damn. that's sick.
ps. I couldn't that you were angry at all.

I've yet to understand what kind of sicko can do such terrible things to essentially defenseless creatures.

Jim, you're being far kinder to that inbred Aryan-nation-looking piece of shit than I would be. Trust me.

Gizmo:
http://www.tennessean.com/local/archives/04/04/49561253.jpg

White trash uncle fucker! I did hear though, that the owner of the dog tracked that asshole down and forced him to take the dog's body back to his girlfriend... I'd like to get that guy alone in a room with a red hot poker....

anyone pissed off enough about this should meet and kill my exhusband. he took my dog and had him put to sleep and got a restraining order against me so i couldn't do anything to prevent it in the meantime.

I personally believe that anyone who intentionally is cruel to animals should be treated to whatever they inflicted on the poor animal (yes, this does include inhumane slaughter of animals for food--do it humanely, and I've got no issues with that). On top of it just being sick and wrong, animal abuse is often the first steo to abuse of humans, especially defenseless ones like children, the mentally handicapped, or the elderly. I say we nip it in the bud before it happens. If they live through it, I betcha they'd think twice about doing it again. And anyone considering doing it would probably think twice, too.

Asshole.

Cruelty to animals makes my blood boil to a point of violence. I would have no problems beating the shit out of someone who was cruel to a defenseless animal. Sick bastard will get his.

I do have to mention, though, it is usually people who do not have kids who compare animals to kids. I absolutely love my dog and cats, but it is not even close. I can't even entertain the thought.

For those of us who will never have children, I can assure you pets engender the same feelings. I have nephews that I love and adore, and I feel the same way about my cats. It's not that I think pets have more value than children, it's that I think lives can be equal. Cruelty to either animals or people makes me want to beat the hell out of the perpetrator--preferably in a very painful, drawn-out way that will involve lots of screaming on their end. I will never have children (for reasons totally none of anyone else's business, and no--adoption isn't an option); and, yes, I absolutely compare my feelings for my pets to feelings about children. So, you're right about that part. It's not necessarily that we simply haven't experienced the "deeper" love of having a child, though. I took care of my nephew at birth, when he needed extensive surgery and his mother wasn't able, for quite some time. I love him and my other nephews deeply, and consider them my own in many ways.

I am not sure I'd feel any different if I had children, as something doesn't need to be fruit of my flesh for me to deeply love and respect it. Then again, I am not the kind of person who has the unconditional love that you see when a weeping woman is telling her son/daughter/husband/wife/mother/father that she still loves them despite the fact that they committed some indescribably horrible crime. So, perhaps it's just that I don't feel that kind of thing for anyone, regardless. Whereas I'd love an animal no matter what, even if it had to be put down for biting someone, etc.

Just my two cents.

I know I'm in the minority here - possibly even a minority of one - but I don't think that a human's life, even that of a child, is any more valuable than that of an animal's. In fact, I'd probably lean the other way in many cases, because I do see humanity as being somewhat like a plague on this planet. It's not like there's going to be a shortage of humans any time soon, and we do have a unique ability to be unnaturally cruel to each other as well as everything around us.

It's not that I don't care about people, though - nor am I particularly a "do no harm" type of person either. It's just that I feel it's somewhat arrogant for us to value human life about all else. Understandable, certainly - but still arrogant.

Of course, many religions do say that humanity is the end all be all, but frankly I think we should take that with a grain of salt considering those afore mentioned religions were also molded by a bunch of humans. Now if a cat came up to me and said "Hey, I was just talking to God, and she says you humans really do matter more than the rest of us", well then, that would be another story.

I can't even read about it.

i'm with melly, i skipped out on reading the story after the first line or so, i knew what it was about - it was just going to be more wincing beyond that point. go melly.

Yet another reason why dogs are better than human beings (and why I have a dog instead of a child).

It's disgusting that he'll get nothing more than a fine and some minor jail time - maybe only probation.

They should a) beat the holy living hell out of that man (I'd volunteer) and b) castrate him. Someone that inhuman shouldn't be allowed to breed. Or breathe.

I completely agree with both you and Kris- humans just keep finding shittier and shittier ways to abuse and destroy every other kind of life on this planet... and this is one of the worst examples I've seen.

Holy fucking crap, what a load of shit from Shawn.

Take it from a person who has had both pets and kids. Having a pet is not even fucking remotely close to having a kid. Not. Even. Close. Having a pet is closer to having a car than to having a kid. I'm serious. I love animals. I cried my eyes out when our dog died. But pets are maintenance, keep them fed, give them some attention, get some happiness out of them, but, and here's the key, go to the movies (etc.) without worrying about them being alone for a few hours. Go to work and not feel immense guilt about them being in daycare. You don't spend ALL OF YOUR TIME AND ENERGY, ALL OF IT on pets during their first few years. Paper training is a joke compared to that.

Kids are SO much deeper, man. I can't even imagine one of my kids dying. It would DESTROY ME. I'm sorry, but this is a pet peeve (no pun intended) of mine. Pets are indulgences. Accessories. Hell, there is a good case they shouldn't even be "owned" by humans.

And nephews and nieces aren't the same thing, trust me. I have those as well, and I love them dearly. I'm not sure I would die for them, though. I would in a second for my kids. And I hope that you would choose your nephews and nieces over your pets without even a blink of the eye. If not, then you have serious problems.

Wow, sac..got a bit of a chip on your shoulder or what? Just because that's your personal view about children doesn't mean it needs to be everyone's.

Since I CAN'T EVER HAVE CHILDREN I don't think you have any right to tell me that my pets are any less worthwhile or loved by me than your children are by you. I appreciate your experience as a parent--now try appreciating the experience of those of us who won't have children. We don't have as much love to give becuase we don't go through labor? Oh, please. Frankly, I think children are just as much indulgences as pets are...and both of them are a choice. I have friends with children, and I respect the hard work that it is--the lack of sleep, the pain, the joys, the pleasures and the frustrations. I am certainly not saying people with children don't love them more than they love their pets. I AM saying that those people without children can love their pets as much as someone else loves a child. You seem to be missing that distinction.

And, given that I raised my nephew for quite some time, I can't feel as much as if he were mine? This is the same thing as saying adoptive parents don't love their children as much as those who naturally give birth. I suspect there are more than a few folks out there who have issues with that, and I am one of them. Would I die for my nephews? Yes. Would I die for my pets? Very probably. I cannot stand the thought of seeing either the children or the pets hurt. Perhaps this just means I am more sensative and caring in general than I am to one specific life form.

You seem to think that work=love. I.e., becuase children are more work, they must mean more love. That equation is WAY oversimplified. If work=love, then most people who worked in crappy jobs would be the happiest folks in the world. You act as though loving pets demeans the loving of children in some way.

So, while I respect that children are more work than pets--I'd certianly never argue that--I disagree with your conclusion that they are, in turn, more innately worthwhile. Ask an old woman who's only companion is her cat or dog, whose children don't come see her often or who'se she's outlived if she loves her pet the same as if it were her child. See what she says.

Sorry, didn't mean to leave me email off in the above post. Usu, this remembers my personal info.

Didn't mean to imply you have no love to give. And yes, I know pets can be very valuable companions. I just get irritated when people compare them to children, or pet owning to parenting. It's just not even close. You simply can't love a pet as much as a child. A child is your soul, your heart, your flesh, your hopes, worries, dreams, anxieties, EVERYTHING. I include adoptive parents in this, as they are the final buffer for their kids against the world, as well.

You really can't screw up a pet, you know? Keep them fed, love them, and they'll be fine. A kid needs SO much love and preperation and understanding and guidance and reasurrance and wisdom. You kill yourself worrying whether you smothered them too much or didn't point them in the right direction, etc. You ever do that with a pet? You ever hold your breath when your pet is playing with other aniamls, hoping he'll fit in, hoping he doesn't get teased, hoping all your love and supporthas prepared him for the world?

It's just not even close.

We'll have to agree to disagree, though you didn't adress why I couldn't love my nephew as my own as I took care of him during a very rough period of his infant life for quite some time. I don't equate worrying about screwing someone up with love, either. I love my grandparents immensely--they are a HUGE part of my world. But, I don't worry about screwing them up.

Yes, there possibly is a difference in the love of a pet and the love of a child for some people. That in NO WAY means that I love one more than the other. Just as I don't love my husband more or less than my grandfather. I love my pets AS MUCH AS I WOULD LOVE A CHILD. Whether or not you believe it is, I suppose, not really relevant to that. My point was that you shouldn't dismiss what others value just because those values and priorities are different from your own; because, unless you stand in their shoes, you can't know how they feel. If you love your child more than your pets, that's fine. That's you. If I had a child, I might, as well. I don't, I never will, so my pet IS my child. I am not sure why that's hard to grasp, but the feelings I'd likely pour into a child are, instead, put into my pets.

The reverse is true for some people--their children are not their everything. In fact, they are little more than an annoyance and a bother. These are, of course, unfit parents. But having or not having children doesn't automatically mean you are capable of, or have, certain feelings.

I do worry about my cats. If I leave them for more than overnight, I do worry and freak out. I do hire someone to come in and take care of them, and this isn't just cleaning boxes--it's playing and loving, as well. And, as a matter of fact, you can screw pets up. One of my cats was abused, so trust me on this.

So, while *your* feelings for *your* pets may not even be close, it's not fair to assume that is always the way that it is. Or, that people who don't have children are somehow less emotionally involved with someone or something else simply because it's not a child. Or that those people who value their pets as though they were children are somehow "less" or dillusional. They're not. You just aren't standing where they are, so your perspective isn't the same.

Bravo, Shawn! How people can think that they know how another person feels without standing in their shoes is beyond me. And WHY someone would get SO worked up about people comparing their love for pets to others' love for children is also strange to me, it's not a competition after all. And it's a logical fallacy to imply that work=love, or worry involved=love, etc. And to state that you can't screw up an animal IS just plain wrong. As you stated with your cat. Animals that have been abused or neglected are definitely affected permanently. Ask anyone who's worked for an animal shelter or vet's office. I too worry about my cats when I leave them for very long. What if one of them gets hurt while they're playing? It's happened before while I was home, so it could easily happen while I'm away.

I just realized what this argument reminds me of, the argument that homosexual marriage threatens the sanctity of heterosexual marriage. The idea that one type of couple's marriage somehow lessens, or in any way affects, another's marriage is ludicrous. In the same vein, the idea that one person's love for a child OR pet somehow affects the legitimacy, sanctity or strength of another person's love for their child or pet is equally ludicrous. If someone says they love their pet as much as you love your child, who cares? Considering the enormous problems in the world, it's insignificant (understatement of the year). If THAT is what gets your undies in a knot, YOU have problems!

Shawn and Tina speak of not knowing how one feels until they have stood in their shoes. Exactly. I have worn the shoes of a childless pet owner, as well as a parent with pets. From those perspectives, I can tell you that there is no freakin' way you can love a pet as much as a child. I'll ask again, would you die for your pets? If you were in a situation where you had to choose between yourself or your pet, would you choose to die so that your pet could live? If so, then yes, we agree to disagree, although I would never understand that type of devotion to an animal. If not, then maybe you can see my point.

ALl of this is silly, really, I have no problems with people who love their pets. I love my pets. It is that one phrase, "My pets are like my chldren," that irks me.

people love their pets.

people love their kids.

so long as we ALL agree its NOT ok to "love" either your pets or your kids, lets all just be friends.

Yes, I would die for my pets. *shrugs* So, we agree to disagree. I am the type of person that would risk my life to save a helpless child, even if it wasn't mine, or a helpless animal if I though I had a chance or rescuing it. It's a thing, and perhaps I am just really, really empathetic. And, whether it bothers you or not, my pets *are* like my children. This may be because I KNOW, 100%, I will never have children. If that were the case for you, perhaps you'd feel the same. Or not. I can't know how you feel about your child because I am not in your head, and you can't know how I feel about my pets, because you're not in mine. Given this, it's virtually impossible to make judgement calls on other people's feelings and emotional attachments.

Either way, why would my pets being like my children be a problem for you? Or me saying such? As long as your not my pet, my child, or my husband, it doesn't really affect you if I feel that way, right? So, why let it irk or bother you?

And you definitely shouldn't...er..."LOVE" your pets *or* your children.

And, you have to be careful what you feed both pets and children, or they'll become toxic...ewww. *goes to clean catbox*

Because equating pets with children is offensive to me. Sorry, but humans come first, for me, especially my kids. That's not to say we shuold run roughshod over the land without regards to other living creatures.

And I'm not talking about risking your life to save a pet, with the possibility of dying. I'm talking about a Sophie's Choice situation, where you and your pet are being held hsotage and the captors say to you, one of you leaves and one of you dies. You're teling me yo would say, "Take Fido"!? Man, that's just nuts.

Another thing that bugs me is people who say they like animals more than humans, becasue animals are "pure" and innocent. Bullshit. Animals are simple, they don't talk back, they don't inconvenience you with opposing views, etc. THAT is why you like animals, they're easy and relationships with humans take work. Ugh.

Humans are the most noble creatures on earth. We live with the knowledge that one day we will die, yet we create art, music, architecture. We form governments in the attempt to make life as good as possible for as many people as possible. Many times we fail and many times we are cruel. But I'll take the beautiful complexity of humans over animals any day.

DAAAHH!!! Don't know why I feel like ranting today.

Okay, now you're suggesting, essentially, that one parents' perspective is somehow the same as another parents' perspective. I would be willing to bet if you asked ten different parents who'd also had pets for their opinions about pets versus kids, for example, you'd get ten different answers (certainly more than one or two). The point we're trying to make is that every INDIVIDUAL situation is different. You may have been a childless pet owner, but you weren't SHAWN, you were YOU. YOU are not SHAWN. SHAWN is not YOU. Until you have stood in her EXACT shoes, had her EXACT life experiences, how can you know how SHE feels about ANYTHING? The logical fallacy you're guilty of here is sweeping generalization...that all childless pet owners feel love in the same way, that all parents feel love in the same way, that all parents with pets feel the same way, which is ludicrous. It's silly, because love is an emotion, it's subjective, you can't really measure it the way you can measure objective things like speed, weight, currency, ect, etc, etc. The way each person feels emotions is shaped by their own collective life experiences, and since each person is different, each person feels emotions differently. To say that you know how a person feels because you've been a "childless pet owner" and they've been a "childless pet owner" is ludicrous. You can't just stick everybody into a basic category and expect them all to have the same opinions and feelings about things. Human emotions are more complex than that.

Yes, this is silly, really. How Shawn, or I, or anyone else for that matter, feels about their pets has absolutely no bearing on how you feel about your kids. Or your pets. Like I said, it's like the whole "sanctity of marriage" issue. Her feelings have no bearing on you, so why get irked about them? Just accept that people are different and move on.

Just to clarify, I started typing my post before Jimbo, Shawn, or Sac posted their most recent (just for perspective).

Also Sac, you are entitled to be offended by whatever you want to be offended by. Trying to impose your views on others, though, is another story. Kinda like anyone who tries to force their religious, political, or other views on other people.

First, let me say I've been searching for an email address to take this off poor Jimbo's blog page. Can't find one--feel free to use mine if you like.

I see our misunderstanding. Hon, I am not equating children with pets. If that's your assumption, it is wrong. I am certainly not equating *your* children with my *pets.* Let me see if I can make this really, really clear.

1) I cannot now, nor will I ever be able to, have children. This includes adoption.
2) I have pets.
3) *I* love *my* pets as much as I would likely love a child.
4) This may be in lieu of loving a child, I don't know. Since I'll never know, it's rather a moot point.
5) This isn't a competition. My pets are not competing with my children, or anyone else's. I wouldn't expect you, for example, to save my pets life instead of your child's or something.

There is no comparison in any of those statments between children and animals (pets or otherwise). What *is* being discussed are my personal emotions about *my* pets. If I said: "My pets are better than your children because...," then *that* would be a comparison. If I said, "Your child is just like my dog because..." then *that* would be a comparison. You're taking something personally that just isn't. It may offend you that I love my cats that much, but I am not sure why it would. The capability to love something that much in and of itself should be a good and positive thing. Pehaps you think animals unworthy of that kind of love, but I disagree. Because I cannot have children, I should never be able to experience this type of love and closeness? That kind of thinking would be incredibly selfish.

Whether I would say "kill me instead of Fido" depends on a lot of things, and they have nothing to do with who I love more. I have a family to support, and to care for. If I knew they were going to be taken care of and that my demise wouldn't scar them for life, yes, I'd probably say "kill me instead of Fido." Now, this is partly selfish. If I knew I'd condemed my pet to death, I'd have nightmares forever--seriously. I had a REALLY shitty life for a good part of my 31 years, and yet I still have bad dreams about my dog (long dead now) being abused. Not dreams about myself and all the horrible stuff that happened when I was younger--the dog. As I said, maybe I am just overly empathetic. Seein anything in pain is heart-wrenching for me (unless it's the asshole in the article that started this whole pose--he can writhe in the pits of hell for eternity and I'd get pay-per-view coverage if it was available).

And, I never said I like animals more than people. I don't *not* have children because I like animals better or something. For now, I'll assume that part of the rant was just getting stuff off your chest and not directed at me, personally. That said, some people prefer easy, so they may like animals better. What you or I think of it doesn't necessarily make it any less true. Some people also prefer the Internet to real people. Again, you and I might find it odd, but that doesn't mean it's not how they feel.

"For those of us who will never have children, I can assure you pets engender the same feelings."

"and, yes, I absolutely compare my feelings for my pets to feelings about children."

Those statements are clearly comparisons between pets and children. That offends me and I gave reasons why. I'm not trying to impos anything on anybody, just disagreeing.

And I will bet you one thousand dollars, seriously, that you would not find ONE parent who had pets before having kids, who would say those two experiences are anything even remotely similar.

Interestingly, this whole arument has given me some insight into the people screaming about "the sanctity of marriage" with regards to same sex marriages. I understand them, now, but still totally disagree with them, as I have no desire to impose my value system on anybody else.

Gee, I learn something new everyday.

Actually, let me retract that, as that would be comparing humans to animals, which I disagree with. If you also disagree with this, then you can't possibly think that loving a pet and loving a child is the same thing, or even equal. In other words, if you get mad at people like Rick Santorum, who compared loving homosexual relationships to beastiality, then you agree with me somehwat on the pet issue. Animals are different and, yes, of lesser concern tham humans, to us at least.

Sorry, jimbo.

"For those of us who will never have children, I can assure you pets engender the same feelings."

This compares FEELINGS. This does not compare children to animals.

"and, yes, I absolutely compare my feelings for my pets to feelings about children."

Again, this compares FEELINGS, not children and animals.

*MY* feelings about *my* pets. What is so hard to get about that? And why do MY feelings about MY pets offend you? I so don't get it. It doesn't offend me that you love your children.

And again, you're missing an entire segment of the population--those of us WHO WILL NEVER HAVE CHILDREN. These are not feelings we express in lieu of loving our kids or something. We won't "Change our minds" once we have children--because we won't have children. Geez.

And no, I don't agree with people who equate homosexuality and beastiality. I love my pets, I don't "LOVE" my pets. Very different thing. I am not even sure how this fits into this conversation.

And yes, I can still think loving a children is, for some people, equally as powerful as loving a child. For those people who are parents, possibly not. For those of who are not and never will be parents, it can be. It isn't, I am sure, the same feeling. Again, I don't love anyone or anything in exactly the same way. That doesn't make it less deep.

RAAAAAAAH!!!

everyone quit bitching, it's jimbo's rant, he's done ~ you all be too!

:P~

i'm gonna agree with tassy, and not just cause i want to get in her pants.

we're done here.

I was done yesterday. I probably should have been done *posts* ago sine it was clearly going nowhere, but it had been a bad day. Heck, even my porn sites were bad yesterday. When your daily free porn sucks, you know it's a bad day.