a spider that can spell if they want to live longer.
Click to expand...

Really? Then why keep mentally retarded humans alive? They seem relatively useless according to these criteria.
 
The torture of animals in the way that these cats were tortured is linked to sociopathy. It does not mean that one who does this will become a sociopath and/or a serial killer, but the link is there. Further, I would be interested in knowing whether this boy was sexually abused. I'd bet he was, since prior sexual abuse is often connected to animal torture/mutilation. At the very least, I'd imagine some sort of physical abuse may have occurred
 
A lot of pavlovian responses
 
Agnapostate said:
No, but there is cause to question why there would be exceptional outrage in such an instance when none exists in the case of livestock or other such animals slaughtered for the purpose of consumption.
Click to expand...

If these were his own cats, I'd see nothing wrong with it.

Conversely, if he did the same thing to other people's livestock, I'd have a problem.
 
Agnapostate said:
So the brutal mutilation of cats would be acceptable to you if it were a widespread element of their preparation for human consumption? I do have to see that argumentum ad populum emerging again. ;)
Click to expand...

No, you do not see argumentum ad populum emerging again. Your pseudo intellectual posturing blinds you.
 
Agnapostate said:
Then it seems that we should return back to the prior question of why there is not similar concern over painful slaughter of livestock and such animals.
Click to expand...

There is, among some, a legitimate concern over factory farms which is why many go out of their way and wallets to eat meat that lived a good life vs eating meat that was stressed, medicated, and lived a torturous existence prior to consumption.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom