Just so no young people are misled, rodney's logic is seriously flawed, as always. He said:



"if he wasn't feeding the snake, he would be guilty of animal cruelty also!--due to starving the snake."



But of course no one was suggesting that the better alternative would be to simply not feed the snake. So this is yet another really dumb thing that rodney says.



Then he said,



"One could even argue that not letting him constrict live prey (feeding fresh killed or thawed) is cruelty, because it prevents the normal activity of a wild snake."



And again, no one was even trying to claim this nonsense. This is a common logical fallacy arguement that people with no real arguement put forward, called a red herring, or straw man arguement - but its a logical fallacy. It has no validity whatsoever.



Its really too bad that some people can't bring themselves to focus on the real arguements at hand. SOme people are so desperate to "win" any arguement that they will ignore reason and logic. While anyone with half a brain would recognize them and ignore them, young people may be influenced by the nonsense someone like rodney spews here all the time.



Joe

[ Show Entire Thread ]