That’s because, genius, rat poison is not meant to be painless. It’s kind of ridiculous to compare it to some kind of barbiturate overdose or carbon monoxide poisoning. Your’s and FinnAgain’s lack of imagination here is commendable for the local PETA meeting but not for discussion of the moral hypothetical I’m curious about.
Lord Ashtar, if you were reading along you would have seen post 260 which makes pretty clear what my “point” was. I wasn’t defending lissener with it, I was curious about where the line was drawn for people expressing outrage.
And some dipshit like Lissener is going to get his hand on the controlled substances a VET uses in the right doses and properly applied, when he can’t even clean an apartment?
Or I guess he has suppy of compressed carbon monoxide and a chamber to distribute it?
The hypothetical you are curious about aint remotely related to what LISSENER was capable of.
You might as well ask “What if Lissener did something the right way, with proper knowledge and abilities, the whole time being responsible and compassionate”
Well, la de fucking duh, if he had done something remotely like that or had in hindsight wished he had we wouldnt be here now would we?
Go suck on a tail pipe yourself and let us know how painless it is/was.
Would it have been better to shoot the cat? Or use some other form of overwhelming, instantaneous violence? Seems like Gladys at least had a chance in the given scenario.
I guess I’m just wondering why a cat’s life is worth more than a rat’s (re: the rat-poisoning tangent). Is it because cats are cute and wanted, and rats are inevitably “pests”? A poisoned rat suffers just as much as a domestic cat left to fend for itself in the great outdoors or whatever, but most people won’t think twice about letting Orkin do their thing (or about the things that happen in slaughterhouses, but that’s a whole other thread).
For the record I found the incident alluded to in the OP a bit abhorrent, but not to the outrage-inducing degree witnessed in most of this thread. Lissener remains one of my favorite posters here.
Rats are in natural competition with humans, not pets. On the occasions where a rat IS someone’s pet, I’d be horrified if their owner poisoned them because they got annoyed. Once an animal makes the transition from pest to pet, actively harming them is disgusting.
the analogy doesn’t extend - last I heard, a virus is incapable of suffering. If it’s really the animal’s suffering people are so concerned about, a rat deserves as much as a cat not to be offhandedly killed or neglected. These value judgments seem to be pretty anthropocentric, which is fine, but we should maintain consistency on that front (i.e., it makes sense to be more outraged at the death of a cute fuzzy animal than at the death of a scurrying pest with matted fur, but we should also attend to the reasons why Animal A was unwanted in this case). Was there a better option re: the way lissener could’ve rid himself of this obnoxious cat? Yes, but I don’t see it as some unforgivable crime that he didn’t avail himself of this.
I guess the way I see it is, what lissener did wasn’t the enormous transgression some here seem to think. It was a minor ethical slip-up in the scheme of things, and people freaking out to the extent witnessed in this thread should probably find more urgent matters to worry about
All that blather doesn’t change the fact that you equated rat poison with an overdose intended to be painless. But I loved the “ain’t” and “la de dah”, such folksy and ageless wisdom you provide.
You don’t like lissener and you lack imagination, so the hypothetical post I asked about is beyond your abilities to tackle. That’s OK. There’s no need to wish death on me. Jeez, you’d think I pissed in your frying pan or something.
I can only imagine what you consider to be a major ethical slip up, if you think throwing an indoor cat out into the winter weather to fend for itself is a minor
one.
As far as the second part of your comment, freaking out on a message board isn’t an indication of what people are actually worried about off the board.
Making up hypothetical scenarios is fun…let’s pretend Lissener intentionally gave his cat awesome sex and the cat had a heart attack and died. Is he still a douchebag? Yes, he intentionally took the cat’s life (or at the very least put the cat in a situation where it was not able to provide or sustain itself in conditions foreign to it as I understand it to be an indoor cat) because he didn’t want to care for it any longer.
Whether the cat died painlessly in post-orgasmic bliss or starved to death in the alley is irrelevant. He took charge of the animal’s life to care for it. The cat did not give back to Lissener in the way Lissener had wanted. Lissener said “Fuck it, Kitty. You’re on your own. Good luck in the snow.” He’s a douchbag.
In the scheme of things, it is minor - not a charming or particularly kind thing to do, but not worth losing sleep over, and not too worthy of sustaining a multi-page internet argument. As I see it, it’s on the same par as poisoning a rat or slaughtering a cow. If someone I knew in real life did this, I’d kinda wince and then move on with life - it wouldn’t really change my judgment of them.
You act as if you are mocking the hypothetical but then give a perfectly proper answer to it. What’s the problem?
And tacoloco, if you think abandoning a cat is a major ethical slip up, where do you go from there? What would you call skipping town on your pregnant girlfriend? Also major or do you have some more extravagant word you would use in that case?
Exactly. No one’s saying this is the right thing to do, or that it’s defensible - just that it’s not the unforgivable cosmic horror people are making it out to be. Obviously it still weighs on lissener’s conscience, or he wouldn’t have posted about it a couple of decades later in a venue guaranteed to incite precisely this reaction. I just think people ought to choose their battles, and I genuinely envy anyone with an outrage quota that can cover both something of this nature and all the other awful things the contemporary world throws at us.
The problem is that trying to obfuscate the issue by creating silly hyootheticals based on the amount of suffering the cat endured is, well… silly. HOW the cat died is completely irrelevant. The fact that it DID (more likely than not) die because it broke some unwritten contract with Lissener in terms of affection and household etiquette is what’s important.
In your opinion, you mean. It’s pretty horrible in my book. I can respect that fact that you don’t see it that way. But don’t dismiss other people’s opinions on the subject simply because you see it differently.
I agree with you that in the grand scheme of life, the universe and everything, what Lissener did barely registers. But that doesn’t mean it wasn’t a shitty thing to do.
Did you forget where you’re posting this?
I wouldn’t assume that just because people are expressing outrage in this forum that people are putting more emphasis or more energy into the outrage than they are with anything happening in their real lives, off the message board.