Sick

Posted by: Andee / Category: , ,


First, read this:

Still dazed after being anaesthetised for three hours, a pedigree pet is hauled upright to show off its new tattoo.

The controversial “body enhancement” was carried out on Mickey – a rare Canadian Hairless breed also known as a Sphynx cat.

His female owner was said to be delighted with the Tutankhamun design inked on to his chest at a tattoo parlour.

She said: “I wanted something new and different for the times we live in.”

But horrified animal rights campaigners last night slammed the sick fad in Moscow as barbaric – and fear it could catch on among wealthy pet owners in the West.

An RSPCA spokesman said: “We are totally against using animals for purely cosmetic reasons just on the owner’s whim. Clearly the animal has no say in the matter.

“We do not believe in using pets as fashion accessories. It shows no respect for the animal whatsoever. So far we have only heard about this practice happening overseas – and we hope it doesn’t spread.”

This really upset me.

Human beings can consent to getting a tattoo. They can officially say, "Yes, I want this permanent piece of art on my body for the rest of my life." They can say, "It's worth the pain and discomfort because this is something I want to use to express myself."

Animals can't consent to this. What right does this person have to do this to their pet?

Lets not forget that the cat is very rare, and on top of that had to be knocked out in order to get the tattoo. Putting animals under can be risky, and the owner put the cat's life at risk because they wanted to put a permanent decoration on it.

This is really messed up!!!

Andee


5 comments:

  1. Gone, long gone. Says:
    March 6, 2009 at 6:08 AM

    Pets + tattoos = stupid

    My imagination would like to see the owner get drunk and pass out. Then the cat dips his claws in some ink and tattoos the owners face.

  1. Nicko Says:
    March 7, 2009 at 1:09 AM

    Agreed Sydney...but you pose the response 'animals can't consent to this', which I ask is this really something we consider about our 'meat' eating?

    Not sure if you a vego, but for me, understanding that we are mass producing meat either organic or not, is to me abhorrent. Animals are surely not treated right in any form.

    Sorry...just my rant on our culture of meat consumption.

  1. Andee Says:
    March 7, 2009 at 5:52 PM

    Nicko,

    I am a vegetarian because I saw how the animals were being raised and killed for mass production. It's sick, and if the people who bought the meat really knew what it was like for the animals, I think there would be a lot less McDonald's in the world.

    I have said this before, and I will say it again...

    I believe we will be judged by how we treat the least of us.

    Andee

  1. Nicko Says:
    March 7, 2009 at 8:59 PM

    Totally Andee. IT makes me feel ill to know that we've turned our animal friends into a product which is slaughtered and then consumed as an item. Health wise it's not right either. Have you read the 'China Study?'...if not do so, great book.

    But ethically speaking, the manner in which we slam meat into everything we eat is appalling.

    AND there is perhaps no reason for it either medically (animal protein debate) or culturally (a culture which consumes animals at the rate we do is ridiculous....even you have to agree here, the Word of Wisdom was bang on. Eat meat sparingly and only...ONLY in times of winter or of famine.

    The problem that I see is that members of the church conveniently ignore this advice...but also, there is no need for the partaking of meat because we're never going to hit a famine like we used to AND we have the technology to have greens available to us all year round.

    Anyway I babble....we agree on somethings you see!!! :)

  1. Anonymous Says:
    March 11, 2009 at 12:35 AM

    A pet doesn't have any say in anything really....do they have a say in who they want their owner to be or what they'd like to have for dinner?

Post a Comment