What Should I Do?

[CBrewton5]

You're borderlining on just being plain insulting but I'm gonna answer your questions anyway

Originally Posted by Susan9608

Actually, yes, that is exactly what I'm going to tell you. And I'm kind of astonished to hear differently. If all you do for your cat is feed him and change his litter once a week, what does your poor cat do with himself?

Cats spend 70% of their day sleeping, so Sploosh spends alot of the time that we are up doing exactly that, sleeping. He gets fed every day, and always has running water in the sink (he refuses to drink from a bowl so he jumps up on the kitchen sink when he wants a drink of water).

My cat, Oscar, gets groomed every day. He's a "mutt" - certainly not a persian - but he does have long hair that needs maintanence.

Sploosh is a tabby mix, so no long hair at all. He's also crotchety in his old age so I doubt he'd even put up with getting brushed. He does like, and does get, lots of love and attention. Generally he's in my or Dave's lap when he's awake quite a bit. Doesn't take much maintenance to love on him while we are watching TV or whatever though, so I don't consider that *work and maintenance*.

Oscar also gets his teeth cleaned with a little brush almost every day.

Unnecessary, IMHO, but *I'm* in no position to tell anybody how to care for their own animal as you seem to incinuate that I don't care properly for mine.

I scoop his litter box at least once, but generally twice a day because I figure I wouldn't like being forced at walk in a box of my own excrement.

On that point I will concede that we could probably do better.

Oscar's water gets changed out twice a day. His dry food gets changed out every day, and he gets fed wet food twice.

As I stated, Sploosh will not drink from a bowl so we do keep the water running pretty much 24/7 at a low drip for him to get water whenever he wants. We do not feed him moist food because in him it causes diarrhea. Occassionally he will get a can of tuna as a treat, one of his favorites.

And the 12-year-old child learns that non-human animals deserve less respect and less consideration for their own best interests than human beings do. The 12-year-old child learns that killing is okay.

The 12 year old child would learn about the food chain. What do you think animals were put on this earth for if not for feeding human beings and other animals that are higher up on the food chain? It's pretty sad if you think that just because a child is brought up knowing this that they'll think killing another human being is OK. People don't eat other people unless they are into cannibalism. Animals may be 'sentient' beings, but they are not equal to humans, not even the domesticated ones, although in our culture we do not eat those. They are not capable of logic or reasoning things out. They do not possess an immortal soul.

[Percy's Mom]

So, your cat doesn't require a lot of maintenance. That still doesn't mean that a child should be given any living animal to teach them responsibility.

On the gun/hunting issue, I don't care how many safety lessons they have or how many times you tell them to be careful, a 12 year old should not have a gun. BB gun, shotgun, pistol, whatever. And like I said before, if the mother or father doesn't want it to happen, that's the way it should be, and hopefully, the grandfather will respect that and not argue the point.

Originally Posted by CBrewton5

They do not possess an immortal soul.

How do you know?

While I'm not going to bother with the argument, you should be prepared for the reactions to your "food chain" "animals are put on Earth to feed humans" statements. That's pretty bold of you on an obviously pro-vegetarian forum.

[Susan9608]

Unnecessary, IMHO, but *I'm* in no position to tell anybody how to care for their own animal as you seem to incinuate that I don't care properly for mine.

I'm not insinuating that you don't take care of your animals properly; I'm going by the information *you* provided - that all a cat needs is to be fed and have it's litter box changed weekly and all a dog needs is to be fed and walked once or twice a day, and expressing that *I* am shocked to find that cats and dogs need so little care.

Also, dental health in cats - and dogs - is quite important. Like human beings, cats teeth will accumulate tartar over time if not cleaned regularly. This can cause deterioriation of the teeth, infection, gum disease, and tooth loss. All of these dental problems can make a cat have trouble eating and grooming.

All of this is beside the point and off topic, though.

Animals may be 'sentient' beings, but they are not equal to humans, not even the domesticated ones, although in our culture we do not eat those. They are not capable of logic or reasoning things out. They do not possess an immortal soul.

I love how you put sentient in quotation marks. Do you deny that animals feel pain? Suffer? Experience fear? Feel love? If you concede yes to any of those questions, then why on earth would you put sentient in quotation marks?

People who suffer from mental retardation are incapable of logic or reasoning things out. Do you think they aren't equal to "normal" human beings, too? Do you think they lack a soul as well?

See, this is the kind of attitude that hunting - along with many other things, as well, but the primary issue here is hunting - teaches people. It teaches them that non-human animals are not equal and do not deserve compassion and respect. That kind of speciest attitude is not one I want my children to have; hell, that kind of attitude is not one I would even want my friends to have. I think it's a pretty despicable way of thinking ... that just because human beings can use "logic" we're better than non-human animals.

The 12 year old child would learn about the food chain. What do you think animals were put on this earth for if not for feeding human beings and other animals that are higher up on the food chain?

So the 12-year-old child learns that it's okay to murder "lesser" living beings for food that is not necessary for survival. Yeah - that's a *great* message.

Were animals put here for people to eat? Hmmm .... animals were here first, so that leads me to think NO. Even if they were, it's just not *necessary* for survival anymore. Hunting and factory farming have become totally barbaric and POINTLESS activities.

Just because you CAN do something - like hunt or eat meat - doesn't mean you SHOULD.

[CBrewton5]

People who suffer from mental retardation are incapable of logic or reasoning things out. Do you think they aren't equal to "normal" human beings, too? Do you think they lack a soul as well?

When you go making comments like that, to ME of all people, this becomes no longer a reasonable discussion and turns into a flame fest, so I'm done. It's quite obvious that nothing anybody says is going to change your mind and that you're so blinded by your own agenda that you care more for your cause than you do the feelings of your fellow HUMAN BEINGS.

[this_lil_piggy]

Just to clarify my 2nd post. In my 1st post I addressed the kids hunting, I don't agree with it. When I lived at home I abided by my dads rules wether I was 10 or 20, and that's just the way it was. "as long as your under my roof, you go by the rules of my household". There are other ways to bond when you are 13.
In my 2nd post I wasn't touching on that part of the discussion anymore. I don't know who brought euthanization into the conversation or what relevance it has. My comment about my dog not responding quickly and peacefully to euthanization was strictly a "tunnel vision" reply to someone else mentioning that their animal went peacefully and quickly. I had no hidden agenda there, other than commenting that it doesn't always go so smoothly.

The 2nd part of my 2nd post in regards to my grandparents...Again, I tend to reply in tunnel vision when a conversation gets this lengthy. I wasn't campaigning for or against hunting. I was merely replying to this across the board statement:

My entire family hunted "FOR FOOD." And what a lame-ass excuse that is anyway. NO ONE needs to hunt for food. Every sorry excuse for a hunter (including my father, stepfather, uncles, nephews, etc.) that supposedly hunts for food does not go after the sick and weak animals. They go after the big rack, very healthy bucks. And don't lecture me about poverty and needing that freezer full of free venison, either. My family was also on welfare sometimes, food stamps, assistance, ... I grew up poor. Still, my family never really needed to hunt to survive. There were plenty of other ways.

You are right, that my grandpa may be only .01% of the hunting population, but I wanted to put it out there that there are SOME that do need to hunt, and do do it for a strict purpose. Not to slaughter carelessly for the name of the game. If hunters would do it for the reasons and as thoughfully as grandpa does, I would far rather support hunting than support any slaughter house on any given day. They hem animals up with no chance, and rather than inject a painless death into them, they cut their throats and watch as they bleed a slow death. It is horrible. These animals are fed and bred to be killed. Most slaughter houses won't even take sick animals for slaughter.
Case in point, a few months ago we had a terrible wreck on highway 306 nearby my house. I was on my way to town when I drove up on it--it was horrendous. A double decker cow trailor had hit the curve too fast and rolled across a field. In the process over 90 cattle were tossed and thrown from the wreckage. There were dead cows every direction you looked. Some were still alive but barely. Not a single slaughter house would accept them. These cattle had been on their way to slaughter, but since they now could not walk into the facility on their own will, they would not take them for processing. Sad.
Anyway, My replies were to specific comments, not to the arguement in whole. Wether I support hunting or not, I really do not know. Resonsibly for food, I think I can handle it, but for the purpose of a sport or head on the wall--no way. I couldn't do it for either purpose, and I do not even eat deer, rabbit, dove, or fish for that matter. To the original inquiry of this conversation, no I do not think a child has a place in the woods hunting.

[Susan9608]

When you go making comments like that, to ME of all people,

You know, this is an on-line forum. I know nothing about you personally, so if you are taking my post personally then that is your issue and not mine. If there is something in your life that you are particularly sensitive about, then that's unfortunate, but you can't expect people who know nothing about it to be extra sensitive about it.

I think it's a legitimate questions, though. If you base the worth of human being on their ability to reason and logic - these qualities being what makes them higher up on the food chain than non-human animals - then what about human beings who cannot use logic and reason? What about children? They can't use logic and reason. What about people in comas or people in vegetative states? What about the neurologically devestated individual who is no longer capable of even breathing on his own? Are those people suddenly worth less than other human beings because they can no longer use logic or reason?

Of course not. A human being's worth is not defined by his ability to logic or reason, so why should a non-human animal's worth be defined that way?

[Percy's Mom]

Perhaps her point was a bit over the top, but reading between the lines, the point was made. Why should her mind be changed when she believes that all animals have feelings, emotions, and "souls" and should be respected as such. What you basically said was, "Heck, it's just a piece of meat, who cares if it's shot?" That's just wrong.

Why were the animals put on Earth? They were put here to make it a beautiful wonderful place full of diversity in life cycle, experiences, methods of communication, and as beings meant to teach us. I don't believe for a second that they were put on Earth primarily to feed humans. Do I still eat some of them? Yes. Do I feel that I'm superior to them in such a way that I would feel good about going out and shooting them down because "They are not capable of logic or reasoning things out. They do not possess an immortal soul." so it must be OK? Absolutely not. I'm no more or less an animal than they are.

[werecatrising]

So I am assuming your cat doesn't get annual exams and vaccinations. By 8 years of age he should have at least had blood work performed and a good dental cleaning.

[wolfie]

You just had to mention dogs! I'm new to guinea pigs and still learning, but I am defintely NOT new to dogs. Dogs like guinea pigs are PACK animals. Their human family members are their pack. They require a MINIMUM of one hour a day of quality interaction and that does not include going out to the bathroom, being fed or getting groomed. You want to talk vet bills? Well we've easily passed the $10,000 mark for our 10 year old Golden Retreiver. Dogs are not cheap and not easy. Are they worth all the time and money- you bet. The bottom line is that no pet of any kind should be given to a child to teach responsiblity. To infer that one type of animal deserves better care than another is discriminatory to say the least.

As for hunting, those rare few who legitimatly hunt for food purposes- I understand. But I will never, ever understand how aiming a weapon at a beautiful living creature and then "taking" it's life could even be considered a sport.

[fairysari]

I know this topic had digressed a bit, but I was just thinking of something - a lot of people have mentioned that putting a gun into the hand of a child is wrong altogether. I don't know if I completely agree with that.

I went to a summer camp since I was 8 years old that had riflery as an activity. It was like and 'upgrade' of archery. We were taught all sorts of safety stuff, and it was an enclosed range way off at one end of camp. We all had to lie down on our stomachs while we were shooting, the only thing we ever shot at was targets, and sometimes balloons, and we all had to wait until we were told for everyone to start shooting at the same time. In many years there I never once heard anyone even mention hunting or killing an animal. And I live in Canada, where guns aren't really popular, I don't know anyone who hunts, and I don't know a single person who owns a gun.

I think that if the 12 year old is really interested in guns, going to a target shooting range would be a good idea. At least to learn gun safety - whether he is allowed to go hunting or not, he should probably do this first. And explaining to him why he can't go kill an animal, if that the decision you make, is probably a good idea too.

[this_lil_piggy]

Exactly Fairy. I think target shooting would be a great way to teach him safety, bond with grandpa, and it may even help her son decide for himself that he doesn't want to aim that gun at anything/anyone--like it did with my son.
We always went to camp as kids too, and archery and guns were always a part of it. We didn't grow up curious about or impressed with the big mystery of guns because we already knew about them. You didnt hear of kids accidently killing a friend playing with a gun they found and were curious about.
I have seen the difference in teaching and not teaching with my own two eyes. My best friend has never allowed her son to touch a real gun. He's never been taught the dangers of them etc. My son has been taught and shown. We were at their house one night and there was a toy gun laying on the table that looked absolutely real. When best friends son attempted to touch it, my son went ballistic. He told him not to touch real guns and when the friend didnt listen my son came running and crying to tell me. I was pretty proud that our lessons stuck in his mind. You just never know what situations or whos house they may be in.

[BabyGrl]

Originally Posted by fairysari

- a lot of people have mentioned that putting a gun into the hand of a child is wrong altogether.

Wow Sari I totally misread this and though you said it was okay to put a gun to a child HEAD and not HAND.

Scared the crap out of me.

[Sabriel]

CBrewton5 ,

I think considering this is a pet forum and that pets are passing on on here all the time that bringing up euthenasia was very distasteful. Your vet may not make it quick and painless, but my vet gives them a bit of gas before so they slowly fall alseep then she euths them. I don't think hunters give the deer a little gas before they shoot them.

Secondly, not everyone here belives as you belive. Some of us come from different backgrounds and theologies that treat animals differently. It's one of my most cherished beliefs that the animals are our brothers and sisters. Put here to guide us, to live with us, to love us and to be loved and to learn and grow as we learn and grow.

I think it's very ironic that you are so offended after making so many offensive statements. You are not the only person that has the ability to be offended you know. And you certainly are not the only minority on this board.

[Fay]

Humans are Animals, We are equal and part of the Animilia Family just like the other species. Just because we have intelligence doesn't make us any better then anyone else. The idea that Animals are defined as creatures that aren't human actually comes from Biblical background and isn't biologically or technically valid, just a way people like to make them be seen "different" or "better" from the other species. Sadly this meaning of Animals have been widely accepted by a vast ammount of the human population and many just don't know better.

Animals can do things that we can't, We need devices and tools to help us achieve these things without these things we are very vunerable, most of us aren't even in touch with our primal instincts of survival, just take the tsunami for example, all the animals knew it was coming, we didn't, and we were killed. Who did we turn on for help afterwards? Animals, They suffered injuries unselfishly to help our species, majority of people would have never done the same for them.

We are the most destructive species in the Animilia Family, From all species we cause the most devistation and unnecesary loses on the entire planet. We think as general human beings that we are so inteligent and so superior. But you know what it really is. Selfishness... If you want to teach your kid to be selfish and inconsiderate and help him be part of the planets destruction then learning him that other animals are less and killing them even though it's not neccesary is okay then that's your descision, but definetaly not what I support.