This Forum is brought to you by The Mastiff Sweet Spot and Friends of the Forum.
Register Calendar
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 6 of 14     «   Prev   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   Next   »
kcornel4

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 958
Reply with quote  #251 
Quote:
Karen, there are other photos that show the AMMA as more Mastiff-like and can easily fool those unprepared and new to Mastiffs.
I don't know anyone who has taken a look at an image or images and run off to buy a dog from a specific breed, or a 'hybrid'. 
The breed description that accompanies Duke -- (an 18 mth old AMMA) -- states: 


Quote:
The American Mastiff has a much drier mouth than other Mastiffs. The drier mouth is due to outcrossing the English Mastiff with Anatolian Mastiff, which occurred early in the development of the breed. The American Mastiff is a large, massive and powerful dog. The head is wide, heavy and rectangular in shape. The eyes are amber in color, the darker the better. The ears are rounded and set high on the head. The muzzle is medium sized, and well-proportioned to the head, which has black mask. The nose is black. It has a


I hardly think PicturesDepot is the first informational source people will consult.

__________________
Karen
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #252 
Quote:
If people like them with longer snouts , &c – what’s the problem ? It’s their choice and their belief and one has to respect it .


I have no problem with personal tastes in mongrels, but not mongrels posing as identical copies of the real deal. Or, using a moniker too close for comfort!

You mentioned the cross filling a demand that was needed. Please inform us of the gap it filled.

If a cheaper $$ Mastiff type, then you are correct.

If a less slobber type, it's debatable. Since nobody seems to demand a less slobbering Saint, or other breed known to slobber.

If healthier,or longer lived, also without proof.

So what exactly was wanting in reality from the creation of this cross? The Nebolish fit the same bill and it was on the scene long before the AMMA came to life.

http://www.ucadogs.com/Breed_Info_American_Bandogge_Mastiff.htm

Another newbie wannabe, but at least with the decency of not using our standard, or making false comparisons. It also uses the Bandogge insert, so as not to confuse with the Mastiff proper.


Quote:
By the way , I’ve seen no pics of American Mastiffs which might suit the idea of a Mastiff lookalike (with - or without photoshopping)



http://deepwoodmastiffs.com/Diesel.htm
The AMMA in this site (above) could easily pass for a Mastiff albeit wanting.






__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
kcornel4

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 958
Reply with quote  #253 
Kristy,

I would add that PicturesDepot is a site in which anyone can submit images, with tags selected from a menu. This site is not owned, nor does it have any affiliation with the AMMA organisation.

__________________
Karen
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #254 
 
Quote:
Quote:
Karen, if someone asked you if you imported your Mastiff from another country, it wouldn't be wrong if you respond with,...."no, it's an American Mastiff!"
Actually I would answer "No, he's an English Mastiff'. Or I might say (as I actually have responded to that question), "No, he was bred in here in the US", I would never think to say 'No it's an American Mastiff'. If I were to 'mis-speak' and say such a thing, I would immediately clarify " That is, he was bred in the US".


Then you'd be wrong, since there's no English Mastiff in America, unless it's been bred in England. If you would say English Mastiff, as a reference to a Mastiff bred in England, or living in England, how is it you can't say an American Mastiff, as a reference to a Mastiff that's been bred here?

Whether it serves as a proxy, or confederate expression, the term American Mastiff belongs to the Mastiff in America.

No other breed should have dominion over that name!

http://www.hiddenacresmastiffs.com/

Please read the copy above. They refer to their AMMAS as Mastiffs and further confuses the public by aligning the cross to the Mastiff in many regards.

Extensive research = a Google and a promise of a drier mouth. 

Quote:
While doing some research on the web, I stumbled across the American Mastiff.


Quoted from an AMMA breeder's page.

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
dirtpoor

Avatar / Picture

SUPER POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 4,102
Reply with quote  #255 
Like I said, this is not the first time, nor the first website where this has been done!  I would be fucking pissed if a picture of one of my dogs ended up ANYWHERE without my permission and even more wrong, titled "American Mastiff".

And per your previous post, I will say again, there is no such dog as an "Anatolian Mastiff"!

You would think "breeders" who knew what they were doing and actually had a specifically desired phenotype in mind would at least know the difference between a breed that exists and one that doesn't.

I called Jan and left her a message, she now knows that there is a picture of what we think is one of her dogs being used without her knowledge or permission, so she can procede with whatever action she deems necessary.

__________________
Kristie in Texas
Proud mom of Daisy and Gunnar who live in Heaven with God and my daddy, Grace my silly clown who makes me laugh when I cry and every opportunity she thinks she can, Oliver who beat the odds and survived the impossible, Chigger, he's an a$$ but he's my little A$$....

And my new boy Elah!!!!!!
kcornel4

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 958
Reply with quote  #256 
Quote:
Like I said, this is not the first time, nor the first website where this has been done!  I would be fucking pissed if a picture of one of my dogs ended up ANYWHERE without my permission and even more wrong, titled "American Mastiff".

And per your previous post, I will say again, there is no such dog as an "Anatolian Mastiff"!

You would think "breeders" who knew what they were doing and actually had a specifically desired phenotype in mind would at least know the difference between a breed that exists and one that doesn't.

I called Jan and left her a message, she now knows that there is a picture of what we think is one of her dogs being used without her knowledge or permission, so she can procede with whatever action she deems necessary.


Re: Calling Jan -- that is very thoughtful of you.
__________________

__________________
Karen
kcornel4

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 958
Reply with quote  #257 
Quote:
Then you'd be wrong, since there's no English Mastiff in America, unless it's been bred in England. If you would say English Mastiff, as a reference to a Mastiff bred in England, or living in England, how is it you can't say an American Mastiff, as a reference to a Mastiff that's been bred here


This is your opinion. Earlier descriptors from the MCOA itself, make reference to protecting the 'English Mastiff'. Even in the current warning about the 'American Mastiff' that the MCOA posted, the title was 'English Mastiff versus American Mastiff'.


The English Mastiff vs. The American Mastiff.  A MUST Read!

What is a Mastiff?

A Mastiff is a giant breed of dog, descended from the ancient Alaunt and Molosser. Today, mastiff is used to describe many different breeds around the world, all descended from the same root stock.

In the US and other English speaking countries, Mastiff is used to refer to the Old English Mastiff (OEM), developed in England and nearly extinct after WW II.



So, you know better than the MCOA as to what the Masitiff breed is, and is not?
If you truly believe what you say, then you had better so advise the MCOA, as well as all of the breeders in this country who believe they are producing English Mastiffs.  You might begin with our forum members who use this nomenclature in terms of describing what they are breeding.

__________________
Karen
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #258 
Quote:

I would add that PicturesDepot is a site in which anyone can submit images, with tags selected from a menu. This site is not owned, nor does it have any affiliation with the AMMA organisation.


Somebody other than a Mastiff breeder placed that photo! In my opinion!

As far as the terminology used in the MCOA, they are factually incorrect!

Old English Mastiff, English Mastiff and American Mastiff should be the domain of the Mastiff proper, even if used incorrectly at times in describing the Mastiff.

There is a long history of these familiar, albeit technically incorrect terms, used to describe our breed.

NO OTHER BREED, OR CROSSBREED, SHOULD TAKE THESE TIME HONORED TERMS AWAY FROM THE MASTIFF!



__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #259 
https://sites.google.com/a/kyniska.com/www/c.c.marshall


Important reading about Erika's relative!

Pertaining to the AMERICAN MASTIFF!

Please read pgs one through seven (at the left of the screen in the site above) as it repeatedly references the AMERICAN MASTIFF!

http://harpers.org/archive/1887/05/the-american-mastiff/

I don't believe Mr. Marshall was referring to the Anatolian cross and the Anatolian cross, should not be using a time honored term, which has long referenced the Mastiff in America!

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
kcornel4

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 958
Reply with quote  #260 
Ok, Kudos, Steve for finding one reference to 'American Mastiff' -- however remote. It does appear, however,  that Erika's relative was a rather contentious individual, whose views were not widely endorsed.

Quote:
As far as the terminology used in the MCOA, they are factually incorrect!

Well, I shall eagerly await their response when you inform them.

Quote:
Old English Mastiff, English Mastiff and American Mastiff should be the domain of the Mastiff proper, even if used incorrectly at times in describing the Mastiff.
I pragmatically do not believe it is possible to claim ALL of these as the domain of the 'Mastiff proper'.

Quote:
There is a long history of these familiar, albeit technically incorrect terms, used to describe our breed
. Sorry, 'technically incorrect?' And which might these be?

Quote:
NO OTHER BREED, OR CROSSBREED, SHOULD TAKE THESE TIME HONORED TERMS AWAY FROM THE MASTIFF!

Ummmm, WHICH time honoured terms?

__________________
Karen
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #261 
From Jann's forum:

Quote:
We ended up feeling very foolish and a bit deceived, but grateful that we found out beforehand.  To be honest, from a newbie's standpoint and a VERY uneducated eye, they did look exactly alike.  We now have a mastiff, have attended many shows, researched breeders, breeding and standards and obviously 2 years later, we know MUCH more now.  At this point, I don't think they look ANYTHING alike but that is only because now I know what to look for. Post #63 from 2006


http://mastiffmessageboard.websitetoolbox.com/post/American-Mastiff-How-big-of-a-problem-is-this-1349375?&trail=350

There are 24 pages on that thread, so you can't say nobody speaking out.

http://mastiffmessageboard.websitetoolbox.com/post?id=2308582


__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #262 
Ok, Kudos, Steve for finding one reference to 'American Mastiff' -- however remote. It does appear, however,  that Erika's relative was a rather contentious individual, whose views were not widely endorsed. So we discount Mr. Marshall to validate the nonsense? It wasn't one reference, it was many. If you wrote an article in Harpers you would be addressing people familiar with the term. You are not factoring in the year it was written, or the records lost from the Club.

Quote:
As far as the terminology used in the MCOA, they are factually incorrect!

Well, I shall eagerly await their response when you inform them.

The OEMC has already validated the name Mastiff and stated all other names are technically incorrect for the breed. Why would the AKC or the MCOA have a different view regarding the breeds proper name? Despite what you see in print! Why was a vote taken to change the name to English Mastiff, if Mastiff was not the correct name?

Quote:
Old English Mastiff, English Mastiff and American Mastiff should be the domain of the Mastiff proper, even if used incorrectly at times in describing the Mastiff.
I pragmatically do not believe it is possible to claim ALL of these as the domain of the 'Mastiff proper'.
Perhaps, but informally it should be respected as a Mastiff marker, not to be usurped by carpetbaggers.
Quote:
There is a long history of these familiar, albeit technically incorrect terms, used to describe our breed
. Sorry, 'technically incorrect?' And which might these be? The names listed as English M, Olde English M, and any other names technically incorrect for the breed.

Quote:
NO OTHER BREED, OR CROSSBREED, SHOULD TAKE THESE TIME HONORED TERMS AWAY FROM THE MASTIFF!

Ummmm, WHICH time honoured terms? The same technically incorrect names listed!

Old Blue Eyes, Sinatra, Frank, Frankie, Chairman of the Board, The Voice, The Leader, all referred to Francis Albert Sinatra.
They were HIS nicknames and imposters would have been laughed at, if they sought to usurp those names for themselves and then try to fool others into thinking they and Sinatra were identical. Formally, he was
Francis Albert Sinatra, but those other handles belonged to him, legally & figuratively.

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #263 
The NAME of our breed is Mastiff, nothing more nothing less, I know lots of people who call them English Mastiffs but that does not make them right and I do not lose any sleep over it.  IF clubs call them English Mastiff they are wrong, Mastiff is this breeds OFFICIAL name.  And that is worldwide. 

On an absolutely tragic note, I am just waiting for more news here in Australia, but apparently there has just been an horrific attack on a toddler who has not survived, the dog responsible is being called a mastiff cross.  That poor little boy would have had no chance.  My son saw some video of the dog who has been put down and said he doubted it had any mastiff in it at all, he said it looked like a cross bred staffie.  I have not seen the video yet.  But we have a dead child and those minutes will never be taken back.  Why the hell does anyone need to cross breeds, at least with a pure bred dog you have some idea of temperament.  And this is also going to go against the Mastiff in general because it has already been named in the attack.

Janine.
kcornel4

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 958
Reply with quote  #264 
Quote:

The OEMC has already validated the name Mastiff and stated all other names are technically incorrect for the breed.


Exactly! Including the  (incorrect) name ' American Mastiff'.

Quote:
The NAME of our breed is Mastiff, nothing more nothing less

Fine, I  will happily accept this, but this does NOT equate to 'American Mastiff".
Janine, that is a horrible incident!


__________________
Karen
Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #265 
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2013/08/05/08/03/toddler-killed-in-dog-attack-in-rural-nsw

Looking at the dog I would think that there could be some mastiff in there, not a good photo to judge.  Just makes me so sad to think of that poor little boy, but some of the other footage of the home and yard tells you a lot, there was a star picket hammered into the base of a tree where, apparently, the dog was chained most of the time.  There was a dirty bowl and nothing but dirt where the dog must have lived.  A complete recipe for disaster and that is what happened.  The dog was a product of its home and the child payed the ultimate price.  Dogs are crossed and sold off to anyone, most of them just want a big dog for status and put no work into the animal at all.  A child dies a horrible death, the dog is put down, a family is left devastated and our breed is coping the blame.
Janine.
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #266 
Quote:
Exactly! Including the  (incorrect) name ' American Mastiff'.


I doubt that the Coca Cola company would want to see it's product only referred to by it's formal name.

If people say, "Let's get a coke" I believe Coca Cola would agree it's about their product, even though not the formal corporate name!

If we speak of the Mastiff in America and refer to it as the American Mastiff, people should not be thinking of an Anatolian cross!

The article that was presented by C.C. Marshall, spoke of the American Mastiff as opposed to Mastiffs living elsewhere.

It was correct and it set the precedent for future references, despite the demise of the American Mastiff Club!

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #267 
It could have been an attack over resources (ice cream).

When we take in a rescue, or if we babysit someone else's dog, precautions must always be considered.

The dog doesn't know to be grateful, or to whom he has been left with. No bonding has occurred and it's past history could be flooded with violence, or harsh treatment.

Let's not forget that no matter how much we love our pets, they are still operating on primitive emotions. Higher reasoning, is not always a primary process at work.


__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
poolguard

Registered:
Posts: 2
Reply with quote  #268 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveOifer
http://americanmastiffworld.com/product_info.php?products_id=29



Exactly like the Mastiff, but without the drool?


You are awesome... you opened to the page with my big fella's picture. The one on the right... Achilles.  He is my boy. Look, he is famous from being in the American Mastiff book and now immortalized on the Mastiff forum. Thanks for the props. Isn't he handsome?
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #269 
Everything is relative.

In the eye of the beholder et al.

A handsome dog, does not make for a handsome Mastiff, or Mastiff cross.

If a breed is true to it's standard, then it can be objectively said to be an admirable example & representative of it's breed. Or, in other words, handsome! Any other views are purely subjective, as in all personal tastes.

Now these words, are also immortalized on the Mastiff forum.

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
dirtpoor

Avatar / Picture

SUPER POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 4,102
Reply with quote  #270 
What a tragedy.  This is what can and does happen when crossing a Mastiff with any other dog, you lose the temperament which is one of it's greatest assets.  Giant breed dogs HAVE TO HAVE a solid temperament otherwise tragedies like this will happen.  The more our breed is "mixed" with other breeds, the more mualings like this one will occur.  My heart breaks for the little boy, his family, and the dog.  As for the person who mixed the dog and sold or gave it away to the first person that came along and wanted it, there are things I would do to him/her that I cannot speak of on this Forum.
__________________
Kristie in Texas
Proud mom of Daisy and Gunnar who live in Heaven with God and my daddy, Grace my silly clown who makes me laugh when I cry and every opportunity she thinks she can, Oliver who beat the odds and survived the impossible, Chigger, he's an a$$ but he's my little A$$....

And my new boy Elah!!!!!!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #271 
AMMA 1/8 Anatolian?
__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #272 
Anatolian Shepherd 100%
__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #273 
The first pictures from the book of the AMMA supposedly 7/8 Mastiff & 1/8 Anatolian and the lower pictures are of the Anatolian Shepherd.

One can see the influence, which appears to be more than 1/8 Anatolian in the AMMA, based on the photos & phenotype.

Promoting a cross and using exact percentages of carried forward genetics, can be a minefield.

You can never tell when the expression of those infused genes are going to emerge in greater quantities, during the early stages of the formation in any cross. It takes many generations to selectively eliminate, or reduce the traits not being sought and it takes skilled minds to attempt such a monumental task.

Typically, perfecting a new breed cannot be had by nebulous standards, clueless breeding practices and descriptions that don't stand up to scrutiny under the light of day.

It's truly unfortunate, that many AMMA fanciers have never attempted to fully understand the Mastiff, it's history and the many breeders that have influenced the modern type. Instead of falling prey to misleading perceptions, that have created an illusion of stability in a cross, that is at best, a work in progress with undefined directions & purpose.

Some may wish to rationalize, in order to justify the birth of a designer breed, by stating that every breed is a work in progress. Since truth mixed with lies are the Devil's comfort, one must first have the ability & experience to separate wheat from chaff. Many in the AMMA community purchased a Mastiff with less drool, as their raison d'etre.

At least that's what the founder was promoting and as one poster on Jann's board stated, that for an extra $500, they could have gotten their AMMA registered as an AKC Mastiff! Who knows how often this practice was done, if true & valid by that poster's comments.

If an alleged faux AKC Mastiff was bred to other AKC Mastiffs, the Anatolian genes could have infiltrated the Mastiff gene pool!

Just another reason why the AMMA can weaken the Mastiff over time, or create the public perception, of only thin lines separating the cross from the real McCoy!

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
kcornel4

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 958
Reply with quote  #274 
Quote:
doubt that the Coca Cola company would want to see it's product only referred to by it's formal name.
If people say, "Let's get a coke" I believe Coca Cola would agree it's about their product, even though not the formal corporate name!


When I lived in Boston, most people referred to Coke, as well as any other carbonated, sweetened soft drink as 'tonic'. In the parts of Ohio where my family live they are called 'pop' or 'soda pop'. I really don't think Coca-Cola minds what their products are informally called, as long as people are buying them.


__________________
Karen
KarenK

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 2,619
Reply with quote  #275 
I will not weigh in again on the original debate but this last post sort of touches on a topic I'm very interested in but can't seem to find an answer to.  That is...

How many generations does it take to fix "type" (what I would call predictability and consistency of form)?

I'm sure we all have opinions and some of us may feel our own breed isn't very well "fixed" but I'm asking if there's a scientific method of determining when type is at least reasonably predictable.  Population Genetics was never my favorite subject so I may be wrong but, as I recall, breed was loosely described as something that breeds true to type.    

All the other issues aside, if I were to be interested in getting an AM, one of my greatest reservations would be how reliably I could predict both its adult appearance and its personality/temperament.  In rescue, we've run across quite a few of them and there wasn't much consistency that I could see, though I suppose the same thing could be said of our own breed.  The tallest dog I've ever seen in my life, bar none, was a registered AM.  (It made a Great Dane look like a midget.)  Most appeared more like poorly bred Mastiffs and a few were far more territorial and had much more protective temperaments than I typically see in Mastiffs.  

Honestly, in my opinion, it's too early in the development of the breed to be describing it with the certainty it is being described.  Just wish I could find a reliable reference.  

__________________
Karen K.
http://www.MastiffsVonHimmel.com

Southern States Mastiff Rescue: http://www.SouthernStatesMastiffRescue.org
kcornel4

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 958
Reply with quote  #276 
Excellent question! I've looked for one, as well.
__________________
Karen
KarenK

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 2,619
Reply with quote  #277 
Drat!  Guess I'll have to pull all those old Genetics books off the shelf and look it up the old-fashioned way.  :)  If I find something, I'll pass it along.
__________________
Karen K.
http://www.MastiffsVonHimmel.com

Southern States Mastiff Rescue: http://www.SouthernStatesMastiffRescue.org
kcornel4

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 958
Reply with quote  #278 
Super! Thank you! :)
__________________
Karen
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #279 
Quote:

When I lived in Boston, most people referred to Coke, as well as any other carbonated, sweetened soft drink as 'tonic'. In the parts of Ohio where my family live they are called 'pop' or 'soda pop'. I really don't think Coca-Cola minds what their products are informally called, as long as people are buying them.


Do you really believe that the company wouldn't mind if some other upstart wanted to use the name Coke for their product?   Get real!

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #280 
Quote:
How many generations does it take to fix "type" (what I would call predictability and consistency of form)?


If you are referring to homozygosity, then it would take approx. 12 brother X sister pairings to bring it to 80-85%, if my memory serves me well.

This would involve selecting those to pair who best match each other in phenotype, in each consecutive B X S pairing.

This can also be achieved through outcrossing, but with utilizing other techniques.

Establishing type requires uniformity in thinking on the part of breeders and in a unified interpretation of the standard ideal.

One can establish type as an intra-type approach within specific kennels (i.e. stamping), but it is short lived once one uses outside lines of different type equivalents. 

(Chart below just added}

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
KarenK

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 2,619
Reply with quote  #281 
Ok.  This is getting interesting.  :)  I found squat in my books btw except for a couple of discussions regarding the validity of "hybrid vigor" as it relates to corn.

1.  It occurs to me that the promoter of the AM claims that AM's are 7/8 Mastiff and 1/8 Anatolian and I'm wondering how she can state that with any certainty.  In any first generation cross between an Anatolian and a Mastiff, pups are predictably 1/2 Anatolian and 1/2 Mastiff.  In the next generation, assuming it is done by crossing one of those pups to a Mastiff, due to random assortment, the resulting pups cannot be said with any certainty to be 3/4 Mastiff and 1/4 Anatolian.  Neither could a following cross be said to be 7/8 Mastiff and 1/8 Anatolian.  Chromosomes assort randomly and pups may inherit more from one grandparent than the other, making fractions of each breed with a pup unpredictable.

Reminding myself of this, I ran across a reference to backcrossing (discussed below) wherein multiple generations of progeny are repeatedly bred back to a single individual which carries the desired trait.  This only works for dominant traits, however, and backcrossing for recessive traits would have to involve intermittent test crosses to look for the presence of the gene before continuing to backcross.

From:  http://passel.unl.edu/pages/informationmodule.php?idinformationmodule=959723462&topicorder=2&maxto=7

The actual procedure for back crossing is almost self-explanatory. In back crossing you have a donor parent (has a gene of interest) and a recurrent parent (an elite line that could be made better by adding the gene of interest). The donor parent is crossed to the recurrent parent. The progeny of this cross is then crossed to the recurrent parent (it is 'crossed back' to the recurrent parent, hence the term back cross). The progeny of this cross is selected for the trait of interest and then crossed back to the recurrent parent. This process is repeated for as many back crosses as are needed to create a line that is the recurrent parent with the gene of interest from the donor parent. The goal of backcrossing is to obtain a line as identical as possible to the recurrent parent with the addition of the gene of interest that has been added through breeding.


Even if the originator of the AM had utilized many generations of backcrossing to stabilize the breed (which I seriously doubt), I still don't see how she can claim with certainty that these dogs are 7/8 Mastiff and 1/8 Anatolian.  If I were to be circumspect about any of her claims, it would be that one as I don't see where the laws of genetics and statistics would bear her out.

__________________
Karen K.
http://www.MastiffsVonHimmel.com

Southern States Mastiff Rescue: http://www.SouthernStatesMastiffRescue.org
kcornel4

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 958
Reply with quote  #282 

Quote:
Do you really believe that the company wouldn't mind if some other upstart wanted to use the name Coke for their product?   Get real!


Really, Steve!  That is not the situation you posited. We have gone over and over THIS (the underlined) scenario with Starbucks, GM, Ford and now Coca-Cola. My answer is always the same (they have trade-marked and protected their brand), as it remains for the Mastiff versus AMMA dispute -- The Mastiff organisation did not. Full stop.

__________________
Karen
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #283 
Yes, and once again, it boils down to legal vs moral, since in the Coke example, if someone would have used that name after Coca Cola established it's nickname, it would have been morally wrong.
__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
dirtpoor

Avatar / Picture

SUPER POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 4,102
Reply with quote  #284 
Karen K,

Most likely what she did is mix the foundation stock (if it was indeed only 2 breeds and not 3 because of the unknown Dane that might be in there) and the first generation would have been 1/2.  She probably then kept breeding to Mastiffs for the next 6 generations thinking this would be an actual 1/8 Anatolian, which as you have shown in your post, isn't how it works.

Just shows how truly clueless they really are.

__________________
Kristie in Texas
Proud mom of Daisy and Gunnar who live in Heaven with God and my daddy, Grace my silly clown who makes me laugh when I cry and every opportunity she thinks she can, Oliver who beat the odds and survived the impossible, Chigger, he's an a$$ but he's my little A$$....

And my new boy Elah!!!!!!
KarenK

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 2,619
Reply with quote  #285 
Actually, sibs share on average only 1/4 of their genetic material.  Breeding back to a parent is actually a closer breeding and the chart doesn't define "inbreeding" which generations are being bred.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveOifer

If you are referring to homozygosity, then it would take approx. 12 brother X sister pairings to bring it to 80-85%, if my memory serves me well.

This would involve selecting those to pair who best match each other in phenotype, in each consecutive B X S pairing.

This can also be achieved through outcrossing, but with utilizing other techniques.

Establishing type requires uniformity in thinking on the part of breeders and in a unified interpretation of the standard ideal.

One can establish type as an intra-type approach within specific kennels (i.e. stamping), but it is short lived once one uses outside lines of different type equivalents. 

(Chart below just added}

__________________
Karen K.
http://www.MastiffsVonHimmel.com

Southern States Mastiff Rescue: http://www.SouthernStatesMastiffRescue.org
KarenK

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 2,619
Reply with quote  #286 
Since I have no knowledge of what may or may not have happened, I am not attempting to pass judgment but to highlight where errors are often made.  

Quote:
Originally Posted by dirtpoor
Karen K,

Most likely what she did is mix the foundation stock (if it was indeed only 2 breeds and not 3 because of the unknown Dane that might be in there) and the first generation would have been 1/2.  She probably then kept breeding to Mastiffs for the next 6 generations thinking this would be an actual 1/8 Anatolian, which as you have shown in your post, isn't how it works.

Just shows how truly clueless they really are.

__________________
Karen K.
http://www.MastiffsVonHimmel.com

Southern States Mastiff Rescue: http://www.SouthernStatesMastiffRescue.org
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #287 
Using brother X sister is the only way to get to the generations necessary for total homozygosity, since you can't pick & choose parental type as you select your pairs, and breeding only to a parent is limited due to lifespan.
__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
dirtpoor

Avatar / Picture

SUPER POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 4,102
Reply with quote  #288 
Errors, lies, complete cluelessness is rampant in the AMMA camp....
__________________
Kristie in Texas
Proud mom of Daisy and Gunnar who live in Heaven with God and my daddy, Grace my silly clown who makes me laugh when I cry and every opportunity she thinks she can, Oliver who beat the odds and survived the impossible, Chigger, he's an a$$ but he's my little A$$....

And my new boy Elah!!!!!!
KarenK

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 2,619
Reply with quote  #289 
Steve, you're throwing around terms much too casually.  "Total homozygosity", as you call it, is never something to be aimed for.  The result would be genetic anomalies due to recessive traits and double-dose phenomena for dominant deleterious traits.  Thus the constant warning to breeders that, while line breeding might solidify a trait you seek, it can also come back and bite you in the a$$.

Total homozygosity implies two identical copies of the same allele, even the mutated alleles we don't want that... and, before you say, "Well, except for the mutations," remember that the mutations, especially in a single dose, are often advantageous in conferring resistance.  Be careful what you say.  It will be repeated and, often, as fact... and we've had that discussion already.  :)   

__________________
Karen K.
http://www.MastiffsVonHimmel.com

Southern States Mastiff Rescue: http://www.SouthernStatesMastiffRescue.org
kcornel4

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 958
Reply with quote  #290 
Very interesting discussion, KarenK!
__________________
Karen
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #291 

How many generations does it take to fix "type" (what I would call predictability and consistency of form)?


This was the question asked!

My answer was correct.

Had the question been different, I would have answered differently!

I was not answering a question regarding feasibility, or optimum conditions for breeding Mastiffs in reducing variability, with minimal genetic consequences, etc.

Fix can imply to correct, or lock in!  Take your pick. But if predictability & consistency of form is what is being sought, then fix means to lock in!

In that post, I never stated that total homozygosity was any goal.

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
kcornel4

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 958
Reply with quote  #292 
Quote:
Yes, and once again, it boils down to legal vs moral, since in the Coke example, if someone would have used that name after Coca Cola established it's nickname, it would have been morally wrong.


I have been reluctant to engage in the 'morality' discussion, as I find it both boring and divisive. However, 'morality' is an individual and subjective set of beliefs which guide individual behaviour .'Legality' is a social agreement which reflects what the majority of people (at least voters or constituents) agree is moral and immoral. They are not separate concepts.

__________________
Karen
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #293 
It is legally correct, when a woman gets raped in Afghanistan and is then stoned to death for her crimes.

I suppose you'd have no moral issue there, just as long as a majority vote was used!

Would the majority of Mastiff owners vote for the creation, or naming of a Mastiff cross called the American Mastiff?

I think not!

A loophole in trademark rules regarding livestock was used, to enable a minority to behave morally incorrect!

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
KarenK

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 2,619
Reply with quote  #294 
No, friend, your answer was not correct.  Neither is the leap that "type" requires "total homozygosity".  I'm not nitpicking.  My goal as always is to see that people following this or any thread do not walk away from it with misinformation which will then get passed along in perpetuity.  What was one of the pertinent quote in your signature line we were referencing earlier?  I can't seem to find it from the New Reply page.  

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveOifer
Using brother X sister is the only way to get to the generations necessary for total homozygosity, since you can't pick & choose parental type as you select your pairs, and breeding only to a parent is limited due to lifespan.

__________________
Karen K.
http://www.MastiffsVonHimmel.com

Southern States Mastiff Rescue: http://www.SouthernStatesMastiffRescue.org
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #295 
The question was about how to FIX type!

You can't fix type unless total homozygosity approaches 100%.

Otherwise, the genetic variance creates variance in phenotype.

Once again, not an outline for breeding, just an answer to the question that was asked!


__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #296 
The whole point of linebreeding, or inbreeding, is to increase homozygosity percentages, in order to increase the quantities of the phenotype you favor.

It's not a FIX!

At best, it's a limited correction, or temporary stabilization.

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
kcornel4

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 958
Reply with quote  #297 

Steve, I have no idea what you are trying to convey with your stoning analogy,other than striking out at me in an effort to shock and stimulate an equally illogical and emotional response. You are now adding religious beliefs and values – which exist in a very different cultural and religious context than the original argument. In order to be useful analogies, the two examples must have points of similarities, including similar proportion and relevance. Help me with this analogy:  So, the AMMA are equivalent to the Taliban in your mind, acting immorally, even if legally, (which actually they were not in the case of Afghanistan) killing the defenseless woman-- representing the Mastiff world?

Do you really want to bring religion and world politics into this discussion?

“I suppose you'd have no moral issue there, just as long as a majority vote was used!” Well, you would suppose wrong, but my personal views are not relevant. My views are my individual values, which have been added to the aggregate of individual and community values that inform our laws. If I  don’t like a law or a legal situation, I will attempt to change it, or support a legal change. I do not simply carp at and vilify people on who have benefited from the situation – particularly if I had an opportunity to use the law to advantage but chose (through action or inaction) not to. Also, imo, sarcasm is a weak argumentative devise which is passive aggressive, as it makes fun of a person’s stated perspective, without really offering a counter argument.

In our country, laws, legal systems, courts and jurist scholars are there to define, interpret, more sharply clarify, protect and establish limits to laws. In our country, the foundation of our legal is system is our constitution, which in turn expresses the consensed view of our founders as to what values are fundamental for achieving their vision, are morally correct and should guide our legal system.  

What you are referring to, in the Afghanistan case, of course is Shariah. In my readings, the issue with Sharia is how human beings choose to interpret it , and what they attend to and not. Here is what one scholar has written :

Excerpts from an article  What Is Shariah and Why Does It Matter?

Sherman A. Jackson

Arthur F. Thurnau Professor of Arabic and Islamic Studies, University of Michigan

Published in the Huffington Post, Sept., 2010

At the most basic level, shariah is the Muslim universe of ideals. It is the result of their collective effort to understand and apply the Quran and supplementary teachings of the Prophet Muhammad (called Sunna) in order to earn God's pleasure and secure human welfare in this life and attain human salvation in the life to come. While the Quran and Sunna are transcendent and unchangeable, shariah itself is the negotiated result of competing interpretations. In fact, most Muslims tend to speak not of shariah but of fiqh, which literally means "understanding" and underscores the distinction between God's prescriptions on the one hand and the human attempt to understand these on the other. This in turn explains two other unavoidable characteristics of shariah: diversity of opinion, and inevitable change. In Sunni Islam (and to do Shiism justice would require a separate treatment) there are four "schools" of fiqh, all equally orthodox, all equally authoritative. This is because Sunnism never established a single ecclesiastical authority or "church" to decide doctrine. Instead, the only doctrines deemed binding on the community as a whole were those on which the community's scholars reached a unanimous -- not majority! -- consensus. In the absence of this, competing parties would simply have to agree to disagree, as no school or individual -- not even the Caliph or temporal rule ar -- could claim the infallible right to impose a doctrine as unassailable truth.

As for change, the rules of shariah are divided into two categories: religious observances (prayer, fasting, etc.) and civil-criminal matters (marriage, sales, adultery, jihad, etc.). While religious observances are relatively static and fixed, the rules on civil-criminal matters are subject to change in accordance with circumstances. Here, in fact, we come to a fourth important feature of shariah: in addition to interpreting scripture in order to apply it to reality, shariah also includes the attempt to process reality to determine how scripture, Prophetic teaching and the cumulative tradition of deliberation would have one respond to it. In this capacity, shariah may end up sanctioning, or even including, all kinds of ideas and institutions that were not dictated by scripture. For example, there were no domes, schools of fiqh or minarets in the Prophet's Arabia. Likewise, the fact that there was no democracy or "human rights" does not automatically render these "un-Islamic." In short, shariah includes the attempt to proffer God-conscious responses to an ever-changing reality. And in this capacity, many of its rules are subject to change with changes in the circumstances to which it seeks to respond.

Having said all of this, shariah is not just "rules." While the common translation, "Islamic law," is not entirely wrong, it is under-inclusive, for shariah includes scores of moral and ethical principles, from honoring one's parents to helping the poor to being good to one's neighbor. Moreover, most of the "rules" of shariah carry no prescribed earthly sanctions at all. The prescriptions covering ablution or eating pork or how to dress are just as much a part of shariah as are those governing sale, divorce or jihad. Yet there are no earthly punishments prescribed for those who violate these dictates. Like the bulk of shariah's "rules," reward and punishment in these areas are the preserve of God in the Afterlife.

Unfortunately, many Americans have been led to believe that shariah equals not only rules but criminal punishments -- floggings, for example. Three quick points: First, criminal sanctions constitute a tiny sliver of shariah. Of the 1,081 pages of the two-volume Arabic text from which I studied shariah, only 60 pages were devoted directly to criminal sanctions! (Jihad, incidentally, took up only 19.) Second, the criminal sanctions of shariah did not emerge as the property or instrument of the Muslim state but functioned in fact to impose limits on the use of state power. Third, the punishments for criminal behavior cannot be separated from the evidentiary rules -- equally shariah! -- that provide for their application (e.g., multiple eye-witnesses). In practical terms, in other words, short of confession, rules on such things as adultery or fornication function almost entirely as moral exhortations. God-consciousness spawned by shariah, not fear of being punished, sustains these ideals. Of course, many Americans will object that such issues should not be subject to any rules or religious exhortations at all. But given some of our increasingly worrisome realities (out-of-wedlock births, etc.), perhaps this would make for fruitful conversation.

 


__________________
Karen
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,876
Reply with quote  #298 
Quote:
I have been reluctant to engage in the 'morality' discussion, as I find it both boring and divisive. However, 'morality' is an individual and subjective set of beliefs which guide individual behaviour .'Legality' is a social agreement which reflects what the majority of people (at least voters or constituents) agree is moral and immoral. They are not separate concepts.


I used the analogy, not to bring in Shariah law, but to show that following certain laws can be immoral and can distort the basic sense of right & wrong.

Every time a cop shoots a dog, he is covered under most laws regarding a cop's perceived notion of what constitutes a threat.

Some shootings are immoral, but legal.

These analogies are a response to your beliefs, namely, that laws constitute moral correctness! (your quote:
They are not separate concepts)

Stoning a woman who has been raped, flies in the face against every moral fiber, in most healthy thinking people.

Knowing basic right from wrong is not rocket science and if masked by a legal loophole, it should be seen as such and condemned, despite the legal umbrella that surrounds those seeking it's protection.

The descriptive wording and the naming of the Anatolian crossbreed was immoral, intentional and without any regard for the potential damages to the Mastiff community.

Legal, but immoral!

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
kcornel4

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 958
Reply with quote  #299 
[QUOTE]These analogies are a response to your beliefs, that laws constitute moral correctness!

Please show me where said that.

 I said, 'Legality' is a social agreement which reflects what the majority of people (at least voters or constituents) agree is moral and immoral. I would add  these concepts modify over time and with cultural and social changes, as in the case of many states which are now affirming the legality of 'gay' marriage (or rather, making civil unions the equivalent of religious unions and offering partners the same legal status, protection and benefits. Many changes in law are precipitated by arguments as to what constitutes 'fairness',and what is equitable' -- both of which what I would consider a 'founding' principle underlying much of our legal system.

Quote:

]I used the analogy, not to bring in Shariah law, but to show that following certain laws can be immoral and can distort the basic sense of right & wrong.


Nevertheless, you selected an analogy that invoked Shariah -- thereby introducing elements of religious, political and secular law, which I believe has no relevance to the AMMA versus Mastiff scenario over the choice and ‘ownership’ of names. I would also add that this was not a good example, as in Afghanistan the application of Shariah law through stoning someone to death is illegal.

We have been specifically discussing the ‘moral’ and legal status of, and the rights to the name “American Mastiff’ – not Shariah stonings in Afghanistan, the bombing of the WTC, nor the morality or lack thereof in extant laws. Are you suggesting that copywrite, patent and trademark laws in this country are immoral?That they distort a basic sense of right and wrong?

 


__________________
Karen
kcornel4

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 958
Reply with quote  #300 

Quote:
Every time a cop shoots a dog, he is covered under most laws regarding a cop's perceived notion of what constitutes a threat.
Stoning a woman who has been raped, flies in the face against every moral fiber, in most healthy thinking people.
Knowing basic right from wrong is not rocket science and if masked by a legal loophole, it should be seen as such and condemned, despite the legal umbrella that surrounds those seeking it's protection.


These are additional highly emotional statements intended to provoke an emotional versus a reasoned response. These reflect your personal values and feelings, and project them onto everyone else (i.e., flies in the face against every moral fiber in 'most healthy, thinking people). Then by definition, anyone who does not agree with this assertion is not healthy or thinking; hence their views may be discredited. IMO,asserting there is a basic and absolute set of principles that differentiates wrong/immoral behaviour from right/moral behaviour, and is 'not rocket science' is overly simplistic in the modern world. Just one simple example related to your example:  Is murder absolutely wrong/immoral?" Part of the answer lies in how does one define 'murder'? Is this a legal or a moral concept? Or both? Is legal execution 'murder'? Are mercy killings 'murder'? Is removing a feeding tube from someone in a PVS murder? These are controversial topics, with people on  opposing sides of an argument invoking very different moral arguments . The definition, in my mind, relies on several factors: the act, the context of the act, the intention behind the act, and in the case of capital punishment, the core societal values underlying punishment: Is it for vengeance and retribution? Is it for deterrence? Is it for rehabilitation? This is why we have a legal system in which jurists and courts unravel the conundrums of this question and establish, interpret, clarify and overturn or affirm existing laws. It is an on-going process.

Quote:
The descriptive wording and the naming of the Anatolian crossbreed was immoral, intentional and without any regard for the potential damages to the Mastiff community.

Legal, but immoral!
 
Whilst I have a horrible suspicion that 'This will bring us back to Do' I will still enquire:
 On what absolute grounds would you base the 'immorality' of the naming of the AMMA. 'Intentional' in what sense? The AMMA people intentionally set out to damage the Mastiff community? Why?

I have asked several times for some quantification of the damages being done to the Mastiff community, and none has been forthcoming. I have suggested we consult with breeders of the Mastiff for their experience, views of damage and losses, etc and perceptions of how important to them the 'naming' situation is. I have heard from someone who said they were irritated by this argument, and wouldn't care if our breed were called 'Whirlygigs' -- that it is the DOG that is important, not the name. If, as you contend the 'backbone' of the Mastiff community is far broader than breeders, then by all means, let's consult them as well.



__________________
Karen
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply