Where Do the Veep Candidates Stand on Animals?

page: 2
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 05:25 PM
link   
Wel, here is where the top of the ticket stands:




Barack Obama and animal rights

The candidate for the Democratic Party, Senator Barack Obama, has been praised for his answer to a woman who asked him "What about animal rights?" during Obama's town hall meeting outside Las Vegas a few months ago.

Obama replied that he cares about animal rights very much, "not only because I have a 9-year-old and 6-year-old who want a dog." He said that he sponsored a bill to prevent horse slaughter in the Illinois state Senate and that he has been repeatedly endorsed by the HSUS (Humane Society of the United States).

"I think how we treat our animals reflects how we treat each other," he added. "And it's very important that we have a president who is mindful of the cruelty that is perpetrated on animals."

Good, diplomatic, generic way to answer a specific question; maybe Time's headline for this story, "Obama Pledges Support for Animal Rights", was a bit over-optimistic.

Still, he is considered a strong candidate on animal rights issues. He has co-sponsored new legislation to stop horse slaughter and export of
horses for human consumption, to upgrade federal penalties for dogfighting and cockfighting, to ban possession of fighting dogs and being a spectator at
a dogfight. He also signed a letter requesting increased funds for enforcement of
the Animal Welfare Act, Humane Methods of Slaughter Act, and federal
animal fighting law. Sent letter to National Zoo expressing concern for
the care of Toni the elephant.

In his response to a questionnaire by the Humane Society Legislative Fund (which tries to pass animal protection laws at state and federal levels), Obama pledges support for nearly every animal protection bill currently pending in Congress, and says he will work with executive agencies such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture to make their policies more humane.

He believes that there is a link between cruelty to animals and violence in society: "I've repeatedly voted to increase penalties for animal cruelty and violence... In addition to being unacceptable in its own stead, violence towards animals is linked with violent behavior in general... Strong [animal cruelty] penalties are important and I support them... As president, I'd continue to make sure that we treat animal cruelty like the serious crime it is and address its connection to broader patterns of violence."

But... he has not yet co-sponsored important animal welfare bills, like the Pet Safety and Protection Act.

Besides, I do not see how Obama can reconcile the position that he professes on cruelty to animals and his support for the right to hunt wild game.

In April 2007 he said: "I don't hunt myself, but I respect hunters and sportsmen". And: "I'm a strong believer in the rights of hunters and sportsmen to have firearms".

Am I too cynical if I suspect a little insincerity in his proclaimed love for animals here?


John McCain and animal rights

His opponent, Republican Party's candidate Senator John McCain, is also strong on animal rights issues, uncharacteristically for a Republican candidate.

McCain co-sponsored new legislation to stop horse slaughter, backed a bill to stop the shipment of live birds between states for the only purpose of cockfighting, supported a bill to stop the killing of bears by ending trade in their gall bladders and other viscera and organs.

Senator McCain also took a position against the fur industry, by voting to eliminate a $2 million subsidy for the mink industry. And he voted against allowing drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, saving the thousands of animals who lived there.

He earned scores of up to 75 percent on the Humane Scorecard.

But... he voted in support of an amendment to the California Desert Protection Act allowing hunting for sport in the Mojave National Park, and apparently he is a supporter of hunting in general.



globalphilosophy.blogspot.com...




posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by schrodingers dog

All issues, no matter how small or great they are to any individual, deserve the respect of talking to the topic at hand.


Fair enough.

I agree.

I apologize for derailing your thread, although I still believe that if you are going to be discussing how candidates view animal life, it would have to include human life as well.

But I will respect your point of view and remove myself from the discussion.



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by skeptic1
 


I have the link to the Humane Scorecard in the OP. I believe McCain has a 25 not 75.
Maybe I'm reading it wrong.

Just to calm everybody down a bit, let me include this little observation from our nice friend Mr. Tolle. It addresses both animals (dogs in this case) and humans for Jamie.


To simply watch a dog without any kind of mental commentary, just tune in…there’s a link. Something else that’s very important for many people is they realize, consciously or unconsciously, that their dog is not judging them. For some people, it’s the only relationship that they have where there’s no fear and where they realize they are being accepted and not judged. For many people it’s the only relationship they have with another being. That’s a pity, because really they should have deep relationships with humans also, but that’s difficult because every human being has a mind and every human being judges and so people become afraid, they withdraw, they put up barriers. I believe that dogs are keeping millions of people sane who would otherwise become deeply neurotic in our alienated world. So, the dog keeps you in touch with Being—beyond mind—Being, the innermost core. You can look into the eyes of the dog and see that innermost core. There are teachings that say every being is a spark of the divine or God. You can see it sometimes more clearly [in dogs] than in a human being because the human being has the veil of mind, negative emotions, and ego, and plays a role. I believe that dogs fill a vital function in the collective consciousness of humanity. I would call them “the Guardians of Being.” They show us what we have lost and, once we realize that, they can help us in our shift into a deeper state of consciousness. Of course, we don’t want to be confined to only deep relationships with dogs, but they can teach us how to relate deeply to another being and then we can learn to relate deeply to humans also.


source



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 05:37 PM
link   
This is all I could find on Biden:




Scored 80% on Humane Society Scorecard on animal protection
The Humane Society 109th Congress Scorecard on animal protection issues scored Biden 80 out of 100, based on:
Biden co-sponsored the Horse Slaughter Prevention Act (S.1915): To bar slaughtering horses for human consumption. Bill had 34 co-sponsors.
Biden voted for the Horse Slaughter Amendment (9/20/2005): to stop export of horses for slaughter.
Biden co-sponsored the Animal Fighting Prohibition Act (S.382): To criminalize dogfighting & cockfighting. The bill had 51 cosponsors & passed unanimously on 4/28/2005.
Biden did not co-sponsor the Downed Animal Protection Act (S.1779): to ban "downed" (unable to walk to slaughter) cattle, pigs & sheep in human food. Bill had 26 cosponsors.
Biden signed the Funding Letter to the Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee: seeking funds for the Animal Welfare Act, Humane Methods of Slaughter Act, & federal animal fighting law. The letter was cosigned by 44 senators & sent on 5/25/2006.
Source: Humane Society 109th Congress Scorecard, www.fund.org Jan 31, 2007



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by skeptic1
 


I see what you are doing. You are referencing this:
Source: Humane Society 109th Congress Scorecard, www.fund.org Jan 31, 2007
The link in the OP is the 110th.



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 05:43 PM
link   
And, here is what I could find on Palin:


John McCain has just announced his choice for the Republican VP slot: Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, who is no friend to animals. In 2007, Palin announced a $150 bounty for wolves. Why? Because wolves prey on moose and caribou, two favorite targets for hunters in Alaska. So Palin instituted a program to encourage hunters to kill wolves so that there would be more moose and caribou for hunters to kill. A lawsuit by Defenders of Wildlife resulted in the Alaska Superior Court ruling that the state Department of Fish and Game did not have the authority to institute a bounty program. A state program to shoot wolves and bears from the air continues, and on August 26, 2008, Ballot Measure 2, which would have stopped the aerial gunning of predators, was defeated by state voters.

Palin is also a hunter and a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association.

In addition, Palin has sued the Bush administration to delist polar bears under the Endangered Species Act because the protection of polar bears interferes with drilling for oil and gas. Palin even penned an op-ed for the New York Times, explaining her scientific arguments against protecting polar bears. Isn't it funny how her op-ed doesn't mention drilling for oil?

Needless to say, from an animal rights standpoint, Sarah Palin would be a disastrous VP


animalrights.about.com...



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 05:45 PM
link   
Considering that wildlife is part of nature and humans are killing the planet... I would vote saving the wildlife over saving the humans.



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
No desperation.
All I said is that this issue matters to ME. Perhaps next time I should run it by you and Jamie?


Dude. I wasn't refering to you!



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 05:56 PM
link   
reply to post by SteveR
 


Sorry mate, everybody came at me all aggressive and such.


Do you want me to go back and change it?



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 06:02 PM
link   
reply to post by schrodingers dog
 




No, it's fine.



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 06:04 PM
link   
ROFL

Mayor Palin could come out and say "I believe Hitler was a great leader" and you conservative whack-os would all start wearing swastikas

I have to agree with the OP

I might be a bow hunter - but there's a big difference in being a responsible hunter who hunts with a semi-primitive weapon

and someone who takes a big elephant gun to go kill thumper

and i sure as hell don't wear fur (i think it just LOOKS dumb)

Palin appeals to the white old RNC men that already supported McCain. She's a sexual eye candy who "likes to watch football!!! OOO !!! OOO!!! OO!!! OOO!!!!"

I bet she likes to set on the couch in her underwear belching, farting, and scratching herself.

Maybe thats why she has 5 children?
So someone is always around to run and grab mommy another beer?

Seriously. She fits it.

She's the perfect example of selling out your own standards to try and win based on lies.

Way to go RNC supporters

you've outdone yourselves this time



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin

I bet she likes to set on the couch in her underwear belching, farting, and scratching herself.

Maybe thats why she has 5 children?
So someone is always around to run and grab mommy another beer?



I can tell you have a serious dis-respect for motherhood and women in general.



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 08:37 PM
link   
I find this trophy hunting thing (and the killing of wolves and bears) in this manner to be offensive and atrocious. The question everyone ought to ask is how would we judge the morality of a superior race that would hunt us for our hides and trophies? The GOP is basically completely odds with almost everything "decent" that I believe in and stand for. On that list would be such topics as protection of the environment, protection of wild animals, guns, big oil and corporations, torture, wars, stripping of the constitution, etc. etc. God, I can't believe I used to be a Republican!



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 08:52 PM
link   
reply to post by whatsup
 


So much of what you say is true.
But at least we have a say on what humans do to each other, though few seem to offer much resistance.
When it comes killing or hurting animals, especially wild ones, it just makes me sick to my stomach and ashamed of my humanity. Why anyone would get up in the morning and decide to snuff the life out of other living creatures I will never comprehend or tolerate near me.
We will have hardly anything to complain about if and when the spacemen come and hunt us down for sport. Earth can become like one of those sick hunting farms where they basically stand the deer in front of you to shoot. Human hunters first in.



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 09:03 PM
link   
I heard Palin was against putting Polar Bears on the endangered species list.

Maybe it's because Polar Bears are increasing in population?

newsbusters.org...


Inuit hunters make their own estimates of the polar bear population based on the number of animals they encounter on their travels. Taylor says scientists have ignored the anecdotal evidence of the Inuit, who say bear numbers were rising. Inuits also report more polar bears wandering into their towns and villages, where they are a threat to children.

"I'm pretty sure the numbers [of polar bears] are climbing," says Pitselak Pudlat, an Inuit hunter and manager of the Aiviq Hunters and Trappers Organization at Cape Dorset, Baffin Island. "During the winter there were polar bears coming into town." His community is north of the bear population studied by Taylor.


Polar Bears don't sound to be too endangered to me.

The same people who would like to see human population control, are likely the same ones who want to put a growing polar bear population on the endangered species list.

I would rather have a VP that would kill, eat, and stuff a polar bear, than one that would kill a human baby.



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by jamie83
 

The reason we have a lot of the species we have today is because of hunters. They were the first conservationists. And no I Do Not hunt but I have had my ear bent by a lot of conservationist hunters years ago before it was ever an issue. The terms are not mutually exclusive as most would believe.

Yes people killed off species in the USA - BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT PUT A BOUNTY ON THEM! Wildlife conservation was hijacked from hunters as a political issue only recently. (within my life time)



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by RRconservative
I heard Palin was against putting Polar Bears on the endangered species list.
Maybe it's because Polar Bears are increasing in population?
Polar Bears don't sound to be too endangered to me.


If your threshold for killing is that the victim has to already be at the brink of extinction then you are absolutely correct.


The same people who would like to see human population control, are likely the same ones who want to put a growing polar bear population on the endangered species list.


Really, who said that. No one one this thread.


I would rather have a VP that would kill, eat, and stuff a polar bear, than one that would kill a human baby.


If you took the time to read all 2 pages of this thread, you would have seen this issue brought up by Jamie. He himself was gracious enough to relent on this totally unrelated topic.




posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 09:52 PM
link   

I would rather have a VP that would kill, eat, and stuff a polar bear, than one that would kill a human baby.


So obama got himself a baby gun and he's going baby hunting?

Exactly how are you infering that Obama is going to be killing babies?


Desperation?

Your party reeks of it this year

[edit on 8/31/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 09:54 PM
link   
He's going on about abortion again trying to derail.
Even Jamie showed enough class to back out of this argument.


[edit on 8/31/2008 by schrodingers dog]



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 10:18 PM
link   
i'm a moderate. i like people, i like animals.
if i'm hungry, i may eat vegetables, fruits, grains, beans or cheese. i may eat meat.
i prefer fruits, grains and cheese to any other kind of food.
i don't wear fur. don't see the need for it, don't live in a cold climate or a state where wearing fur is part of the culture. i don't agree with killing animals if not necessary. i have diabetes so i need a certain amount of protein to keep ye olde pancreas stabilized. i think all these questions are best handled with common sense.

what does this have to do with palin? her state of origin and the common lifestyle there, is lending an additional layer of complexity to the topic. perhaps it's an issue of culture? eskimo culture and the lifestyle in alaska is seriously different in that regard.





new topics
top topics
 
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join