Euthanasia
is 'Unethical' for Dogs or Cats, as a Socialized Health Care Solution
To Die Because
It's Your Time to Go, is Not the Same Thing as Helping Take that Life by a
Bullet or by a Syringe Filled with Poison, because a Dog's Life and a Human's
Life Has 'intrinsic Value'
By Dean A. Ayers
Lead Investigative Reporter
NationalDogPress ©
24 Nov. 09
At one time a long time ago, I would have said pet euthanasia was ethical for
animals that could not be saved. After all, who wants to watch an animal
suffer? None of us do, and so we take our younger and older pets to a doctor
who shaves their leg, inserts an IV and injects poison in a shot injection, or
worse, in secret, they hold the dog down and stab a long needle into the dog's
heart while the dog is yelping in severe pain and trauma from the heart
injection pain of the euthanasia death.
I have since, in light of many debates over pet euthanasia, assisted-suicide
(euthanasia of people), changed my mind. I believe euthanasia of pets and animals,
let alone humans, have led us to "de-value" life as well as the life
of our lesser creatures.
Animal people and animal haters, now have a mind-set that says it's OK to put
someone like their beloved dog or cat, out of their misery, but based upon a fraudulent
excuse that it's going to be done, in the name of humanity. I really feel that
euthanasia of pets and animals is wrong. Period!
Human life is not the same thing as animal life. Humans are made in God's
image, and they have a soul, a spirit, a value that cannot be measured. But as
God is my witness, and I am a Man of God with Authority of the Priesthood, our
pets and animals are god given, and have an eternal Spirit to live, as well.
This is not an opinion, but witnessed by Testimony of God.
Allowing someone or some pet, to die because they choose it is not the same as
helping take that life. God allows pets to give up their ghost of spirit, when
the time comes. The same as human spirits, as well. This right of life to the
end of a natural death from old age also is a Right, that goes for the extended
family, and that of their pets, dogs, cats, and other animals as well.
Pet Euthanasia - That is murder, and it is not ethical in any sense of the
word. Just because life is hard for humans, and for the pets, doesn't mean we
have the right to leave this earthly world any time we want to, or worse, to
choose when someone else (human or pet dog) leaves this world. Man does not
have the God given authority to play God, and kill - even their pets and animals.
Anyone can find an excuse to murder in the name of a "humane" cause
or manner. Even with an old dog that is a member of the family. This does not
justify the action as moral, legal or right.
The deliberate taking of a life, in any family, an extended member of the
family, or to include the family dog's life equals murder, plain and simple,
and as such it should not find its way into legal criminal debate because it
shouldn't occur to anyone. The laws have become "perverted."
The taking of a pet's life via euthanasia is unethical. Period. This country has a Right to freedom
of religion that is legal, binding and not debatable to extend to the religious
Right of the family. The "Law" cannot legally override the Rights of
American citizens. The Law can unethically over-ride them however, if We the
People do not stand up for our Rights of Liberty and Freedom.
A Dog's life has "Intrinsic Value''
Finding that a dog "is somewhere between a person and personal
property," a new York trial court said a pet owner whose dog died
following unauthorized surgery may seek damages beyond the purchase price of
the animal, there for a dog's life has "intrinsic value."
In 1989, Herbert Erwin took his five-year-old registered mastiff to the Animal
Medical Center in the Bronx for treatment of an infected callus on the
dog" leg. The veterinarian told Erwin the callus could be surgically
removed or it could be treated by draining it. Erwin opted for the latter,
explicitly rejecting surgical treatment, according to court documents.
Erwin left his dog with the veterinarian for treatment. Instead of draining the
sore, the veterinarian anesthetized the dog and surgically removed the callus.
The dog died the next day due to complications from the anesthesia.
The dog owner asked another veterinarian in the office to perform an
autopsy, and he asked that the dog's body be retained so he could collect it.
No autopsy was performed, however, and the body had been disposed of by the
time Erwin came to pick it up.
Erwin sued the veterinary practice for negligence, breach of warranty, and loss
of companionship. He also sought emotional distress damages since the
veterinarian failed to perform the autopsy and disposed of the body despite his
wishes. (Erwin v. Animal Medical Center, No. 2603/95B (N.Y. Civ. Ct. Aug. 21,
1996).)
Bronx County Civil Judge Karen Smith threw out all but the negligence claims.
No trial date was set to resolve them.
Smith ruled that New York's warranty statute applies to "goods," not
rendered services and that loss of companionship and emotional distress damages
cannot be claimed for the loss of personal property, which a dog is considered
under New York law.
On the negligence claims, the defendant argued that, if damages are awarded,
they must be limited to the fair market value of the dog. The court disagreed,
citing previous cases where a pet's "intrinsic value" may be
considered.
Smith, referring to still other cases, said a jury may also consider the dog's
age, health, breed, training, usefulness, and any special traits of value, such
as its guarding ability, when setting damages. "Depreciation,"
however, cannot be considered because "a good dog's value increases rather
than fails with age and training," the court held.
Euthanasia of Humans and Animals a Hot-button topic
Unfortunately, we live in a world where this debate has become a hot-button
topic, debated endlessly among those of us who care about the issue both pro or
con.
In general, I don't believe there will be any change in the minds of any Animal
Rights Activists, Vets, or any Governmental Authorities in favor of pet
euthanasia, once they take a stance on the issue.
We the People, as United States citizens in a country with a Bill of Rights and
Constitutional Laws of Justice, each have strong feelings and strong reasons
for our views on pet euthanasia and human assisted-suicide. But this does not
allow for any person, police officer or Justice of the Court, let alone any
other citizen or authority to impose their personal views on the Right of Life
for the public, its citizens and their pets and animals.
As an Honorable Defender of this Nation, its U.S. Citizens, its Legal System,
and its Law Enforcement as a moral person which I AM, I take a stance against
murder, whether it is hurting people, unborn babies, or family and extended
family members to include our pets. Only man and his 'secret combinations' of
agendas has allowed this debate to escalate to a criminal debate over humane
euthanasia murder in the name of 'animal rights' humanity for pets and
animals.
I believe there is a Biblical view of "authority" to stop pet
euthanasia, as well as human euthanasia assisted suicide, or Obama health
care public options that encourage "death panels" to determine
who lives when they are young or old, based upon the expense, rather than the
"intrinsic value" of life, and the choice of the patient (human or
animal owner) as well.
Any time we consider taking a life, even that of our own pets, let alone
someone else's pets; we "demean" the lives of others, their rights,
and their "religious right" to their "intrinsic value" to
live by God's word and die naturally, even with their pet's death to be
naturally, at home, not by forced euthanasia of the law.
Euthanasia is "PAINTED" as painless
and peaceful? I beg to differ.
Euthanasia is "painted" as
such a painless and peaceful way for an animal to die, when in fact, a vast
majority of executioners allegedly "fail" to pre-medicate the dog,
pet or animal to relieve the animal of its "conscious" pain and
stress of the upcoming euthanasia execution process.
Then the executioners allegedly "fail" to use proper butterfly
intravenous line needles and devices for proper administration of the
medication injections of the "death drug." Instead the executioners
allegedly take the "fast and cheap" way to kill (euthanize) your
dogs, pets, and animals by sticking the syringe and "huge" needle
directly into the dog or animal's heart, with no pain or stress relieving
pre-medication (the dog is alert, afraid, feels and knows the pain and stress
of what is happening to them when they are 'stabbed' in the heart to die), as
the executioner or assistant is holding the animal down while the "death
drug" (a Poison) is stabbed into the heart.
Or commonly executioner uses the direct "cheap" method of allegedly
administering the "death drug" by a syringe that is allegedly stuck
directly into the animal's leg or elsewhere on the body or limbs in
"attempt" to hit a proper vein to inject the "death drug"
into the heart that way. Thus the needle sticks, are causing major pain and
distress to the pet in this syringe needle sticking process into the animal's
limbs (if they even hit a proper vein at all).
More than one attempt to inject the "death drug" may well have to be
done in this manner to kill the dog or pet because the executioner is unable to
hit a proper vein to inject the drug (no death drug going directly into the
heart via the veins and the dog does not properly or quickly die, it suffers
without death quickly or easily...do you get it)?
Why are not the pet owners always present for the euthanasia process?
Why do you thing the executioners DO NOT want the pet owner to witness the
euthanasia, unless a substantial additional fee is charged? Because of what I
just explained to you that allegedly goes on by executioners (vets. and animal
shelters, etc.)to kill your pet or animal (listed above).
The Bottom Line!
Bottom
line; it is unethical for the "mandatory" use of Dr. Death by man's
excuse of the legal word (in animal laws) to "mandatorily" execute
pets or animals in this manner of forced euthanasia, especially when the dogs,
pets and animals are executed in an "improper" method and manner of a
painful and stressful "death" execution, for many (unethical) reasons
to justify their lack of use of the proper euthanasia techniques and procedures.
As an Investigative Reporter and Animal Lover, I
Say, "The truth is rarely pure and never simple."
###
Animals
C.L.U.B.- Freedom National
Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit)
"The truth is rarely pure and never simple."
PLEASE DONATE to Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization
Incorporated (Non-Profit) BY CLICKING ON THE PAYPAL LINK BELOW:
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=6721925
Fair Use Notice: Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted
work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or
debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from
this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must
obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Legal Disclaimer: The information, articles, or
links (posted, embedded or otherwise) to the above postings are
provided to give readers more information on general
dog-related or associated subjects and are not intended as legal
advice. All individuals are urged to contact licensed attorneys in their states
regarding specific legal issues.
Copyright © 2006-2009, Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National
Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) Iowa 2009, NationalDogPress News, All
Rights Reserved
Comments