I never mentioned Castaway. I have said that she handled the situation wrong, I just don't find it as appauling as most of you do because cruel and inhumane things happen to animals all the time in our own backyards. Service animals are unique but they are not unique to dogs. Other animals such as cats monkeys, horses, birds, dolphins, elephants, rabbits, and yes even lizards are used as service animals and guess what, people form attachments with them as well, it is just not on the same level as dogs, meaning not as many people own these others animals as they do dogs.
So because enough people are cruel to animals, we somehow shouldn't be affected by it anymore... How can you not see how bad that argument is?
It is a cruel cruel world. When people get bent out of shape over a cat or dog it makes it obvious they are not living in the real world.
You're either expecting people to be less affected or expecting them to simply hide how they feel. Neither of which makes any damn sense.
I loved stuffed chicken and that lil guy must be like just a few months old. But damnit if he's nto delicious!
Here ya go droxford, you've worked hard for this: Arguing on the internet always makes me think of this: <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/teMlv3ripSM?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/teMlv3ripSM?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
Fail. I'm not expecting a damn thing from anybody. Stop assuming. I just see where droxford is coming, I see both sides. I understand how somebody could not give a damn and I understand how somebody could be outraged. I've posted that in this thread already. I posted the videos because I mentioned that people take joy in killing helpless, baby animals all the time and they asked for video proof so there you go. Then when I post that, those people start with the "oh but those are rats, mice, or whatever not dogs" but the fact is there are more humane ways to feed your pet, capture an animal, etc. than what I posted just like there are more humane ways to deal with the puppies. If you want to be outraged fine with me be outraged, do I think it is a little over the top, sure but I am not telling you how to feel at all. Thanks.
I've skimmed through this thread and while I personally find what she did revolting I think we need to know more about this situation before calling her a psychopath. As others have pointed out we form emotional attachments to our pets and dogs and cats are our favorite pets so we are going to react more to seeing them killed. That is our culture though and not all cultures react the same way or consider dogs to have the same value that we do. I know very little about rural Bosnia and presuming what she is saying is true, these were diseased animals, she may very well have a reason to kill them. As for her reactions if that culture doesn't value dogs that way it may be understandable that she makes light of the situation. She might not be a psychopath or being intentionally callous but she doesn't see what the big deal since her culture doesn't place the same emotional investment in dogs.
Just curious, if CCR is wrong, what message were you trying to impart by pointing out that "inhumane things happen to animals all the time?"
cool. Very reasonable justification as the idea that everyone's level of reaction should be at the same or some arbitrary level is indeed an absurd if not idiotic notion. Though to be fair, I dont believe anyone in this thread ever challenge yours or anyone else's degree of sensitivity (at least to this incident). But On the hand from what i gathered from a few posts, there seems to be a notion that somehow feeling appalled or emotionally/morally/ethically disturb is somehow hypocritical. Barring anyone finding it arousing, heroic or humorous, IMO its silly to question anyone's response to this video... if someone doesn't find it disturbing, cool. But if like me, you find it sick and expresses it, it doesnt necessarily mean we are unaware of other bad events ocurring, are hypocrites, regard all animals the same, dont regard all animals the same, vegetarians, hunters, farmers, dog eaters, cow dippers or whatever else... it just mean we find that girl and her action disturbing.
I get that which is why I have given examples on both sides. Drox stated people only get mad when something cute is slaughtered, I gave an example where they don't. I have stated several reasons why people shouldn't get mad at drox as well. I've just been defending him more due to the outnumbered factor I guess. Like I have said, I believe both sides have decent arguments and I understand where both are coming from.
Even if those puppies were "diseased", there is still a better way to handle it. You dont get somebody to videotape you throwing them in the river. What is society coming to when people try to justify her actions?? I'm no tree hugger or environmental freak, but I do speak up when things are just obviously wrong.
What people are objecting to is droxford's notion that, people shouldn't feel disturbed, sick, outraged, dislike, disapproval and express it in this thread because it is hypocritical (unless they are a vegetarian). The idea that you or Droxford are defending the notion that people only get mad when something cute is slaughtered is erroneous as first, YOU ARE ASSUMING a lot of things in that sentence. IE... noone gets mad at those other examples, those who do are mutually exclusive from those disturbed here, different people dont have different level of association, attachment to different things as well as animals, different animals are different, different instances of slaughter, feeding, animal cruelty, hunting and torture are DIFFERENT thus resulting in VARYING reactions. As I stated before, the notion that someone SHOULD have a certain reaction aside from the extremes (arousal, excitement etc) from videos depicting the torture and killing of animals unless they are vegetarians and if they dont are thus HYPOCRITES is RIDICULOUS and monumentally stupid! And that precisely is the argument droxford is posing, which not suprisingly many posters are objecting to. Examples: Noone (atleast so far on this board) gives a **** if he doesnt find this act offensive, noone gives a care if he thinks cute animals dieing, matters more or less or the same as none cute one... its all fine, thats his reaction... what everyone is taking objection to is notion that we somehow forfeited our right to be disgusted, disturbed by the video unless we are vegetarians or hypocrites.
Does everything need to be a debate? Sure, we can all see a bigger picture, but do we HAVE to? Do we really need someone to play the devils advocate? Everybody here agrees it was a ****ty thing the girl did. Everybody here can sense a bigger picture. This is turning into "I'm sorry your dog just died, but all dogs go to heaven so get over it" Well, ***** you for sharing. (not saying this at you, Dubious).
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DThKSgTHryM?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DThKSgTHryM?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
