Caring more about animals than people

I guess that's what we get when we live in a country that can kill 55,000,000 babies and few even say anything.

Here we have WTAP making a big deal out of the fact that a man had 16 dogs in his enclosed pick up truck.

They mention how the "Humane" "officer" took his dogs.  They agreed to let him have 4 of his dogs back IF he gets them spayed/neutered.  Isn't that gracious?  After he pays a "fee" for the "service" with a gun to his head.  The rest of them will end up euthanized....because we know that's better than spending the night in the back of a very large enclosed truck with their buddies.

What the story should have highlighted was the fact that the man's house burned down and he didn't have a place to live.  He went to spend the night with his sister in Parkersburg.  He didn't leave his dogs to roam on his property, he brought his dogs with him. 

No mention in the story if the man needed anything, how he was going to make it, etc....you know, your typical "human interest" story. Nope, we have to kick a man when he's down because his dogs are not spayed or neutered.

Pretty sad when the first thing the media can think of for a story in this situation is not about the man losing his house and belongings. 

Weird!

P.S.  Merriam/Webster needs to add this description as an example:  Oxymoron = Humane Society

Another thing I'm seeing: this stupidity is concentrated around large concentrations of people, I.E. cities.  If this fellow was in our neck of the woods, or any rural area, I suspect, no one would have thought of calling the police because he had some dogs in his truck, that's normal!  This man would have been given donations of clothing and cash to help him out. 

How I'm voting on the statewide issues

Issue 1: NO, this does not belong in our state's Constitution, which is a long term document. This issue deals with a temporary situation. When the temporary situation is over, the amendment will still be in the Constitution. Our state's Constitution should be for long term guidance, not short term desires.. Also, Ohio can't afford to go $200,000,000 in debt, no matter how noble the cause.

Issue 2: Reluctantly YES. reluctantly because the need for such an amendment is stupid. However, the lilly livered animal worshipers will spend and spend until they make us all meat free. The main problems I have with this Issue is: If it's really to circumvent a threatened "humane" society push for another ballot initiative to really make it difficult to farm in Ohio......why give the "humane" society a seat on this board at all? The "humane" society is about as un-Ohioan as they come. We shouldn't codify their existence in our Constitution. You see why I said reluctantly.

Issue 3: NO, we do not need further / expanded gambling in Ohio. There are many reasons one should oppose this social leach of a vice. The most recent example of the corrosiveness of gambling is watching our Governor. He was once 100% against gambling...very recently. However, the empty promise of millions of dollars from gambling to fund the state government has made our use to be devout anti-gambling Governor start rolling the dice with our future. One of the only things I agreed with Mr. Strickland with was this issue, until he did an about face. It's a sad thing to behold.

Here's a link with the ballot language and the (official) pros / cons of each initiative

Jackson county "humane" society discriminates against light dogs

I've got to comment on this....other than the falsely named "humane" society.

"Funds available to help with spaying/neutering for big dogs
The Humane Society of Jackson County announces it has funds to help large dog owners spay/neuter their pet(s).

"BIG DOG OWNERS, we've got money for you!!!!! (To help fix your dog, that is.) Call the Humane Society of Jackson County at (740) 286- 6435. No documents required. Your dog should weigh 40 lbs. or more. Please spay/ neuter your pet for 3 reasons: Better behaved dog, Healthier dog, Save lives.

--Lisa Abele treasurer, HS of Jackson County"

As for the 3 reasons they state for neutering "big" dogs.

• Better behaved dog. Well, if you want a dog that wants to lay on his back with this feet in the air better behaved, they are right. What about having the spunk to kill Coons, Coyotes and Groundhogs? What's the point of having a dog in southeastern Ohio if they can't / won't do that?
• Healthier? really?
• Save lives. How?

And, why discriminate against the little guys? If all of these reasons are true, isn't it true for the French breeds as well?