I didn't say that little troll. I was just adding to the story.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Oh wow well if Micheal Jackson's kids thought it was a good idea then clearly it's a sensible thing to do.
It's not just about the wheels. It's about the food, medication, vet visits, and perhaps most importantly the time of the people involved.
They are loyal to that person because they have fed them and played with them over a long history. Not because they hugged them a lot.Kmarion wrote:
Bullshit. Dogs are very sociable animals. Take away the affection and you have a dog that just moaps around dead on the inside. It is just as important as anything else for a happy life. Some dogs even develop separation anxiety when their owners are not around. They don't eat, they lay around doing nothing.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Human displays of affection are not the dog's idea of attention. Sure the dog might want to snuggle up or whatever when it's tired, but attention is playing and getting food. Not wrapping your huge arms around its vulnerable neck.
Are you going to do any of those things to future Mrs. Jennings to show your love for her?KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Ah, so when my friend's dog paws at me and licks my hand and sits by me and pushes his body in to me its because he is trying to get food or play, not trying to get me to pet him. Gotcha. You should have a TV show, dog whisperer. Seriously, I think you must be some kind of dog psychologist or something.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Human displays of affection are not the dog's idea of attention. Sure the dog might want to snuggle up or whatever when it's tired, but attention is playing and getting food. Not wrapping your huge arms around its vulnerable neck.
Give me a break.
I didn't say you did. Just raping any ethos you may have had.Kmarion wrote:
I didn't say that little troll. I was just adding to the story.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Oh wow well if Micheal Jackson's kids thought it was a good idea then clearly it's a sensible thing to do.
It's not just about the wheels. It's about the food, medication, vet visits, and perhaps most importantly the time of the people involved.
and so? If it's coming from willing people what the fuck is it to you?
Wasn't that my point?KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
I may pet her and let her off her leash from time to time. 'Cause, you know, dogs are the same as humans and all.
It's not loyalty, its a desire to be around people, to be loved. Jesus I feel sorry for your animal(s). God forbid they get a sandspur.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
They are loyal to that person because they have fed them and played with them over a long history. Not because they hugged them a lot.Kmarion wrote:
Bullshit. Dogs are very sociable animals. Take away the affection and you have a dog that just moaps around dead on the inside. It is just as important as anything else for a happy life. Some dogs even develop separation anxiety when their owners are not around. They don't eat, they lay around doing nothing.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Human displays of affection are not the dog's idea of attention. Sure the dog might want to snuggle up or whatever when it's tired, but attention is playing and getting food. Not wrapping your huge arms around its vulnerable neck.
No they like attention, they are still social animals. The point is they don't understand human social gestures.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
I thought your point was that dogs don't like attention, but they do like attention, but only to get food and playtime. So yeah, you really don't have a leg to stand on (geddit lol).
It's their choice. Putting money, time, and effort into making an animal happy is worth it TO THEM. They are not hurting as they try to help. They are making his life better, and it shows.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
I didn't say you did. Just raping any ethos you may have had.
A waste is a waste. No matter what the good intentions, no matter how little it hurts anything else.
The problem is I wish it was only a waste, then it would be like so much else. The problem is they're hurting as they try to help.
Oh, so now you're the dog whisperer? lmaoFlaming_Maniac wrote:
It's a dog. It's loyalty. Don't kid yourself. For most dogs it's worth about as much as a treat.
This is the problem.Kmarion wrote:
Putting money, time, and effort into making an animal happy is worth it TO THEM.
You are imposing human emotions on an animal because it's domesticated.Kmarion wrote:
Oh, so now you're the dog whisperer? lmaoFlaming_Maniac wrote:
It's a dog. It's loyalty. Don't kid yourself. For most dogs it's worth about as much as a treat.
No it is not. I did not say it was only about them. You see what you want to see. I was responding to the supposed waste of time and your need to judge others on how it's best spent.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
This is the problem.Kmarion wrote:
Putting money, time, and effort into making an animal happy is worth it TO THEM.
Deal. Some dogs wont touch anything when they are alone.. even with a bowl of food sitting next to them.You are imposing human emotions on an animal because it's domesticated.Kmarion wrote:
Oh, so now you're the dog whisperer? lmaoFlaming_Maniac wrote:
It's a dog. It's loyalty. Don't kid yourself. For most dogs it's worth about as much as a treat.
Stand equidistant from your dog as a stranger with a steak. Have the stranger drop the steak. See where the dog goes.
But it's not about doing good for the animals then is it? It's about making someone feel good by helping animals...regardless as to how much good they are actually doing.Kmarion wrote:
No it is not. I did not say it was only about them. You see what you want to see. I was responding to the supposed waste of time and your need to judge others on how it's best spent.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
This is the problem.Kmarion wrote:
Putting money, time, and effort into making an animal happy is worth it TO THEM.
As exemplified by my dog losing 10 pounds when we went on a vacation.Kmarion wrote:
Deal. Some dogs wont touch anything when they are alone.. even with a bowl of food sitting next to them.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
You are imposing human emotions on an animal because it's domesticated.Kmarion wrote:
Oh, so now you're the dog whisperer? lmao
Stand equidistant from your dog as a stranger with a steak. Have the stranger drop the steak. See where the dog goes.
Ya, I get the omg they are just being selfish.. "i'll be the bad guy cause I'm a man" ar rarr. oo so very controversial of you. They do what is best for the animal. Must I remind you again that they put animals down also? you said it wasn't worth the time, money, or effort. I was responding directly to this to say it's not up to YOU specifically in terms of financial cost or time spent.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
But it's not about doing good for the animals then is it? It's about making someone feel good by helping animals...regardless as to how much good they are actually doing.Kmarion wrote:
No it is not. I did not say it was only about them. You see what you want to see. I was responding to the supposed waste of time and your need to judge others on how it's best spent.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
This is the problem.
It's all part of a formula. Sometimes they need love and attention more than a steak.As exemplified by my dog losing 10 pounds when we went on a vacation.Kmarion wrote:
Deal. Some dogs wont touch anything when they are alone.. even with a bowl of food sitting next to them.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
You are imposing human emotions on an animal because it's domesticated.
Stand equidistant from your dog as a stranger with a steak. Have the stranger drop the steak. See where the dog goes.
Then again I didn't say they were alone did they? You're right there...it's just that a steak is a lot more interesting than you are.
They do what they think is best for the animal. Which is often a very skewed thing.Kmarion wrote:
Ya, I get the omg they are just being selfish.. "i'll be the bad guy cause I'm a man" ar rarr. oo so very controversial of you. They do what is best for the animal. Must I remind you again that they put animals down also? you said it wasn't worth the time, money, or effort. I was responding directly to this to say it's not up to YOU specifically in terms of financial cost or time spent.
Yeah maybe on their deathbed lol.Kmarion wrote:
It's all part of a formula. Sometimes they need love and attention more than a steak.
You've ever owned a dog?Flaming_Maniac wrote:
No they like attention, they are still social animals. The point is they don't understand human social gestures.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
I thought your point was that dogs don't like attention, but they do like attention, but only to get food and playtime. So yeah, you really don't have a leg to stand on (geddit lol).
Often? Not in my experience. Yes anybody that does any good is just doing it to pat themselves on the back.. I geddit.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
They do what they think is best for the animal. Which is often a very skewed thing.Kmarion wrote:
Ya, I get the omg they are just being selfish.. "i'll be the bad guy cause I'm a man" ar rarr. oo so very controversial of you. They do what is best for the animal. Must I remind you again that they put animals down also? you said it wasn't worth the time, money, or effort. I was responding directly to this to say it's not up to YOU specifically in terms of financial cost or time spent.
I didn't say it was up to me. They can do what they want. The wonderful thing about America is that people are allowed to waste their time and pat themselves on the back for doing it.
Some very alive and very healthy animals are disciplined and won't jolt out because they know it will upset their owner. I guess if you just threw a dog in a backyard and tossed the occasional steak over the fence they would though.Yeah maybe on their deathbed lol.Kmarion wrote:
It's all part of a formula. Sometimes they need love and attention more than a steak.
Last edited by AussieReaper (2009-12-12 18:09:28)
They are in it for themselves whether they know it or not. It's a pretty simple fact.Kmarion wrote:
Often? Not in my experience. Yes anybody that does any good is just doing it to pat themselves on the back.. I geddit.
But not only themselves. I'm not saying that they don't enjoy they feeling they get from doing it. But that isn't to say that is the only or wrong thing to do. I've had to put down animals before. I also took comfort in the fact knowing it was the right thing to do. This can go either way.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
They are in it for themselves whether they know it or not. It's a pretty simple fact.Kmarion wrote:
Often? Not in my experience. Yes anybody that does any good is just doing it to pat themselves on the back.. I geddit.
They are pack animals. That is simple nature.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
They are in it for themselves whether they know it or not. It's a pretty simple fact.Kmarion wrote:
Often? Not in my experience. Yes anybody that does any good is just doing it to pat themselves on the back.. I geddit.
Last edited by AussieReaper (2009-12-12 18:18:42)
They are doing it for themselves haha. Even if they are doing what is truly best for the animal they are ultimately doing that because it is best for themselves. At least in that instance they find pleasure through doing what's best for another living thing.Kmarion wrote:
But not only themselves. I'm not saying that they don't enjoy they feeling they get from doing it. But that isn't to say that is the only or wrong thing to do. I've had to put down animals before. I also took comfort in the fact knowing it was the right thing to do. This can go either way.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
They are in it for themselves whether they know it or not. It's a pretty simple fact.Kmarion wrote:
Often? Not in my experience. Yes anybody that does any good is just doing it to pat themselves on the back.. I geddit.