Dogs vs. Babies

[Catholic_Dude]

I won’t even bother answering the rest of your post; I think I’d be wasting my time, but why shouldn’t we refer to animals as “he” or “she”? They do come in male and female, just like people.

The point is they used to be described as “it” a lot more often and that helped to emphasize the infinite chasm between them and humans.

What do you think about spending hundreds of dollars on “medical” treatment for pets?

 

[CarolAnnSFO]

What do you think about spending hundreds of dollars on “medical” treatment for pets?

I think there’s nothing wrong with it, as long as you have the money, and are still maintaining your responsibility towards any people in your care. If you only have enough money to buy medicine for your dog, or for your child, but not both, then the child comes first. But if you do have the money (and/or the child is covered under your health insurance), why not?

But I think my definition of “pet” is very different from yours – you implied in your earlier post that pets belong on farms, living outdoors and eating scraps. To me, that isn’t a “pet”, it’s a “wild animal”. Even the cows, chickens, and pigs have barns, henhouses, and pigpens.

 

[CarolAnnSFO]

I may sound old fashioned or superstitious or even CATHOLIC! but I do believe the Catholic teachings on Satan.

I don’t think there’s anything incompatible with Catholic teaching in caring for your pets – it in no way means you value human life any less.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

I think there’s nothing wrong with it, as long as you have the money, and are still maintaining your responsibility towards any people in your care. If you only have enough money to buy medicine for your dog, or for your child, but not both, then the child comes first. But if you do have the money (and/or the child is covered under your health insurance), why not?

Hundreds of dollars? You dont think that money could go to really help a fellow human? There has to be some limit to how much will be spent.

But I think my definition of “pet” is very different from yours – you implied in your earlier post that pets belong on farms, living outdoors and eating scraps. To me, that isn’t a “pet”, it’s a “wild animal”. Even the cows, chickens, and pigs have barns, henhouses, and pigpens.

What I meant was it is wrong to have, for example, a dog if your living space doesnt include a large yard for it to run around in, that is why I said farms are the proper environment. Lets not forget they can go to the bathroom out in a field where you wont have to pick up after them, that is probably the most degrading thing to pick up after dogs and cats.
Further, there is no problem if it has a dog house, just so that the dog is not living inside and especially in or near the kitchen or bedroom. As for food, Im not saying starve them, just dont go out of your way buying special food, they can eat whatever you dont eat or cant finish.

 

[system]

I don’t think there’s anything incompatible with Catholic teaching in caring for your pets – it in no way means you value human life any less.

Agreed. No one said there was.

Again, I think some wires are crossed, since I never said caring for your pets went against church teaching.

I keep getting answers that quote my post, but answer someone else’s post.

I’m off to talk to my bassett hound. SHE understands

 

[whatevergirl]

Dont you think there is a disproportionate amount of fuss over this dog fighting issue involving Atlanta Falcons player Michael Vick?

They are now bringing puppies and dogs onto shows like the Larry King show, Fox news, Cnn, whatever to gain sympathy in this disgusting sport, if it can be called this. No doubt this practice is dispicable but is it more important than the millions upon millions of terminated pregnancies in the same United States? WHERE ARE OUR PRIORITIES FOLKS?

Are dogs or animals in general now more important than people? I guess it is if you were to view these TV shows. It goes to show how progressively secular we have gotten in this country. And we have the gall to ask God to bless it.

I think I know what you are meaning, here. My husband concurs with you, frankly. But, he’s also an ex football player so…

I don’t think it’s so much that the dogs are being looked at as higher than humans…or that we as a society put more emphasis on an animal’s life, than a human’s. I think that what it shows more is how celebrities are thought of as higher than God, at times…to be quite frank. That’s the problem I have with the whole issue. If someone down the street of anytown USA were doing this very same thing that Michael Vick did…would we care? What is truly sickening is that there are many…because he is a star athlete…think he should just be slapped on the wrist, and left to continue being a millionaire football player. It’s like Paris Hilton…same fuss. No dogs, but same fuss. I think society is fasincated by celebrities making mistakes. That’s where the real sadness comes in. I say…he shouldn’t be allowed to play football…case closed. He shouldn’t be given treatment better than the average Joe, because he is a quarterback for the Falcons. Big woop.

I also think that until society starts viewing fetuses as the beginning of LIFE, as a whole…we will not see the same outrage over abortion.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[PLAL]

Dog Fighting and Abortion are both evil. Abortion is a greater evil then dog fighting. People are talking about the do fighting issue more than abortion because we are living in a twisted world.

---

By the way, I heard in the new movie coming out called “UnderDog” at the end of the movie UnderDog kills Michael Vick. Just kidding.

 

[CarolAnnSFO]

Hundreds of dollars? You dont think that money could go to really help a fellow human? There has to be some limit to how much will be spent.

I never said anything about spending without limit. Under that reasoning, nobody should ever have or do anything that isn’t essential to sustain life, because the money could be better spent to help people. No CDs, no DVDs, no books, no magazines, no newspapers, no computers, no internet, no eating out, no movies, no clothes beyond one or two sets, no recreation of any kind – it gets kind of silly. It’s all about balance. Can you honestly say you donate every penny of your money that isn’t directly related to minimally keeping you alive? Somehow, I doubt it (of just about anyone, not just you).

I don’t think it’s degrading to pick up after my cats. They live in my house, and I don’t live on a farm. They’re very good company, and completely non-judgemental. They have lived their lives as indoor pets, and I would never throw them outside to forage for scraps. I do leave food outside for the strays that are living outdoors. And I will buy (human) food for this week’s food pantry collection at my church. Life is not a zero-sum game.

 

[CarolAnnSFO]

Again, I think some wires are crossed, since I never said caring for your pets went against church teaching.

I keep getting answers that quote my post, but answer someone else’s post.

I’m off to talk to my bassett hound. SHE understands

Again, my apologies if I mis-responded to your posts. That’s the danger when we all start quoting each other.

I know what you mean about your bassett hound understanding. My cats understand me.

 

[PLAL]

Here’s my question…

How come most of the people involved with PETA (animal rights) are also Pro-Abortion?

 

[CarolAnnSFO]

Here’s my question…

How come most of the people involved with PETA (animal rights) are also Pro-Abortion?

I don’t have an answer to that. I have never seen any document that purports to explain how PETA members feel about abortion – I have no idea whether they support it or not.

That bears no relevance to how most people feel about their pets. PETA is an extreme organization, and way off the mainstream. And even if it is true that most PETA members support abortion, it simply doesn’t follow that all people who care about animals support abortion. There is no logic to that whatsoever.

1. Caring about animals doesn’t mean you hate people.
2. Caring about animals doesn’t mean you value them more highly than people.
3. Caring about animals doesn’t mean you support abortion.
4. The fact that Michael Vick’s dogfighting situation is all over the news has a whole lot more to do with his being a celebrity than whatever he did or didn’t do. Joe Schmo’s dogfighting ring will never make the news.
5. The mainstream media is not going to focus on abortion because a) they believe, or pretend to believe, that a fetus is not actually human life, b) abortion is legal, and c) the vast majority of abortions are performed on women who are not celebrities.

 

[Nevarlander]

I agree. Joe Schmo who raises fighting dogs doesn’t make the news, but Michael Vick is famous. If a famous woman has an abortion, it will be plastered all over the news.

No it won’t. Famous people care about their image, and it’s bad for your image in a lot of the world still (even in America), so they’ll cover it up.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

The question is: How do we get the same positive response to save human life from the media and downplay abortions at the same time. God did place Man above the animals but he put Man in a steward position to reign over them. So, God Himself placed man on a higher level than our dogs and cats. That being said, I behuves us to respect the life of all animals great and small.

If we have respect for our unborn it naturally follows that we will have respect for animals.

This is along the lines of what I’ve heard suggested. God gave us dominion over animals and they are for our use. Our treatment of them is, however, a reflection on us, on our dignity as creatures created in the Image of the Holy One. Thus, I would think that pitting one animal against another animal for our entertainment would be a diminishment of our dignity as the sons and daughters of the Lord God.

Of course, in this day and age when we kill our own young, our mistreatment of animals is to be expected.

 

[Zooey]

Here’s my question…

How come most of the people involved with PETA (animal rights) are also Pro-Abortion?

Please don’t put us pet lovers in the same category with PETA!! PETA does not care about anything but promoting an agenda…
Do you know how many PETA people have been arrested for their part in crimes that involve death & injury to animals?? I know a little bit about this, because I live in the vicinity of one of the largest businesses that raises animals for scientific research. (NOT testing for how to make a fuchsia eyeshadow for movie stars; real science, like development of drugs to treat a variety of health conditions in humans).
One of their biggest problems is with people from the [so-called] “animal rights” people, who have repeateedly broken in, & killed the animals they were “saving”.
There are also animals there which were being raised as pets, who have been turned loose in sub-zero weather to freeze to death. Same thing…Same kind of people.

A lot of folks hear PETA [or, insert extremist group of your choice], & think they are animal lovers. Nothing could be further from the truth. One of their main objectives is to end the right of human beings to have pets at all.
I have no use for them, nor for the other extremists who call them selves “animal rights advocates”, because I have too much knowledge of their actual agenda. These are the same lot who, some months ago, made a splash in the headlines in Germany, demanding that a German zoo should starve to death a baby polar bear whose mother had rejected it. Ummmm…yeah. That’s a real nice idea. Let’s “save” the animals by killing them all off.

Michael Vick’s behaviour has not been just criminal; it has been despicable. Personally, I see him as being in the same lot as PETA: An example of human beings’ ability to destroy,* just because they can*.
And it all connects, yet again, to** the same:crying: culture of death that sponsors abortion**. That’s what frustrates me: I can see the correlation, & I can’t seem to make people understand that this is all of a piece with a world that has turned its back on God.

But, as I say: http://bestsmileys.com/clueless/4.gifThat’s me.

 

[RhyannaRose]

I do not want to make personal attacks, but Catholic Dude, I can honestly say I do not trust people who have no compassion for animals very far. I have to wonder if something happened in your childhood to make you so bitter about one of the beautiful things in God’s creation, and I do pray that someday you will resolve it.

I have four dogs, four cats, about a dozen fish, I spent ten years riding/training/showing horses until a back injury ended that, and eight years now assisting in local animal charities with time, money and other methods of support. I do believe somewhat in animal rights…they have a right to be treated humanely by humans and not tortured or abused. Outside of that, I believe since we have domesticated certain animals, we are now in charge of the care of these animals. I do not believe that animal lives are equal to or greater then human lives. If put in a situation where I had to choose between a child and a dog, the dog is going to come out on the short end of the stick. But I also cherish the beauty of the relationship between man and domestic animal.

I do agree with what was said about PETA. Personally, I don’t think there’s too many organizations that I am teed off at more. They say that my beloved pets, mostly rescues, were better off dead then in a good home where they get good food, healthcare, companionship and protection. I would like to second in the urging that pet lovers and PETA fanatics are NOT lumped in the same group.

And while I am writing this, I have a twenty pound black cat on my lap. My father found him the week after Halloween five years ago and he’s been a treasured part of the family since.

I think animals do have more emotions then they are given credit for, but I do think humans have higher reasoning. Which, once again, would be why humans should treat them fairly. However, I can honestly say I am not a vegetarian, and there’s alot of leather on my shoe rack. They’re very cute, but God put cows here for a reason and it wasn’t just to walk around going “moo”.

And it saddens me greatly to think of animals as having no soul. I don’t think of Heaven often, since the Bible says it’s beyound our comprehension, but when I do I think of joining all my lost family members, including two very beloved dogs that had to be euthanized due to terminal illnesses. It may seem silly to some of you, but I don’t have a big family and having a hard time fitting in during school animals were my refuge. And I see the greatness of God’s creation in them and all things from the natural world. But my love of animals and nature and everything else that I love in life is second to my love of God and Jesus.

Oh, and one more thing…I am the kind of person who would put cute little clothing on dogs. It makes humans smile and dogs love the extra attention, so why not? I live my life in a way that if I fulfill my obligations to God (you know these already), family and country (following the law of the land), then I’m going to march to the beat of my own drummer. Which includes cute little shirts on my dog.

 

[RhyannaRose]

I also want to add that I think sympathy and compassion for animals is a good thing for a person to have. We got my Mom a fish tank three months ago and we’ve lost about a dozen fish getting it started - and lost some to a pet store’s wrong advice. The fact that both she and I can get so distressed over the fish getting sick tells me that the chances of us ever harming a human are pretty far and few between.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

I never said anything about spending without limit. Under that reasoning, nobody should ever have or do anything that isn’t essential to sustain life, because the money could be better spent to help people. No CDs, no DVDs, no books, no magazines, no newspapers, no computers, no internet, no eating out, no movies, no clothes beyond one or two sets, no recreation of any kind – it gets kind of silly. It’s all about balance. Can you honestly say you donate every penny of your money that isn’t directly related to minimally keeping you alive? Somehow, I doubt it (of just about anyone, not just you).

I don’t think it’s degrading to pick up after my cats. They live in my house, and I don’t live on a farm. They’re very good company, and completely non-judgemental. They have lived their lives as indoor pets, and I would never throw them outside to forage for scraps. I do leave food outside for the strays that are living outdoors. And I will buy (human) food for this week’s food pantry collection at my church. Life is not a zero-sum game.

You make a perfectly valid point, not each and every penny has to be given to charity or anything, that is why I tried to make it clear this was ‘hundreds’ of dollars that was the issue.

 

[dranzal]

Here’s my question…

How come most of the people involved with PETA (animal rights) are also Pro-Abortion?

I’ve often wondered if it wouldn’t be useful for a good pro-life satirist to write a story or series of stories about animal abortions. Somehow, I think the above mentioned crowd would suddenly be appalled at the atrocity of manually ripping apart baby Fido’s and Fi Fi’s.

1. Five year old Sassy, the proud mother of 2 litters already, is happily looking forward to the arrival of her third litter. Her owners have taken her to the vet and discovered that there are 4 babies coming. The other cats are really excited. Why do the owners look upset? What do they mean too many cats in the house? Oh, good. We’re back at the vet and he will tell them it’s okay. Wait, what is he doing to me. Stop! My babies!!! (To be really effective, there would have to be some amount of description of abortion of the kittens.)
2. Three year old Lady was specially bred and is a gorgeous award winning show dog. Her owners have spent thousands on her keeping her in tip-top shape. However, after a brief escape, she was found to be expecting. Lady, bored with all the glitz of show-life, eagerly awaited her first pups. Her owners had other plans…

You get the idea. I fully expect that, in response to stories depicting the deliberate snuffing out of these precious little pre-born lives, the Peta folks would be very angry. The little victims would be kittens and puppies, not fetuses and certainly not “blobs of tissue”.

 

[CarolAnnSFO]

You make a perfectly valid point, not each and every penny has to be given to charity or anything, that is why I tried to make it clear this was ‘hundreds’ of dollars that was the issue.

But how do you know that I’m not a multi-millionaire for whom “hundreds of dollars” is just pocket change? (I’m not, but you get the point).

RhyannaRose:

I do not want to make personal attacks, but Catholic Dude, I can honestly say I do not trust people who have no compassion for animals very far. I have to wonder if something happened in your childhood to make you so bitter about one of the beautiful things in God’s creation, and I do pray that someday you will resolve it.

I couldn’t agree more. There was talk upthread about making pet dogs live outdoors and finding scraps to eat. This is less accommodation than anyone would give to a chicken destined for the dinner table. It is making a pet animal (wose species has been domesticated for thousands of years) live like a wild animal, and forcing it to compete with true wild animals (such as coyotes) for food. That is cruelty, in my book.

(I like the rest of your post as well, RhyannaRose. By the way, I don’t see anything wrong with dressing pets in cute clothes if it makes everyone happy, but I can tell you, my cats would never stand for it! )

dranzal:

I’ve often wondered if it wouldn’t be useful for a good pro-life satirist to write a story or series of stories about animal abortions. Somehow, I think the above mentioned crowd would suddenly be appalled at the atrocity of manually ripping apart baby Fido’s and Fi Fi’s.

This may not be such a bad idea. I’m a revert, and was away from the Church for a long time. During part of that time, I supported a woman’s right to an abortion. What changed my thinking was a series of fetal pig dissections I had to do at University. I felt bad for those poor little pigs who never even had a chance to be born. Then it hit me, how could I feel bad about the fetal pigs, and not feel just as bad about aborted babies?

 

[Sean_Boyle]

I think there’s nothing wrong with it, as long as you have the money, and are still maintaining your responsibility towards any people in your care. If you only have enough money to buy medicine for your dog, or for your child, but not both, then the child comes first. But if you do have the money (and/or the child is covered under your health insurance), why not?

But I think my definition of “pet” is very different from yours – you implied in your earlier post that pets belong on farms, living outdoors and eating scraps. To me, that isn’t a “pet”, it’s a “wild animal”. Even the cows, chickens, and pigs have barns, henhouses, and pigpens.

How much money is to much? Three thousand, six thousand dollars. If a surgery at the vet delays the enivable death of a pet by 18 months and costs two thousand dollars, was that waistful?

What about the suffering of the pet. Is that ever taken into account? Some people seem to value the love they feel for the pet and opt for surgery over the responsibility they have to make reasonable decisions that are for the good of the pet. Needlessly causing the pet to suffer through surgeries is also abuse. Where is the line?

Would you be willing to pay more for certain favorite pets versus other pets?