you’ve just demonstrated that I was correct. There are, indeed, people who pay $30 grand for an animal. Just because you personally wouldn’t put that value on it doesn’t mean no one could, should, does, or is insane for doing so. I may personally feel that some stupid piece of colored carbon isn’t worth shit and wouldn’t spend 10 cents let alone hundreds of thousands of dollars on it, but guess what? Liz Taylor disagrees. and I’ll bet there’s houses worth less than her diamonds, too. Vive la difference.
No, the judgment recognized that the man was not going to stop practicing such disgusting negligence unless he had huge consequences to pay. If he got some slap on the wrist, the next time, his dog might be killing a child. The man deserved a serious punishment for letting a dangerous animal roam free.
See, this is why you, Neurotik and tdn are going in circles. It’s clear to me that tdn has been using “children” to mean “dependents” but you and Neurotik are only seeing “children” as “children”.
Obviously I would, given the stipulation that I don’t know about the presence of the baby. :rolleyes:
For the most part, yes. But I know that humans can be just as irrational in claiming a “bond” with other homo sapiens that are even less capable than a cat of reciprocating. Look at the Terri Schiavo case. There was an emotional bond there, even if it was completely one sided.
Puh-leeze. There are animals, (and plants, and critters that fall into one of the other kingdoms recognized by biologists) more valuable than Osama bin Laden.
Another point: Cats are more capable of reciprocating than human infants. A newborn can’t even hold its own head up, for christs sake.
No, I don’t like ill-mannered children. I despise parents who allow their children to behave that way. Consideration of others feeling must be taught from childhood or it is never learned. And yes, when a child has been feeding fish to sea lions and has covered himself in said fish and his parents have not cleaned him up, on a warm day, he stinks.
That said, I have gone out of my way to save children from injury when their parents weren’t paying attention to them. At the hockey arena where I have season tickets, some parents seem to think the seats are gym sets for their children to climb over. I saved three children from possible broken legs last season by catching them when they climbed over the seat beside mine and the seat bottom folded up. Not once was I thanked by the parents, or was the child scolded for climbing over something that wasn’t meant to be climbed over.
And as far as pets not being worth the life of a single human being, I definitely disagree with that sweeping a statement. I don’t think my cats are worth the life of an innocent child, and I hope I am never forced to make that choice. However, given the choice between the life of Cricket (who is currently melting into my lap) or the life of the guy that kidnapped a 12 year old and raped & murdered her - of course Cricket’s life is worth much more than the life of such a scumbag.
Snakescatlady, I’m betting these irresponsible children owners are also irresponsible pet owners. 
Ok, I got really tired of reading this thread about midway through page four, so sorry if nobody’s brought this up yet:
I don’t think tdn’s girlfriend is necessarily crazy for treating her cats like her children.
She could very well be a cat herself.
Though that would make tdn one sick, uh, puppy.
A fur-mommy in Africa recently saved a flesh-baby that was abandoned by it’s own flesh-mother.
From Fox News:
It seems the fur-mommy took the flesh-baby back to her fur-home and tucked her in with her very own fur-baby. Some local flesh-children then found the fur-home containing the flesh-baby and alterted some flesh-elders who brought her to the hospital.
NurseCarmen, you are so right.
Based upon your emotionally stunted comments, it was certainly worth more than you anyway…
K, this was really funny. heh.
Fuck off.
I know I promised to stay out of this thread, but this one point was sticking in my craw. And I apologize for my earlier ranting.
Yep. That seems to be the disconnect. I hope I can resolve this whole bit of the argument in one post, and we can all be right with each other.
I’m not sure how you guys define crazy, but I define it as a general disconnect from reality. So let’s see if my gf is disconnected in any way:
She does not believe that her cats are human children, she knows they are cats. She does not believe they sprang from her loins. She knows their birth mothers were also of the feline persuasion. She does not breast feed them. She does not send them off to school. She does not let them eat at the dinner table. She makes them eat cat food from bowls on the floor. So far she sounds pretty grounded in reality, would you agree?
In a fire she would do her best to save them but not at the expense of saving a child (or adult) human. She knows that she will outlive her cats, and when they die, she will be devastated. But it wouldn’t be like losing a flesh baby. She is well aware that a human death is far more tragic. Grounded in reality, AND a sense of perspective. We still together on this?
So why does she refer to her cats as her children when they are clearly cats? Because they sort-of take the role of children. Since there are no flesh babies in the household, the position is open. Now what is common between flesh babies and fur babies? They would be loved by her. They would be dependant on her for food, shelter, and medical needs. They’re cute cuddly 10-pound bundles of projectile vomit. They need their poop cleaned up. They’re the “little ones” of the house. So, while I agree it’s crazy to believe her cats are human children, is it really all that crazy to refer to them as “the children”?
I hope that makes things clearer and we can put all of this stupidity behind us.
(a)Do you think no one in the history of humanity has ever had to choose between saving the life of a pet and an unknown child in a fire/natural disaster type situation such as the one I described?
I mean, sure, it’s not likely to happen to you tomorrow, or ever, but I abso-bloody-lutely guarantee that it HAS happened, and will happen again.
(b) So what if it’s a bit contrived? Why not answer anyhow? I mean, sure, it’s not LIKELY that someone will walk up to me tomorrow and say “here’s a magic button. You can push it. If you do, it will kill a random human being but permanently end all wars”. Heck, it’s not even remotely plausible. But it’s still an interesting question to discuss, and how I would answer it says something about me which might shed light on how I would act in more possible situations.
I’ve seen it all now. Parakeets have been Godwinized
Dan Norder you are no less than a complete fucking idiot.
In regards to the dog saving the baby, geez it’s not like the dog actually had cognitions like hmmm I really love and care about this kid. It just acted on pure animal instinct that did not require much thought. Anyone care to bring up all the times animals have killed people?
I’m a good dog! Though I do so enjoy eating pussy.