On Apr 17, 9:40 pm, "Bob Terwilliger" >
wrote:
> Bryan wrote:
> > You like dogs better than humans. Species traitor.
>
> The way you keep going on and on with that "species traitor" thing makes me
> wonder if you are trying to write a song about it, and hoping we all buy it.

I don't often try to write songs. I just do write songs.
Interestingly though, I did write a song called Traitor, but the verse
lyrics never flushed out. The chorus was/is:

Union busting rent-a-cop, well
You're a traitor to your class, and it'd
Serve you right if a fellow worker kicked
Yeah, kicked
Your freakin' ass

Considering that you've never really heard my work, your hostility to
it is based on your feelings toward me, not my songs, and I say, "me,"
as opposed to my Usenet persona because I really do tell the truth on
here about how I think. That's why I'm pretty certain that any
logician would never conclude that I have stated that I get pleasure
from the suffering of animals.
I care no more, no less about the suffering of a dog than about the
suffering of a factory farmed pig, and I bet that most of my critics
here eat factory farmed pork. I choose not to eat veal, and would
choose not to eat foie gras--but that's not a sacrifice because I
detest liver--because in those cases the abuse, in my opinion, crosses
an arbitrary line. IIRC, I have never condemned anyone for eating
veal. I may have explained why I'm squeamish about it.

I do, however, take pleasure in the pain of certain humans, such as
the negligent dog owners who fail to curb their dogs. There are dogs
that I like, gentle dogs that don't have it in them to harm a person.
Those who choose to own dogs that are not human child safe should be
punished if their foolish decision leads to a human child getting
hurt. I'm not against, for example, Om having a handgun, but if she
was so negligent as to let that gun cause harm to a child, she should
endure consequences. I do not give dogs a special dispensation. Dogs
that have potential for harming humans are dangerous weapons, just
like guns, and when the owner fails to exercise due diligence they
should have their right to own dogs taken away, just as habitual drunk
drivers are banned from driving, or child molesters are banned from
unsupervised contact with children, or violent felons are disallowed
the right to own firearms.

Dogs are wonderful as assitance animals for the disabled. Many breeds
make wonderful pets, and both human and dog are enhanced by that
relationship. People who keep potentially dangerous types of dogs are
not morally reprehensible, like those who breed and fight pit bulls,
but they are ignorant and selfish, and when that selfishness leads to
an attack against a human, I call it as I see it.

FURTHERMO
If my goal was to sell CDs, I sure as heck wouldn't post stuff that I
know alienates potential *customers*.
I offered mp3s for free. It's easy enough to pirate anyone's stuff.
The only thing that a person is required to pay for is an authorized
CD, which in this case comes with enhancments other than full quality
sound, which is pretty easy to get w/o paying for it. It's kind of
like the public radio model. If you like it enough, and can afford
it, you buy in and get the coffee mug or tote bag. If not, you listen
for free. We realize that, and aren't "hoping [you] all buy it." I'm
sleepy. Goodnight all.
>
> Bob