While in Santa Monica, one of my friends wanted to pay a homeless man money because he had a (well groomed and friendly) dog. I asked her - you want to give money to someone who would require such an animal to live without proper food and shelter? You support a guy who chooses for that dog to live like that? He’s a cruel and mean person. He could ask at any pet store, and get in contact with a half dozen no-kill dog shelters, and could give that dog a good life.
Apparently he doesn't understand that some people consider their dogs and cats part of the family, and would sooner amputate a limb then abandon a pet that has shown them loyalty and love. And his blithe statement that the guy could just contact a no-kill dog shelter shows how little he understands the problems facing cats and dogs in today's economy. The no-kill shelters are filling up fast and many do not have room for any more doggies or kitties, fewer and fewer people are adopting. We don't know this homeless person, but since the dog appeared well groomed we are betting the homeless guy is taking the best care of his dog he can. We know lots of beans that will do without themselves just so their cats or dogs can have the food or medicine they need.
At it really bothers us when some elitist snob says that only the people that can afford to properly care for their pets (and of course the elitist snob gets to define what properly care for them means) should have them. We know lots of people who have opened their homes and hearts to abandoned dogs and cats, even though they don't have the money to 'properly care for them' according to some people. We are sure that a cat or dog who is loved by his/her person is happy even if their person is poor and can't afford to give them 'caviar'.
We think beans should be less judgemental and more understanding, who knows one day it may be you on the street with only the love of a dog to sustain you.
~Socks, Scylla & Charybdis
PS: We wouldn't let Mommy write this post cause she would have said too many bad words.
7 comments:
If I were the dog, I am sure I would prefer to stick by my bean than go to a shelter. There is a thing known as loyalty. Material comfort to a furry does not have the same importance to some humans. (please note the emphasis on 'some') Besides, that dog is family, companion and perhaps all that the homeless man has. How unthinking and how shallow!
We understand completely. Sometimes we can't let Jan even read our posts. Sometimes we just have something important to say and we don't want to be bleeped in the blogosphere. :)
We think you did a great job of expressing yourselves.
Hi, cats! I thought you might want to check out my latest blog. It's about a lion and a little kitten... but not together. I thought it might be of interest to all of you!
- Elise
Hi Elise O, a lion and a little kitty sound intriguing.
MoMo, that is exactly how we felt.
Thanks JFF.
~Socks, Scylla & Charybdis
We are so with you on that one! Looking at the behavior of dogs of homeless people compared with people who have dogs for show, or because they are a rare breed, or because it's the thing to do, or whatever false reason - you'll find that the homeless person's dogs shows all the behavior of a healthy pack dog. Not the case in a lot of the other cases!
Whereas life on the street might not be one to look for as a human a dog on the streets leads a better life than one that is locked in an apartment and only gets to go out for his business three times a day!
From the originating articles author.
"The no-kill shelters are filling up fast and many do not have room for any more doggies or kitties, fewer and fewer people are adopting."
I agree. If you have animals you can't care for, you should find them good homes. This isn't easy, but it must be done. If it takes a few weeks or months to find a good owner, a person [bean?] should do it.
"At it really bothers us when some elitist snob says that only the people that can afford to properly care for their pets (and of course the elitist snob gets to define what properly care for them means) should have them."
Whoa! Are you suggesting that someone who can't immunize their dogs, feed them proper food, or give them proper shelter should keep animals anyways? I hope not. I'll admit to being a snob, but I don't think I'm asking a lot.
P.S.: Owned by 2 cats.
We are sure that doing without immunizations would be preferable to being KILLED, because no one wants you.
Apparently you are unaware of the thousands of dogs and cats that are euthanized every day because no one wants them. When every dog and cat has a loving home then elitist snobs like you can worry about IF their beans are worthy.
And exactly what is 'proper shelter and food', your definition may be different from someone else's and very different from a feline and canines.
Remember all that POISONED PET FOOD!!!! All of us that dutifully feed our felines and canines pet food specifically designed for them because our veterinarians told us it was better for them then table scraps saw our pets die because their 'proper food' was POINSONED. All those poor cats and dogs who were being feed table scrapes "improper food according to some people" survived.
I happen to think that love is more important then material possessions. I think most dogs and cats would agree.
And honestly you can't have any idea if the homeless man's dog was immunized or not; since we are sure you didn't ask. After all you don't have to have a house in order to take you dog to the vet, you just need CASH.
Post a Comment