Not again: Video shows woman throwing puppies into a river

No, they don’t. Some people find it amusing to anthropomorphise animal actions and pretend that what they do by instinct is motivated by rational reflection and self-awareness of one’s own nature as human acts are. Sadly, some other people take these jokes seriously.

An animal can “learn” to do something which it is habitually rewarded for, or avoid somnething it is habitually punished for. A beaver can “build a beaver house”. All this is instinct. Man can train animals to do what he wants them to do, but the animals do not actually think about what they are doing.

What do you mean when you say animals do not have “the gift of reason?” I’m thinking you may be basing your claim on a philosophical system.

As are all claims made by anyone about anything. My “claims” are based on the natural law philosophical system which is enbraced byu the Catholic Church. Which philosophical system is your claim that animals can reason based on?

I agree what if killing an animal we should minimize its suffering. But if you have ever baited a fishhook with a worm, you have tortured it.

No, I said killing an animal “should only be done when necessary and should be done in the most humane way which is reasonably possible under the circumstances.” To efficiently catch a fish, it is often necessary to bait a hook with a live worm. There is a purpose to doing it, the fisherman is not poking holes in worms just for the fun of watching them bleed. Just as it is often necessary to drown puppies.

You ought to be infinitely more appalled at the murder of babies than at the apparently necessary putting down of puppies.

The supposed link between abortion and caring for animals has been brought up time and time again on this forum and it is getting old. Why do we assume the worst in people? I admit I do that myself sometimes but it does nothing to make me a better Christian.
When I first heard about this woman, my initial reaction in my thoughts was not a very charitable or moral one. However I still think anyone who does something like this needs help so that she does not turn around one day and do something similar to a child.

I and many other people I know have put down puppies, kittens, chicks or other unwanted young animals. I’m pretty certain none of us is mentally ill or a potential murderer. Why do you assume the worst in people? We don’t need your “help”.

:confused: I can see no logical reason why it would OFTEN (or ever) be NECESSARY to drown puppies. There’s this thing now, called spaying and neutering, that keeps an animal from having young that no one wants to take care of.

I agree that human life is more valuable than animal life, but some people act as if you can’t care about animals without that being detrimental to your care for unborn babies.

See my earlier post. The fact that spaying and neutering exist does not keep away the possibility that there will ever be any unwanted puppies in the world. For one thing most people in the world could not possibly afford veterinary services.

I agree that human life is more valuable than animal life,

Not just more valuable - infinitely more valuable. “You are worth more than many sparrows”.

but some people act as if you can’t care about animals without that being detrimental to your care for unborn babies.

Caring about animals is fine. But people who exhibit this over-the-top hysteria about a single act of cruelty to animals, or even about the necessary humane killing of animals, are almost invariably totally indifferent to, or even actively supportive of, killing human babies. They are the ones exhibiting the gross contradiction, so don’t complain about those who merely point out these people’s contradictory, hypocritical, and morally perverse behaviour.

You ought to be infinitely more appalled at the murder of babies than at the apparently necessary putting down of puppies.

How do you know I am not more appalled by the murder of babies? Presumptions again. But im not going to bother defending myself regarding that topic as this is not a thread about abortion. Murder is murder. I do not need a lesson on Catholicism from you, thank you very much.

I and many other people I know have put down puppies, kittens, chicks or other unwanted young animals. I’m pretty certain none of us is mentally ill or a potential murderer.

As have I, by humane euthanisation. Not because they were unwanted, but because they were in deep suffering. I did not call you or anyone else or myself a murderer.

Why do you assume the worst in people? We don’t need your “help”.

Why are you placing yourself in the category of people I said needed help, when I never did so myself? I mentioned people who abuse animals, who cause them needless pain.
I never said you do, please do not put words in my mouth. I like to think that as a Catholic you do not, but if i somehow had the knowledge that you do routinely partake in the abuse of animals, (abuse in the sense most people understand it) then I would respectfully urge you to seek help.

Well, in the U.S.A. and most of the western world, the idea that it “often” be “necessary” to drown puppies seems silly to me. Take them to a shelter where they will at least try to adopt them out before putting them down.

No, they don’t. Some people find it amusing to anthropomorphise animal actions and pretend that what they do by instinct is motivated by rational reflection and self-awareness of one’s own nature as human acts are. An animal can “learn” to do something which it is habitually rewarded for, or avoid somnething it is habitually punished for. A beaver can “build a beaver house”. All this is instinct. Man can train animals to do what he wants them to do, but the animals do not actually think about what they are doing.
[/quote]

Apparently, you have never obedience trained a dog. Animals very much do make decisions as to what stimuli they respond to and how they should do so… as do humans.

A beaver building a dam is instintual, its not something which is taught to them. I am not aware on the learning properties of beavers, but I don’t doubt that some humans have taught them to behave in ways they wouldn’t in nature.

ah… so its not a matter how long it takes an animal to die or how much it suffers… its simply a matter of expedience on the part of the human?

I made no such presumption. I merely said that you should be** infinitely** more appalled by the murder of babies.

But im not going to bother defending myself regarding that topic as this is not a thread about abortion. Murder is murder. I do not need a lesson on Catholicism from you, thank you very much.

Delighted to hear it.

As have I, by humane euthanisation.

There’s nothing in the video to suggest there was anything less than humane about the manner of putting down the puppies. The woman is obviously conscientiously trying to make them land right in the centre of a fast-flowing and apparently icy-cold river where they would die almost instantly with little or no suffering.

Not because they were unwanted, but because they were in deep suffering.

Why should that make a difference? If it’s wrong to put down a puppy, it’s wrong for whatever reason.

I did not call you or anyone else or myself a murderer.

You said

When I first heard about this woman, my initial reaction in my thoughts was not a very charitable or moral one. However I still think anyone who does something like this needs help so that she does not turn around one day and do something similar to a child.

Now I may have misunderstood you as saying that this woman is mentally ill and a potential murderer, but if you didn’t mean that, what else could you have possibly meant?

Why are you placing yourself in the category of people I said needed help, when I never did so myself?

Because I have done exactly what the woman in the video did.

I mentioned people who abuse animals, who cause them needless pain.
I never said you do, please do not put words in my mouth. I like to think that as a Catholic you do not, but if i somehow had the knowledge that you do routinely partake in the abuse of animals, (abuse in the sense most people understand it) then I would respectfully urge you to seek help.

If “most people” think that humanely putting down unwanted puppies is “abuse”, then “most people” need “help” to learn the difference. Nobody could be more opposed to the abuse of animals than I, so please cut out the patronising “respectful advice”.

Unless I missed the news that when Clinton sent US tropps to the Balkans in the 90s he annexed Bosnia, this utterly inconsequential incident did not take place in the USA (or even the EU). I imagine the Bosnians have enough weighty issues to deal with without pandering to the Anglo anthropomorphic idea of animal shelters.
And please don’t refer to selling dogs to new owners as “adopting them out”. Not only is this silly and absurd anthropomorphism, it is distressing and offensive to adoptees, adoptive parents, adoption agencies, and the many would-be adoptive parents who never get the chance to adopt because of the abortion holocaust.

That is extremely insulting nonsense. If an animal is hard to train, it is because its intelligence is low, not high, or because you’re not trauining it correctly. A dog can “learn” to behave as his owner wants him to because he will get rewarded for doing it and punished for not doing it. He never thinks or reasons as even a child does, that he will behave in a certain way because, he reasons, it’s the right thing to do.

A beaver building a dam is instintual, its not something which is taught to them. I am not aware on the learning properties of beavers, but I don’t doubt that some humans have taught them to behave in ways they wouldn’t in nature.

Exactly. Animals do what instinct or man tell them to do. They don’t think.

ah… so its not a matter how long it takes an animal to die or how much it suffers… its simply a matter of expedience on the part of the human?

Exactly again. Animals like the rest of the created world were given to man for man to make wise use of for the good of himself and other men. If it’s necessary to kill an animal to do this there is no moral issue, other than that the animals should not be caused to suffer unnecessarily. Not because animals have the “right” not to suffer; animals have no rights; but because to cause unnecessary suffering to an animal would be contrary to the dignity of the man who is causing it.

Really, many of the comments on this thread, mostly by professed Catholics, are quite dismaying. Try reading for example, “Cruelty to Animals”, newadvent.org/cathen/04542a.htm

I have read the posts on this thread and yours have struck me with dismay. You are a Christian living in the US and you talk of expedience in the drowning of puppies, kittens etc. All of creation is God’s, we are to be good stewards of God’s creation and we will have to answer to God one day. If we have to put down an animal it should be done in the most humane way possible. Since you own a computer and can use it you are obviously educated and not poor. Thus you should know better and have the means to make sure there are no “unnecessary” animals to get rid of and to use really humane means to end the suffering of any animal.

For a person to knowingly cause an animal to suffer is to diminish himself. We humans made in the image of God with the privilege of superior intellect should know and act better. So you believe that a creature of God has no right to be treated humanely and not suffer?

BTW I believe dogs have the intelligence of a 3 year old child. Most dogs behave better than 3 year old children.:slight_smile:

  1. People make such a big deal about animal “cruelty”
  2. Many of these same people and more besides insist on the identification of mankind as simply a particularly clever animal, but an animal all the same.
  3. It therefore follows that we shouldn’t kill fetuses because they are animals and that would be animal cruelty.

I believe Thomas Aquinas said it was wrong to give charity to animals, but at the same time it was wrong to be cruel to them because it could encourage cruelty toward people. However, I’m not sure what constitutes “charity” when it comes to animals. Perhaps it’s one of those “You know it when you see it” things.

Keep the discussion on the topic of the** video** of the woman throwing puppies into a river. This is not the subforum for discussing animal vs human rights, or whether or not animals have souls.

The woman in the video is stated to be in Bosnia. Not in the USA or EU. I doubt there are any animal shelters there; considering its recent history Bosnians have more important and pressing problems than what to do with unwanted puppies.

Please don’t refer to buying a puppy as “adopting”; it is distressing to adopted people (such as my wife) and a totally inappropriate term.

The woman in the video is not smiling and is apparently taking no pleasure in what she is doing, but gives the impression of someone doing an unpleasant but necessary task as efficiently as practicable. Note that she does not just toss the bucketful of pups in the river any old how (which might cause them a slow and painful death from exposure), but takes care and considerable exertion to individually place each pup into the centre and fastest flowing part of the icy cold river. No doubt this was the most humane and efficient way available to her of disposing of the puppies. There is absolutely nothing in the video to suggest that any cruelty is going on. The threats against this apparently innocent woman are the only thing here which are “despicable”.

The Church teaches that it is a sin to condemn another man for any sin without evidence that he in fact has committed that sin.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.