JustOneMorePet

Every Pet Deserves A Good Home…

Department of Islamic Justice Bows Down to Muslims Irrational Hatred of Dogs……. SHEER INSANITY !!!!

It’s time to get serious about eliminating Sharia Law, and all Muslim idiocies, like this one, so contact and pressure Congress to get rid of all Muslims consulting government, military, Obama’s administration, universities!!!!  Europe has already political correctnessed themselves onto the road of oblivion.  There is no one blinder than he who will not see and will not learn from others!  Tony~

Dept. of Islamic Justice Bows Down to Muslims Irrational Hatred of D…

barenakedislam – Cross-Posted at TeaParty.org – h/t to Claudia Johnson

Because Muslims consider dogs to be filthy, the cases of pet dogs being poisoned in Europe and Turkey have skyrocketed. And now, this Muslim dog insanity is being submitted to by the Islamopandering Obama Regime, who have ruled that ‘Guide Horses’ must be allowed in shops, restaurants and even on airplanes.

logic from DOJ: Miniature horses are viable alternatives to dogs for individuals with allergies, or for those whose religious beliefs preclude the use of dogs,” the rules state. A recent Justice Department ruling that allows miniature horses to be used instead of dogs as service animals for the blind and handicapped, also mandates that shops, restaurants, hotels and even airlines be forced to allow service horses into their establishments or face lawsuits if they refuse to accommodate horses.
First, let me tell you why the use of horses as service animal is both stupid and cruel to the animals. Horses are NOT domestic animals as dogs and cats are. Horses are not physically compatible with an indoor life in a typical home. Horses, no matter how small, are grazing animals who require several hours a day of outside turnout where they can roam and graze at leisure. Horses cannot be housebroken which means these guide horses are fitted with a diaper – humiliating. To confine a horse to a house with only a limited amount of slow walking as exercise is cruel and unusual punishment.

Horses require a lot more room than dogs.. Dogs are fed and walked a couple of times a day, while horses eat hay and grass and produce waste throughout the day. Even the smallest mini needs an 8-by-10-foot stall and room to run around for exercise. Walking slowly in a harness does not constitute exercise for a horse. A horse is meant to be in an environment where he can move about, small or not, eat throughout the day and be with his buddies.
Horses don’t get fleas, but they do get parasites, ticks and attract flies.
Now that the Department of ‘Islamic’ Justice has ruled that service horses must be allowed in all retail establishments, there will be a run on people getting mini service horses, knowing that they can sue any business or restaurant that refuses to allow them in. I can see CAIR sponsoring a program to give horses to Muslims, just so they can sue even more businesses for ‘Islamophobic’ discrimination.
But just as fast as people may rush to get in on the newest fad, once they find out how difficult it is to properly care for horses, they will abandon them, leaving the animals homeless if it doesn’t work out. It’s not unusual, unfortunately, for them to end up on the slaughterhouse floor because there’s no home for them.
Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) is trying to have this stupid mandate overturned. As he stated:

“What I object to,” said Chaffetz, “is the Department of Justice forcing businesses and restaurants…. think about airplanes. Look, even the Miniature Horse Association has come out and said, look, you can’t potty train, for instance, a horse to the same degree you can a canine. And so it just seems like the federal government, the Department of Justice, is going overboard in issuing a rule. Sure enough, they issued a rule, March 14th, and within a week, restaurants being sued in California for not allowing horses into their restaurant. It just seems absurd, just over the top.
This reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of what the ADA regulations require. Those regulations specifically define "service animals" to include dogs only. As the regulations specifically say, "[o]ther species of animals, whether wild or domestic, trained or untrained, are not service animals for the purposes of this definition." 28 C.F.R. 36.104. A business is required to accommodate service animals — dogs — except where "[t]he animal is out of control and the animal’s handler does not take effective action to control it" or "[t]he animal is not housebroken." 28 C.F.R. 36.302(c). So, even if we’re dealing with a service dog, if it’s not housebroken, a business does not have to let it in.
FOX NEWS Already there is a lawsuit in Los Angeles by Jose Estrada, the plaintiff in the case filed this month in Los Angeles court. His attorney, Morse Mehrban, told FoxNews.com that a dog "doesn’t have the sufficient strength to pull him in his wheelchair."
So Estrada, a paraplegic, uses a 29-inch-high miniature horse named Princess. According to the complaint, the two retail stores being sued "refused to permit said animal" inside along with Estrada last month. The suit says Princess "is housebroken" and would not "compromise" the safety of those two stores. Estrada is suing for "no less than" $4,000 in damages.
The federal rules state that businesses should allow in the horses as long as they’re trained, considering such factors as the size of the horse, whether it’s under control, whether it’s "housebroken," and whether its presence would compromise "legitimate safety requirements."
Amador says the horses cannot be housebroken.
The Guide Horse Foundation, though, says on its website that the horses "learn exactly the same behaviors as a guide dog," and that they "never bite or kick except when attacked." (That is crap! Horses will bite or kick for many reasons. But the biggest problem is horses, by nature, will spook and run away from a myriad of seemingly non-scary objects. I know from many years with horses, that they will spook at a plastic bag blowing in the wind, a piece of white paper on the ground, a loud noise, a dog that runs up to it, rustling leaves, and more. Nearly anything can and will spook a horse at one time or another. And because the horse’s natural instinct is to run away, that is what they will do every time)
The organization could not be reached for comment.
The American Miniature Horse Association does not condone the use of miniature horses for that purpose. Association President Harry Elder applauded those who have received "ADA certification" to train animals but questioned the use of miniature horses. "Although the American Miniature Horse is bred to be intelligent, curious, gentle, sensible, willing to cooperate and easy to train, it remains in all respects physically and instinctively a true horse. The American Miniature Horse can be readily trained to be lead or driven but, in most cases, it would not make a suitable replacement for an animal such as a guide dog," he said in a statement.

Guide Horse NO! Why Miniature Horses should NOT be used as Guide Animals for the Blind. In fact, they are a DANGEROUS alternative to a Guide Dog.
Not that it will do you any good, but you can contact the DOJ here:
Eric Holder
202-353-1555 
http://www.justice.gov/

Related:

Banning Dogs as Pets

Jihad making lives “Ruff” for Dogs in Europe; PETA Silent

Muslims in Spain Declare Jihad on Dogs

Man’s Best Friend in Shariah’s Cruel Crosshairs

Dogs… Pets – Beyond Traditional Islam

The Latest Enemies of Iran: Dogs and Their Owners

Iran Cleric Says Dogs “Unclean” and Not to be Kept as Pets

1 Million Stray Dogs in Iraq to be Culled

Pakistani Blogger Slams Islamic Feast of EID

Operation Bagdad Pups – No Buddy Gets Left Behind

First the Greenies Want Us to Eat Our Dogs… Now the Academics Say it is Insulting to Call Them Pets

Shocking Report… Gov’t to Decide What Pets You Can Own

Help Save USMC Sergeant Rex – Updated

PAKISTANI BLOGGER SLAMS ISLAMIC FEAST OF EID: ‘CALL ME AN INFIDEL’ BUT I CAN‘T ’MAKE MERRY‘ AT ’MASS-MURDERING’ CUTE ANIMALS

June 30, 2012 Posted by | animal abuse, animal behavior, Animal or Pet Related Stories, Animal Rights And Awareness, animals, Dogs, Dogs, Just One More Pet, Man's Best Friend, Pet and Animal Training, Political Change, Service and Military Animals, Stop Animal Cruelty, Unusual Stories, We Are All God's Creatures, Working and Military Dogs and Related | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 15 Comments

Banning Dogs as Pets

This is how it happens, folks. Little by little. Law by law. The proponents of sharia get themselves elected to positions of power – and then, before too long, they start trying to subject the rest of us to it, bit by bit:

Hasan Küçük, Hague councilor for the Islam Democrats, says dogs should be banned as pets in the city, reports De Telegraaf. The Muslim party says that the animals belong in nature, not inside the house. Küçük says that keeping dogs is animal abuse and should therefore be criminalized.

Needless to say, Hasan Küçük’s concerns have nothing whatsoever to do with animal abuse – and everything to do with the fact that Islam considers dogs to be impure. Like women, Jews, and gays, dogs are on the front line of the confrontation in the West between sharia-observant Muslims and the rest of us. When you see Muslims making trouble over dogs, you can bet that it’s just the beginning of all kinds of trouble over all kinds of things that run afoul of Islamic religious law.

To be sure, Küçük’s suggestion – which came in response to a proposal by animal-rights advocates that The Hague be made more dog-friendly – was immediately shot down by other members of the city council. Küçük was undoubtedly not surprised. He knows these things don’t change in a day – they change over time, by a gradual process of wearing down. People like Küçük are exceedingly patient. And they trust in their own patience and intransigence – and in our weakness, our distraction, our readiness to give in, eventually, under steady pressure, on what may seem to us like small matters that are not worth fighting over.

Küçük’s proposal is nothing new. For years now, the Western media have featured, with some frequency, news stories about blind people with guide dogs being refused taxi rides by devout Muslims cabdrivers, being thrown off buses because of complaints by Muslim passengers, or being refused access to stores by devout Muslim shopkeepers. Daniel Pipes has been assiduous in cataloging such cases, some of them dating back to the 1990s, in places ranging from Milwaukee to Melbourne.

The Muslims in these cases invariably argue that their religion commands them not to be around dogs. But it’s not just about dogs but about pretty much every little detail of daily life. The same people who object fiercely to the presence of dogs in their shops or cabs also maintain that their religion commands them not to do, or touch, or say, or see, or be in the vicinity of a great variety of things that are commonplace in the Western world. And once they’ve gotten their way with regard to dogs, they’ll move on to another thing – and then another, and another – at which they take offense, and once again spell out exactly how they expect non-Muslims to change their behavior in order to keep the peace.

It’s the logic of conquerors. But many authorities in the West have bowed to it. In British Columbia, cab drivers whose “honest religious belief…precludes them from transporting certified guide dogs” have been exempted from having to do so. The Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport has alsoworked out a “compromise” between blind people and Muslim cabbies. In Britain, in response to Muslim complaints about “sniffer dogs” used to identify terrorists at airports, authorities limited the dogs’ activities out of “cultural sensitivity.” When sniffer dogs are taken into mosques or Muslim homes, moreover, they’re fitted with “leather bootees” to avoid giving offense.

Generally speaking, as the Muslim percentage of a city’s population climbs, the demands for appeasement grow more and more aggressive. Last year,reports Soeren Kern, Islamic groups in the Catalan city of Lérida – which is 20% Muslim – called for a ban on dogs on public transport and in certain public spaces on the grounds that their presence violates Muslims’ “religious freedom and their right to live according to Islamic principles.” The city’s refusal to introduce such a ban was succeeded by a series of dog poisonings. No surprise there: this is precisely the kind of development that one can expect after a certain point in this process, when demands and pressure haven’t turned the trick.

To treat Muslims’ complaints about dogs as if they deserve serious and respectful consideration is, of course, absurd. But over time, even the absurd becomes familiar. That’s one thing these people are counting on. They’re counting on their ability to wear the rest of us down gradually, accustoming us to ideas, beliefs, and “sensitivities” that, at first blush, strike us as ridiculous. They’re counting on our ultimate willingness to compromise our values, one by one, out of fear of conflict and a misguided ardor for social harmony. They’re counting on our readiness to tell ourselves that we’re not surrendering or being submissive but are simply being good, respectful, cooperative neighbors.

It’s precisely in this way that sharia law is being introduced, step by inexorable step, into the West. The only way to put a halt to it is to ensure that everyone in a position of power in the West is aware of exactly what the Hasan Küçüks among us are up to, and is willing to stand up to them every step of the way – knowing that it’s not about dogs, but about dogma; not about puppies, but about power.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Source: FrontPageMag.com

Related:

Jihad making Lives “Ruff” for Dogs in Europe; PETA Silent

Muslims in Spain Declare Jihad on Dogs

Man’s Best Friend in Shariah’s Cruel Crosshairs

Dogs… Pets – Beyond Traditional Islam

The Latest Enemies of Iran: Dogs and Their Owners

Iran Cleric Says Dogs “Unclean” and Not to be Kept as Pets

1 Million Stray Dogs in Iraq to be Culled

Pakistani Blogger Slams Islamic Feast of EID

Operation Bagdad Pups – No Buddy Gets Left Behind

First the Greenies Want Us to Eat Our Dogs… Now the Academics Say it is Insulting to Call Them Pets

Shocking Report… Gov’t to Decide What Pets You Can Own

February 8, 2012 Posted by | Animal or Pet Related Stories, Animal Related Education, Dogs, Just One More Pet, Man's Best Friend, Pets | , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

Israel: ‘We didn’t kill the dog,’ as court denies ordering stoning of a dog to death

Published June 22nd, 2011 – 14:08 GMT via SyndiGate.info

The court secretariat has strongly denied reports which claimed that it had passed out orders for stoning a dog to death because the judges believed that it was the reincarnation of a lawyer who had been cursed for insulting Jews.

The secretariat has said that it was ‘bitter humor’, and all that happened was the local dogcatcher had removed the dog.

"The female dog found a seat in the corner of the court. And the children were delighted by it; there were hundreds outside the court. They are used to seeing stray cats but most have never seen a dog before. The only action we took was to dial the number of the Jerusalem Municipality to get the people in charge to take it away" the statement of the court said.

"There was no talk of reincarnation, a lawyer has never been mentioned, either now or 20 years ago, and there was no stoning" the statement said further.

The rabbinical court had reportedly passed the sentence after a large dog wandered into a court in Mea Shearim neighborhood of Jerusalem and frightened the judges.

Dogs are not often invited to sit in courtrooms-  in the witness stand, or jury box, or bench for that matter. But in this case in an Israeli courtroom a dog made an appearance but reportedly was not tried for any crimes.

Dogs are not often invited to sit in courtrooms- in the witness stand, or jury box, or bench for that matter. But in this case in an Israeli courtroom a dog made an appearance but reportedly was not tried for any crimes.

 

Related:

Dogs… Pets – Beyond Traditional Islam

Man’s Best Friend in Shariah’s Cruel Crosshairs

June 23, 2011 Posted by | animal behavior, Dogs, Just One More Pet, Man's Best Friend, Pets, Unusual Stories | , , | Leave a comment

The Latest Enemies of Iran: Dogs and Their Owners

The Latest Enemies of Iran: Dogs and Their Owners – Fighting Shariah

By Azadeh Moaveni

z

Iranian officials find themselves in a cultural war with the West and see what they’re offering as an ‘Islamic lifestyle’ failing measurably.”

For much of the past decade, the Iranian government has tolerated what it considers a particularly depraved and un-Islamic vice: the keeping of pet dogs.

During periodic crackdowns, police have confiscated dogs from their owners right off the street; and state media has lectured Iranians on the diseases spread by canines. The cleric Gholamreza Hassani, from the city of Urmia, has been satirized for his sermons railing against "short-legged" and "holdable" dogs. But as with the policing of many other practices (like imbibing alcoholic drinks) that are deemed impure by the mullahs but perfectly fine to many Iranians, the state has eventually relaxed and let dog lovers be.

Those days of tacit acceptance may soon be over, however. Lawmakers in Tehran have recently proposed a bill in parliament that would criminalize dog ownership, formally enshrining its punishment within the country’s Islamic penal code. The bill warns that that in addition to posing public health hazards, the popularity of dog ownership "also poses a cultural problem, a blind imitation of the vulgar culture of the West." The proposed legislation for the first time outlines specific punishments for "the walking and keeping" of "impure and dangerous animals," a definition that could feasibly include cats but for the time being seems targeted at dogs. The law would see the offending animal confiscated, the leveling of a $100-to-$500 fine on the owner, but leaves the fate of confiscated dogs uncertain. "Considering the several thousand dogs [that are kept] in Tehran alone, the problem arises as to what is going to happen to these animals," Hooman Malekpour, a veterinarian in Tehran, said to the BBC’s Persian service. If passed, the law would ultimately energize police and volunteer militias to enforce the ban systematically.

In past years, animal-rights activists in Iran have persuasively argued that sporadic campaigns against dog ownership are politically motivated and unlawful, since the prohibition surfaces in neither the country’s civil laws nor its Islamic criminal codes. But if Iran’s laws were silent for decades on the question of dogs, that is because the animals — in the capacity of pet — were as irrelevant to daily life as dinosaurs. Islam, by custom, considers dogs najes, or unclean, and for the past century cultural mores kept dog ownership down to minuscule numbers. In rural areas, dogs have traditionally aided shepherds and farmers, but as Iranians got urbanized in the past century, their dogs did not come along. In cities, aristocrats kept dogs for hunting and French-speaking dowagers kept lap dogs for company, but the vast majority of traditional Iranians, following the advice of the clergy, were leery of dogs and considered them best avoided.

That has changed in the past 15 years with the rise of an urban middle class plugged into and eager to mimic Western culture. Satellite television and Western movies opened up a world where happy children frolicked with dogs in parks and affluent families treated them like adorable children. These days, lap dogs rival designer sunglasses as the upper-middle-class Iranian’s accessory of choice. "Global norms and values capture the heart of people all around the world, and Iran is no exception," says Omid Memarian, a prominent Iranian journalist specializing in human rights. "This is very frightening for Iranian officials, who find themselves in a cultural war with the West and see what they’re offering as an ‘Islamic lifestyle’ failing measurably."

The widening acceptability of dog ownership, and its popularity among a specific slice of Iran’s population — young, urban, educated and frustrated with the Islamic government — partly explains why dogs are now generating more official hostility. In 2007, two years into the tenure of hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, security forces targeted dog owners alongside a crackdown on women’s attire and men’s "Westernized" hairstyles. In the regime’s eyes, owning a dog had become on par with wearing capri pants or sporting a mullet — a rebellious act.

The government’s tolerance for this low-level lifestyle dissidence fizzled after Ahmadinejad’s contested electoral victory in 2009, which sparked massive demonstrations and the most serious challenge to Islamic rule since the 1979 revolution. In the aftermath of that upheaval, the state has moved to tighten its control over a wide range of Iranians’ private activities, from establishing NGOs to accessing the Internet, to individual lifestyle decisions, according to Hadi Ghaemi, the director for the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran. "No doubt such attempts are motivated by a desire to squash acts of criticism and protests, even if through symbolic individual decisions that simply don’t conform to officially sanctioned lifestyles," Ghaemi says.

The criminalizing of dogs, in this context, helps the government address the legal gray areas concerning lifestyle behavior. When authorities found it difficult to police what it termed Westernized hairstyles worn by young men, it solved the problem last year by releasing a poster of specifically banned styles.

For many young people, these measures are a firm reminder that the government will brook no disobedience, whether it be chanting antigovernment slogans in the streets or sporting excessively long sideburns. Dog owners in Iran, like much of the population, are mostly preoccupied these days with inflation, joblessness and the parlous state of the country’s economy. But they will soon need to consider whether keeping their shih tzu or poodle is worth the added worry. Their dogs may face the same fate as the hundreds of street dogs that the government regularly sweeps from the streets of Tehran. "Many in Tehran and other big cities find the killing of street dogs offensive and cruel," says Memarian. "It’s like the Iranian people and officials live in two different worlds."

Source:  Time Magazine

Related: 

Dog/Pet Ownership Under Attack… Stand Up Now and Help!

Dogs… Pets – Beyond Traditional Islam

Man’s Best Friend in Shariah’s Cruel Crosshairs

And then there are the Fanatical “Green People”…

Greenies Gone Wild Again… for Earth Day  -  Back to Americans Doing More, Including Eating Our Dogs

Ditch Your Family Pet to Save the Planet… I think NOT!!

“The greatness of a nation, a people, and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated!” …Mahatma Gandhi

And When You Look at the Pet and Animal Abuse and Cruelty Around the World… Including in the United States… You Wonder if We Have Made Any Progress at All

This is in America:  No Mercy:  Calf Farm Cruelty Exposed Plus We Are Still Euthanizing 4 Million Dogs Plus Additional Pets in Shelters in America Every Year…  Join the No Kill Movement and Become Part of the Solution.  There is a Better Way!

April 28, 2011 Posted by | Adopt Just One More Pet, animal abuse, Animal or Pet Related Stories, Animal Rights And Awareness, animals, Change Number of Pet Restrictive Laws. Ordinances and Rules, Dogs, Help Familie Keep Their Pets, Just One More Pet, Man's Best Friend, Outreach for Pets, Pet Abuse, Pet Friendship and Love, Pet Owner's Rights, Pets, Political Change, Stop Animal Cruelty, Stop Euthenization, We Are All God's Creatures | , , , , , , , , | 11 Comments