Pets vs Humans Options

[queen]

this may turn into a debate topic, but for now, i think it's better suited in the lounge.

we all know people with pets, and some of us may have pets of our own. my question to you: is your pet more important than the life of a human, say like your neighbor who lives down the street?

of course i wouldn't expect you to compare your pet/s with a family member, because to some of us, pets are members of the family. but let's say you had to choose between funding a starving child on the other side of the planet vs financing your terminally ill pet's surgery, which would you choose?

i was browsing xanga, and one of the front page posts caught my attention. it was about a dog who had undergone $13g worth of surgery only to die the next day. the blogger questioned the morality in spending that amount of money on a dog, when s/he could've nourished 100+ children in a thirdworld country for a year.

personally, i would fund any surgery my dog would need. he's just that important to me.

[jaeman]

I really have to look at the options and weigh pros and cons in this situation. In general, it's really hard to make a decision involving the loss of life. Personally, the only pets I've ever had are numerous tropical fish, two turtles and two parakeets.

But that's besides the point, if the situation were between my beloved dog and a neighbor I knew next door, I would have probably chosen my beloved dog. But then, the choice varies to whom you've known the most and whoever you've been closest with.

And that's one of the attitudes some people exhibit: their mindset of animal's lives being lower than a human's life. Which totally irks me. Oh well, everyone has their pet peeves. On that note, I asked my friend this same question and he replied: "The neighbor. The dog will not be able to benefit society in anyway. This person would continue to pay his or her taxes, support the job market, and enjoy life freely, not as some person's happiness toy.

[Spirited Away]

And that's one of the attitudes some people exhibit: their mindset of animal's lives being lower than a human's life. Which totally irks me. Oh well, everyone has their pet peeves. On that note, I asked my friend this same question and he replied: "The neighbor. The dog will not be able to benefit society in anyway. This person would continue to pay his or her taxes, support the job market, and enjoy life freely, not as some person's happiness toy.

Well, I have a rebuttal for your friend.

First, let me explain that my dogs make me happy 24/7. When I'm down or stressed, all I have to do is look at them play or groom themselves and feel better. When I'm happy, I don't keep it to myself. In fact, for my oldest dog's birthday, I donated $50 to St. Jude's. For the anniversary of one of my other dog's adoption, I donated $50 to The Smile Train. This is an annual thing. I make other people feel good about themselves when I'm happy and I feel better about myself enough to where I'm confident that I benefit society, however little.

A dog isn't a toy. It's a life. However, if one of my dogs' death could save a human life, I'd would let my dog die to save that life. Human life is more valuable. HOWEVER, to say that a dog can't benefit society or that it's a "toy" is too demeaning and heartless, a comment that can only come from someone who has no love for animals.

A dog's worth depends on its human owner. If your friend thinks that a dog is useless, well, it reflects that the owner is useless to society as well, in my opinion.