top | item 24634161

(no title)

jeffnv | 5 years ago

Are fish not animals? Thanks a lot American Public School System.

discuss

If you read through the entire article, that is part of the point. It's an interesting take on how the judicial system was used in the 1800s with animal cruelty.

hamaluik|5 years ago

Fish don’t actually exist ;)

Wonderful book on the topic: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/50887097-why-fish-don-t-...

stan_rogers|5 years ago

...or "fish" is synonymous with "chordata". I'm happy to call myself a fish.

protomyth|5 years ago

Well, I thought it was just the crappy reservation school that miseducated me, but I guess we both get to blame government classification for tradition and economics. A scarier subject you will not find. One of my favorite threads on HN has government classifications run to the absurd [edit] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12781157 [/edit]

tyingq|5 years ago

Extending animal rights laws to fish would be a pretty impactful decision.

Falling3|5 years ago

So would extending them to farm animals. (I'm aware there are ostensible protections for farm animals, but they offer very little protection even if they were consistently enforced. Animals raised for food are often explicitly exempted from animal protections.)

cies|5 years ago

Impact meaning, good for the environment? I hear again and again that some parts of the sea are nearly empty.

jibal|5 years ago

As the article that you didn't read notes, the title comes from a newspaper piece of the time that reflected "confusion about some basic biological concepts".

dan-robertson|5 years ago

Fish are actually made from soil. When it slips from the riverbank into the water it, becomes a fish. At least, this theory plus history is the reason catholics may eat fish on their no-meat Fridays.

ada1981|5 years ago

I thought the fish eating was economic policy to support the fisherman.