"Benign Vanilla" wrote in message
...

"george" wrote in message
news:0PJvd.234897$HA.24792@attbi_s01...
snip
It is you that has repeatedly stated in this thread that "fish are not
as
complex as humans", and "fish don't feel like humans do". You are the
one
anthropomorphizing this conversation. Nobody else is making this
comparison.

That is not anthropomorphizing. Do you even understand the meaning of the
word?

anthropomorphize - to attribute human form or personality to things not
human.

Your assumption that fish "suffer" is an anthropomorphization.

So are you saying only people can suffer? Do we need to step on your dogs
tail again? Me thinks it is YOU that does not understand the term. I will
admit, I do have trouble spelling it though.

I'm saying that fish can't experience pain and suffering because they aren't
physiologically built for it. Dogs and fish are not the same animal, at least
the last time I looked (there is a dogfish). Dogs do experience pain and
suffering, because they ARE built for it, as are we.

My analogy using the dog was simply intended to point out the error in
your
logic. A less advanced creature does not by virtue of being less
advanced
deserve less respect, or lack of compassion. Human, Dog, fish, etc.

I never said anything about not respecting other living creatures. That
you
would think that I would do otherwise is disrespectful of me.

Saying you can just toss a fish on the ground because it doesn't feel pain
like a human is IMHO not respecting that creature.

On the contrary. Letting the fish languish in the pond until it dies, and/or
possibly infects the other fish is disrespectful.

The original thread was simply about minimizing the suffering of an
ailing
fish. You contend that fish are so less advanced then us, that simply
tossing it on the ground is adequate. I contend that any living being
should
be treated as important and as a pond owner I take that philosphy to a
degree whereby I do what I can to minize the suffering of every living
creature around me.

I take it then, that you've never been fishing, or when you do, you have
someone
else bait the hook. Am I close?

I fished once when I was child. Since then, I think maybe I have fished once
more after that. No bait. I am not comfortable with the practice, but don't
get me wrong, I am not saying no-one should fish, so don't go there.

I am glad to hear that. I've raised fish for a very long time (mostly aquaria),
and have no problem with fishing, or with eating fish. Fish is by far more
healthy for you than just about any other animal food (as long as you don't eat
too much - who knows how much mercury is in the them these days?). Does that
make me a bad person, or disrespectful of the fish? I don't think so. I care
for my fish as well, if not better than most. Fish ponding is relatively new to
me, having built my pond only two and a half years ago (something that I've
worked towards for nearly 8 years). But in those two years, I've only lost one
fish (that jumped out, and wasn't found until it was too late) out of some 26
fish. My albino channel catfish has been sick twice, and I've been able to
bring him back to health both times. That's not a bad record, if I must say so.
And I've not lost an aquarium fish in more than five years.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, as we clearly have different
philosophies on the importance of lesser species.

BV.

P.S. I don't believe you can treate anything but humans, humanely.


Whatever that means.

It's a joke to try and lighten the mood.

BV.

Ok. Oh, and if you or anyone else was offended by my PETA remark, my apologies
(only if you don't belong to them, though). I thik they do more harm than good.
It's just that they have been using some of the same arguments about fish having
"feelings" to justify harrassing fishermen, and wildlife officials. And that
doesn't sit well with me at all. Before too long, they will no doubt demand
that petshops and backyard ponds be banned.