What do Iran and San Francisco have in common?
- Dog-haters
- Jihadi-sympathizers
- Moonbats who thought they could control radical Muslims
Iran bans pet ads, brands dogs “unclean”
Of course, so did the prophet of Islam: “Ibn Mughaffal reported: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) ordered killing of the dogs, and then said: What about them, i. e. about other dogs? and then granted concession (to keep) the dog for hunting and the dog for (the security) of the herd, and said: When the dog licks the utensil, wash it seven times, and rub it with earth the eighth time.” — Sahih Muslim 551
Note also that just as unclean as dogs are unbelievers.
Sharia Alert from the Islamic Republic of Iran: “Iran bans pet ads, brands dogs ‘unclean,'” from NewsCore, August 27 (thanks to Weasel Zippers):
IRAN today banned all advertisements in the country for pets, pet shops, pet food and other pet products, claiming that people’s love for their dogs and cats may lead to “evil outcomes”.
The edict, announced by Iran’s powerful Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance, is based on a fatwa issued by Grand Ayatollah Nasser Makarem Shirazi, 86, a hardliner who lives in Iran’s holy city of Qom.
Read the rest. The comments are truly fascinating.
Okay, I’ll admit it. Although I’m mostly a cat person, I like dogs too. But that isn’t the point here. The real issues here have to do with tyranny, and with the unreasoning hatred and disgust that some people feel toward innocent living creatures.
Whenever any government, at any level, arrogates the power to micromanage the lives of its citizenry to this extent, we have a problem. Evidently, in the case of San Francisco, they might have become a little embarrassed by the ridicule resulting from media exposure. Iran, on the other hand, has no such compunctions.
San Francisco has told its contentious plan to ban the sale of all pets but fish to sit and stay — until January at the earliest.
The city garnered national headlines last month, when the city’s Animal Control and Welfare Commission proposed banning all pet sales in a move aimed at keeping small animals from being dumped on the Animal Control.
That commission last night, however, opted to put off discussion of its potential ban until 2011. The commission did come up with a new idea, however: Requiring would-be pet owners to obtain a license and take classes. This would ostensibly cut down on impulse purchases of guinea pigs and other small animals inundating the Animal Control office.
Let it be known that, as far back as last month, SF Weekly suggested alternatives: a “guinea pig fee” to offset the city’s costs in caring for hordes of abandoned rodents or a waiting period for potential pet buyers — “the Guinea Pig Brady Bill.”
These half-serious suggestions don’t look so outlandish anymore.
