Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When are we, as humans, going to evolve and stop "owning" any animals? There are FAR FAR too many animals on this planet, especially the human kind.

I'm with you brother. But first let's get rid of these ridiculous bans. One thing at a time.

I can't understand these people who think that because someone, somewhere writes a rule on a piece of paper the rest of us all have to follow it. It makes no sense to me at all. Surely the rest of us should continue to make our own judgments about what is right and wrong and ignore rules which go against our consciences and morality.

That's what the whole civil rights movement was about after all - ignoring rules that were immoral.

How can anyone think it's OK to discrimnate against dogs in this way?

Completely missing my point, and I'm nobody's "brother." I'm simply pointing out that human use/ownership//interaction with/dominion over animals must come to a complete end.

Also, pointing out there are a few billion too many humans existing on planet earth. Time to depopulate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When are we, as humans, going to evolve and stop "owning" any animals? There are FAR FAR too many animals on this planet, especially the human kind.

I'm with you brother. But first let's get rid of these ridiculous bans. One thing at a time.

I can't understand these people who think that because someone, somewhere writes a rule on a piece of paper the rest of us all have to follow it. It makes no sense to me at all. Surely the rest of us should continue to make our own judgments about what is right and wrong and ignore rules which go against our consciences and morality.

That's what the whole civil rights movement was about after all - ignoring rules that were immoral.

How can anyone think it's OK to discrimnate against dogs in this way?

My argument does not depend on false equivalencies at all. The proposition consists of "we must follow the rules because they are rules". My counter argument is very simple

1. We should not follow rules because they are rules. Comaprisons to the civil rights movement or Nazis are perfectly valid here and not false equivalence because I am not claiming tha the issues addressed by the rulesets in question are equivalent. I am making the very basic claim that a rule should not be followed just because it exists, but instead because it is moral. And when it is immoral it should not be followed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When are we, as humans, going to evolve and stop "owning" any animals? There are FAR FAR too many animals on this planet, especially the human kind.

I'm with you brother. But first let's get rid of these ridiculous bans. One thing at a time.

I can't understand these people who think that because someone, somewhere writes a rule on a piece of paper the rest of us all have to follow it. It makes no sense to me at all. Surely the rest of us should continue to make our own judgments about what is right and wrong and ignore rules which go against our consciences and morality.

That's what the whole civil rights movement was about after all - ignoring rules that were immoral.

How can anyone think it's OK to discrimnate against dogs in this way?

What rights does a dog have? You understand that if your dog was running free in the countryside on a persons farm they have a right to shoot your dog to protect their livestock. Your dog is an animal and is only protected from cruel and unusual treatment. Your dog is property and needs to be licensed and registered within the county it is owned. Your dog is also owned. Your dog is not recognized as anything more than property like your car. It has no inherent rights. It can be put down for any number of reasons, it can be bred, it can be used for labor or entertainment. It has no choice regarding any of these possible paths.

It can be a service dog, it can be a racing dog, it can be breeding dog, a hunting dog, a bomb sniffing dog, a search and rescue dog, it can be used to protect farm animals, it can be used in police work. It can be any of these things with choice. It can be bred with the sole purpose of developing traits that are used for any of the above scenarios.

In short, the dog is what society allows it to be, and in regards of some county parks it is not allowed on them. Just as there are places that you are also denied entry.

You're describing all the rules. Yes - those are the rules. I'm pointing out that those rules are wrong and we have a duty to disobey them. Once upon a time we had rules that defined certain people as slaves. Then we had rules that black people couldn't enter some businesses, or sit in some seats on buses. No doubt by your logic we would still be following those rules - because rules are rules and must be followed.

Should people have followed those rules?

Should we follow the dog rules today? Did dogs get to vote on those rules? I didn't think so. You are a dog slaver.

While I certainly enjoy your trolling I'm willing to continue to play along with your bit as long as you actually make a case beyond false equivalencies. I know you're goofing but commit better and make a actual argument beyond satirical talking points.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When are we, as humans, going to evolve and stop "owning" any animals? There are FAR FAR too many animals on this planet, especially the human kind.

I'm with you brother. But first let's get rid of these ridiculous bans. One thing at a time.

I can't understand these people who think that because someone, somewhere writes a rule on a piece of paper the rest of us all have to follow it. It makes no sense to me at all. Surely the rest of us should continue to make our own judgments about what is right and wrong and ignore rules which go against our consciences and morality.

That's what the whole civil rights movement was about after all - ignoring rules that were immoral.

How can anyone think it's OK to discrimnate against dogs in this way?

What rights does a dog have? You understand that if your dog was running free in the countryside on a persons farm they have a right to shoot your dog to protect their livestock. Your dog is an animal and is only protected from cruel and unusual treatment. Your dog is property and needs to be licensed and registered within the county it is owned. Your dog is also owned. Your dog is not recognized as anything more than property like your car. It has no inherent rights. It can be put down for any number of reasons, it can be bred, it can be used for labor or entertainment. It has no choice regarding any of these possible paths.

It can be a service dog, it can be a racing dog, it can be breeding dog, a hunting dog, a bomb sniffing dog, a search and rescue dog, it can be used to protect farm animals, it can be used in police work. It can be any of these things with choice. It can be bred with the sole purpose of developing traits that are used for any of the above scenarios.

In short, the dog is what society allows it to be, and in regards of some county parks it is not allowed on them. Just as there are places that you are also denied entry.

You're describing all the rules. Yes - those are the rules. I'm pointing out that those rules are wrong and we have a duty to disobey them. Once upon a time we had rules that defined certain people as slaves. Then we had rules that black people couldn't enter some businesses, or sit in some seats on buses. No doubt by your logic we would still be following those rules - because rules are rules and must be followed.

Should people have followed those rules?

Should we follow the dog rules today? Did dogs get to vote on those rules? I didn't think so. You are a dog slaver.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When are we, as humans, going to evolve and stop "owning" any animals? There are FAR FAR too many animals on this planet, especially the human kind.

I'm with you brother. But first let's get rid of these ridiculous bans. One thing at a time.

I can't understand these people who think that because someone, somewhere writes a rule on a piece of paper the rest of us all have to follow it. It makes no sense to me at all. Surely the rest of us should continue to make our own judgments about what is right and wrong and ignore rules which go against our consciences and morality.

That's what the whole civil rights movement was about after all - ignoring rules that were immoral.

How can anyone think it's OK to discrimnate against dogs in this way?

What rights does a dog have? You understand that if your dog was running free in the countryside on a persons farm they have a right to shoot your dog to protect their livestock. Your dog is an animal and is only protected from cruel and unusual treatment. Your dog is property and needs to be licensed and registered within the county it is owned. Your dog is also owned. Your dog is not recognized as anything more than property like your car. It has no inherent rights. It can be put down for any number of reasons, it can be bred, it can be used for labor or entertainment. It has no choice regarding any of these possible paths.

It can be a service dog, it can be a racing dog, it can be breeding dog, a hunting dog, a bomb sniffing dog, a search and rescue dog, it can be used to protect farm animals, it can be used in police work. It can be any of these things with choice. It can be bred with the sole purpose of developing traits that are used for any of the above scenarios.

In short, the dog is what society allows it to be, and in regards of some county parks it is not allowed on them. Just as there are places that you are also denied entry.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When are we, as humans, going to evolve and stop "owning" any animals? There are FAR FAR too many animals on this planet, especially the human kind.

I'm with you brother. But first let's get rid of these ridiculous bans. One thing at a time.

I can't understand these people who think that because someone, somewhere writes a rule on a piece of paper the rest of us all have to follow it. It makes no sense to me at all. Surely the rest of us should continue to make our own judgments about what is right and wrong and ignore rules which go against our consciences and morality.

That's what the whole civil rights movement was about after all - ignoring rules that were immoral.

How can anyone think it's OK to discrimnate against dogs in this way?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When are we, as humans, going to evolve and stop "owning" any animals? There are FAR FAR too many animals on this planet, especially the human kind.

I'm with you brother. But first let's get rid of these ridiculous bans. One thing at a time.

I can't understand these people who think that because someone, somewhere writes a rule on a piece of paper the rest of us all have to follow it. It makes no sense to me at all. Surely the rest of us should continue to make our own judgments about what is right and wrong and ignore rules which go against our consciences and morality.

That's what the whole civil rights movement was about after all - ignoring rules that were immoral.

How can anyone think it's OK to discrimnate against dogs in this way?

What rights does a dog have? You understand that if your dog was running free in the countryside on a persons farm they have a right to shoot your dog to protect their livestock. Your dog is an animal and is only protected from cruel and unusual treatment. Your dog is property and needs to be licensed and registered within the county it is owned. Your dog is also owned. Your dog is not recognized as anything more than property like your car. It has no inherent rights. It can be put down for any number of reasons, it can be bred, it can be used for labor or entertainment. It has no choice regarding any of these possible paths.

It can be a service dog, it can be a racing dog, it can be breeding dog, a hunting dog, a bomb sniffing dog, a search and rescue dog, it can be used to protect farm animals, it can be used in police work. It can be any of these things without choice. It can be bred with the sole purpose of developing traits that are used for any of the above scenarios.

In short, the dog is what society allows it to be, and in regards of some county parks it is not allowed on them. Just as there are places that you are also denied entry.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When are we, as humans, going to evolve and stop "owning" any animals? There are FAR FAR too many animals on this planet, especially the human kind.

I'm with you brother. But first let's get rid of these ridiculous bans. One thing at a time.

I can't understand these people who think that because someone, somewhere writes a rule on a piece of paper the rest of us all have to follow it. It makes no sense to me at all. Surely the rest of us should continue to make our own judgments about what is right and wrong and ignore rules which go against our consciences and morality.

That's what the whole civil rights movement was about after all - ignoring rules that were immoral.

How can anyone think it's OK to discrimnate against dogs in this way?

Anonymous wrote:When are we, as humans, going to evolve and stop "owning" any animals? There are FAR FAR too many animals on this planet, especially the human kind.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When a field is posted no dogs like at sully so you have to walk past the sign with your dog, then it is someone saying the rules don’t apply to me.
When a parent yells at Ref when told not to, same thing
When parents yell at each other cursing they break the law of society
We have rules so people can get along.
There are always people who don’t like the rules or don’t follow them. Dog lover no one cares that your dog wants to say hi. I love dogs. I don’t love your dog and when you tel me he is just friendly I don’t know you or your dog. I don’t walk up to strangers and lick them smell their crotch and then have my wife tell you I’m harmless.
Just admit you are someone who intentionally doesn’t follow t rules. You are who you are. It’s not your dogs fault it’s yours

Not sure what (or who) you are talking about, but I'm the poster who pointed out that leashed dogs are allowed at Fairfax County Parks. I don't take my dog onto the field (inside the fence) at Sully (or anywhere else there is a sign clearly prohibiting dogs). On the walking paths or grassy area outside of the fence at Sully, dogs are fine. That is where my dog and I have watched my kids' games when I've taken him there.

I keep my dog leashed and under control at all times. I do not let him interact with anyone without their consent. I prefer when strangers don't interact with him without my consent either (or let their unwatched kids do so). Most dog owners are the same way.

It seems like you just don't like dogs. Either that or you are one of those obsessively negative people who focus on the minority of bad things and ignore the majority of good things. Either way I feel sorry for you.

This weekend my kid had one game at a school field, one at a county field, and the other at a private venue which does have a no dog policy. So the dog only came to one game. Shockingly, he did not smell anyone's crotch or run onto any fields. He did lick a few hands, but only of people who presented their hands to be licked. He's a cute dog. He thinks everyone in the world exists to be love and be loved, and that's the way he looks at everyone he sees. People smile when they see him. The world needs more smiles.

Some people certainly smile and others are simply being polite. Follow the rules. The next level of tool is the toy dog owner who has to take their dumb dog everywhere they go. I like dogs just fine but I’m never interested in your stupid slobbering dog energy. Whenever you say “oh sorry he is really friendly and just excited” I want to punch you and many others do too.

No. You're the only one who wants to punch someone for owning a dog.

No, I want to punch the owner who can’t control their dumb dog when they are jumping all over me, especially at a location where the dog is not allowed. I don’t blame the dog but I do blame you, leave it home or keep it under control.

You're still the only dysfunctional moron who feels the desire to punch someone over a dog's behavior. And don;t blame me - I don't own a dog - but nor am I so gloriously selfish that I think I have the right to ban dogs from the open air just because I prefer things without them. You are a monstrously selfish person.

I'm certainly not going to punch the dog but I'd punch the owner who can't control the dog. Keep your dumb, slobbering, jumping dog away form people you don't know, follow the stated rules and you'll be fine. If I get knocked, pushed, scratched or worse because of your dog then we have a situation.

I'm not the one banning dogs. If the a sign is posted it is the rule of that park period. Some allow it some don't. Some roads you can drive 70mph some are 25mph.

Dogs cannot be banned from parks, any more than birds, deer, or spiders can. You are like the giant who built a wall around his garden to prevent the children playing. No doubt he made a rule too.

If a park authority decides to ban dogs they can. Dogs are not allowed in many public areas. In fact, some parks may ban dogs in order to protect the birds, rabbits, dear and other wildlife so that they are not disturbed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When a field is posted no dogs like at sully so you have to walk past the sign with your dog, then it is someone saying the rules don’t apply to me.
When a parent yells at Ref when told not to, same thing
When parents yell at each other cursing they break the law of society
We have rules so people can get along.
There are always people who don’t like the rules or don’t follow them. Dog lover no one cares that your dog wants to say hi. I love dogs. I don’t love your dog and when you tel me he is just friendly I don’t know you or your dog. I don’t walk up to strangers and lick them smell their crotch and then have my wife tell you I’m harmless.
Just admit you are someone who intentionally doesn’t follow t rules. You are who you are. It’s not your dogs fault it’s yours

Not sure what (or who) you are talking about, but I'm the poster who pointed out that leashed dogs are allowed at Fairfax County Parks. I don't take my dog onto the field (inside the fence) at Sully (or anywhere else there is a sign clearly prohibiting dogs). On the walking paths or grassy area outside of the fence at Sully, dogs are fine. That is where my dog and I have watched my kids' games when I've taken him there.

I keep my dog leashed and under control at all times. I do not let him interact with anyone without their consent. I prefer when strangers don't interact with him without my consent either (or let their unwatched kids do so). Most dog owners are the same way.

It seems like you just don't like dogs. Either that or you are one of those obsessively negative people who focus on the minority of bad things and ignore the majority of good things. Either way I feel sorry for you.

This weekend my kid had one game at a school field, one at a county field, and the other at a private venue which does have a no dog policy. So the dog only came to one game. Shockingly, he did not smell anyone's crotch or run onto any fields. He did lick a few hands, but only of people who presented their hands to be licked. He's a cute dog. He thinks everyone in the world exists to be love and be loved, and that's the way he looks at everyone he sees. People smile when they see him. The world needs more smiles.

Some people certainly smile and others are simply being polite. Follow the rules. The next level of tool is the toy dog owner who has to take their dumb dog everywhere they go. I like dogs just fine but I’m never interested in your stupid slobbering dog energy. Whenever you say “oh sorry he is really friendly and just excited” I want to punch you and many others do too.

No. You're the only one who wants to punch someone for owning a dog.

No, I want to punch the owner who can’t control their dumb dog when they are jumping all over me, especially at a location where the dog is not allowed. I don’t blame the dog but I do blame you, leave it home or keep it under control.

You're still the only dysfunctional moron who feels the desire to punch someone over a dog's behavior. And don;t blame me - I don't own a dog - but nor am I so gloriously selfish that I think I have the right to ban dogs from the open air just because I prefer things without them. You are a monstrously selfish person.

I'm certainly not going to punch the dog but I'd punch the owner who can't control the dog. Keep your dumb, slobbering, jumping dog away form people you don't know, follow the stated rules and you'll be fine. If I get knocked, pushed, scratched or worse because of your dog then we have a situation.

I'm not the one banning dogs. If the a sign is posted it is the rule of that park period. Some allow it some don't. Some roads you can drive 70mph some are 25mph.

Dogs cannot be banned from parks, any more than birds, deer, or spiders can. You are like the giant who built a wall around his garden to prevent the children playing. No doubt he made a rule too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When a field is posted no dogs like at sully so you have to walk past the sign with your dog, then it is someone saying the rules don’t apply to me.
When a parent yells at Ref when told not to, same thing
When parents yell at each other cursing they break the law of society
We have rules so people can get along.
There are always people who don’t like the rules or don’t follow them. Dog lover no one cares that your dog wants to say hi. I love dogs. I don’t love your dog and when you tel me he is just friendly I don’t know you or your dog. I don’t walk up to strangers and lick them smell their crotch and then have my wife tell you I’m harmless.
Just admit you are someone who intentionally doesn’t follow t rules. You are who you are. It’s not your dogs fault it’s yours

Not sure what (or who) you are talking about, but I'm the poster who pointed out that leashed dogs are allowed at Fairfax County Parks. I don't take my dog onto the field (inside the fence) at Sully (or anywhere else there is a sign clearly prohibiting dogs). On the walking paths or grassy area outside of the fence at Sully, dogs are fine. That is where my dog and I have watched my kids' games when I've taken him there.

I keep my dog leashed and under control at all times. I do not let him interact with anyone without their consent. I prefer when strangers don't interact with him without my consent either (or let their unwatched kids do so). Most dog owners are the same way.

It seems like you just don't like dogs. Either that or you are one of those obsessively negative people who focus on the minority of bad things and ignore the majority of good things. Either way I feel sorry for you.

This weekend my kid had one game at a school field, one at a county field, and the other at a private venue which does have a no dog policy. So the dog only came to one game. Shockingly, he did not smell anyone's crotch or run onto any fields. He did lick a few hands, but only of people who presented their hands to be licked. He's a cute dog. He thinks everyone in the world exists to be love and be loved, and that's the way he looks at everyone he sees. People smile when they see him. The world needs more smiles.

Some people certainly smile and others are simply being polite. Follow the rules. The next level of tool is the toy dog owner who has to take their dumb dog everywhere they go. I like dogs just fine but I’m never interested in your stupid slobbering dog energy. Whenever you say “oh sorry he is really friendly and just excited” I want to punch you and many others do too.

No. You're the only one who wants to punch someone for owning a dog.

No, I want to punch the owner who can’t control their dumb dog when they are jumping all over me, especially at a location where the dog is not allowed. I don’t blame the dog but I do blame you, leave it home or keep it under control.

You're still the only dysfunctional moron who feels the desire to punch someone over a dog's behavior. And don;t blame me - I don't own a dog - but nor am I so gloriously selfish that I think I have the right to ban dogs from the open air just because I prefer things without them. You are a monstrously selfish person.

I'm certainly not going to punch the dog but I'd punch the owner who can't control the dog. Keep your dumb, slobbering, jumping dog away form people you don't know, follow the stated rules and you'll be fine. If I get knocked, pushed, scratched or worse because of your dog then we have a situation.

I'm not the one banning dogs. If the a sign is posted it is the rule of that park period. Some allow it some don't. Some roads you can drive 70mph some are 25mph.