« The WSJ Rips DeLay | Main | A Grenade in the Chicken Yard »
March 29, 2005
Successful Opposition to Animal Cruelty
I received this update from William Galbraith who alerted me to HB 1962 and HB 1963 last week.
Congratulations to all who helped to ignite the firestorm surrounding these terrible bills. We won!
According to the El Paso Times, Chente Quintanilla insists that
Critics misunderstood the bill...
The two-term El Paso Democrat says he merely wanted to give judges more discretion so that people did not end up in state jail for lesser infractions with the state's law against animal cruelty.
I don't buy his explanation, but I'm glad to that this bad legislation won't see the light of day.
Posted by Lyn Wall at March 29, 2005 11:56 AM | Permalink
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.houstondemocrats.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/76
Comments
Ah yes, animal cruelty ... a subject that has haunted me a bit lately. How is it that it is illegal -- inhumanly cruel -- to starve a dog or cat, but not Terry Schiavo? If capital punishment is wrong, how is it not wrong to kill an innocent, helpless woman who is so healthy that after 12 days without nutrition, she is still alive?
Posted by: Dale Napier at March 29, 2005 01:08 PM
It is simple. It is none of your (our) business.
Posted by: John Cobarruvias at March 29, 2005 03:36 PM
There is a world of difference between cockfighting and deliberate acts of animal cruelty and letting a woman with no cerebral cortex end her struggle.
Posted by: Lyn at March 29, 2005 03:52 PM
They're not "letting her end her struggle": they're ending her struggle for her, with no input from her. That's not to say it is the wrong move, except for one thing: they do not have her request, nor her permission.
Do you want the state to allow you to be killed without your permission? Do you assume that just because they are making the best decision in this case, they always will make the best decision, absent your say-so?
This specific case was none of our busines until the family made it a public spectacle -- now it is indeed our business. As Tom Delay knows, this matter can visit any family today -- a grandparent, a parent, a sibling, a spouse, a child. None are exempt. This can all be avoided with a living will. Short of that, it is a gross violation of a person's civil liberties to starve them to death.
Posted by: Dale Napier at March 29, 2005 04:13 PM