Yes, I think that this is a case of my environment being very different from yours. Around here, we have wolves and coyotes (think of a canid that’s smaller than a wolf, but still more than big enough to catch and eat a cat), and even some large wild cats, which sometimes make themselves known in even quite large cities. Our native birds are more endangered from imported birds rather than cats. We also have Homo(phobic) Goodolboyus, who regards cats as yet another threat to his masculinity, who will catch and torture cats. And, of course, we have the people who supply medical labs with experimental animals…including “random source” cats (in other words, cats who might very well be someone’s pet, but who are outside at the moment) who will pick up any cat that they can quickly catch. A cat that’s been a pet is obviously easier to catch and confine than a true feral cat.
Dumping a cat in the US is not a kind alternative to putting it to sleep.
I didn’t even realize “Dear Abby” was still chugging along! Back when it was a big deal, and even now, I suspected a lot of the letters were self generated fakes to gin up reader interest. In looking at a few of the current letters that suspicion has not diminished.
This cat abusing woman (IMO) may well not even exist.
NEWS FLASH! Everybody already figured this out. You’re late to the party. They have even formed opinions based on this fact, just different from yours.
Nah, you missed my point, and you made stuff up in order to do it. It’s highly unlikely that Loretta is so poor/sick/crazy/whatever that she couldn’t have found a better way to deal with the cat situation. Even poor or disabled people can and do possess compassion and common sense. There were so many better ways to handle the situation, including getting rid of the cat if that’s what she really wanted to do, that it’s really a stretch to find a way to excuse her for it. She behaved abominably. I’m not one of the people advocating putting her out on an ice floe for it, you’ll note. I’m just saying, she behaved in a selfish, heartless way, and I doubt there are enough mitigating circumstances in her favor to change my mind about that.
I’m not, and I stated why, and gave you an example of a way Loretta could have handled it that would have taken minimal effort that would have been more humane. The fact is, Loretta very likely didn’t give a shit, and that’s cruel.
Alphaboi was creating scenarios where Loretta was worse; you were creating scenarios where she was better. All we know is she said she’d take care of a cat and instead she dumped it on the side of the road. I’m willing to believe that’s what happened, and to say, based on that, she’s a jerk. Where’s the overreaction there? It seems like a reasonable conclusion to me.
I didn’t see the dreadful tale of Loretta in the OP’s link at first (it got moved to the previous day’s column page), but got distracted by the current day’s crop of problems, including that poor girl in Tucson who is dating Mr. Wrong but doesn’t have the guts to tell him bye-bye. Abby’s advice to ditch him:
“If he asks why, tell him you’re not interested in having anything to do with anyone who belittles you and calls your religious beliefs “b.s.,” and regardless of how “patient” he is, you will never sleep with him.”
I am now envisioning the boyfriend’s rapid religious conversion.
The opinion that a human being should be tortured in any number of cruel ways and left to die, or just brutally murdered outright as a response to their treatment of a pussycat is much, much, much fucking different than mine; mine is intelligent, rational and seems to somehow place humanity higher on the value scale than housepets.
Did she make a reasonable attempt to mitigate the consequences of breaking her word to the best of her ability?
NO
End of discussion. The answers “YES” and “NO” to those questions describe a sack of matter that superficially resembles a human and contributes nothing to the world but greenhouse gases and 310K blackbody radiation.
It turns out that a hard line against animal abuse is useful for protecting humans.
There are two, and only two, barriers between civilization and barbarism: internal (conscience) and external (fear of punishment). Animal abuse is a highly reliable diagnostic indicator that the former has profoundly failed. To compensate, society needs to crank the latter up to 11 as a last-ditch attempt to insure that today’s cat abuser doesn’t become tomorrow’s child abuser.
What she did to the cat was lazy and immoral. But what she did to her own GRANDCHILDREN was downright cruel. She let them scour the neighborhood for 10 days AND return the cat to her care!!! Obviously their pain means less to her than her own momentary discomfort of telling them she cannot care for the cat any more.
Agreed. Also, if Loretta’s husband said no, where was he in all this? I’m wondering why he didn’t say anything to the kids for ten days. After all, they’re his grandkids, too.
Don’t bother, runner pat. If I remember my SDMB freakshow history correctly, CM has in the past promoted shooting cats if they tread on his property.
As far as the charmer in the OP, well, my sentiment is with those insulting her so vividly. Admittedly, I can’t condone internet rageaholics who gleefully describe torturing humans as punishment for their actions. If they were serious, the orgasmic descriptions of torture would be horrifying at worst and hypocritical at best when used by people decrying a lack of compassion.
Fortunately these posts are simply people letting out their disgust at what is a despicable, inhumane act. Plus, we’re in the pit and there’s often competition to post with the most righteous anger.
Anyway, I will say that domestic animal abandoners deserve public disapproval and significant fines and/or community service at animal shelters. Loretta is a shitheel for lying to her kids and especially for behaving so callously toward a living, breathing creature, much less one that was loved by her own loved ones.
I get that not everyone likes cats, but let’s face it–she did make a promise. No, it’s not the same as abandoning a child, but why abandon it at all? There are other options. Tell the family and let them decide what to do with it. If they say, “Sorry, you HAVE to watch it, we won’t take it,” then take it to a shelter. But this is so passive aggressive. Why wouldn’t you just say, “No, I can’t watch the cat now that you’ve moved out–I don’t want this responsibilitY”?
Yes, we know, you drown cats you find running around. But, yet AGAIN, said cat was the possesion of her GRANDCHILDREN.
Would you deliberately destroy the possesion of your child’s, or your grandchild’s, after promising to look after it? If your daughter came to you and said, “Dad, could you watch my Barbie for me?” and you promised, would you then dump said Barbie in the trash?
Or you – you’re a gun owner. You ask someone to look after your gun, but they don’t like guns, so they turn it into one of those programs where you get, oh, a computer or a stereo or something. You’d be pissed, right?
What he said.
(-Guin, who is posting with a kitten climbing on her shoulder.)
