|
|
| Public Forum |
Proceed to Auspet's
New Discussion Forum |
Pet
Directory |
Classifieds
| Home
| LinkXchange
|
 Click here to make Auspet.com your default home page |
|
 Auspet - Message Boards
 Dogs - all types
 intresting article dog "owner" vs dog "Guardian"
|
 UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! |
next newest topic | next oldest topic |
| Author | Topic: intresting article dog "owner" vs dog "Guardian" |
|
honeybear Member  Posts: 926 |
posted 03-10-2004 09:48 AM
 
this about what our pets have become to us and should we be their gaurdian vs owner http://slate.msn.com/id/2096577/ IP: Logged |
|
bullylove1 Member Posts: 173 |
posted 03-10-2004 11:04 AM
I just read that aswell. I think this could stir a lot of controversy. Yikes! I personally don't care what people call their dog. I say she is my baby, others purely use the term "pet" "owner" whatever. I think their heart is in the right spot for wanting animals to be treated fairly, but I do not think changing the manner in which we refer to them will help. The only thing that is going to stop pet abuse and neglect is the proper education (on adopting and breeding) and for people to speak up when they see the abuse/neglect instead of lookig the other way. Just my two cents! ------------------ IP: Logged |
|
honeybear Member Posts: 926 |
posted 03-10-2004 01:08 PM
I agree, well said. one thing the aricle says which has become very commonplace is when our pets need need to go to the rainbrow bridge, and we cant let them go and up letting them suffer too long. I know , been there. They are such a big part of our lives. honeybear IP: Logged |
|
susan_cude@hotmail.com Member Posts: 813 |
posted 03-10-2004 02:22 PM
I liked her take on it very much! Animals are not human after all! But that doesn't demeanish (sp) their value. Just my 2 cents.. Interesting article.... Susan IP: Logged |
|
susan_cude@hotmail.com Member Posts: 813 |
posted 03-10-2004 02:32 PM
I just have to say one more thing...Sometimes the animal activists go too far! I'm talking about the far left wing ones....when you protect a grey owl and hundreds if not thousands of families loose thier jobs! or a little "rare" mouse is found on your farm and you loose that years crop and all the cost is put on you! What about Human rights! it's o.k. that children have nothing to eat and families loose all they have because someone deemed that animal as more valuable than they are.... That's the sort of thing, I have a real problem with! Susan IP: Logged |
|
dogangel Member Posts: 132 |
posted 03-10-2004 06:26 PM
I don't agree w/this article. And I read another one on that page (http://slate.msn.com/id/2083699/), and I don't agree with that either. I really couldn't care less whether I'm called the "guardian", "mommy", or whatever else of my dogs. I just hate being called "the owner". Personally I do not make any distinction between my dogs and my son. I love them equally (of course in different ways). And it hurts me that somebody who would hurt my babies would probably get away just with a $100.00 fine (see Dukesdad case at the lake), whereas some idiot who was dumb enough to spill her hot cofee in her lap gets rewarded with millions of dollars just because we need to make a distinction between the rights of a human and that of a mere dog. I don't own my babies. I own my house, my yards and everything in them, but not my dogs. They are breathing, living and loving creatures, and we share the house. Yes, like all children they have to abide by some rules, but that doesn't make them "my property". The second article was talking about rescuing dogs as if it was something shameful to do (!!!!). Yes, I rescued all of my dogs, and I'm proud of it. And no, that doesn't necessarily mean that they were turned into spoiled brats to make up for their shady past. And I think petfinder and rescue groups are great. They actually rescue dogs that would be put to sleep at kill shelters, just because nobody shows any interest in them until "D-day", and find good homes for them, even if they're thousands of miles away. Can somebody please explain to me what exactly is wrong in doing this??? Just my 2 cents. IP: Logged |
|
susan_cude@hotmail.com Member Posts: 813 |
posted 03-10-2004 11:19 PM
Of coarse I think rescue organizations are a good thing, and Thank Goodness for them!! I love my dogs to death, God has given me these little creatures to look after and I will do it to the best of my ability, but I would never put them on the same level as my children. BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN I DON'T LOVE THEM... Susan IP: Logged |
|
Jamiya Member Posts: 1392 |
posted 03-11-2004 06:24 AM
You don't make any distinctions between your dogs and your son? So, if your house was burning down and you could only save one other being and a dog was close by, you would save that dog and not your son? Interesting.
IP: Logged |
|
dogangel Member Posts: 132 |
posted 03-11-2004 07:56 AM
No, Jamiya, it's not like that. First, I understand what you're trying to emphasize, but to begin with I hope I'm never put in a situation where I have to make such choices (that reminds me of a very good movie - if you ever watched it - "Sophie's choice" - it was about a mother during WWII - briefly she had to make the choice between sparing the life of either her son or her daughter in a concentration camp). But anyway, if this ever happens, I would try or die trying to save all of them. What I was reffering to was that I treat my dogs EXACTLY as I treat my son - they're all my children. IP: Logged |
|
Jamiya Member Posts: 1392 |
posted 03-11-2004 08:20 AM
I know where you're coming from. My dog and cats are my babies as well. But no matter what your heart says, your mind has to tell you that your child needs a mother more than a dog. For you to die trying to save the dog would be a tragedy your son would pay for every day for the rest of his life. Something to think about. That being said, I do treat my dog like my child - sort of. A dog is NOT a child. They require different things because they are different species. What's good for a dog may not be good for a child, and vice versa. I think that's the point the article was trying to make. A lot of people baby and spoil their dogs in the name of love and "treating them like a human child" and the dog ends up paying for it. If, however, you mean that you treat them the same in a GENERAL way - like you give them both the structure and discipline that they need as individuals - then that's a different story.
IP: Logged |
|
dogangel Member Posts: 132 |
posted 03-11-2004 09:45 AM
Thank you! That's exactly what I meant. I shower my dogs with kisses (like I do my child), and I discipline them like I did my child (past tense, he is 23 - if I still had to do it, then I would have a big problem - it would mean I didn't do a good job when I was supposed to...) Anyway, I still hate the idea that I "own" the dogs. I'm just a parent to them like I am to my son. And believe that implies PLENTY of resposibilities!!! Including knowing the difference between humans and canines. Whoever can't make that difference is not a good parent...  IP: Logged |
|
Jamiya Member Posts: 1392 |
posted 03-11-2004 09:51 AM
I guess I am not big on semantics. Whatever it is called, I will still treat my animals the same way. Someone on another board discussing this article had a nice post on the subject. Perhaps I will ask to cross-post.
IP: Logged |
|
honeybear Member Posts: 926 |
posted 03-11-2004 10:13 AM
well - I think of my dogs and cat as my babies, I do not have children - I dont think of myself as their owner, I am to them, their mom, Maybe their caregiver - they are my family but I dont think changing the name owner/guardian will change anything. I will say this and probably get a lot ot flack for it. But my pets come first, and then my husband (now if there is a fire or tragedy, mu husband is first, so I think really am looking for some other terminology. And the reason I think this is because of an ex SOB husband who was cruel to my cats and I am not even go to go there because it was 16 years ago and still brings tears to my eyes. My point is my hsuband can take care of himself, but my dogs and cat cant. - they rely on me. it would be the same if I had children - they would depend on me and therefore they would come first. just the way I see it honeybear IP: Logged |
All times are ET (US) | next newest topic | next oldest topic |
  |
|
Contact Us | Auspet.com
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.45c
| Home | Contact us | Advertise here | Jobs at Auspet | |
| © 1999-2017 AusPet.com |