..... he adopted stray cats from Boston-area shelters -- and then dissected them.

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Quick!!!! Make her a citizen and have her run for Lott's seat in the Senate!!!!

Woman who nursed puppies has no regrets

A young Norwegian mother who took a litter of puppies to her own breast when her dog died giving birth remains proud of her unusual move. Now, six weeks later, both her infant son and eight of the puppies that survived are crawling around the family's Christmas tree in Siggerud, west of Oslo.



Kine Skiaker, her son Emil and eight puppies are celebrating Christmas at the Skiaker home west of Oslo.

PHOTO: OLAV OLSEN
RELATED ARTICLES
Young mother nursed orphaned pups - 11.11.02

"I've had lots of reaction, mostly positive," Kine Skiaker tells newspaper Aftenposten. But Skiaker also had to tolerate some less-than-flattering remarks.
"No one has complained to me directly, but I've heard from others that some people thought it was disgusting that I would nurse Emil (her son) and the puppies at the same time," she said. "I just have to tolerate that, and can only say that I washed myself thoroughly after I'd nursed the puppies."

Skiaker says she's also been told by experts that she helped save the puppies' lives. "That makes me feel good," she said. "Then I can accept that some think what I did was nauseating."

The drama began Friday November 8 when Skiaker's Canarian Warren Hound, named Aida, started giving birth to a litter of 14 puppies. Suddenly the puppies stopped coming and the next stop was the vet's office.

In the end, both Aida and three of the puppies died, while another three died later.

Those that survived were in desperate need of nourishment, and that's when Skiaker impulsively took them to her breast. She fed them over that first weekend, until surrogate mother dogs could be found to take over.

Today, the eight surviving puppies (four males and four females) are back in the Skiaker's home and in good health. So is baby Emil, now five months old and happy to play with his canine comrades in the Skiakers' living room.

One of the puppies will be soon be delivered to new owners in Kongsberg. She's the only one with a name, so far, and it's Aida, after her late mother.
 
If the election were held today, I would probably vote for him, depending on who his opponents are. I knew it would only be a matter of time before the "truth behind Bill Frist" articles begin to surface. He also broke up with a fiance prior to their wedding, so he must be a very, very bad man.

As bonosloveslave pointed out, students of veterinary medicine dissect cats, as well as dogs and other furry friends, quite often. I know someone who attended medical school just as Senator Frist did, and they dissected cats before they moved up to dissecting human cadavers. The human cadavers were from people who had died of natural causes and donated their remains to science in advance. The cats were not necessarily natural deaths. In 6th grade science class, we dissected a frog and a baby pig.

What is your opinon on animals used for research for medical cures? I hat eto inform you of this, but animals have even perished for AIDS research.

The lady who nursed the puppies may have a chance in Mississippi as duck hunting and other bird hunting is very popular there, and dogs are a valuable part of that practice.

At least for the sake of consistency, ALL of the people criticizing Senator Frist for this are 100% vegetarians.

~U2Alabama
 
U2Bama said:

What is your opinon on animals used for research for medical cures? I hate to inform you of this, but animals have even perished for AIDS research.

Overall I think animal research is a good thing, as long as it is humanely carried out. Often, we are able to 'kill 2 birds with one stone' - drugs or treatments may end up being useful for both humans and animals at the end of a project. There are quite a few drugs out there that are safe or have few side effects in animals but ended up not being suitable for human use - many animals have still benefited.

Like it or not, humans are more valuable than animals, and though not all research is applicable across all species, we can get a lot of good info from research using animals and spare many human lives in the process. When it is possilbe to use other means for research, such as computer simulations or past case studies, I would wholeheartedly say to use that info first.
 
I normally don't post in FYM because I'm not overly fond of controversy. But I saw the heading of this thread, and honestly, I thought of Jack the Ripper! I'm reading Patricia Cornwell's book about him, "Portrait of a Killer". This is not cool about the cats.... ugh.
 
We need Martha to keep people on topic.

1. This is not about animal research, these cat killings were not done as part of his course study.
2. To go to the humane society and adopt pets to kill them is illegal, the statue of limitations has expired by now.
3. We don?t live in a world were people are punished for your perception of God?s sins. In the real world lying and murder are not equal.
4. He was a med student. He was over 18 years, an adult. He broke a law. Maybe, a felony? A law breaker leading the republicans? Any of these cats could have been someones family pet.
5. If your family pet got loose and was at the humane society, would you want it to end like this.
6. I don?t believe our Vet-student or our Med-student would ever dream of doing anything like this.



Some of the rationalization is very interesting to me. To give the alternative of killing children or this behavior is absurd.

The alternative is to follow the course study and dissect animals in class or break the law and kill what we consider family pets.

All that being said, the reason I posted this was not to slam him. But, to ask the question ?Would you vote for him.?" I gave my answer in my initial post.
 
Re: We need Martha to keep people on topic.

deep said:





All that being said, the reason I posted this was not to slam him. I gave my answer in my initial post.
Hi Bias-
:|
plez define slam..
is it just less than besmirching one's good character?:eyebrow:
help us out.

thank u..

DB9
 
Last edited:
As some other people have pointed out, dissection is common in medical schools, allied health schools, nursing schools, and anywhere else you have to learn anatomy and go to those labs to pass the :censored: course. The students don't really have a choice so it's not fair to hold them responsible for the morality of the thing.
OK, enough controversy for today. :lol: :lol:
 
U2Bama said:
If the election were held today, I would probably vote for him, depending on who his opponents are. I knew it would only be a matter of time before the "truth behind Bill Frist" articles begin to surface. He also broke up with a fiance prior to their wedding, so he must be a very, very bad man.


I think that's true for all politicians though, in fact for most people who are "famous" in any way. It's not specifically because he's a Republican.

As bonosloveslave pointed out, students of veterinary medicine dissect cats, as well as dogs and other furry friends, quite often.


There is a world of difference between a student of medicine or veterinary science dissecting an animal as part of their studies and adopting an animal under the pretense of giving it a good home and then killing it and dissecting it. It's not just that he dissected an animal, it's that he intentionally killed a healthy cat which he pretended he was going to offer a home to.

People often give pets to a humane society etc because they're not able to take care of them anymore and they want them to have a good home...how would you feel if you had to give up your pet and you found that someone had adopted it in order to kill it? If he hadn't killed those animals they could have been adopted by people who would have given them a good home for the rest of their lives.
 
There are more articles out there on Frist.

I am not going to post them, all.

The initial question was could you vote for someone who did this.

Many people have a right/ wrong mentality. Evil doers, etc. Either you are with us or against us.

Life is more complicated than that.

This seems to be prevalent in Conservatives groups.

It seems to me that people with that thinking have tried to color this behavior as something different than it was.

At election time, in the voting booth, we really only have two choices. No reason to be partisan 24/7. Save it for the booth.

Why it is not a slam in my opinion is because it is public information, true and something that was not in the discussion to hail Frist as the Second Coming.



After all, Rep r ppl too. They sin, lie, break laws and occasionally get elevated to high office.


Maybe, some of you might have liked it better if I posted, would you vote for a man that goes to Africa and does surgery in villages under the light of flashlights.

What would be the point in that?
 
Re: Re: Re: Hmmmm

bonosloveslave said:


I guess what I meant is, we all decide for ourselves (consciously or not) 'how bad is too bad'. Some think Frist shouldn't be elected if he runs for prez because of the cat situation. Others would say, well, if he murdered a person, that would be REALLY bad, then he definitely shouldn't get to be prez. Some would say the same if there was adultery in his past, where others would say who cares? What if he shoplifted as a 10 year old? At 40? At 10 years old, he would know what he was doing was wrong, but I bet alot of people would cut him some slack, vs. an incident occuring at 40 - BUT - shoplifting is shoplifting is shoplifting...........

Sorry to use these crappy examples, I don't mean to imply that Frist has done any of the above things :huh:

*WE* judge what will disqualify someone (in our eyes) from being a worthy leader of our country. In the big scheme of things, God doesn't keep a point sheet when we do something wrong - "Uhoh, white lie = 1 point - oh, there he goes again, stole an extra newspaper = 5 points..."

US3 the "google"-meister breathes a sigh of relief!
 
Dreadsox said:
Quick!!!! Make her a citizen and have her run for Lott's seat in the Senate!!!!

Woman who nursed puppies has no regrets

A young Norwegian mother who took a litter of puppies to her own breast when her dog died giving birth remains proud of her unusual move. Now, six weeks later, both her infant son and eight of the puppies that survived are crawling around the family's Christmas tree in Siggerud, west of Oslo.



Kine Skiaker, her son Emil and eight puppies are celebrating Christmas at the Skiaker home west of Oslo.

PHOTO: OLAV OLSEN
RELATED ARTICLES
Young mother nursed orphaned pups - 11.11.02

"I've had lots of reaction, mostly positive," Kine Skiaker tells newspaper Aftenposten. But Skiaker also had to tolerate some less-than-flattering remarks.
"No one has complained to me directly, but I've heard from others that some people thought it was disgusting that I would nurse Emil (her son) and the puppies at the same time," she said. "I just have to tolerate that, and can only say that I washed myself thoroughly after I'd nursed the puppies."

Skiaker says she's also been told by experts that she helped save the puppies' lives. "That makes me feel good," she said. "Then I can accept that some think what I did was nauseating."

The drama began Friday November 8 when Skiaker's Canarian Warren Hound, named Aida, started giving birth to a litter of 14 puppies. Suddenly the puppies stopped coming and the next stop was the vet's office.

In the end, both Aida and three of the puppies died, while another three died later.

Those that survived were in desperate need of nourishment, and that's when Skiaker impulsively took them to her breast. She fed them over that first weekend, until surrogate mother dogs could be found to take over.

Today, the eight surviving puppies (four males and four females) are back in the Skiaker's home and in good health. So is baby Emil, now five months old and happy to play with his canine comrades in the Skiakers' living room.

One of the puppies will be soon be delivered to new owners in Kongsberg. She's the only one with a name, so far, and it's Aida, after her late mother.

wonder what the public breast feeding laws are in norway.
Lady! Get a pump and an eye dropper!

In a related matter lil Emil has been reported to compulsively scratch behind his ear, and in a "pavlovian-like" manner pee on newspaper when it is laid out.
 
deep said:
There are more articles out there on Frist.

1-I am not going to post them, all.

2-The initial question was could you vote for someone who did this.

3-Many people have a right/ wrong mentality. Evil doers, etc. Either you are with us or against us.

4-Life is more complicated than that.

5-This seems to be prevalent in Conservatives groups.



6-Why it is not a slam in my opinion is because it is public information, true and something that was not in the discussion to hail Frist as the Second Coming.



7-After all, Rep r ppl too. They sin, lie, break laws and occasionally get elevated to high office.


8-Maybe, some of you might have liked it better if I posted, would you vote for a man that goes to Africa and does surgery in villages under the light of flashlights.

9-What would be the point in that?

chain/Hi Bias/deep and other various sundry alters

1--that must of took some real restraint.;)

2-yes based on he qwikly coming clean, and his track record in public office.:)

3-swipe at GW.*

4-der..:huh:

5- another predictable swipe at a certain group.:up:

6-i dont see conservative members posting threads about character flaws in ppl from over a quarter CENTURY ago.:huh:
Other than to denengrate this person's character that has NOTHING do w his service NOW, whats the purpose of this thread?

7- that would be correct, however when caught they-
-come clean
-know the definition of "is:"-:|
and take ownership of their errors and responsibilities.
thank u very much.:)

8-that would be above you, based on your posting history here.:|

9-my point exactly.:|

peace-
Out

Diamond
 
Last edited:
Re: Re: Re: Hmmmm

bonosloveslave said:


*WE* judge what will disqualify someone (in our eyes) from being a worthy leader of our country. In the big scheme of things, God doesn't keep a point sheet when we do something wrong - "Uhoh, white lie = 1 point - oh, there he goes again, stole an extra newspaper = 5 points..." When we commit any sin, big or small (in our eyes), God's heart is broken and we are seperated from Him. When we can admit what we did was wrong and ask for forgiveness, the relationship is restored, and it is like that sin is cast to the ocean floor, never to be dredged up again. SOOOOOOO nice that Christ is able to do that, I think we would all be alot better off if we were capable of doing the same.


Keeping it in context w/ the protagonist of this thread...
And, please excuse the pun, but allow me to play "devil's advocate" here. So then we are to forgive Clinton as he has apologized, went to church carrying that big bible w/ the cross on it, and actually prayed w/ a reverend? Moreover he was "acquitted"(unless impeachment is considered sentence) of his crime by a jury of his "peers?.
 
Re: Hmmmm

bonosloveslave said:
Hi all,

Gotta ponder this one for a bit. As some of you know, I am a veterinary student, and animal dissection is part of my curriculum. My guess is, Frist was trying to further his understanding of anatomy - would you rather he went out, adopted a child, and dissected the child to get his anatomy lesson? As much as I love animals and my chosen profession, animals are NOT humans. I'm not saying that what he did was right, there are other ways he could have acquired the knowledge he was trying to gain. But this is something he did a long time ago, we all have done stupid things that we probably wouldn't have done if we had thought them through a bit more. NO ONE is perfect, ANY presidential candidate is going to have skeletons in their closet. He has expressed remorse for his actions. Just remember - in God's eyes, all sin is equal. Lying, envy, gluttony, etc is just as repulsive to Him as murder.

I'll even take this a little further. IF the cat was euthanised humanley before dissection I don't know if it's really a horrible thing. I've done dissections in school ..those animals have to be killed in order for us to disect them. For god sakes ppl you think cows are treated humanely ????? pigs???? Chickens???

it's a bit hypocritical to call him out on this considering the culture of america doesn't treat any animals particualrly well..EXCEPT for housepets.




As long as frist understands that the lives of those animals were valuable yet served to make hima better surgeon..I can let him off on this



if you have a surgoen...would you like to have a guy that had never done an animal dissection??

thousands of cows,pigs,turkeys,chickens are killed everyday to feed america does anyone say a word ...no...but a man disects a cat and uses the knowledge to serve humanity...and he's a monster.....ridiculous
 
Last edited:
those chicken mcnuggets are starting to dance---::dance: in my abdomen now..:angry:
thank Arun;)

this is not sexy:angry:
 
Last edited:
Re: Re: Hmmmm

Arun V said:


I'll even take this a little further. IF the cat was euthanised humanley before dissection I don't know if it's really a horrible thing. I've done dissections in school ..those animals have to be killed in order for us to disect them. For god sakes ppl you think cows are treated humanely ????? pigs???? Chickens???

Arun, I understand what you're saying here, but that's not the point as I see it. I work in a humane society, and a huge part of our mission is to find new, loving homes for animals that have suffered neglect, abuse and abandonment. We interview every candidate very carefully and have a list of known animal abusers.

If someone says the wrong thing in the interview, they can't have the pet. Furthermore, if someone adopts animals over and over again, they are immediately suspended from further adopting as this usually means they are selling the animals to labs, or in this case dissecting them themselves. I'm not sure what rules that humane society has, and why he wasn't caught. Maybe he went to different societies each time.

The point is, everyone can understand the need for students to dissect, as it has been mentioned, that should be happening as part of their classwork. (there are even supposedly good electronic alternatives, but I don't know muh about that and that's not the point). But (as has already been mentioned again) they should NOT be going to Humane Societies under the pretenses of adopting a pet. That is horrible. At least he admited what he did was wrong....then again of course he would, he's trying to get elected!

(and no, cows, pigs and chickens are not overall treated humanely...I got a free range turkey for Xmas. Yum!) ;)
 
Re: Re: Re: Hmmmm

Mrs. Edge said:


Arun, I understand what you're saying here, but that's not the point as I see it. I work in a humane society, and a huge part of our mission is to find new, loving homes for animals that have suffered neglect, abuse and abandonment. We interview every candidate very carefully and have a list of known animal abusers.

If someone says the wrong thing in the interview, they can't have the pet. Furthermore, if someone adopts animals over and over again, they are immediately suspended from further adopting as this usually means they are selling the animals to labs, or in this case dissecting them themselves. I'm not sure what rules that humane society has, and why he wasn't caught. Maybe he went to different societies each time.

The point is, everyone can understand the need for students to dissect, as it has been mentioned, that should be happening as part of their classwork. (there are even supposedly good electronic alternatives, but I don't know muh about that and that's not the point). But (as has already been mentioned again) they should NOT be going to Humane Societies under the pretenses of adopting a pet. That is horrible. At least he admited what he did was wrong....then again of course he would, he's trying to get elected!

(and no, cows, pigs and chickens are not overall treated humanely...I got a free range turkey for Xmas. Yum!) ;)


1.) electronic alternatives...are crap if you want to learn it you have to see it..up front esp when your planning on being a surgeon....you don't have an electronic option there

2.)....so if I raise an animal with the sole intention of killing it and I take all of it's offspring for the same purpose essentially dooming it and it's lineage to endless slaughter...that's ok

but...I take three or four cats and disect them after euthanising them humanely...and this is horrible?

ok I see...so it's ok to treat an animal inhumanely...as long as it doesn't come from a humane society?
 
my whole problem w the animal right's crowd is this-


favortism of certain speices-
how come its ok to save a baby seal but snuff out a poor little pig? as we eat our BLTs:angry:
how come we can save the dolphins while munching a tuna-fish sandwich?:angry: whats up w that?:huh:

there is a disparity here that needs to b addressed:down:
i say equal rights for all the creatures:up:
not affrimative action for only a select few determined by some self appointed do gooders..:angry::down:

thank u-
DB9
:dance:
 
First of all, I am not some PETA animal rights maniac. Mania and extremism of any kind makes me very uncomforable....with the sole exception of mania towards U2, and of course Beatlemania. ;)

I was a vegetarian for 4 years, but totally fell off the wagon. I wear leather goods, I eat meat. Wherever possible, I order free range meat because at least the animal will have lived a happy life. I think that as long as animals are farmed for a certain purpose and treated humanely in life, and then are euthanized (if only they would do that in factories!) then what happens to their carcass is immaterial to me.

So Arun, I suppose if you were to have a lab animal farm, and the animals were euthenized humanely and then dissected, that would be OK with me. I do NOT believe in senseless cosmetic testing, but that is entirely another subject.

All I was saying about about the Humane Society is that sure, you can adopt the animals and then euthanize them (I can't remember now if he actually did euthanize them, maybe he did) but the Humane Society is NOT an animal lab farm! Can you imagine if people went and adopted orphans and then euthanized them and harvested their organs? It's just a matter of principle that bugs me. To adopt animals from there under these false pretenses is just plain slimy. Let him breed his own animals, or ask his teachers for more animal bodies if he is all that keen on learning more.

At the Humane Society, we work very hard to care for these animals and I might add, people give us donations so that we can continue our work of finding HOMES for these animals. They do not pay to have us sell them off for medical testing. We have a responsibility to the donors, the public and the animals in this regard.

Oh, and as I said, I don't know much about electronic alternatives, but I was putting it out there. I understood that there are some good ones to use in place of frogs etc for general anatomic info, maybe more for high schools and as an additional suppliment in med schools.

diamond, I absolutely agree with you, there are huge discrepancies and hypocricies with animal favouritism (ie horrible to do experiments on bunnies, who cares what happens to "uglier" animals like lizards). And I don't see how a vegetarian who is a vegetarian for moral purposes (not health) can shun meat and wear leather at the same time. I think you are either all the way one or all the way the other.

I believe ALL animals have an important role in our ecosystem, and one should not be favoured over an other. The point about the dolphins is they were getting caught in the tuna nets, which is totally wasteful, cruel and unfair. We should only patronize people who fish responsibly. Anyway, if people are to have dominion over animals, they should take this role with responsibly and grace. Animals, like children are defenseless and have a right to live a full and cruelty free life. Cruelty to animals is just one step on the ladder towards cruelty to people as we all know.


OK, now I am going shopping. Bye! :wave:
 
Well I'm not saying that what first did was RIGHT


I was raised vegetarian on the belief that ALL creatures are equal under god and that one should practice absolute nonviolence towards them.

I only wear leather upon no alternative and choose synthtic whereever possible.




I do not have the same objections to leather for the following reasons

1.) it's usually taken from animals killed in the meat process
2.) it lasts a hell of a lot longer than the meat from the cow and is by far less wasteful

however that is for a another thread.

I'm just saying that to say what he did was wrong is extremley hypocritical considering the values of western culture and the ways animals are viewed/ treated.


Also the orphan point is moot...why?? because we've already determined that killing humans is wrong but killing animals isn't according to the value system here.




I also...am going shopping
 
Back
Top Bottom