You are one sick individual for making those vile comments about me just because I value my dogs more than some kid. I said it before and will say it again. The over inflated importance placed on children is beyond ridiculous! They are animals too and there is NOTHING overly special about them!
Anyway, my dogs would be saved BEFORE you and BEFORE some child. So just deal with it and quit attacking other people because they would save the life that is more important to them!!
Oh and you didn't post that link because you thought that dog and cat people would find it interesting. You only posted it to cause upset.
When dogs live with you and when they share their lives with you (and vice versa) then bonds are created. Those bonds can be just as strong as bonds between humans, So dogs become part of the family and thus become more important than random strangers. That is why I would save my dogs lives before that of a strange human. Additionally, importance cannot be defined by intelligence. If that is how you define it then you would have to say that a mentally impaired person is less important than one that isn't.
I did say 'largely' based on intelligence. Just so we're clear, I would not say a mentally impaired human was of any less worth than a mentally able one.
I tend to go species by species, but there are other factors too.
Well said. I'd also say that critically endangered animals such as an Amur leopard or black rhinos lives are more important than that of a farmed pig, which maybe more intelligent.
Thank you, and yeah I fully agree with the above here too. If Fido was stuck in a raging inferno with a Javan Rhinoceros, it would be the horny one that I'd sling over my shoulder and carry to safety amidst the cheers of the adoring animal loving crowd gathered below*
*the plausibility of me lifting a rhino may have some degree of artistic licence here, and i've no idea what he's doing in a house or even why it's on fire in the first place, but you get my drift!
What do you think of this statement made by PETA ?
'This selfish desire to possess animals and receive love from them causes immeasurable suffering, which results from manipulating their breeding, selling or giving them away casually, and depriving them of the opportunity to engage in their natural behavior. They are restricted to human homes, where they must obey commands and can only eat, drink, and even urinate when humans allow them to.'
Would you consider the possibility that pet owners are putting human need above animal need after all ?
^^^^^ Have to agree with this 100%. Just because someone "loves" animals, doesn't mean that they make great pet owners. Dogs regularly die in hot cars, cats are kept indoors in small flats, small animals are constantly handled and petted which can cause them great stress, fish are made to live in small tanks, the list goes on and on.
Dog and cat shows should be banned, the animals suffer hugely because of disgusting breeding trends. Council estate "breeders" (not meaning to slur council tenants but you know what I mean) should be prosecuted for farming out their Staffies and GSDs in order to sell the pups for £300 a throw on Gumtree. People who take their dogs to music festivals must be completely stupid. All would probably consider themselves to be animal "lovers". But I wouldn't rate them as pet owners.
I
*the plausibility of me lifting a rhino may have some degree of artistic licence here, and i've no idea what he's doing in a house on fire in the first place, but you get my drift!
My money is on th fact he is logged into DS demanding to know if people would prefer to be stranded on a desert island with him or a peado, when the house was engulfed in flames......maybe....?
My money is on th fact he is logged into DS demanding to know if people would prefer to be stranded on a desert island with him or a peado, when the house was engulfed in flames......maybe....?
Haha, this seems like a more than plausible expainationto me!
*heads off to look for the paedo vs animal on a desert island thread*
What do you think of this statement made by PETA ?
'This selfish desire to possess animals and receive love from them causes immeasurable suffering, which results from manipulating their breeding, selling or giving them away casually, and depriving them of the opportunity to engage in their natural behavior. They are restricted to human homes, where they must obey commands and can only eat, drink, and even urinate when humans allow them to.'
Would you consider the possibility that pet owners are putting human need above animal need after all ?
Sorry but no actual pet lover or animal lover would take even the slightest bit of notice to anything the crazies at PETA say.
I'm an animal lover. I don't eat or wear animals or anything derived from animals and I think peta are the scum of the earth.
PETA are responsible for thousands of animal deaths a year because apparently an animal is happier dead than being a pet according to them. And so they euthanise any stray pets that they happen to 'rescue' they don't even attempt to save them. Yet they slate anyone else who does the same. They're are extreme hypocrites who deserved to be nothing but ignored.
PETA are nothing but crazy extremists out to make money. Despite their front line story they couldn't give a flying toss about the welfare of animals. A quick google search to find their financials also shows they are quite happy to find several terrorist organisations.
Sorry but no actual pet lover or animal lover would take even the slightest bit of notice to anything the crazies at PETA say.
I'm an animal lover. I don't eat or wear animals or anything derived from animals and I think peta are the scum of the earth.
PETA are responsible for thousands of animal deaths a year because apparently an animal is happier dead than being a pet according to them. And so they euthanise any stray pets that they happen to 'rescue' they don't even attempt to save them. Yet they slate anyone else who does the same. They're are extreme hypocrites who deserved to be nothing but ignored.
PETA are nothing but crazy extremists out to make money. Despite their front line story they couldn't give a flying toss about the welfare of animals. A quick google search to find their financials also shows they are quite happy to find several terrorist organisations.
I didn't really mean to ask for an appraisal of PETA as an organisation, which undoubtedly has carried out some dubious actions. I would like to know what you think of the actual statement however.
Well the whole pack theory has been debunked and the person who originally said that dogs (like wolves) form packs retracted his statement after further studies revealed that dogs are not like wolves. In the wild dogs are more solitary animals and might pair up with other dogs for hunting and mating purposes.
And science has PROVEN (through MRI scanning) that dogs share the same part of the brain as humans do for displaying love.
Your dogs would forget you within a week if they had to be rehomed, so no, they don't love you.
I didn't really mean to ask for an appraisal of PETA as an organisation, which undoubtedly has carried out some dubious actions. I would like to know what you think of the actual statement however.
Oh. Well basically. PETA said it. So my opinion of it is it's worthy of nothing but contempt. And is complete bollox.
Oh. Well basically. PETA said it. So my opinion of it is it's worthy of nothing but contempt. And is complete bollox.
But that's just my opinion of course.
Which bit of the statement is the most bollox to you ? That animals/pets are sold as commodities ? If you think animals are equal to humans, why for a human is that called slavery ? Do you call the selling of pets slavery ?
Well the whole pack theory has been debunked and the person who originally said that dogs (like wolves) form packs retracted his statement after further studies revealed that dogs are not like wolves. In the wild dogs are more solitary animals and might pair up with other dogs for hunting and mating purposes.
And science has PROVEN (through MRI scanning) that dogs share the same part of the brain as humans do for displaying love.
I'm sure that's how you like to see it, but the science just says "the specific people that the dog knows are associated with good things and pleasant anticipations, and anything that reminds them of these people lights up the reward center of their canine brain." Which seems pretty obvious. They are reminded of their main reward providers. So what? Are you trying to imply that this science proves a dog's 'love' for its owner is equivalent to the love one human can have for another?
Which bit of the statement is the most bollox to you ? That animals/pets are sold as commodities ? If you think animals are equal to humans, why for a human is that called slavery ? Do you call the selling of pets slavery ?
I'm sorry I'm really not willing to get into a discussion about a statement from peta. I can't not put into words my contempt for them and anything they say. Any stance that take is made a complete moot point by them slaughtering thousands of animals a year.
You asked what I though, I answered. Perhaps someone else will be more willing to discuss it further. But that person isn't me.
I'm sorry I'm really not willing to get into a discussion about a statement from peta. I can't not put into words my contempt for them and anything they say.
You asked what I though, I answered. Perhaps someone else will be more willing to discuss it further.
It is myself that asked about slavery not PETA. Would you be willing to discuss that ?
It is myself that asked about slavery not PETA. Would you be willing to discuss that ?
Well no I don't think owning a pet is slavery.
A slave has a master, has tasks and is paid a pittance to live a life dictated by others. With no freedom at all. Slaves aren't given proper
remuneration or appreciation.
My dogs have no such tasks. Are cared for to the best of my abilities. . In essence I'm a slave to them. I make sure they are fed, watered, warm, dry, clean, healthy etc etc. If my dog wants to go for a walk, he brings me his lead and I get my coat. If he wants to go in the garden he taps the door and I open it. When he wants the fire on he drags the fire grate (no I'm not joking) and I put the fire on. My dogs get everything they need and want to the best of my ability. This costs me time, money, effort. And I ask nothing of my dogs in return for this. So if dogs are slaves then children are also slaves as parents do the same for their children as I do for my dog. Care for them to the best of their ability, feed, clothe etc etc.
Dogs are no longer wild animals, they have been domesticated for years (yes, that's due to humans) When left to their own devices they have no way of feeding themselves, are often abused by thugs or knocked over. PETA apparently think a dog would prefer to be on the street, starving to death or worse, that loved and cared for.
A slave has a master, has tasks and is paid a pittance to live a life dictated by others. With no freedom at all. Slaves aren't given proper
remuneration or appreciation.
My dogs have no such tasks. Are cared for to the best of my abilities. . In essence I'm a slave to them. I make sure they are fed, watered, warm, dry, clean, healthy etc etc. This costs me time, money, effort. And I ask nothing of my dogs in return for this. So if dogs are slaves then children are also slaves as parents do the same for their children as I do for my dog. Care for them to the best of their ability, feed, clothe etc etc.
Dogs are no longer wild animals, they have been domesticated for years (yes, that's due to humans) When left to their own devices they have no way of feeding themselves, are often abused by thugs or knocked over. PETA apparently think a dog would prefer to be on the street, starving to death or worse, that loved and cared for.
In short. As I said, it's complete bollox.
Thanks for the reply. My issue was about the selling of animals as pets, but no matter.
Thanks for the reply. My issue was about the selling of animals as pets, but no matter.
I think it depends.
There are excellent breeders who are trying to undo years of bad breeding and genuinely trying to help raise the standard of the breed for generations to come. Sadly that costs money so to carry on doing the work they so they sell the puppies. The genuinely care about those puppies though and any genuinely good breeder will have a clause in the contract that states should the owner no longer be able to care for the puppy the puppy must be returned to the breeder. They spend thousands on health tests checking for defects and possible health risks before even deciding to breed. Then spend yet more thousands finding a 'stud' dog who's owner has also spent thousands on testing for genetic conditions, hip scores, elbow scores etc etc. And only breed those dogs who aren't pre disposed to specific health issues in an attempt to eventually completely remove them from the breed (say hip dysphasia in German shepherds for example).
There are also scum bags who see ££ and so we have puppy farms and scummy back yard breeders. Obviously those should be prosecuted to the furthest extent of the law repeatedly until they stop what they're doing.
I also don't agree with 'show' animals as it sets breed standards which the mentioned good breeders try so hard to stay away from. (English bull terriers and their snouts being so short it causes breathing problems etc).
But sadly we live in a world where animals are seen as less than nothing. Which I find very sad.
Animals, as animals love unconditionally and humans don't. With humans there is always interest involved.
Do you really believe that animals love people at all, let alone unconditionally?
I think dogs just depend or their owners for food and shelter, in much the same way as wild dogs depend on the leader of their particular pack.
Take a dog away from a cruel, negligent owner and it will soon depend on its new caring owner and forget all about the previous bad owner. That's hardly unconditional love.
Animals, as animals love unconditionally and humans don't. With humans there is always interest involved.
You don't think dogs and cats "love" their owners because they have come to recognise them as their primary reward givers then? You think a cat loves its owner unconditionally? They're off like a shot if somebody else feeds them better.
What a load of nonsense some people think, honestly.
Excuse me for quoting just that one small part, but it reminds me of the dog next door who (seemingly) has trained its providers to shout its name whenever it barks.
It's like it's shouting (in its dog language) "What's my name?" and gets the response it desires.
Having two dogs it is blatantly obvious that they have different personalities. My dogs hate raw carrot whereas plenty of other dogs love them. One of my dogs loves playing with footballs and the other one isn't interested in them. The one who doesn't like footballs loves squeaking toys whereas the other one doesn't. Neither of them will play tug games where lots of other dogs do. One loves peanut butter whereas the other one doesn't. That's because each dog is a unique individual with their own likes and dislikes. It has also been said that dogs aren't self aware. I have found that claim not to be true. My male dog dislikes most other male dogs and will not tolerate another male dog in the house. When he sees himself in the mirror he does not react. He knows the reflection is not another dog.
Is this still a Greyhound and a Lurcher you're keeping in the house? I'm sure you make up for it, being an animal lover. Must be exhausting for you though.
Your dogs would forget you within a week if they had to be rehomed, so no, they don't love you.
Rubbish! Dogs have extremely good memories and some rehomed dogs never settle in and in some cases have to be returned to the people who originally had them. I have a friend with a Border Collie and that dog will NOT go out for a walk with anyone but my friend. She can't even stay away from home and leave him with people he is familiar with as he becomes very withdrawn, will not eat and won't even use the toilet. That is how attached that dog is to my friend!
Is this still a Greyhound and a Lurcher you're keeping in the house? I'm sure you make up for it, being an animal lover. Must be exhausting for you though.
Yes and you do realise that one dog is male and the other female? Besides what exactly was the point of that comment?
Comments
Would you kill yourself to save your dogs life?
I did say 'largely' based on intelligence. Just so we're clear, I would not say a mentally impaired human was of any less worth than a mentally able one.
I tend to go species by species, but there are other factors too.
Thank you, and yeah I fully agree with the above here too. If Fido was stuck in a raging inferno with a Javan Rhinoceros, it would be the horny one that I'd sling over my shoulder and carry to safety amidst the cheers of the adoring animal loving crowd gathered below*
*the plausibility of me lifting a rhino may have some degree of artistic licence here, and i've no idea what he's doing in a house or even why it's on fire in the first place, but you get my drift!
^^^^^ Have to agree with this 100%. Just because someone "loves" animals, doesn't mean that they make great pet owners. Dogs regularly die in hot cars, cats are kept indoors in small flats, small animals are constantly handled and petted which can cause them great stress, fish are made to live in small tanks, the list goes on and on.
Dog and cat shows should be banned, the animals suffer hugely because of disgusting breeding trends. Council estate "breeders" (not meaning to slur council tenants but you know what I mean) should be prosecuted for farming out their Staffies and GSDs in order to sell the pups for £300 a throw on Gumtree. People who take their dogs to music festivals must be completely stupid. All would probably consider themselves to be animal "lovers". But I wouldn't rate them as pet owners.
My money is on th fact he is logged into DS demanding to know if people would prefer to be stranded on a desert island with him or a peado, when the house was engulfed in flames......maybe....?
Haha, this seems like a more than plausible expainationto me!
*heads off to look for the paedo vs animal on a desert island thread*
I worry about those people who would choose an animal. Probably for the best that they stay in their basements.
I think it got covered somewhere in this thread.......I think, it is after all a very random dilemma, so is probably in a thread about cheese!:D
Sorry but no actual pet lover or animal lover would take even the slightest bit of notice to anything the crazies at PETA say.
I'm an animal lover. I don't eat or wear animals or anything derived from animals and I think peta are the scum of the earth.
PETA are responsible for thousands of animal deaths a year because apparently an animal is happier dead than being a pet according to them. And so they euthanise any stray pets that they happen to 'rescue' they don't even attempt to save them. Yet they slate anyone else who does the same. They're are extreme hypocrites who deserved to be nothing but ignored.
PETA are nothing but crazy extremists out to make money. Despite their front line story they couldn't give a flying toss about the welfare of animals. A quick google search to find their financials also shows they are quite happy to find several terrorist organisations.
I didn't really mean to ask for an appraisal of PETA as an organisation, which undoubtedly has carried out some dubious actions. I would like to know what you think of the actual statement however.
Your dogs would forget you within a week if they had to be rehomed, so no, they don't love you.
Oh. Well basically. PETA said it. So my opinion of it is it's worthy of nothing but contempt. And is complete bollox.
But that's just my opinion of course.
Which bit of the statement is the most bollox to you ? That animals/pets are sold as commodities ? If you think animals are equal to humans, why for a human is that called slavery ? Do you call the selling of pets slavery ?
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/canine-corner/201410/is-the-dogs-brain-tuned-love-people
I'm sorry I'm really not willing to get into a discussion about a statement from peta. I can't not put into words my contempt for them and anything they say. Any stance that take is made a complete moot point by them slaughtering thousands of animals a year.
You asked what I though, I answered. Perhaps someone else will be more willing to discuss it further. But that person isn't me.
It is myself that asked about slavery not PETA. Would you be willing to discuss that ?
Well no I don't think owning a pet is slavery.
A slave has a master, has tasks and is paid a pittance to live a life dictated by others. With no freedom at all. Slaves aren't given proper
remuneration or appreciation.
My dogs have no such tasks. Are cared for to the best of my abilities. . In essence I'm a slave to them. I make sure they are fed, watered, warm, dry, clean, healthy etc etc. If my dog wants to go for a walk, he brings me his lead and I get my coat. If he wants to go in the garden he taps the door and I open it. When he wants the fire on he drags the fire grate (no I'm not joking) and I put the fire on. My dogs get everything they need and want to the best of my ability. This costs me time, money, effort. And I ask nothing of my dogs in return for this. So if dogs are slaves then children are also slaves as parents do the same for their children as I do for my dog. Care for them to the best of their ability, feed, clothe etc etc.
Dogs are no longer wild animals, they have been domesticated for years (yes, that's due to humans) When left to their own devices they have no way of feeding themselves, are often abused by thugs or knocked over. PETA apparently think a dog would prefer to be on the street, starving to death or worse, that loved and cared for.
In short. As I said, it's complete bollox.
Thanks for the reply. My issue was about the selling of animals as pets, but no matter.
I think it depends.
There are excellent breeders who are trying to undo years of bad breeding and genuinely trying to help raise the standard of the breed for generations to come. Sadly that costs money so to carry on doing the work they so they sell the puppies. The genuinely care about those puppies though and any genuinely good breeder will have a clause in the contract that states should the owner no longer be able to care for the puppy the puppy must be returned to the breeder. They spend thousands on health tests checking for defects and possible health risks before even deciding to breed. Then spend yet more thousands finding a 'stud' dog who's owner has also spent thousands on testing for genetic conditions, hip scores, elbow scores etc etc. And only breed those dogs who aren't pre disposed to specific health issues in an attempt to eventually completely remove them from the breed (say hip dysphasia in German shepherds for example).
There are also scum bags who see ££ and so we have puppy farms and scummy back yard breeders. Obviously those should be prosecuted to the furthest extent of the law repeatedly until they stop what they're doing.
I also don't agree with 'show' animals as it sets breed standards which the mentioned good breeders try so hard to stay away from. (English bull terriers and their snouts being so short it causes breathing problems etc).
But sadly we live in a world where animals are seen as less than nothing. Which I find very sad.
I think dogs just depend or their owners for food and shelter, in much the same way as wild dogs depend on the leader of their particular pack.
Take a dog away from a cruel, negligent owner and it will soon depend on its new caring owner and forget all about the previous bad owner. That's hardly unconditional love.
Most other animals barely recognise their owners.
You don't think dogs and cats "love" their owners because they have come to recognise them as their primary reward givers then? You think a cat loves its owner unconditionally? They're off like a shot if somebody else feeds them better.
What a load of nonsense some people think, honestly.
It's like it's shouting (in its dog language) "What's my name?" and gets the response it desires.
I do understand the attraction.
Yes and you do realise that one dog is male and the other female? Besides what exactly was the point of that comment?