Animal Lovers (1211 hits)
Category: NewsRating: 0.53 on 38 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by Goose <goosehkr at hotmail dot com> (View user info) at 2005-09-22 16:49:19 EDT
So, I was perusing CNN when this article jumped out at me: http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/22/katrina.pets.ap/index.html
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Federal disaster grants to state and local governments should be conditioned on how they accommodate pets in their evacuation plans, say lawmakers disturbed that some Hurricane Katrina victims refused to leave home because they couldn't take their animals with them.
"I cannot help but wonder how many more people could have been saved had they been able to take their pets," Rep. Tom Lantos, D-California, said Thursday.
Lantos and Reps. Christopher Shays, R-Connecticut, and Barney Frank, D-Massaschusetts, are sponsoring a bill that would require that state and local disaster preparedness plans required for Federal Emergency Management Agency funding include provisions for household pets and service animals.
More than 6,000 pets have been saved in Mississippi and Louisiana, said Michael Markarian, executive vice president of the Humane Society of the United States, but tens of thousands more could still be in New Orleans alone. Texas, he said, has been better at allowing people to take their pets with them ahead of Hurricane Rita but a formal policy is still needed.
"We cannot rely on individual acts of compassion," Markarian said.
Holly Hazard, executive director of the Doris Day Animal League, said there are 4,000 outstanding requests to rescue pets more than three weeks after Katrina hit.
While the legislation may draw attention to the issue, it doesn't "have any real meat in it," said Sara Spaulding, a spokeswoman for the American Humane Association. She said uniform protocols on rescuing and sheltering animals, for example, should be formulated at the federal level with consultation from animal welfare groups.
---"I cannot help but wonder how many more people could have been saved had they been able to take their pets," Rep. Tom Lantos, D-California, said Thursday.--- Let's take a look at this statement. I've had pets all of my life, and most notably our dogs have always been like members of my family, but lets get serious here. If push comes to shove, and a motherfucking class 5 hurricaine is blowing our shit down the street, Fido is going to have to fend for himself.
Granted, I can see the importance of making sure service animals, like seeing-eye dogs, would be important to have along if you're, for example, blind, but I will never, NEVER support an animal over a human. If we have money to feed a group of cats or a group of starving children, guess who's getting the pancakes in the morning.
As some of you know, I was in different parts of Louisiana after Katrina hit assisting with rescue and relief efforts. For part of the time, we were stationed in Asshole, Mississippi, or wherever, and in the particular refugee camp, the SPCA had taken over the barns to store all of the stray dogs that had been abandoned by their owners. The howling that came out of that building would break the heart of even the cruelest sumbitch alive - it was bad enough that we moved a couple of miles away and walked the extra distance to work every morning. They also were performing emergency surgery on some of the animals, and since they had run out of room, were conducting said surgery next to the mess tent (insert Chinese food joke here). Needless to say, we subsisted on MREs for three days.
However, at this same camp, families who had left New Orleans before the hurricaine, who had followed good advice and common sense and had gotten the fuck out while the getting was good, were trapped here with no medical supplies or attention, and very little food. Yet, on the same site, dogs, fucking dogs were getting surgery. Fuck that - people come first. Animals should not be our top priority, and all of these hurried plans to make everyone's booboos all right are, to me, too little, too late. Maybe we should be concerned about helping people now, and helping the people in Texas who are about to get washed away before we start making plans for the future of cute little furry animals for some time in the future.
User Reviews
Submitted by flarn-dorfar (user info) at 2005-09-23 16:54:04 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
please stop attacking my posts, retaliation is cheap but the only way
Submitted by ghola (user info) at 2005-09-23 16:20:12 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by goose (user info) at 2005-09-23 16:02:35 (#)
Ranking: 0
Again, I think all of the things that I listed as our strengths (culture, civilization, language, art, etc.) are more than enough to tip the balances in our favor.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And when we ultimately destroy ourselves and everything around us--- do they still matter then?
Submitted by Loren1 (user info) at 2005-09-23 16:13:54 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
loki -
It's true in theory, and I hate to tell you this, but I wouldn't leave my pets behind either.
----------
I'm with Loki, but not when it comes to a positive rating.
Submitted by goose (user info) at 2005-09-23 16:02:35 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Again, I think all of the things that I listed as our strengths (culture, civilization, language, art, etc.) are more than enough to tip the balances in our favor.
Submitted by ghola (user info) at 2005-09-23 15:56:17 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by goose (user info) at 2005-09-23 13:51:54 (#)
Ranking: 0
Simply because not all animals share human kind's inherant weaknesses doesn't mean we are not superior creatures.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Um, yes it does.
Judge the species on weaknesses and strengths. Ultimately the weaknesses will have a far more converse reactions than the strengths.
Submitted by flarn-dorfar (user info) at 2005-09-23 14:33:39 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Sorry forgot to -2 the first time.
For lieing about drug addiction to save face, and for partisan comments regarding another member of this site.
Submitted by flarn-dorfar (user info) at 2005-09-23 14:33:12 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
For lieing about drug addiction to save face, and for partisan comments regarding another member of this site.
Submitted by goose (user info) at 2005-09-23 13:51:54 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I'm not ignoring it, I don't feel as though it plays a role. I don't base the superiority of mankind on the effect we have on the environment and ecosystems in which we exist. I base my feelings of being better than the animals on the fact that we're more intelligent, we have developed culture (arguably), a written language, art, music, literature, and have adapted so that we can exist, as a species, anywhere on earth, and with any luck, beyond. In no other animal that I'm aware of do you see the compassion that humans can display. Conversely, we are also capable of great cruelty.
Its similar to saying that dolphins are smarter than us because they don't have weapons or war. Neither to slugs, but I feel more important than them. Simply because not all animals share human kind's inherant weaknesses doesn't mean we are not superior creatures.
Submitted by flarn-dorfar (user info) at 2005-09-23 13:39:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
[garbage deleted by bart]
Submitted by leilani (user info) at 2005-09-23 13:23:47 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-09-22 17:01:54 (#)
Ranking: 2
It's true in theory, and I hate to tell you this, but I wouldn't leave my pets behind either.
Submitted by ghola (user info) at 2005-09-23 13:15:56 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
ick, ignore terrible grammer and insert the word, "we" into that last statement
Submitted by ghola (user info) at 2005-09-23 13:10:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by goose (user info) at 2005-09-23 08:54:52 (#)
Ranking: 0
Wait - there's no reason to think that humans are superior to animals? You're kidding, right? Ignoring the abilty to create and use tools, as well as sentient fucking thought, the fact that we have no natural predators any more, and have actually domesticated other species might be a clue hinting at our superiority. Fucking hippies.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is laughable. Are you ignoring humans' destructive nature and disregard for the environment in which live as well?
Submitted by icarus1987 (user info) at 2005-09-23 09:59:37 EDT (#)
Ranking: -1
I've got an idea. Why don't you shut the fuck up, and let people make their own decisions?
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-09-23 09:12:58 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
ajanssen - We moved to NC when I was a kid, but I was born in Texas, most of my family is still there and I spent quite a few summers and holidays there as a kid.
Submitted by goose (user info) at 2005-09-23 08:54:52 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Wait - there's no reason to think that humans are superior to animals? You're kidding, right? Ignoring the abilty to create and use tools, as well as sentient fucking thought, the fact that we have no natural predators any more, and have actually domesticated other species might be a clue hinting at our superiority. Fucking hippies.
Yes, you're right, morontian - it was a generalization. However, I would say say that knowing nothing about the individual, if it came down to me being able to save either a person or an animal, I'm going to choose the person every time. I don't understand how you could not.
Finally, I'm not upset that they were helping the animals at the camp in Mississippi - what I'm upset about is that the animals were recieving better care than the people were. There's something that isn't right about that. Plus, vets can work on humans - I've had tetanus shots and stitches administered by veternarians more than once.
Submitted by Phallic_Cymbals (user info) at 2005-09-23 05:08:31 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2005-09-22 21:43:28 (#)
Ranking: 2
While I agree, the people who were doing surgery on the dogs were vets, not doctors. They couldn't help you if they tried so why shouldn't they be helping out the animals instead?
___________________________
They need the guy who sewed the ear to the mouse, he could do both.
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2005-09-23 04:29:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by HighFructoseCornSyrup (user info) at 2005-09-23 03:57:37 (#)
Ranking: -2
Nah, humans suck. I mean, living organisms suck in general, but humans are a particularly shitty species.
-=-=-=-==--=-=-=-==-=-=-
You fucking hypocritical piece of shit. First you say that nobody could ever be in the position to judge one species as greater than another and now you say this? Suck my human cock.
Submitted by HighFructoseCornSyrup (user info) at 2005-09-23 03:57:37 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Nah, humans suck. I mean, living organisms suck in general, but humans are a particularly shitty species.
Submitted by sinna (user info) at 2005-09-23 03:29:56 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I got arrested for animal loving once.
I didn't actualy bother reading this, but it's 8am I'm at work and I'm pissed off my tits! Yeah!
Submitted by morontian (user info) at 2005-09-23 00:12:40 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Generalization, generalization.
I would take saving an opossum over some fuck who's going to rape and kill someone at a rescue site.
"OMG!!11! Hes teh !st pers0n 2 say that!!!"
Fuck it, it's true. Emotional connections can't be measured in opposable thumbs. You are either willing to die for who or what you love, or you're content with leaving it for dead. It's your choice.
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2005-09-23 00:09:12 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by ghola (user info) at 2005-09-22 23:06:11 (#)
Ranking: -2
but I will never, NEVER support an animal over a human
--------------------------------------------------------
This sort of egotistical view point sickens me and also helps explain what is wrong with this world, this society. There is absolutely no reason to think that human beings have some sort of superior standing in the grand scheme of things. This idea has always struck me as rather selfish. Why would anyone attempt to place their own needs (or the needs of their species) above that of another's needs?
-=-=--==-=-=-=-=-=--
NURRRRRRRRRRRRR
Stupidest. Belief. Ever.
Honestly you're up there with the Mormons.
You had better be a vegetarian or a cannibal. At either rate you're still a moron.
Submitted by ghola (user info) at 2005-09-22 23:06:11 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
but I will never, NEVER support an animal over a human
--------------------------------------------------------
This sort of egotistical view point sickens me and also helps explain what is wrong with this world, this society. There is absolutely no reason to think that human beings have some sort of superior standing in the grand scheme of things. This idea has always struck me as rather selfish. Why would anyone attempt to place their own needs (or the needs of their species) above that of another's needs?
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2005-09-22 21:43:28 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
While I agree, the people who were doing surgery on the dogs were vets, not doctors. They couldn't help you if they tried so why shouldn't they be helping out the animals instead?
Submitted by munkeypants (user info) at 2005-09-22 20:33:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I dunno man. I's a tough choice to make. Family is family.
Submitted by ajanssen (user info) at 2005-09-22 19:42:24 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Loki, when did you become a Texan? I thought you were a Tarheel?
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-09-22 18:43:31 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I was about 9 or 10 and I'm not kidding about my dad still being pissed off. We were going down the Colorado, why we had the dog along I have no idea, but she fell off the raft so I dove in after her. I caught her under her front legs and swung my feet under her so I could kick off to keep us from crashing into the rocks. I believe that was about the point when my dad caught up to us so we went down class 3 rapids with me hanging onto Buffy, dad hanging onto me, and mom piloting the raft. As I recall, the lecture started before we even got out of the water.
Mom at least waited to see that I was just a bit scratched and bruised before she started in.
such language too - people really shouldn't use that kind of language in front of a kid
My sisters thought I was a hero.
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2005-09-22 18:38:47 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Vengance (user info) at 2005-09-22 17:58:12 (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-09-22 17:01:54 (#)
Ranking: 2
It's true in theory, and I hate to tell you this, but I wouldn't leave my pets behind either.
-------------------
Then you're a moron. Darwinism at work here. Emotion has no place in survival.
-----
that's how Nature culls the herd, human and animal alike.
Submitted by ajanssen (user info) at 2005-09-22 18:34:10 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Loki, you speak the truth. I didnt know you were a Texan. When did this happen?
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-09-22 18:29:42 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
No proper Texan would leave behind their animals. It just isn't done. Keep in mind that I once jumped into rapids when my dog fell off the raft. My dad is pissed off about it to this day, but yea I'd do it again. He knows that, I think that's why he's still pissed off about it.
I'd jump into rapids after you too insane, don't worry.
Submitted by Insanethemind (user info) at 2005-09-22 18:11:09 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
Loki,
If "not leaving" your pets behind meant dying with them, then it seems to me your priorities are a *bit* out of order.
If what I said above is true, SURELY YOU JEST, older sis! ;)
Submitted by Vengance (user info) at 2005-09-22 17:58:12 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-09-22 17:01:54 (#)
Ranking: 2
It's true in theory, and I hate to tell you this, but I wouldn't leave my pets behind either.
-------------------
Then you're a moron. Darwinism at work here. Emotion has no place in survival.
Submitted by bob (user info) at 2005-09-22 17:13:56 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
oh yea, all of the services down in new orleans are organizations that are funding their expeditures themselves so it doesnt effect the care for the people at all
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2005-09-22 17:11:12 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Leave the rabbit. Take a nigger.
Submitted by bob (user info) at 2005-09-22 17:10:14 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
im sorry but there is no way in hell im leaving without my pets.
and as an employee of the largest animal shelter in the northeast, we have taken in over 300 animals from New Orleans.
most of them are amazingly nice animals for what they have been through.
they didnt deserve to die anymore than any person did
im not saying that dogs are more valuable then people but they shouldnt have been left behind in New Orleans.
it was stupid for the government to disallow any people to take their pets if they wanted to, especially if they didnt go to shelters.
Submitted by firefly (user info) at 2005-09-22 17:03:26 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-09-22 17:01:54 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
It's true in theory, and I hate to tell you this, but I wouldn't leave my pets behind either.
Submitted by ajanssen (user info) at 2005-09-22 16:56:53 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Texas will need help. Its supposed to spawn tornadoes as far as Dallas. I dont think duct tape is going to help us on this one.
Submitted by Insanethemind (user info) at 2005-09-22 16:54:32 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
A-fucking-men!
They should have simply euthanized any and all stray animals in need of surgery and focused on the humans.
I was listening to NPR the other day (my dad drives me to work, so I am forced to suffer through that crap) and this woman was saying how she "would stay there with her animals and die with them, so they wouldn't die alone", if she were not able to evacuate them with her.
She would actually choose to die, over escaping and leaving the stupid pets to fend for themselves!
Fanatics I say.