PETA is mad at Obama for swatting a fly

I'll bet Joe Biden is glad it wasn't him that got swatted.

That was just a sample of what he's gonna get if he doesn't watch out and keep his mouth shut.

 

Obama's going to have to let two turkeys live next Thanksgiving.

 

I find the more interesting angle to be how impressed with himself Obama was. "Oooh, you killed a fly, you dah man!"

 

Flies carry filth and disease; it is therefore legitimate to kill them. This is essentially how I distinguish what insects are and aren't worth killing. If it's detrimental to humans, like flies or mosquitos or wasps, it's a perfectly natural animal thing to kill them for self-preservation. Everything else in nature cares about protecting its own species. Why should humans be different?

This is my philosophy, in response to Obama.

I have no response for PETA, because they are, as always, laughable.

-sj loves kevin spacey

 

[image=http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q45/rlj_07/smeagol.jpg]
Smeagol wouldn't hurt a fly!

 

For once, I'm with PETA on this one. They made their statement because loads of people approached THEM for a statement. Their response is a politicatl gesture by sending him a bug catcher. This is the first time I've seen PETA have a sense of humour.

 

[image=http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q45/rlj_07/smeagol.jpg]
We could let her do it. She's always hungry for sweeter meats.

 

.....................................................................what

 

Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle...

 

Why, she wouldn't even harm a fly....

 

Deputy press secretary Josh Earnest said the White House has no comment on the matter.



The perfect response to something so asinine.

 

I meant the distinction in the value of its life. I thought that was clear in context.

 

I really want to comment on how much skill it must have took to do that, but I have the feeling you all expect that too much from me.

 

Well, yeah, at least with regards to animal life. I just don't think lack of intelligence, ugliness, or the minor inconvenience it causes should devalue it.

 

Are all the members of PETA five years old or something?

 

Eh, this might sound callous or whatever, but I think that since a dog is capable of returning affection, providing pleasure, and rendering service to humans in ways that are more valuable than anything that could be accomplished by a fly, I'd think there is a pretty obvious distinction in the value of their lives.

 

That, and vilify the fly.

 

That's not objective criteria. Humans have more sympathy for animals that were raised to be companions, are more like us, and resemble infants/fellow humans in some ways (hence "cuteness"). Obviously if I were forced to, I'd choose a dog's life over that of a fly. But I'm never going to be presented with such a situation. We as a society don't value the lives of individual dogs much more than flies, anyway, but that's beside the point.

I don't object to killing a mosquito that could be carrying malaria. I also don't object to the killing of animals for food. I do object to killing an animal for no good reason. I'm not "mad" about it (and neither is PETA if anyone actually bothers to read what they said) and it's not like I'm going to hold a funeral for the fly (5 pm Saturday if you want to attend).

 

It's objective that a dog can be trained to assist a blind person and a fly can't.

 

I agree with Guy.

 

There are plenty of dogs. We exterminate millions of them due to overpopulation. And only certain breeds are good guide dogs. Doesn't really raise the value of an individual unless it's in training or already trained to be a guide dog.

 

Bacteria and viruses aren't animals, you silly person! Neither are any other single-celled organisms.

Now, if Joe Biden tested a teleporter and a fly got in...