The Biden Administration: a puppy-hug in the making

No, I quoted where you said exactly that:

Nope. I do not pick up my wife’s dog’s shit, or walk it, or take it to regular* vet visits, or groom it. It is very much my wife’s pet that happens to live in the same house as I do. That’s the only difference between it and my friend’s pet cats, who I show as much affection to.

Don’t get me wrong - I’ve had pets of my own. I’ve had pet dogs, including sharing ownership of some with my wife. The current dog is not one of them.

It’s got nothing to do with “things on my plate”, and everything to do with the fact that I just do not want a pet anymore. Not space, not time, not other hobbies. I just don’t have a need or desire to own a pet right now or for the foreseeable future.

* I would, of course, take it for any emergency thing if needed.

The generalized proposition was “loving animals reflects human empathy”

Yes, the example of Hitler is out there. That’s the point - history’s worst monster loved his dog.

There’s enough documentary evidence of Hitler’s animal relationships (with multiple dogs) to say that it wasn’t a myth. We have films, letters by other people, etc. Look, I get the idea you’re peddling here, but - we know Hitler had a drug problem, do you seriously think we’d not know if he had an animal abuse one?

And anyway, the point I was initially objecting to said jack about how well-treated the pets are, just talked about the ownership, quality of treatment was a later moving of the goalposts.

Now, kindly fuck off with this “I agree with you but…” bullshit. This is not GD and I don’t need a “Well, ektshually…” motherfucker like you pathetically attempting to school me on argument methodology.

You want to pick a fight with me, just pick a fucking fight, asshole, don’t hide behind some missaplied “plural of anecdote” fuckery. DrS’s “keeping pets means you’re not a monster” idiocy was thoroughly disproven when I posted the picture. Everything else is just commentary.

Reflections are bidirectional. And imperfect. It is a dramatic misreading, especially given the context of everything else I said, to think that what I meant there was an absolutist “if you own a pet, you must be a good person.” Which is the only possible statement that your ridiculous Hitler example could have contradicted.

Wonderful fortune cookie line. Absolute bullshit as a defence of your own words. The very admission that it was a bidirectional statement means I wasn’t misreading anything. You’re just frantically backpedaling from the implications of that inversion.

And if the Hitler example was so “ridiculous”, you wouldn’t have needed to waste the pixels downplaying his affections for Blondi.

That last reply to Princhester was a bit of rhetorical excess, I’m not saying your thesis is “must”, but it is “if you own a pet, it indicates human empathy as well”. And that’s just not true. And this isn’t just belied by Hitler, or Churchill, or any other monster… I’m sure Genghis Khan loved his horses. But even in the mundane - IME, excessive cat owners are often severely lacking in the human empathy department. And I’ve known enough stone-cold killers with pets in my day. Hell, look for the previous thread on “Would you save your pet or a stranger…”

You are also saying if you don’t own a pet, there’s “something wrong” with you, which is not just bullshit, but personally insulting to me, so I have zero inclination for any charitable reading of your idiocy.

And yet after being told repeatedly that this is not what I meant, and again having ignored every other thing I said, you continue to pursue this. At least you admit to “rhetorical excess”, though I’d call it “breathless hyperbole”.

You know what’s even weirder than not owning a pet? When your wife has a pet living in the same house that you don’t also consider your pet. Super weird, man.

Gosh. That, ladies and gentlemen, was the sound of some hollow, fragile, glass breaking.

Yes, like I said, backpedalling from the implications.

Coming from a person who thinks not having a pet means you’re somehow “wrong”, I think I’ll live.

Question - if your daughter has a pet goldfish or hamster, is that your pet too? No, people can own pets independent of their living arrangements. An animal I have no non-emergency responsibility or duty of care towards is not my pet.

That kind of pithy comeback only works if you’re right, dumbshit. If you’re wrong, as you are here, it means I just called you a motherfucker and you came back with “no, u”.

Weak-ass shit for a weak-ass douchecanoe.

Daughter? Of course. But I dispute your premise: I’d consider myself to have non-emergency responsibility toward any pet in the same household. Sure, someone else might be the primary caregiver (especially for a fish or hamster, given that they tend to stay in one room). But if said care wasn’t up to my standards, I’d fill in the difference regardless of whether I considered myself the primary.

It gets a little dicier if you want to expand the thought experiment to roommates instead of close family members. My college roommate’s birds were not mine. And yet even then I considered myself to have a duty of care toward them, despite birds being at close to the bottom of my favorite pets list.

Regardless, cats and dogs are a little different from fish, because they tend to have free roam of the house and thus their existence impacts all members. Hence I would expect consensus and thus shared responsibility. It has certainly been the case in all families I’ve observed so far. Apparently it’s not universal.

Well, we differ - my daughters’ pets are their pets, not our collective pets. I don’t clean their cages or tanks, I don’t feed them, I didn’t even pay for them, they are not in any sense “mine”.

I would “fill in the difference” by exercising my parental oversight of the slacking person not performing their duties, not by doing it for them.

A pet isn’t your pet because it impacts you, it’s your pet because you’re responsible for it.

No, I was quite clear (before we got the dog) that I did not want one, that my wife was free to get one, but I would not be responsible for it if she did. Pets are not kids, consensus is not required - as long as I wasn’t objecting to the very presence of a dog (which I don’t - I love dogs) - for an adult to have a pet. I am not the landlord.

Hey, remember when this thread was about President Biden?

Good times…

Dr.S was the one who decided to take a giant dump on all non-pet owners - in a Pit thread.

I don’t care who started it - you kids settle down right now or I swear I will pull this thread over and leave you both by the side of the forum.

Hmm, a special forum for the “special” posters; the ones that like arguing with 8 or have a multiple page argument about a throwaway remark, hmmm.

Nah. According to the OAN boards, Pence became a RINO on January 6 since he didn’t help Trump win. Of course, according to those lunatics, anyone who disagrees with Trump on any issue is a RINO, and must be voted out of office and replaced with a sycophant.

I I wish I were kidding about that.

This is apparently a real thing - crows pass on “this person is a right bastard/good bloke” to each other and respond appropriately across generations. Now, if crows are chasing after you in widely disparate geographical areas, then it might well be the Crow King has marked you.

Biden? Puppy-hugs? Hello?

I hear that tye Bidens are going to keep the Tiny Carters as pets now…

Have we ever seen Sleepy Joe’s long-form birth certificate? With a middle name like Robinette, he was probably born in France (maybe next to a faucet).

Umm, what’s a page?