The point would not be to teach the water a lesson, but to teach those uppity hydrologists a lesson. The pro-Brexit camp understands that the good folk of Great Britain have had quite enough of those terrible experts.
9 Likes
That’s how the sausage is made though.
3 Likes
Not true - tRump is a very fearful and insecure man, afraid of the entire world outside his protective bubble. He’s managed to successfully isolate himself from almost everyone he doesn’t know or control since he was in school.
2 Likes
I don’t know. I’m torn on this one as this is an objective fact. 
6 Likes
Is smug self-importance also an emotion?
1 Like
Even easier, just make an official statement that humans are scientifically considered animals and since animals can’t feel emotion or pain…
3 Likes
If you can’t feel emotions, how can you fake pain?
2 Likes
For these people, it’s a way of life.
2 Likes
I’m not sure if this is just semantics about the wording of a draft bill, because the spirit of the clause is already covered by UK law.
Animal Welfare Act 2006, section 4
Blockquote (1)A person commits an offence if—
(a)an act of his, or a failure of his to act, causes an animal to suffer,
(b)he knew, or ought reasonably to have known, that the act, or failure to act, would have that effect or be likely to do so,
( c) the animal is a protected animal, and
(d)the suffering is unnecessary.
(2)A person commits an offence if—
(a)he is responsible for an animal,
(b)an act, or failure to act, of another person causes the animal to suffer,
(C )he permitted that to happen or failed to take such steps (whether by way of supervising the other person or otherwise) as were reasonable in all the circumstances to prevent that happening, and
(d)the suffering is unnecessary.
(3)The considerations to which it is relevant to have regard when determining for the purposes of this section whether suffering is unnecessary include—
(a)whether the suffering could reasonably have been avoided or reduced;
(b)whether the conduct which caused the suffering was in compliance with any relevant enactment or any relevant provisions of a licence or code of practice issued under an enactment;
(C )whether the conduct which caused the suffering was for a legitimate purpose, such as—
(i)the purpose of benefiting the animal, or
(ii)the purpose of protecting a person, property or another animal;
(d)whether the suffering was proportionate to the purpose of the conduct concerned;
(e)whether the conduct concerned was in all the circumstances that of a reasonably competent and humane person.
(4)Nothing in this section applies to the destruction of an animal in an appropriate and humane manner.
1 Like
Came here for this. Takes one to know one.
1 Like
Posting how the “UK government votes that animals are incapable of feeling emotion and pain”, then 2 hours later posting “How to win the wishbone wish”, aka having fun with parts of an animal that has been mistreated and killed. :-/
3 Likes
all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others
6 Likes
The god of the Bible sure made a mistake giving humans dominion over the animals. I bet his wife is pissed!
3 Likes
Perhaps because i got confused about who wrote Animal Farm (H.G. Wells?) or about who wrote The Island of Dr. Moreau (George Orwell?), you’ve reminded me of this:
whose chorus line of “Who makes the rules? Someone else!” seems appropriate to the topic.
3 Likes
We get it you are disappointed in BoingBoing… @frauenfelder a candidate for the list.
2 Likes
all animals are equal, but some animals are more tasty than others
Fixed
7 Likes
I hope i’m on the list ;D
Edit: Damn, guess i don’t complain nearly as much as i think i do
1 Like
Believe it or not, there are legal lines that provide minimal protection for animals right now.
Things can, quite profitably, get much worse and apparently will, now.
Try Greenland. Or, as an alternative, move to Scotland; this whole brexit thing is gonna be super crappy for those people, so they will have every reason to split off from the UK.
1 Like
Sentience is impossible to define or measure.
