Animal abuser becomes patron of RSPCA

[Dogberry]

https://protectthewild.org.uk/news/animal-abuser-king-charles-becomes-new-patron-of-the-rspca/

Totally bizarre.
A morally bankrupt society in awe of the royals.

 

[palindrome]

Perhaps the RSPCA should now mean - Royal Society for the Preservation of Cruelty to Animals.

John

 

[Tony L]

I was planning to add this to the Charles thread, but it is so utterly absurd it deserves its own thread. The RSPCA should be utterly ashamed and I will think twice before donating anything from now on (my usual destination is dedicated sea turtle charities, but I have given to RSPCA in the past).

PS Get yours here!

Adopt A Turtle

Take out a turtle adoption for £3 per month and help us reduce illegal fishing, expand marine protected areas, and help strengthen the enforcement to halt the illegal trade in turtles.

support.wwf.org.uk

 

[PaulMB]

I wonder if Eliza Egret is the real name of the writer....

Probably the RSPCA reckon that the prestige of having Charles III outweighs the contradictions. Also, a lot of people think that kicking your dog around is cruel and shameful, (lower class) but mowing down pheasant or having your dogs tear a fox apart is very cool (upper class).

 

[Tony L]

Also, a lot of people think that kicking your dog around is cruel and shameful, (lower class) but mowing down pheasant or having your dogs tear a fox apart is very cool (upper class).

Only idiots.

 

[blossomchris]

I stopped my subscription years ago, a joke set up and has been for a long time

 

[canonman]

I stopped my subscription years ago, a joke set up and has been for a long time

Agreed.
I struggle to get my head around this statement........We will euthanase an animal only if this is in the best interest of their welfare

 

[Pravda]

Agreed.
I struggle to get my head around this statement........We will euthanase an animal only if this is in the best interest of their welfare

Well , that's ok then

 

[Tony L]

I struggle to get my head around this statement........We will euthanase an animal only if this is in the best interest of their welfare

In fairness if some moron like Charles has shot and maimed it this may be the most humane option.

PS I wonder if the RSPCA asked Kristi Noem first and were turned down?

 

[canonman]

Well , that's ok then

I can't imagine any healthy animal thinking 'oh kill me, it's obviously in my best interest'

 

[gez]

https://protectthewild.org.uk/news/animal-abuser-king-charles-becomes-new-patron-of-the-rspca/

Totally bizarre.
A morally bankrupt society in awe of the royals.

I'm no fan of the monarchy or of charlie boy specifically, but I do notice that every one of the quotes (and thus presumably proofs) that he made were at least 20 years ago. Is there actual evidence of his current position and behaviour?

I ask this because as far as I'm concerned people should be allowed to change, and should it be the case that he's had a rethink about this topic and now wants to make ammends in some way by supporting an animal welfare charity, then I don't see any problem. IF that's the case obviously. IF he's still an avid fox hunting supporter, then yes the RSPCA has clearly made a misstep.

 

[gez]

I can't imagine any healthy animal thinking 'oh kill me, it's obviously in my best interest'

Animals don't think.

 

[Dogberry]

I'm no fan of the monarchy or of charlie boy specifically, but I do notice that every one of the quotes (and thus presumably proofs) that he made were at least 20 years ago. Is there actual evidence of his current position and behaviour?

I ask this because as far as I'm concerned people should be allowed to change, and should it be the case that he's had a rethink about this topic and now wants to make ammends in some way by supporting an animal welfare charity, then I don't see any problem. IF that's the case obviously. IF he's still an avid fox hunting supporter, then yes the RSPCA has clearly made a misstep.

ok
Get him to make a statement against shooting animals for sport and fox hunting.etc.

 

[calorgas]

Animals don't think.

Eh?

 

[gez]

Eh?

Just what I said. Animals are incapable of rational thought. They (with the exception of a couple of particular types of chimpanzee) have no sense of self. The do not think. They react, or behave instinctively, that's it.

 

[Enfield boy]

They remember those who've treated them well, they can find their way home, they learn the meaning of words. They must be capable of thought.

 

[Sonority]

I have read some utter rubbish on this forum, but this garbage really takes the biscuit.
Do not think?
Utterly ridiculous statement.

 

[Joe P]

Animals are capable of learning and reasoning. And depending on the task, they occasionally surpass humans in their ability to recollect. Even among honey bees (insects, no less!) there's incontrovertible evidence that bees recall where they were when collecting nectar and pollen to bring back to the hive. They've also evolved a way of communicating the distance and direction of the food source to other workers in the hive through the famous waggle dance.

Are they capable of deep abstraction or pondering what happens if you divide by zero? Probably not, though not that many humans can or do either.

However, one thing is absolutely certain. Animals experience physical and psychological pain. Cruelty to animals is illegal for precisely that reason.

Joe

P.S. As we all know, animals do think they're pretty smart. Shit on the ground, see in the dark.

 

[Sonority]

Having seen dolphins heard mullet and create bubble curtains, then get others to join in, not thinking?
Whales likewise (though yet to witness that)
Try having a conversation with any cat or dog owner and tell them they do not think or are incapable of thinking.

 

[ks.234]

Just what I said. Animals are incapable of rational thought. They (with the exception of a couple of particular types of chimpanzee) have no sense of self. The do not think. They react, or behave instinctively, that's it.

Like Human Beings then.