OT: dogs being killed at the Sochi games. What we can do to help them

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by kcohen

Who said THAT on this thread?

It seemed a fair inference when someone posted let's start with people and two responses were essentially that people can help themselves but animals cannot.

[drmondobueno]

I would suggest you watch the Olberman lmk again. The show participants suggested the dogs reacted like pets , not feral animls. A factoid was thrown out about people being relicated by the government in order to build the facilities. It was suggested the dogs were staying where they used to live. Why did the dogs not go with their former masters? And on and on...

This just smacks of big business, big government, big television taking what is wanted and ignoring the rest. We dont know what happened to the people, if anything. But we do know what is being done to the dogs.

My wife and I have five rescued cats, the only reason we don't have dogs at this time. Our local community is trying to raise several hundred thousand dollars to construct a safe, warm animal shelter. In an area with a total population of under 25,000 it will not happen soon but it will happen.

I can tell you people in this small area with its very limited funds do get better attention than animals. We dont euthanize people.

Keith Temple

[kcohen]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

It seemed a fair inference when someone posted let's start with people and two responses were essentially that people can help themselves but animals cannot.

Your inference is pretty far out if you deduced that I said that dogs are MORE deserving of charity than humans. In any case, it's pretty dicey to establish a "needometer" to gauge what is more of a priority for charitable giving. With limited resources, we all must, unfortunately, pick and choose.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by kcohen

Your inference is pretty far out you deduced that I said that dogs are MORE deserving of charity than humans. In any case, it's pretty dicey to establish a "needometer" to gauge what is more of a priority for charitable giving. With limited resources, we all must, unfortunately, pick and choose.

Yes, I agree and said so, people should give as their hearts dictate. My dispute was with the notion being offered to justify giving to animal rights that people can fend for themselves. I did not bring that into the picture, you did.

[kcohen]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Yes, I agree and said so, people should give as their hearts dictate. My dispute was with the notion being offered to justify giving to animal rights that people can fend for themselves. I did not bring that into the picture, you did.

You conveniently omit that I wrote ON MANY LEVELS people can help themselves and that animals cannot. If this is not so, tell me how it's not. I don't see how giving to animal welfare needs to be justified. You brought THAT into the picture.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Ken I think we are squabbling needlessly and we probably agree more than disagree, but why bring whether people can or can't help themselves into it at all? How is it even relevant to whether this is a good cause? Why did you bring it up in the first place?

[Cardboard Junkie]

I'll say it. I hate most people, and I love most animals.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Cardboard Junkie

I'll say it. I hate most people, and I love most animals.

You and Linus.

[kcohen]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Ken I think we are squabbling needlessly and we probably agree more than disagree, but why bring whether people can or can't help themselves into it at all? How is it even relevant to whether this is a good cause? Why did you bring it up in the first place?

I don't know. I forgot.

No seriously (somewhat), to react to the below post. Nothing more. I respect that people prioritize things differently. But it is a fact that stray dogs cannot help themselves. And yes, I agree that children mostly cannot help themselves, but they are not being shot with poison darts, at least not in any civilized country that I know of.

Originally Posted by johnmh71
"Not to say this isn't bad, but aren't there people out there that need help too? I would start there before I moved onto animals."

I'm done.

[Runscott]

I think everyone should be forced to only eat only one food item (whichever one they think is the best), and nothing else.

Or to be more relevant to this forum, you can only collect one baseball card - whichever one you think is the most important.

[drcy]

You can help animals in your local area. And/or people too. That's not a snide remark, but a recommendation. There are strays and shelters in all localities, and being nice to a strange dog or providing water and food for local birds in winter is all a good thing. Adopt a new pet and give it an enjoyable life. Be helpful to others is also a good start. Be nice to your pet, take it for a walk today. Get your dog or cat spayed or neutered. Built a bird's nest that will protect it from cats. Have a conversation with a homeless person on the street, treat him or her as a normal person. People begging for money have told me they appreciate a conversation more than money. If you want to do charity more formal, that's great. Sign up to volunteer once a week. If you wish to donate money for a Russian dog shelter, that's great. If you prefer your charity go to downtrodden humans instead of dogs that's great as long as you do it. As my dad would say "It's not an either/or situation, it's a both/and."

Interestingly, Putin is a well known dog fan and is famous/notorious for bringing his black lab with him to meetings, including with international leaders such as German Chancellor Angela Merkel below.





The photos aren't an endorsement, just something about Putin I already knew. I read a lot.