South Dakota governer executed her puppy because she didn't like it

[Politesse]

The conservative in this instance made the easy choice the evolutionary Darwin decision based on only fittest will survive. Removing a chicking eating dog from the reproduction pool of other fit animals who don't eat chickens.

The “hard” option was to take the time and care to properly train the dog. show Christian compassion, to save a dog that is not nearly as fit as others .

Honestly, I love animals myself and believe they are Gods gift to all of us. But for all the do gooders out there, at least be more honest with what this is all really about. Because there are real consequences even for acting compassionate.

That's not how evolution works. It's not like Christianity, with its impotent god who needs human helpers to push things along. We bred dogs into a rather unexpected form and we choose to keep them around. No one owes it to Darwin to either keep an animal around or kill them, only our own sense of morality.

 

[laughing dog]

The conservative in this instance made the easy choice the evolutionary Darwin decision based on only fittest will survive. Removing a chicking eating dog from the reproduction pool of other fit animals who don't eat chickens.

The “hard” option was to take the time and care to properly train the dog. show Christian compassion, to save a dog that is not nearly as fit as others .

Honestly, I love animals myself and believe they are Gods gift to all of us. But for all the do gooders out there, at least be more honest with what this is all really about. Because there are real consequences even for acting compassionate.

WTF are babbling about Darwinian selection? as Politesse pointed out, this is not about evolution or survival of the fittest.

It is about a smug stupid lazy jackass who confuses her incompetence with “making a hard choice”.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The conservative in this instance made the easy choice the evolutionary Darwin decision based on only fittest will survive. Removing a chicking eating dog from the reproduction pool of other fit animals who don't eat chickens.

The “hard” option was to take the time and care to properly train the dog. show Christian compassion, to save a dog that is not nearly as fit as others .

Honestly, I love animals myself and believe they are Gods gift to all of us. But for all the do gooders out there, at least be more honest with what this is all really about. Because there are real consequences even for acting compassionate.

What this is really about is a person bragging about being super responsible and principled and a great leader cause she killed an animal.

That somehow killing an animal and leadership went hand in hand. Teddy Roosevelt was an avid hunter and woodsman. I think he'd have dropped an anvil on gov. Noem for her claim.

 

[Toni]

The conservative in this instance made the easy choice the evolutionary Darwin decision based on only fittest will survive. Removing a chicking eating dog from the reproduction pool of other fit animals who don't eat chickens.

The “hard” option was to take the time and care to properly train the dog. show Christian compassion, to save a dog that is not nearly as fit as others .

Honestly, I love animals myself and believe they are Gods gift to all of us. But for all the do gooders out there, at least be more honest with what this is all really about. Because there are real consequences even for acting compassionate.

Virtually any dog will eat chickens given the chance. If they are hungry enough, even those that prefer braised boneless chicken thighs cut into bite sized pieces will try for a chicken or rabbit if they can catch it. Some dogs will catch a squirrel or rabbit or chicken out of instinct and not have any idea what to do with it, being well fed and fairly civilized.

There exist a host of solutions to a dog in the hen house that don’t involve shooting a young healthy dog who doesn’t perform as you’d like.

They include:

Re-homing the dog to a family seeking a pet, not a hunting dog

Confining the dog to a nice enclosure with plenty of shelter from the elements ts, including too much sun and providing it with plenty of space to run, plenty of fresh, clean water and food and some human companionship

Providing the chickens with a more secure chicken yard that will keep out all of the predators, including those who can and will dig under a fence

Training your dog to ignore chickens and other livestock. This will require a lot of time and patience and experience and is not always effective for a dog with a high prey drive, which is an instinct that results from the genetic traits for seeking out and killing prey being amplified through generations of selective breeding. It may be the only solution is to permanently separate the dog and chickens. But it is not necessary to kill either.

 

[RVonse]

The conservative in this instance made the easy choice the evolutionary Darwin decision based on only fittest will survive. Removing a chicking eating dog from the reproduction pool of other fit animals who don't eat chickens.

The “hard” option was to take the time and care to properly train the dog. show Christian compassion, to save a dog that is not nearly as fit as others .

Honestly, I love animals myself and believe they are Gods gift to all of us. But for all the do gooders out there, at least be more honest with what this is all really about. Because there are real consequences even for acting compassionate.

WTF are babbling about Darwinian selection? as Politesse pointed out, this is not about evolution or survival of the fittest.

It is about a smug stupid lazy jackass who confuses her incompetence with “making a hard choice”.

Of course it is about evolution. Humans (both smart and stupid) are an integral part of the theory of evolution just like the rest of the animal knigdom. Human actors also affect other animals as part of their natural selection. If a human kills a dog how is that any difference to a shark killing a dumb human in its waters?

The whole point of evolution is to sift out the non fit actors who should not reproduce.

 

[RVonse]

The conservative in this instance made the easy choice the evolutionary Darwin decision based on only fittest will survive. Removing a chicking eating dog from the reproduction pool of other fit animals who don't eat chickens.

The “hard” option was to take the time and care to properly train the dog. show Christian compassion, to save a dog that is not nearly as fit as others .

Honestly, I love animals myself and believe they are Gods gift to all of us. But for all the do gooders out there, at least be more honest with what this is all really about. Because there are real consequences even for acting compassionate.

Virtually any dog will eat chickens given the chance. If they are hungry enough, even those that prefer braised boneless chicken thighs cut into bite sized pieces will try for a chicken or rabbit if they can catch it. Some dogs will catch a squirrel or rabbit or chicken out of instinct and not have any idea what to do with it, being well fed and fairly civilized.

There exist a host of solutions to a dog in the hen house that don’t involve shooting a young healthy dog who doesn’t perform as you’d like.

They include:

Re-homing the dog to a family seeking a pet, not a hunting dog

Confining the dog to a nice enclosure with plenty of shelter from the elements ts, including too much sun and providing it with plenty of space to run, plenty of fresh, clean water and food and some human companionship

Providing the chickens with a more secure chicken yard that will keep out all of the predators, including those who can and will dig under a fence

Training your dog to ignore chickens and other livestock. This will require a lot of time and patience and experience and is not always effective for a dog with a high prey drive, which is an instinct that results from the genetic traits for seeking out and killing prey being amplified through generations of selective breeding. It may be the only solution is to permanently separate the dog and chickens. But it is not necessary to kill either.

That is compassion. Evolution is the long process of the non fit (bad) dogs who have no self control to getting removed from the population. The good dogs still might have a taste for chicken but they are smart enough not indulge. Then they reproduce and their offspring make good dogs compatible with human development.

It does seem brutal especially on an individal level. But that is science best theory on how life developed on this planet.

 

[pood]

The conservative in this instance made the easy choice the evolutionary Darwin decision based on only fittest will survive. Removing a chicking eating dog from the reproduction pool of other fit animals who don't eat chickens.

The “hard” option was to take the time and care to properly train the dog. show Christian compassion, to save a dog that is not nearly as fit as others .

Honestly, I love animals myself and believe they are Gods gift to all of us. But for all the do gooders out there, at least be more honest with what this is all really about. Because there are real consequences even for acting compassionate.

WTF are babbling about Darwinian selection? as Politesse pointed out, this is not about evolution or survival of the fittest.

It is about a smug stupid lazy jackass who confuses her incompetence with “making a hard choice”.

Of course it is about evolution. Humans (both smart and stupid) are an integral part of the theory of evolution just like the rest of the animal knigdom. Human actors also affect other animals as part of their natural selection. If a human kills a dog how is that any difference to a shark killing a dumb human in its waters?

Because the shark is just seeking food and the human killing the dog, especially in the way this evil woman did, does not kill it for food and if the person had a conscience, would not do it at all?

The whole point of evolution is to sift out the non fit actors who should not reproduce.

No, sorry, evolution does not have a “point,” there is no “should not reproduce” in evolution, you evidently don’t understand the biological meaning of “fitness,” and, finally, most evolution may be neutral via genetic drift, not involving selection at all.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Are you saying Noem killing her puppy would have been OK if she had barbecued the dog and ate it?

 

[pood]

The conservative in this instance made the easy choice the evolutionary Darwin decision based on only fittest will survive. Removing a chicking eating dog from the reproduction pool of other fit animals who don't eat chickens.

The “hard” option was to take the time and care to properly train the dog. show Christian compassion, to save a dog that is not nearly as fit as others .

Honestly, I love animals myself and believe they are Gods gift to all of us. But for all the do gooders out there, at least be more honest with what this is all really about. Because there are real consequences even for acting compassionate.

Virtually any dog will eat chickens given the chance. If they are hungry enough, even those that prefer braised boneless chicken thighs cut into bite sized pieces will try for a chicken or rabbit if they can catch it. Some dogs will catch a squirrel or rabbit or chicken out of instinct and not have any idea what to do with it, being well fed and fairly civilized.

There exist a host of solutions to a dog in the hen house that don’t involve shooting a young healthy dog who doesn’t perform as you’d like.

They include:

Re-homing the dog to a family seeking a pet, not a hunting dog

Confining the dog to a nice enclosure with plenty of shelter from the elements ts, including too much sun and providing it with plenty of space to run, plenty of fresh, clean water and food and some human companionship

Providing the chickens with a more secure chicken yard that will keep out all of the predators, including those who can and will dig under a fence

Training your dog to ignore chickens and other livestock. This will require a lot of time and patience and experience and is not always effective for a dog with a high prey drive, which is an instinct that results from the genetic traits for seeking out and killing prey being amplified through generations of selective breeding. It may be the only solution is to permanently separate the dog and chickens. But it is not necessary to kill either.

That is compassion.

Right, and social species evolved compassion, reciprocal empathy, etc.

Evolution is the long process of the non fit (bad) dogs who have no self control to getting removed from the population.

You don’t understand the concept of fitness. You also ignore artificial selection when it comes to dogs. Many dogs are bred to be “bad.”

The good dogs still might have a taste for chicken but they are smart enough not indulge. Then they reproduce and their offspring make good dogs compatible with human development.

What a cute story.

It does seem brutal especially on an individal level. But that is science best theory on how life developed on this planet.

You have created a caricature of evolution.

 

[Elixir]

Humans (both smart and stupid) are an integral part of the theory of evolution

Spoken in concert with the fallacious “survival of the fittest” trope, this constitutes the entire “understanding” of the “stupid humans” version of evolution.
In fact, Vonse, humans have nothing whatsoever to do with evolution other than being one of its myriad transient outcomes. The theory describing it is not evolution any more than a map is a territory.

Fitness can only be measured in retrospect, and is not a quality possessed by the fit, but a relationship between an organism and its environment.

Common misunderstandings are very fertile grounds for ignorant assertions, as you so aptly demonstrate.

 

[Elixir]

Are you saying Noem killing her puppy would have been OK if she had barbecued the dog and ate it?

Or fed it to the pig and eaten the pig?

 

[Shadowy Man]

It is about a smug stupid lazy jackass who confuses her incompetence with “making a hard choice”.

and the hypocrisy of her “pro-life” position.

 

[Toni]

The conservative in this instance made the easy choice the evolutionary Darwin decision based on only fittest will survive. Removing a chicking eating dog from the reproduction pool of other fit animals who don't eat chickens.

The “hard” option was to take the time and care to properly train the dog. show Christian compassion, to save a dog that is not nearly as fit as others .

Honestly, I love animals myself and believe they are Gods gift to all of us. But for all the do gooders out there, at least be more honest with what this is all really about. Because there are real consequences even for acting compassionate.

Virtually any dog will eat chickens given the chance. If they are hungry enough, even those that prefer braised boneless chicken thighs cut into bite sized pieces will try for a chicken or rabbit if they can catch it. Some dogs will catch a squirrel or rabbit or chicken out of instinct and not have any idea what to do with it, being well fed and fairly civilized.

There exist a host of solutions to a dog in the hen house that don’t involve shooting a young healthy dog who doesn’t perform as you’d like.

They include:

Re-homing the dog to a family seeking a pet, not a hunting dog

Confining the dog to a nice enclosure with plenty of shelter from the elements ts, including too much sun and providing it with plenty of space to run, plenty of fresh, clean water and food and some human companionship

Providing the chickens with a more secure chicken yard that will keep out all of the predators, including those who can and will dig under a fence

Training your dog to ignore chickens and other livestock. This will require a lot of time and patience and experience and is not always effective for a dog with a high prey drive, which is an instinct that results from the genetic traits for seeking out and killing prey being amplified through generations of selective breeding. It may be the only solution is to permanently separate the dog and chickens. But it is not necessary to kill either.

That is compassion. Evolution is the long process of the non fit (bad) dogs who have no self control to getting removed from the population. The good dogs still might have a taste for chicken but they are smart enough not indulge. Then they reproduce and their offspring make good dogs compatible with human development.

It does seem brutal especially on an individal level. But that is science best theory on how life developed on this planet.

Humans have bred specific traits into ( and out of) dogs for centuries. That is not evolution. That is selective breeding.

But you are correct: the solutions I suggested are compassionate ones. Good ranchers and farmers have compassion for their animals, and if it is necessary to put down an animal or to kill an animal for slaughter, a good farmer or rancher will do so as quickly and painlessly as possible. Sometimes that dies include shooting an animal too sick or injured to survive. This is not what happened to Noem’s dog. She killed it without much feeling at all and out of anger and expediency.

Compassion is a desirable quality in a leader. So is patience, intelligence, knowledge and common sense. Noem seems to lack all of these qualities.

 

[RVonse]

No, sorry, evolution does not have a “point,” there is no “should not reproduce” in evolution,

What? Then how did the present life on this planet get here if not by reproducing? Please explain to me how life is all around us without being born or otherwise hatched from an egg? Virtually all life on this planet has a finite period it can live so it must reproduce or it then becomes extinct.

Trilobite - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And yes that is evolution.

 

[Toni]

No, sorry, evolution does not have a “point,” there is no “should not reproduce” in evolution,

What? Then how did the present life on this planet get here if not by reproducing? Please explain to me how life is all around us without being born or otherwise hatched from an egg? Virtually all life on this planet has a finite period it can live so it must reproduce or it then becomes extinct.

Trilobite - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And yes that is evolution.

Evolution does arise from natural selection.

Dog breeds arose from selective breeding.

 

[bilby]

No, sorry, evolution does not have a “point,” there is no “should not reproduce” in evolution,

What? Then how did the present life on this planet get here if not by reproducing?

It didn't, and the text you quoted didn't even slightly hint that it did. You should re-read it, and try to understand it l, before reacting to it.

Please explain to me how life is all around us without being born or otherwise hatched from an egg?

Nobody has suggested that such an absurdity is the case, so no explanation is required. You should re-read the text you quoted, and try to understand it l, before reacting to it.

Virtually all life on this planet has a finite period it can live so it must reproduce or it then becomes extinct.

Trilobite - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Yes, everyone here knows that.

And yes that is evolution.

No, it's just natural selection.

 

[Elixir]

how did the present life on this planet get here if not by reproducing?

Gee, sounds like you're ready to accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior, Creator and Protector. @RVonse. No?

 

[TomC]

Evolution does arise from natural selection.

Dog breeds arose from selective breeding.

Selective breeding is artificial selection, but the end result is not that different. Different environments result in miniature dachshunds and massive pit bulls.

To me, the salient feature of this story, if it's true, is the abject hypocrisy. This "VP hopeful" claims to want protection for the innocent, while also bragging about shooting a dog rather than training it well or finding it a more suitable home.

Apparently, Ms Noem doesn't care much about protecting or providing for Innocents if they don't serve her purposes. She'll just shoot 'em.

It's bad enough when it is a dog. Why she would do differently when it's a mentally ill human or political opponent is anybody's guess. I see no reason to believe she would.

It's the fascist way. Quietly find a Final Solution.
Tom

 

[pood]

No, sorry, evolution does not have a “point,” there is no “should not reproduce” in evolution,

What? Then how did the present life on this planet get here if not by reproducing? Please explain to me how life is all around us without being born or otherwise hatched from an egg? Virtually all life on this planet has a finite period it can live so it must reproduce or it then becomes extinct.

What? How does this even address what I wrote? You wrote, “The whole point of evolution is to sift out the non fit actors who should not reproduce,” and I was simply pointing out that this sentence is pure bullshit from the first word to the last. Evolution does not have “a point” and does not somehow decree or dictate who “should” or “should not” reproduce.

 

[laughing dog]

The conservative in this instance made the easy choice the evolutionary Darwin decision based on only fittest will survive. Removing a chicking eating dog from the reproduction pool of other fit animals who don't eat chickens.

The “hard” option was to take the time and care to properly train the dog. show Christian compassion, to save a dog that is not nearly as fit as others .

Honestly, I love animals myself and believe they are Gods gift to all of us. But for all the do gooders out there, at least be more honest with what this is all really about. Because there are real consequences even for acting compassionate.

WTF are babbling about Darwinian selection? as Politesse pointed out, this is not about evolution or survival of the fittest.

It is about a smug stupid lazy jackass who confuses her incompetence with “making a hard choice”.

Of course it is about evolution. Humans (both smart and stupid) are an integral part of the theory of evolution just like the rest of the animal knigdom. Human actors also affect other animals as part of their natural selection. If a human kills a dog how is that any difference to a shark killing a dumb human in its waters?

Yes. Sharks kill to eat and survive.

The whole point of evolution is to sift out the non fit actors who should not reproduce.

So that dog should have killed the lazy stupid alleged human?