North Dakota Votes in Favor of Animal Cruelty
5 views
Skip to first unread message
Judy Reed, AnimalVoices
Nov 13, 2012, 12:03:23 AM11/13/12
to AnimalVoices, AnimalVoices Colorado AVC, AnimalVoices Friends Everywhere
AnimalVoicesNews&Alerts!
Note: If you are not an AnimalVoices subscriber (no Google tag at bottom), please drop me a note if you'd like to be removed.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~>
Source/Letters: <http://www.opposingviews.com/contact>
Link: <http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/animal-rights/north-dakota-votes-against-animals>
Animal Rights
North Dakota Votes in Favor of Animal Cruelty
By Animal Blawg, Mon, November 12, 2012 >>
http://www.opposingviews.com/users/animal-blawg
Seth Victor
In what must be a move of Dakotan solidarity, the people of North Dakota voted last week against Proposition 5, which would have made it a class C felony, punishable by incarceration, ³to maliciously and intentionally harm a living dog, cat or horse.²
There would have been the typical exceptions for veterinarians, hunters, scientists, and, of course, agriculture workers. This is a measure aimed at domestic pets, which would have enforced against instances akin to Michael Vick¹s dog torture.
Nevertheless, 65.4% of voters opted to have North Dakota remain with South Dakota as the only two states in the nation without animal cruelty felonies.
Interestingly, this comes in the same election when three states approved same-sex marriage, a measure in nearby Minnesota to outlaw same-sex marriage was voted down, and recreational marijuana was legalized in two states. Additionally, within North Dakota, voters opted to ban indoor smoking in the workplace by a 2-1 majority, but also voted 2-1 for a measure that bans any law that would abridge farmers and ranchers from employing their own industry practices. It seems that while we as a nation are in a piecemeal fashion expanding the liberties of our own species, animals are clearly still an ³other² that do not receive the same considerations.
The vote on the smoking measure in a state that is traditionally wary of government intervention shows that individuals do not have an absolute right to do what they want to the detriment of others, but efforts to extend that same logic to establish animals as something more than property remain trapped in our legal schizophrenia. I can grasp the reasoning behind the farmed animal vote; established industry, I expect, advertised, lobbied, and campaigned more effectively to keep the status quo. Why anyone in 2012 would want to keep torture to companion animals punishable only by a slap on the wrist, however, is beyond me.
Founded in 2007, OpposingViews.com is an independent media site that publishes original journalism on politics, social issues, religion, sports and entertainment. Our editorial staff presents breaking news, in-depth analysis and cutting-edge content around the clock. Based in Los Angeles, we currently reach 4 million users every month.
Entire site copyright 2008-2012, OpposingViews.com
~~~Free E-News-Clip & Alert Services:~~~>
This is distibuted for nonprofit research and educational purposes only.
[Ref.http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html]
AnimalVoicesNews&Alerts
OPT TO ADOPT! KEEP WILDLIFE IN THE WILD, Alive and Free
Note: If you are not an AnimalVoices subscriber (no Google tag at bottom), please drop me a note if you'd like to be removed.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~>
Source/Letters: <http://www.opposingviews.com/contact>
Link: <http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/animal-rights/north-dakota-votes-against-animals>
Animal Rights
North Dakota Votes in Favor of Animal Cruelty
By Animal Blawg, Mon, November 12, 2012 >>
http://www.opposingviews.com/users/animal-blawg
Seth Victor
In what must be a move of Dakotan solidarity, the people of North Dakota voted last week against Proposition 5, which would have made it a class C felony, punishable by incarceration, ³to maliciously and intentionally harm a living dog, cat or horse.²
There would have been the typical exceptions for veterinarians, hunters, scientists, and, of course, agriculture workers. This is a measure aimed at domestic pets, which would have enforced against instances akin to Michael Vick¹s dog torture.
Nevertheless, 65.4% of voters opted to have North Dakota remain with South Dakota as the only two states in the nation without animal cruelty felonies.
Interestingly, this comes in the same election when three states approved same-sex marriage, a measure in nearby Minnesota to outlaw same-sex marriage was voted down, and recreational marijuana was legalized in two states. Additionally, within North Dakota, voters opted to ban indoor smoking in the workplace by a 2-1 majority, but also voted 2-1 for a measure that bans any law that would abridge farmers and ranchers from employing their own industry practices. It seems that while we as a nation are in a piecemeal fashion expanding the liberties of our own species, animals are clearly still an ³other² that do not receive the same considerations.
The vote on the smoking measure in a state that is traditionally wary of government intervention shows that individuals do not have an absolute right to do what they want to the detriment of others, but efforts to extend that same logic to establish animals as something more than property remain trapped in our legal schizophrenia. I can grasp the reasoning behind the farmed animal vote; established industry, I expect, advertised, lobbied, and campaigned more effectively to keep the status quo. Why anyone in 2012 would want to keep torture to companion animals punishable only by a slap on the wrist, however, is beyond me.
Founded in 2007, OpposingViews.com is an independent media site that publishes original journalism on politics, social issues, religion, sports and entertainment. Our editorial staff presents breaking news, in-depth analysis and cutting-edge content around the clock. Based in Los Angeles, we currently reach 4 million users every month.
Entire site copyright 2008-2012, OpposingViews.com
~~~Free E-News-Clip & Alert Services:~~~>
This is distibuted for nonprofit research and educational purposes only.
[Ref.http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html]
AnimalVoicesNews&Alerts
Web address (read posts, subscribe):
<http://groups.google.com/group/AnimalVoicesNews-Alerts>
To unsubscribe, send email to
<AnimalVoicesNews-Alerts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages