I think this is apples to oranges since you comparing an injury of a random dog to this poor kid. If it was some bullshit about a legal fund for the vicious dog's owner vs the poor injured child then I would be more sympathetic to whatever you're trying to push here.
You wasted alot of time writing a post that broken down is the equivalent of "people are better than animals". Dogs are just animals, like any other animal, just like we humans are an animal. Animals have been classified by humans based on their food chain utility. Humans are super predators, dogs are considered the same thing. At some point between the history of wolves and pre-historic humans, dogs evolved from domesticated wolves. This is believed to have happened because of common goals, hunting and gathering, etc. Apparently now companionship is also part of the mix.
That is how human anthropologists would describe the homo sapien and canis lupus familiaris relationship and shared evolution.
Your second paragraph indicates your belief that dogs shouldn't be considered at the same emotional effect for a human as that same human should consider starving children in Africa. People use money as they see fit, it is a "liquid" commodity controlled by any given individual.
Your third paragraph is all your opinion. Which you have every right to express. Evolutionary biologists believe dogs will out survive humans on the timeline of this planet.
I don't get what you mean miss Rose, that's a lovely name by the way.
The point I could have explained this a number of ways, but this was the only 'truthful' one I had based on experience and web searching. I'm not trying to accuse dogs as being bad, or to allow people to think for once that maybe humans are treating dogs with too much love, because no matter what I say, I know it's not going to change anything, people are still going to choose to love animals and dogs as much, or more than they ever have.
I just wish to see what the majority of people who come across this question think, is it normal for people to choose to spend more money on a dog with a small non-fatal cut on it's leg, than they do on a child who had it's face mauled off by a dog and is currently in hospital, in a near-death situation.
These people aren't in particularly paying money towards the perpetrator *the dog that mauled the child's face* it is a completely different dog, however in saying this, all dogs are unpredictable and they live entirely based off instinct, no matter how well a dog is trained by it's owner, it is still capable of mauling a child's face if it feels like it. Even the tiniest of yappy pet dogs can damage humans if it so desires, this is the unpredictable nature of the canine that some of us have come to accept.
I should mention, as apart of the story with the child, the dog that undertook the attack is a bulldog, and it is currently being defended by a group of people saying that the dog was the victim, and that the child was at fault, this information didn't get me anywhere closer to the question I was trying to ask so I didn't bother mentioning it.
To get to the point, I don't understand what you mean by 'comparing apples and oranges' but I'm assuming you're saying that it was a bad comparison...it's not when it comes around to my overall question, it's already true that the majority of people on this world are dog lovers, only about a million dislike dogs, and only a few thousand of that million wish to actually harm them. I'm not apart of that few. But it has now come to my attention that the majority of dog lovers feel that dogs deserve more love, care, money spent and so on than other humans, their own kind. This says a lot of things about the person, that they've got some problems may be one of them, but this statement too, depends.
Well, I'm certainly more interested in the welfare of my own Siamese cat and my sister's poodle than the majority of people. My interest is not so much, because I dislike people per se, but rather, because the two animals I've mentioned are dearly beloved members of my own family.
I think people who have pets of their own will tend to notice tragic stories about animals, because that's what those people relate to so naturally that's what they gravitate towards. I don't see anything wrong with it. A person I don't know will never be more important to me than my own pet, that's just how I and many like me naturally feel. I don't naturally see other people I don't know as one of my own, and to me it's no tragedy. It is what it is.
Having said all that I don't have a problem with vicious dogs being put down. My cat was interested in an injured desert finch, and I only had to tell him, "NO" once. He's my special little guy!
Is it normal that dog lovers care more for their pet than a child?
← View full post
I think this is apples to oranges since you comparing an injury of a random dog to this poor kid. If it was some bullshit about a legal fund for the vicious dog's owner vs the poor injured child then I would be more sympathetic to whatever you're trying to push here.
--
Niggers_on_powertrips
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
-
qcbugz
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
-
Thedollcollector8==D
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-5
-5
You wasted alot of time writing a post that broken down is the equivalent of "people are better than animals". Dogs are just animals, like any other animal, just like we humans are an animal. Animals have been classified by humans based on their food chain utility. Humans are super predators, dogs are considered the same thing. At some point between the history of wolves and pre-historic humans, dogs evolved from domesticated wolves. This is believed to have happened because of common goals, hunting and gathering, etc. Apparently now companionship is also part of the mix.
That is how human anthropologists would describe the homo sapien and canis lupus familiaris relationship and shared evolution.
Your second paragraph indicates your belief that dogs shouldn't be considered at the same emotional effect for a human as that same human should consider starving children in Africa. People use money as they see fit, it is a "liquid" commodity controlled by any given individual.
Your third paragraph is all your opinion. Which you have every right to express. Evolutionary biologists believe dogs will out survive humans on the timeline of this planet.
Also, you're sexy.
--
RoseIsabella
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Well, thank you!
I don't get what you mean miss Rose, that's a lovely name by the way.
The point I could have explained this a number of ways, but this was the only 'truthful' one I had based on experience and web searching. I'm not trying to accuse dogs as being bad, or to allow people to think for once that maybe humans are treating dogs with too much love, because no matter what I say, I know it's not going to change anything, people are still going to choose to love animals and dogs as much, or more than they ever have.
I just wish to see what the majority of people who come across this question think, is it normal for people to choose to spend more money on a dog with a small non-fatal cut on it's leg, than they do on a child who had it's face mauled off by a dog and is currently in hospital, in a near-death situation.
These people aren't in particularly paying money towards the perpetrator *the dog that mauled the child's face* it is a completely different dog, however in saying this, all dogs are unpredictable and they live entirely based off instinct, no matter how well a dog is trained by it's owner, it is still capable of mauling a child's face if it feels like it. Even the tiniest of yappy pet dogs can damage humans if it so desires, this is the unpredictable nature of the canine that some of us have come to accept.
I should mention, as apart of the story with the child, the dog that undertook the attack is a bulldog, and it is currently being defended by a group of people saying that the dog was the victim, and that the child was at fault, this information didn't get me anywhere closer to the question I was trying to ask so I didn't bother mentioning it.
To get to the point, I don't understand what you mean by 'comparing apples and oranges' but I'm assuming you're saying that it was a bad comparison...it's not when it comes around to my overall question, it's already true that the majority of people on this world are dog lovers, only about a million dislike dogs, and only a few thousand of that million wish to actually harm them. I'm not apart of that few. But it has now come to my attention that the majority of dog lovers feel that dogs deserve more love, care, money spent and so on than other humans, their own kind. This says a lot of things about the person, that they've got some problems may be one of them, but this statement too, depends.
Either way, I appreciate you commenting.
--
RoseIsabella
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Well, I'm certainly more interested in the welfare of my own Siamese cat and my sister's poodle than the majority of people. My interest is not so much, because I dislike people per se, but rather, because the two animals I've mentioned are dearly beloved members of my own family.
I think people who have pets of their own will tend to notice tragic stories about animals, because that's what those people relate to so naturally that's what they gravitate towards. I don't see anything wrong with it. A person I don't know will never be more important to me than my own pet, that's just how I and many like me naturally feel. I don't naturally see other people I don't know as one of my own, and to me it's no tragedy. It is what it is.
Having said all that I don't have a problem with vicious dogs being put down. My cat was interested in an injured desert finch, and I only had to tell him, "NO" once. He's my special little guy!
I shall feed your cat a couple crushed up halcion and then wait for him to pass out so i can then have my way with him.