Budikka666 wrote:

Chris Assaf is going to be a father soon!!! wrote:

Budikka666 wrote:

Mark K. Bilbo wrote:

On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 05:41:40 -0700, Budikka666 wrote:

http://www.thekansascitychannel.com/news/9959428/detail.html
"A 4-year-boy survived a dog attack Thursday afternoon, KMBC's Martin
Augustine reported. Zachary Thomas and his sister had just come
outside of their grandmother's townhouse when a pit bull mix ran out of
its owner's home and up to the 4-year-old. Grandmother Wilma Adams ran
over to pull the dog away, which she said was as tall as her grandson."

I wonder what divine message this was supposed to convey to us? Ot
could it simply be that there is no loving god and ***** happens when
people drop their guard?

Not only that but I have pits, know other pit owners and people who
raise them professionally (not for fighting, I'd call the cops on anybody
I found out who was up to that). Based on that, I know that they are NOT
naturally aggressive toward human beings. They were bred to be aggressive
toward other dogs but to not attack humans even in the heat of a fight.
The upshot is a dog that loves human beings. Hell, adores even.

I have a 90 pound pit mix. Biggest "risk" you'd run having small children
around him is he's 90 pounds of puppy (at 7, which is middle aged for his
size). He'd want to play but he's just too big, he could hurt them without
meaning to at all.

(He scares the crap out of people being big and loud and fast. But you're
big risk is he's running to you to "greet" you and hasn't a clue how big
he is. 90 pounds of puppy can be hard to handle even for me at times. <g>)

The people over the decades who bred them to aggressive toward other dogs
(for fighting) but trainable and obedient to humans, ended up producing a
dog that instinctively trusts and loves human beings. You have to go way
out of your way and work at it to make a pit "mean." And such an effort is
stupid. Pits will naturally defend their owners. You don't have to "do"
anything. Just treat them well.

My point being that we humans have basically bred a breed (even if not
officially "recognized") that instinctively trusts and loves us. Then
there are people that abuse that trust. Then when the dog "goes off," we
blame the dog who can't take the stand and testify about the abusive
treatment by the owner.

So "god" let us breed an animal that adores us then let some of us abuse
the trust we instilled in them and get away with blaming the dog for the
inevitable result.

I'm underwhelmed.

Now that I think about it...

People love to ask us here in alt.atheism what it would "take" to convince
us there is a "god." I've got one. Next time there's an attack by a pit
bull (provided people actually identified the dog right, most times, they
don't, they just say "pit bull" because that's the breed that is currently
the Big Scary in the media), the dog miraculously gains the power of
speech and testifies in court against his or her owner...

--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
"As hip as it is for outsiders to blame New Orleans
for everything bad that happened during and after
Hurricane Katrina, the truth is that the people
who lived here were much more prepared for a big
storm than the federal government that promised
us flood protection." [Jarvis DeBerry]

http://makeashorterlink.com/?V180525DC

"Everything New Orleans"
http://www.nola.com

What's commonly referred to as a "pit bull" is not necessarily an exact
term. Many bull terriers can be included in that "generic"
description. This may account for "pit bull" being identified as the
attack dog in many cases of maulings.

I worked in a veterinarian's office for a while and the only dogs I
took extra care with were chows and toy weiner dogs! Pits were no
different from any other breed to me. In fact the only one I recall
clearly was a pitiful pup with parvo (try saying that three times
fast).

The way breeds get a bad rep is that people "know" pedigree breeds are
appallingly inbred even when breeding control aimed for. Consequently
they have reputations - 1 in 5 Dalmations are deaf in one or both ears
for example, but there is also an "understanding" about breeds: cocker
spaniels are dumb, border collies are smart, bulldogs have breathing
problems, etc., so any breed is likely to have a label that goes with
it, regardless of how accurate the label is..

In this way it's now come to be understood that pit bulls are
dangerous. I suspect the real "dangerous" has come from those who've
swallowed the pit bull "rep" and deliberately bought a dog which
they've then raised to be mean/vicious because it fulfills something
that's missing in their lives. Theists cling to their god for the same
reason.

But the problem is that this god doesn't seem to be ready to step in
and do what any decent human would do - protect a child from danger,
whether it be from a terrorist, a natural catastrophe, a car accident,
or a pedophile priest. Or from an animal attack.

God uses the police officers, firefighters, and paramedics to protect
kids. They are his vessels.

I don't recall reading that in the Bible. Where is it - the Book of
ERT?

See, I'd always thought your *god* was at fault for *lying* to us about
having dominion over animals. But I *do* recall Jesus purportedly
claiming that *anything* we ask for in prayer we will receive. Do you
suppose that Grandmother Wilma Adams *never* prayed that her
grandchildren would be kept safe from harm? Is *she* at fault?

And perhaps, since you're such an expert.....

I am not a theist, actually.

Learned it from my research on theists.

Now, I am doing research on atheists.

Budikka666 wrote:

Chris Assaf is going to be a father soon!!! wrote:

Budikka666 wrote:

Mark K. Bilbo wrote:

On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 05:41:40 -0700, Budikka666 wrote:

http://www.thekansascitychannel.com/news/9959428/detail.html
"A 4-year-boy survived a dog attack Thursday afternoon, KMBC's Martin
Augustine reported. Zachary Thomas and his sister had just come
outside of their grandmother's townhouse when a pit bull mix ran out of
its owner's home and up to the 4-year-old. Grandmother Wilma Adams ran
over to pull the dog away, which she said was as tall as her grandson."

I wonder what divine message this was supposed to convey to us? Ot
could it simply be that there is no loving god and ***** happens when
people drop their guard?

Not only that but I have pits, know other pit owners and people who
raise them professionally (not for fighting, I'd call the cops on anybody
I found out who was up to that). Based on that, I know that they are NOT
naturally aggressive toward human beings. They were bred to be aggressive
toward other dogs but to not attack humans even in the heat of a fight.
The upshot is a dog that loves human beings. Hell, adores even.

I have a 90 pound pit mix. Biggest "risk" you'd run having small children
around him is he's 90 pounds of puppy (at 7, which is middle aged for his
size). He'd want to play but he's just too big, he could hurt them without
meaning to at all.

(He scares the crap out of people being big and loud and fast. But you're
big risk is he's running to you to "greet" you and hasn't a clue how big
he is. 90 pounds of puppy can be hard to handle even for me at times. <g>)

The people over the decades who bred them to aggressive toward other dogs
(for fighting) but trainable and obedient to humans, ended up producing a
dog that instinctively trusts and loves human beings. You have to go way
out of your way and work at it to make a pit "mean." And such an effort is
stupid. Pits will naturally defend their owners. You don't have to "do"
anything. Just treat them well.

My point being that we humans have basically bred a breed (even if not
officially "recognized") that instinctively trusts and loves us. Then
there are people that abuse that trust. Then when the dog "goes off," we
blame the dog who can't take the stand and testify about the abusive
treatment by the owner.

So "god" let us breed an animal that adores us then let some of us abuse
the trust we instilled in them and get away with blaming the dog for the
inevitable result.

I'm underwhelmed.

Now that I think about it...

People love to ask us here in alt.atheism what it would "take" to convince
us there is a "god." I've got one. Next time there's an attack by a pit
bull (provided people actually identified the dog right, most times, they
don't, they just say "pit bull" because that's the breed that is currently
the Big Scary in the media), the dog miraculously gains the power of
speech and testifies in court against his or her owner...

--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
"As hip as it is for outsiders to blame New Orleans
for everything bad that happened during and after
Hurricane Katrina, the truth is that the people
who lived here were much more prepared for a big
storm than the federal government that promised
us flood protection." [Jarvis DeBerry]

http://makeashorterlink.com/?V180525DC

"Everything New Orleans"
http://www.nola.com

What's commonly referred to as a "pit bull" is not necessarily an exact
term. Many bull terriers can be included in that "generic"
description. This may account for "pit bull" being identified as the
attack dog in many cases of maulings.

I worked in a veterinarian's office for a while and the only dogs I
took extra care with were chows and toy weiner dogs! Pits were no
different from any other breed to me. In fact the only one I recall
clearly was a pitiful pup with parvo (try saying that three times
fast).

The way breeds get a bad rep is that people "know" pedigree breeds are
appallingly inbred even when breeding control aimed for. Consequently
they have reputations - 1 in 5 Dalmations are deaf in one or both ears
for example, but there is also an "understanding" about breeds: cocker
spaniels are dumb, border collies are smart, bulldogs have breathing
problems, etc., so any breed is likely to have a label that goes with
it, regardless of how accurate the label is..

In this way it's now come to be understood that pit bulls are
dangerous. I suspect the real "dangerous" has come from those who've
swallowed the pit bull "rep" and deliberately bought a dog which
they've then raised to be mean/vicious because it fulfills something
that's missing in their lives. Theists cling to their god for the same
reason.

But the problem is that this god doesn't seem to be ready to step in
and do what any decent human would do - protect a child from danger,
whether it be from a terrorist, a natural catastrophe, a car accident,
or a pedophile priest. Or from an animal attack.

God uses the police officers, firefighters, and paramedics to protect
kids. They are his vessels.

I don't recall reading that in the Bible. Where is it - the Book of
ERT?

See, I'd always thought your *god* was at fault for *lying* to us about
having dominion over animals. But I *do* recall Jesus purportedly
claiming that *anything* we ask for in prayer we will receive. Do you
suppose that Grandmother Wilma Adams *never* prayed that her
grandchildren would be kept safe from harm? Is *she* at fault?

And perhaps, since you're such an expert.....

I am not a theist, actually.

My wife and father-in-law are the experts, not me. They do read these
posts, you know.

Budikka666 wrote:

Chris Assaf is going to be a father soon!!! wrote:

Budikka666 wrote:

Mark K. Bilbo wrote:

On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 05:41:40 -0700, Budikka666 wrote:

http://www.thekansascitychannel.com/news/9959428/detail.html
"A 4-year-boy survived a dog attack Thursday afternoon, KMBC's Martin
Augustine reported. Zachary Thomas and his sister had just come
outside of their grandmother's townhouse when a pit bull mix ran out of
its owner's home and up to the 4-year-old. Grandmother Wilma Adams ran
over to pull the dog away, which she said was as tall as her grandson."

I wonder what divine message this was supposed to convey to us? Ot
could it simply be that there is no loving god and ***** happens when
people drop their guard?

Not only that but I have pits, know other pit owners and people who
raise them professionally (not for fighting, I'd call the cops on anybody
I found out who was up to that). Based on that, I know that they are NOT
naturally aggressive toward human beings. They were bred to be aggressive
toward other dogs but to not attack humans even in the heat of a fight.
The upshot is a dog that loves human beings. Hell, adores even.

I have a 90 pound pit mix. Biggest "risk" you'd run having small children
around him is he's 90 pounds of puppy (at 7, which is middle aged for his
size). He'd want to play but he's just too big, he could hurt them without
meaning to at all.

(He scares the crap out of people being big and loud and fast. But you're
big risk is he's running to you to "greet" you and hasn't a clue how big
he is. 90 pounds of puppy can be hard to handle even for me at times. <g>)

The people over the decades who bred them to aggressive toward other dogs
(for fighting) but trainable and obedient to humans, ended up producing a
dog that instinctively trusts and loves human beings. You have to go way
out of your way and work at it to make a pit "mean." And such an effort is
stupid. Pits will naturally defend their owners. You don't have to "do"
anything. Just treat them well.

My point being that we humans have basically bred a breed (even if not
officially "recognized") that instinctively trusts and loves us. Then
there are people that abuse that trust. Then when the dog "goes off," we
blame the dog who can't take the stand and testify about the abusive
treatment by the owner.

So "god" let us breed an animal that adores us then let some of us abuse
the trust we instilled in them and get away with blaming the dog for the
inevitable result.

I'm underwhelmed.

Now that I think about it...

People love to ask us here in alt.atheism what it would "take" to convince
us there is a "god." I've got one. Next time there's an attack by a pit
bull (provided people actually identified the dog right, most times, they
don't, they just say "pit bull" because that's the breed that is currently
the Big Scary in the media), the dog miraculously gains the power of
speech and testifies in court against his or her owner...

--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
"As hip as it is for outsiders to blame New Orleans
for everything bad that happened during and after
Hurricane Katrina, the truth is that the people
who lived here were much more prepared for a big
storm than the federal government that promised
us flood protection." [Jarvis DeBerry]

http://makeashorterlink.com/?V180525DC

"Everything New Orleans"
http://www.nola.com

What's commonly referred to as a "pit bull" is not necessarily an exact
term. Many bull terriers can be included in that "generic"
description. This may account for "pit bull" being identified as the
attack dog in many cases of maulings.

I worked in a veterinarian's office for a while and the only dogs I
took extra care with were chows and toy weiner dogs! Pits were no
different from any other breed to me. In fact the only one I recall
clearly was a pitiful pup with parvo (try saying that three times
fast).

The way breeds get a bad rep is that people "know" pedigree breeds are
appallingly inbred even when breeding control aimed for. Consequently
they have reputations - 1 in 5 Dalmations are deaf in one or both ears
for example, but there is also an "understanding" about breeds: cocker
spaniels are dumb, border collies are smart, bulldogs have breathing
problems, etc., so any breed is likely to have a label that goes with
it, regardless of how accurate the label is..

In this way it's now come to be understood that pit bulls are
dangerous. I suspect the real "dangerous" has come from those who've
swallowed the pit bull "rep" and deliberately bought a dog which
they've then raised to be mean/vicious because it fulfills something
that's missing in their lives. Theists cling to their god for the same
reason.

But the problem is that this god doesn't seem to be ready to step in
and do what any decent human would do - protect a child from danger,
whether it be from a terrorist, a natural catastrophe, a car accident,
or a pedophile priest. Or from an animal attack.

God uses the police officers, firefighters, and paramedics to protect
kids. They are his vessels.

I don't recall reading that in the Bible. Where is it - the Book of
ERT?

See, I'd always thought your *god* was at fault for *lying* to us about
having dominion over animals. But I *do* recall Jesus purportedly
claiming that *anything* we ask for in prayer we will receive. Do you
suppose that Grandmother Wilma Adams *never* prayed that her
grandchildren would be kept safe from harm? Is *she* at fault?

And perhaps, since you're such an expert.....

My wife and father-in-law are the experts, not me. They do read these
posts, you know.

Budikka666 wrote:

Chris Assaf is going to be a father soon!!! wrote:

Budikka666 wrote:

Mark K. Bilbo wrote:

On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 05:41:40 -0700, Budikka666 wrote:

http://www.thekansascitychannel.com/news/9959428/detail.html
"A 4-year-boy survived a dog attack Thursday afternoon, KMBC's Martin
Augustine reported. Zachary Thomas and his sister had just come
outside of their grandmother's townhouse when a pit bull mix ran out of
its owner's home and up to the 4-year-old. Grandmother Wilma Adams ran
over to pull the dog away, which she said was as tall as her grandson."

I wonder what divine message this was supposed to convey to us? Ot
could it simply be that there is no loving god and ***** happens when
people drop their guard?

Not only that but I have pits, know other pit owners and people who
raise them professionally (not for fighting, I'd call the cops on anybody
I found out who was up to that). Based on that, I know that they are NOT
naturally aggressive toward human beings. They were bred to be aggressive
toward other dogs but to not attack humans even in the heat of a fight.
The upshot is a dog that loves human beings. Hell, adores even.

I have a 90 pound pit mix. Biggest "risk" you'd run having small children
around him is he's 90 pounds of puppy (at 7, which is middle aged for his
size). He'd want to play but he's just too big, he could hurt them without
meaning to at all.

(He scares the crap out of people being big and loud and fast. But you're
big risk is he's running to you to "greet" you and hasn't a clue how big
he is. 90 pounds of puppy can be hard to handle even for me at times. <g>)

The people over the decades who bred them to aggressive toward other dogs
(for fighting) but trainable and obedient to humans, ended up producing a
dog that instinctively trusts and loves human beings. You have to go way
out of your way and work at it to make a pit "mean." And such an effort is
stupid. Pits will naturally defend their owners. You don't have to "do"
anything. Just treat them well.

My point being that we humans have basically bred a breed (even if not
officially "recognized") that instinctively trusts and loves us. Then
there are people that abuse that trust. Then when the dog "goes off," we
blame the dog who can't take the stand and testify about the abusive
treatment by the owner.

So "god" let us breed an animal that adores us then let some of us abuse
the trust we instilled in them and get away with blaming the dog for the
inevitable result.

I'm underwhelmed.

Now that I think about it...

People love to ask us here in alt.atheism what it would "take" to convince
us there is a "god." I've got one. Next time there's an attack by a pit
bull (provided people actually identified the dog right, most times, they
don't, they just say "pit bull" because that's the breed that is currently
the Big Scary in the media), the dog miraculously gains the power of
speech and testifies in court against his or her owner...

--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
"As hip as it is for outsiders to blame New Orleans
for everything bad that happened during and after
Hurricane Katrina, the truth is that the people
who lived here were much more prepared for a big
storm than the federal government that promised
us flood protection." [Jarvis DeBerry]

http://makeashorterlink.com/?V180525DC

"Everything New Orleans"
http://www.nola.com

What's commonly referred to as a "pit bull" is not necessarily an exact
term. Many bull terriers can be included in that "generic"
description. This may account for "pit bull" being identified as the
attack dog in many cases of maulings.

I worked in a veterinarian's office for a while and the only dogs I
took extra care with were chows and toy weiner dogs! Pits were no
different from any other breed to me. In fact the only one I recall
clearly was a pitiful pup with parvo (try saying that three times
fast).

The way breeds get a bad rep is that people "know" pedigree breeds are
appallingly inbred even when breeding control aimed for. Consequently
they have reputations - 1 in 5 Dalmations are deaf in one or both ears
for example, but there is also an "understanding" about breeds: cocker
spaniels are dumb, border collies are smart, bulldogs have breathing
problems, etc., so any breed is likely to have a label that goes with
it, regardless of how accurate the label is..

In this way it's now come to be understood that pit bulls are
dangerous. I suspect the real "dangerous" has come from those who've
swallowed the pit bull "rep" and deliberately bought a dog which
they've then raised to be mean/vicious because it fulfills something
that's missing in their lives. Theists cling to their god for the same
reason.

But the problem is that this god doesn't seem to be ready to step in
and do what any decent human would do - protect a child from danger,
whether it be from a terrorist, a natural catastrophe, a car accident,
or a pedophile priest. Or from an animal attack.

God uses the police officers, firefighters, and paramedics to protect
kids. They are his vessels.

I don't recall reading that in the Bible. Where is it - the Book of
ERT?

See, I'd always thought your *god* was at fault for *lying* to us about
having dominion over animals. But I *do* recall Jesus purportedly
claiming that *anything* we ask for in prayer we will receive. Do you
suppose that Grandmother Wilma Adams *never* prayed that her
grandchildren would be kept safe from harm? Is *she* at fault?

And perhaps, since you're such an expert.....

My wife and father-in-law are the experts, not me. They do read these
posts, you know.

Budikka666 wrote:

Chris Assaf is going to be a father soon!!! wrote:

Budikka666 wrote:

Mark K. Bilbo wrote:

On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 05:41:40 -0700, Budikka666 wrote:

http://www.thekansascitychannel.com/news/9959428/detail.html
"A 4-year-boy survived a dog attack Thursday afternoon, KMBC's Martin
Augustine reported. Zachary Thomas and his sister had just come
outside of their grandmother's townhouse when a pit bull mix ran out of
its owner's home and up to the 4-year-old. Grandmother Wilma Adams ran
over to pull the dog away, which she said was as tall as her grandson."

I wonder what divine message this was supposed to convey to us? Ot
could it simply be that there is no loving god and ***** happens when
people drop their guard?

Not only that but I have pits, know other pit owners and people who
raise them professionally (not for fighting, I'd call the cops on anybody
I found out who was up to that). Based on that, I know that they are NOT
naturally aggressive toward human beings. They were bred to be aggressive
toward other dogs but to not attack humans even in the heat of a fight.
The upshot is a dog that loves human beings. Hell, adores even.

I have a 90 pound pit mix. Biggest "risk" you'd run having small children
around him is he's 90 pounds of puppy (at 7, which is middle aged for his
size). He'd want to play but he's just too big, he could hurt them without
meaning to at all.

(He scares the crap out of people being big and loud and fast. But you're
big risk is he's running to you to "greet" you and hasn't a clue how big
he is. 90 pounds of puppy can be hard to handle even for me at times. <g>)

The people over the decades who bred them to aggressive toward other dogs
(for fighting) but trainable and obedient to humans, ended up producing a
dog that instinctively trusts and loves human beings. You have to go way
out of your way and work at it to make a pit "mean." And such an effort is
stupid. Pits will naturally defend their owners. You don't have to "do"
anything. Just treat them well.

My point being that we humans have basically bred a breed (even if not
officially "recognized") that instinctively trusts and loves us. Then
there are people that abuse that trust. Then when the dog "goes off," we
blame the dog who can't take the stand and testify about the abusive
treatment by the owner.

So "god" let us breed an animal that adores us then let some of us abuse
the trust we instilled in them and get away with blaming the dog for the
inevitable result.

I'm underwhelmed.

Now that I think about it...

People love to ask us here in alt.atheism what it would "take" to convince
us there is a "god." I've got one. Next time there's an attack by a pit
bull (provided people actually identified the dog right, most times, they
don't, they just say "pit bull" because that's the breed that is currently
the Big Scary in the media), the dog miraculously gains the power of
speech and testifies in court against his or her owner...

--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
"As hip as it is for outsiders to blame New Orleans
for everything bad that happened during and after
Hurricane Katrina, the truth is that the people
who lived here were much more prepared for a big
storm than the federal government that promised
us flood protection." [Jarvis DeBerry]

http://makeashorterlink.com/?V180525DC

"Everything New Orleans"
http://www.nola.com

What's commonly referred to as a "pit bull" is not necessarily an exact
term. Many bull terriers can be included in that "generic"
description. This may account for "pit bull" being identified as the
attack dog in many cases of maulings.

I worked in a veterinarian's office for a while and the only dogs I
took extra care with were chows and toy weiner dogs! Pits were no
different from any other breed to me. In fact the only one I recall
clearly was a pitiful pup with parvo (try saying that three times
fast).

The way breeds get a bad rep is that people "know" pedigree breeds are
appallingly inbred even when breeding control aimed for. Consequently
they have reputations - 1 in 5 Dalmations are deaf in one or both ears
for example, but there is also an "understanding" about breeds: cocker
spaniels are dumb, border collies are smart, bulldogs have breathing
problems, etc., so any breed is likely to have a label that goes with
it, regardless of how accurate the label is..

In this way it's now come to be understood that pit bulls are
dangerous. I suspect the real "dangerous" has come from those who've
swallowed the pit bull "rep" and deliberately bought a dog which
they've then raised to be mean/vicious because it fulfills something
that's missing in their lives. Theists cling to their god for the same
reason.

But the problem is that this god doesn't seem to be ready to step in
and do what any decent human would do - protect a child from danger,
whether it be from a terrorist, a natural catastrophe, a car accident,
or a pedophile priest. Or from an animal attack.

God uses the police officers, firefighters, and paramedics to protect
kids. They are his vessels.

I don't recall reading that in the Bible. Where is it - the Book of
ERT?

See, I'd always thought your *god* was at fault for *lying* to us about
having dominion over animals. But I *do* recall Jesus purportedly
claiming that *anything* we ask for in prayer we will receive. Do you
suppose that Grandmother Wilma Adams *never* prayed that her
grandchildren would be kept safe from harm? Is *she* at fault?

And perhaps, since you're such an expert.....

My wife and father-in-law are the experts, not me. They do read these
posts, you know.