Next Up: Kaos Needs a Home
Posted Monday, February 19th, 2007 by nycgadgetgirlI got a call awhile ago from the transporter that dropped Kaos with her foster family. They will send pictures later. Just now, I got an email from the foster mom..
We have KAOS and she is a very sweet dog. She does listen to commands like sit, no and she loves affection! She came into the house and just ran around looking and sniffing. I will keep in touch and Please let me know when you have a permanent home for her.
and she sent PICTURES!
And, while we’re here, I missed an IM on meebome while I was out running some errands, so I’m going to answer it now…
meeboguest209093 asked
"hey. i didn’t understand how did the dog get to Florida if it was yours? and why can’t you take it back?"
The answer is contained in my blog, but a synopsis is…. Kaos was never mine in the sense of being my pet. Kaos belonged to a homeless man in my neighborhood. Myself and a few friends helped him take care of her and then flew them to Miami (where he had family) back in November, because they wouldn’t have survived a winter on the streets of NYC. Benedict - her companion - has disappeared and the shelter called my vet (from her rabies tag) and the vet called me because their records showed her as "mine" since I took her in for her exam and vaccinations. I still don’t know what happened to Benedict, but I feel responsible for Kaos and I know what a wonderful dog she is, so I’m doing everything I can to save her. Unfortunately, I can’t adopt her myself, because I already have two dogs (one more than allowed) in my apartment!. I hope that answers your question meeboguest209093 and please visit again. 
Update (4:18pm): The foster just called and apparently Kaos has a cough, so she may have picked up kennel cough at the shelter. She said she’s a real love. Whenever they sit down she runs over and puts her head and their lap and stands there to be petted. Awwww….
Update (5:16pm): Added a fourth picture from Kaos’s foster family. Gotta love those ears!
February 19th, 2007 at 5:54 pm
[...] As I mentioned before, go to NYC GadgetGirl and let JG know what you want to donate, and how. And even better, if you’re interested in providing a forever home to this sweet, affectionate, and well-trained baby, say so. Kaos deserves a home where she will be cared for consistently, and with love. No one can tell you better how extraordinary this dog is than JG; she’s had the pleasure of seeing her soft eyes in person. Kaos is very people-oriented and wants nothing more than to please. Need proof? Go see the photographic evidence- it will melt your heart. [...]
February 19th, 2007 at 6:01 pm
I just want to hug her. She has such a sweet, sweet face.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:19 pm
Jenna,
I am so happy to hear of this good turn of events for Kaos. My only question is do you know if she’s housetrained? I’m worried that she’s not because she’s been a homeless dog on the street. Keeping my fingers crossed!
February 19th, 2007 at 10:27 pm
I am the foster parent of KAOS and let me tell you she is the sweetest friendliest & most affectionate dog! She will make a great companion for someone. She loves to be pet and snuggles next to me on the couch. She knows the commands sit, stay, NO (tried to chew my slippers) and loves to run and fetch. I wish I could keep her but it is impossible so I would like her to go to a good home. She is a GREAT Dog!!!
February 19th, 2007 at 10:58 pm
Kristine - It’s doubtful that she’s housetrained, since she’s never lived in a house. I’m guessing she’ll train fast though, especially if she’s crate trained. Jeanette can tell us more after she’s had her a couple days. Are you interested in adopting her? On second thought… I should have your email address from your comment. I’ll email you right now!
February 20th, 2007 at 12:32 am
Instead of spending all this time and money to save an animal, wouldn’t it have been better to funnel those resources into finding Benedict, the human.
I’ve just never understood the anthropomorphizing of dogs and find it curious that someone who’s obviously as generous and kind-hearted as yourself would focus that goodness on beasts rather than on man.
February 20th, 2007 at 12:51 am
Hi Chris. I have actually been trying to find out what happened to Benedict and until tonight, didn’t have anything to go on. Luckily, I now have the name and location of the shelter he was in, so I’m going to call them tomorrow. I am actually quite worried about him because it is very, very unlike him to not take care of Kaos.
Wanting to save Kaos has nothing to do with anthropomorphizing her. It does have to do with respect for life though (any life) AND the fact that both myself and my daughter have a connection to this dog.
Additionally, Kaos did not CHOOSE the situation that she was in. I can tell you, from speaking with Benedict numerous times, that he did, in fact, choose to live the life he is living. Helping him isn’t really an option. He’s actually made it very clear to my friends and me in the past that he didn’t want anything from us, but he was willing to accept help taking care of Kaos when he needed it.
I do have a soft spot for dogs, but not to the exclusion of humans. I don’t see a problem with caring for the condition of humans AND canines. I choose my causes though, and Kaos happens to be one of them.
Trust me, if a person and an animal (even a dog) were about to get run over by a bus, I’d save the person. (Unless of course, the person put the dog there and intended for them to both be killed. Then I’d probably let the person make his own choices and save the dog… which didn’t have a choice.)
February 20th, 2007 at 1:35 am
That bus scenario perfectly illustrates what I’m getting at. Choosing to save the life of an animal over a person, because you consider the qualities of the particular person undesirable, is something I just don’t understand.
I do pro bono public defense work when I can, and it’s the most demoralizing thing because I really feel the cultural lionizing of animals is sapping our compassion toward other humans. It’s so easy to love something that’s cute, obedient, and can’t talk back or disagree with us.
February 20th, 2007 at 8:19 am
It is me foster Mom, and all I can say is that I agree with Jenna. A human is capable of helping himself if he wanted to (evidently Benedict didn’t want the help) but an animal does not have that capability, so why not help them? They are still a living creature God created.
What is the saying.. “DOG is MANS BEST FRIEND”
Last night was our first night and other than her nasty cough she did great! She DOES seem to be housebroken (there was no mess this morning)and she loves to go outside and walk.
Right now she is laying on the couch like a “Queen”.
I am glad there are people like Jenna,Anne and all the others who have a heart for animals.
God Bless you ALL!
February 20th, 2007 at 10:24 am
Chris, I think you misunderstood my bus example. It would have nothing to do with judging the qualities of the person. I would not hesitate to save the person before the animal UNLESS the person was committing suicide and trying to take the dog with him. My example was about CHOICE on the part of the human and LACK OF CHOICE on the part of the dog. That’s all. (And, of course, the example is philosophical. I can’t say for sure how I would react if presented with this situation in reality.)
PS My dog disagrees with me all the time, but I love him anyway.
February 20th, 2007 at 10:25 am
I think Chris is too sarcastic
though I do understand what he said.
A long time ago, in a cold night, I saw the middle aged homeless woman with four small puppies.
I got furious because obviously she was using those puppies as baites.
But later I realized that I had paid my attention only to puppies, not to her at all.
Hmmm, something was wrong with this picture.
But still I believe what Jenna is doing now is 100% right.
Because those animals cannot help themselves, humans can(well, most of the times, at least less helpless than those animals) as she says.
It is easy to criticize about someone like people who try to help animals in New Orleans or in Africa like “why don’t they spend their time and energy to help people instead of animals? There are so many people are suffering or starving there”.
But someone has to help animals too, at least I believe so.
I do not know why Benedict left Kaos.
But it was his choice and I know he can survive by himself if he choose to do so.
And nobody will try to put him to sleep.
Chris, people you are supposed to criticize are those who are not trying to help any humans or any animals, not someone like Jenna who are trying to help one helpless animal.
Yes, too many of us are not doing anything.
Sometimes we feed much better food to our animals than the food people in developing countries are eating.
Yes, something is definitely wrong with this picture but we are the ones who created this, not animals did.
So should we feed much worse food to our animals?
Unfortunately it is not that simple.
Again I do understand your thought but I think you are criticizing a wrong person.
February 20th, 2007 at 11:08 am
blue - You expressed several things I have wondered/worried about also. When I consider the number of people and animals in the world that are living in substandard conditions, being abused, starving, etc… it is overwhelming. Instead of giving up, I try to
- provide the best that I can for my family (including my pets, much to the chagrin of people like Chris apparently)
- have a positive (or at least not negative) impact on all of the people that I come into contact with in my life, and
- do what I can to help the people/animals/causes on which I choose to spend time and effort.
I agree with you that one set of needy shouldn’t suffer simply because another set suffers. Everyone has differing views and priorities. One of my priorities happens to be companion dogs needing rescue.
February 20th, 2007 at 11:42 am
Thank you for saving Kaos’ life. Almost all dogs that come out of that shelter have kennel cough. Foster Mom, you might want to take him to a vet for antibiotics and a cough suppressant.
February 20th, 2007 at 11:49 am
thanks juJuBear.
Jeanette took Kaos to the vet this morning. She got a couple injections (cough suppressant and antibiotic) and went home with antibiotics also.
February 20th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
I’m not jumping on you for rescuing the dog, if that’s what you wanted to do; it’s assigning that act the tag of charity or selflessness or heroism that’s concerning me.
This is a dog. You are compassionate, kind, and predisposed to help out the less fortunate. When I observe an individual like you commit precious hours of their lives to something so trivial, commit money which could be used to advance human interests, I think it’s high time to take that individual aside and argue the point. Take this in the spirit of fraternal concern in which it’s intended.
I’m also not an animal-hater and grew up with dogs, cats, horses, and cows—-all of which I tended daily and treated kindly. So, it’s not animals I hate; it’s waste. Which is what this rescue operation was—-pure waste. Wasted efforts, wasted energy, lost time—all to move some soulless, uncomprehending creature. As if that’s worth anything.
Just looking at the comments on this blog chills me to the bone because among all the clearly thoughtful, educated people posting here the consensus seems to be that saving the life of a dog is just as noble as bettering the lives of humans.
February 20th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
I know you aren’t jumping on me Chris. I don’t feel like I’ve been attacked. Don’t worry. Actually, I’m a bit uncomfortable with some of the praise people have been sending me in comments and email… I just did what I needed to do for a living creature that I feel responsible for. That’s all.
I think you and I just have to agree to disagree on whether this was a waste. We each have our reasons for feeling the way we do, and, luckily, we’re all entitled to our individual opinions and beliefs.
February 20th, 2007 at 4:21 pm
No, it’s not that easy, and it’s not a matter of individual opinion. Something’s rotten. There’s some fundamental shift that has occurred and has changed the way humankind perceives itself in a very subtle, insidious way, and it’s made you–an intelligent, upright woman–identify with an animal, ascribe human characteristics to it. That’s so troubling to me.
Remember in “Moby Dick”, when Starbuck criticizes Ahab for obsessing over the whale, and he says: “Vengeance on a dumb beast that simply smote thee from the blindest instinct! Madness! To be enraged with a dumb thing, Captain Ahab, seems blasphemous.” So too to be enamored of one.
February 20th, 2007 at 7:38 pm
I disagree, Chris… it _is_ a matter of individual opinion, and frankly, for the more humane among us, it’s a moral imperative. If we don’t speak for the animals, who will? Would you have them all revert to running wild on the street, unvaccinated, unsheltered and unloved? Should we continue to allow 1000s of animals a day to be euthanized in shelters because they’re “just dumb things”?
Personally, I think that part of what makes us human is our ability to care for other species. I don’t care to give up my humanity, so I’ll continue to put time and money into helping animals when I can. Does this mean I don’t also work to help humans? No. I’ve volunteered with local aid groups and helped with food pantry drives and Toys for Tots… I sent donations for the Hurricane Katrina victims and to Americares for use in aid in foreign countries in need. I don’t see that the abilty to help humans negates the ability to help animals… I can have concern for my fellow human beings _and_ be concerned for the welfare of our fellow travellers on this earth. (A reasonable definition of animal welfare comes from Wikipedia… “Animal welfare is the viewpoint that animals, especially those under human care, should not suffer unnecessarily, including where the animals are used for food, work, companionship, or research.”) Kaos falls into that category… an animal under human care… specifically, an animal whose care had in the past been helped along by Jenna and her friends. Does our responsibility to another being stop just because they move out of state? Somehow I don’t think so.
So I’ll join Jenna over in the camp of people agreeing to disagree with you. Frankly… I prefer the company here… the people who think that animals _do_ matter, and who know that they _do_ understand when they’ve been rescued from a bad situation.
February 20th, 2007 at 8:59 pm
Thanks for contributing to the conversation, Debbie, but I’m a pretty poor candidate to suggest as lacking humanity. I think you’re just trying to vilify me as a way of explaining my aversion to animal ‘charity.’
I’m a lawyer and farmer who grew up with humanitarian parents, and it’s rubbed off on me. I’m heavily involved in two charities–one that sponsors polio vaccines to children in Africa and one that collects and sends eyeglasses to the homeless and funds literacy programs for them. I’m on the board of directors for my local Habitat for Humanity chapter, and I help build one house per year for a needy family. And by “help build” I don’t mean I just donate money; I mean, I’m one of the people hammering the thing together. I’ve stumped for the Empty Stocking Fund since I was in college, done pick-up and delivery of donated food for a soup kitchen, and I’m in the “Big Brother” program at a local orphanage.
My “little brother” is eight and was systematically abused by his meth-addicted mother since babyhood and has terrible emotional problems as a result. He was assigned to me, I was told, because three foster families have throw him out, no one else in the Big Brother program would have him, and I was the only volunteer big enough to restrain him when he “throws fits.” (And I can tell you that his fits are so violent that I, at 6’3”, have real difficultly getting him back under control.) I’m not yet thirty, but I go to his parent-teacher conferences and in all his eight years, I’m the only person that’s ever given him a birthday party.
That brings me to the crux of my issues on all this. It’s easy to help a dog. They’re pack animals who are instinctively submissive to the alpha who feeds them and humans–who know this–still somehow mistake the slavish devotion of the species as love. A few words I’ve seen on this blog describing Kaos have included sweet, affectionate, people-oriented, friendly and “well-trained baby.” That’s just how the domestic dog’s mind is wired to behave–it has little do with “personality” and even less to do with any imagined deeper relationship or allegiance you may think your dogs feel toward you.
In contrast, there’s nothing easy about helping my little brother. This kid–and myself, and people in general–is none of those words used to describe Kaos. He’s nothing you’d see and want to save, because he’s willful, combative, manipulative, and ungrateful. In other words, he’s very, very human.
The problem is, beyond the mere folly of going to such great lengths to save the immaterial life of Kaos or any animal, I think there’s a great danger in it as well. I think people are more inclined now to be dismissive of the suffering of other people and more likely to sympathize with domestic animals because they’re cute and obedient. Several people, including two members of the foster families who’ve dumped him, have indicated my little brother doesn’t deserve help because he “chooses” to behave the way he does, as if that bad attitude indicates that his is a life that doesn’t merit aid. And as another illustration, my little brother’s orphanage was recently denied a local grant, which instead went to buy ‘developmental toys’ for puppies at the animal shelter. The puppies, I guess, provided a better photo-op for the benefactor than did the ruffians at the boys’ home.
February 20th, 2007 at 10:04 pm
The very idea that you think rescuing a dog is easy demonstrates your ignorance on the subject, Chris. Kaos may be a sweet tempered dog but this is surely not the case with every animal out there that rescuers work with ever day. And despite the fact that you have taken a handful of comments from a handful of people and decided it has affected the thinking of humankind as a whole - you are (to me) sadly mistaken. It is still difficult as hell to get anyone to care about anyone but themselves these days, and if you’d ever tried to beg someone for an hour of their time to save the life of another living being in an animal rescue setting, you’d see that. And somehow I think be satisfied.
If you find our charitable feelings and efforts towards one dog “disturbing” I find your flippant use of such words as Wasteful and Worthless in reference to another living creature as the same. You may certainly take the tack that humans are above all other living things, but we cannot simply disregard everything else on earth in the interest of bettering human lives - by completely disregarding the welfare of everything else we bring about the deterioration of ourselves as well. Stop caring about the over population problem now rampant in our cities and soon it will become unmanageable - no one will be able to walk anywhere without fear of feral dogs, no one will be able to leave trash unattended and believe it safe from feral cats.
If nothing else, be satisfied that these people are showing compassion for something besides themselves and those that it is easiest for them to do the same for (read: family and friends, favored familiars). It is a rare trait these days. Perhaps when those who are aware of their hearts and willing to use their heads and hands for the betterment of someone or something else become the majority rather than the minority, we can work towards a better balancing act of the charitable causes. Certainly, as has already been pointed out, the only limit on what a person can donate is placed by their ability and will to do so - not isolated to a single cause.
February 20th, 2007 at 10:26 pm
Chris, buddy, if you think it’s easier to step outside yourself and your own species, and extend a hand of help to another living thing, I challenge you to get out there and do it someday.
Furthermore, if you believe than any life is immaterial, worthless or a waste, then you, sir, are no humanitarian, nor are you a shining example of a human being as a species. You are, however, a perfect example of everything you seem to think is wrong with the world.
Compassion is not a single species trait, and does not only extend to your own kind. Please, if the best you can do here is tell people that they’re wasting their time saving a life, go find another place to step upon your pedastle and feel superior about your daily life and what you do.
And last, but certainly not least, it’s not your place to tell anyone else what cause to support. I’ll thank you to keep it to yourself.
February 20th, 2007 at 11:13 pm
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/01/06/60minutes/main665263.shtml - Dogs detect cancer
http://www.redcross.org/news/ds/0109wtc/011002dogs.html - Therapy Dogs Lift Spirits at Ground Zero
http://www.avma.org/onlnews/javma/dec01/s121501m.asp - Dogs help at Ground Zero
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16952774/ - Dog saves crash victim
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=News&id=3053529 - Stray dog saves abandoned baby
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/01/02/world/main664271.shtml - Dog saves child from Tsunami
We have herding dogs and livestock guardian dogs who farmers and ranchers rely on; guard dogs, both trained and not, who protect their families with their lives; police dogs; service dogs who help the handicapped; cadaver dogs who bring closure to heartbroken families; search and rescue dogs who rescue humans lost on hikes and runaway children; bomb detection dogs; therapy dogs that help the eldery, hospitalized and mentally handicapped; dogs that alert to drops in blood sugar levels or oncoming seizures and so much more. Dogs fill many jobs we cannot do ourselves or cannot do as well as they can. There are many people alive today who owe their life to a dog and many more whose lives are greatly improved thanks to a dog.
Immaterial? Hardly.
February 20th, 2007 at 11:23 pm
But, surely, Saigh and Blaidd, you can agree with me that humans are unique among other living things. Right? That there is some quality that a human life possesses that is absent from all other things—-whether that quality be reason, or, if you’re religious, the presence of a soul or a part or element or energy that lives forever, or the ability of scientific thought, or rationalizing, or linguistics, or an appreciation of a future, or artistry, or the quality of empathy. Right? So, that even though we have all the physiological characteristics of being just a common animal, there’s something about us, something extra that makes us more than that, that makes us greater than that?
And if you agree with that, can’t you see how I would suggest that it’s the interest of humans which should be our focus and that our interest in the baser animals should be limited to their maintenance and care, certainly, but that Herculean expenditures of time and money are best reserved for the aid of people?
I don’t feel superior to anyone, but I do feel it’s my place (or obligation, more accurately) to argue points with other people who have charitable natures, like the author of this blog. If everyone’s supposed to keep their opinions to themselves and no one is ever supposed to present differing viewpoints, what’s the point of being able to speak? Nobody on here appears to be a child; I think everyone can handle a civil conversation about charity just fine.
February 21st, 2007 at 12:04 am
Chris, for me, it’s as simple as this.
Pets make people’s lives better. As companions, as partners in animal-assisted therapy (great examples here: http://deltasociety.org/download/BeyondLimits06-07IA.pdf), as police or rescue or drug- or bomb-detection dogs, and in a million other ways.
And since pets make our lives better, I’m going to do my damnedest to make their lives better. Sometimes that means helping a local stray find a home. Sometimes it means helping with a rescue transport to get a homeless animal to rescue, or to get an adoptable animal to its forever home. And yes, sometimes it means spending a long weekend helping with emails and phone calls to get attention to a plea like Jenna’s for Kaos, and chipping in to help with the vet bills.
I don’t, in any way, mean to diminish the value of the work you do with kids or other “people-based” charities. At the same time, nothing you can say will diminish my belief in the rightness of working with animal-based charities.
February 21st, 2007 at 12:04 am
Different does not equal greater, Chris. I wonder how much you really know about animal intelligence and behavior. Did you know that dogs have shown the ability to reason? They clearly have abstract thought, and show the ability to fast map - something that was previously thought to be a human only ability. In fact, they show the ability to fast map on a depth equal to children. Fast-mapping is considered one of the most essental building blocks to language learning.
Many species of animal have shown a sense of self, something else that was thought only to be a human trait. And this isn’t relegated to just chimpanzees, elephants or dolphins. These same species have shown remarkable traits of empathy - I’m sure you’ve heard of elephants and their sense of death and ability to mourn.
And unless you can build skyscrapers, paint a world class portrait or find a cure for cancer, well, I’m afraid, in this line of logic, that would make you less important and worthy than those who can. And that’s without mentioning those human beings who have none of those qaulities of reason, sense of future, appreciation of art or the ability of scientific thought. They, too, would be less worthy, if everyone were to abide by this line of logic. Fortunately for you, this isn’t the case with everyone, and I’m sure you mean something to someone out there, despite all of your flaws.
And even if I were the kind of person who followed your line of thinking, and believed in it, nothing about your insistence that saving any life is a waste of time would make sense to me. Nothing. It’s nonsensical, and hints of perhaps some kind of dislike for any creature that isn’t of your species. Perhaps you were scarred as a child or perhaps you simply have no love of non-human animals. Whatever the case may be, Chris, you would not be where you are today were it not for the domestication of dogs and various other animals. I dare say that there would be no art to appreciate, no science to be thought of and no lingering need to think of the future if it weren’t for the dog, which made it possible for man to evolve into what he has today. You owe your life to these animals, whether you like it or not.
“can’t you see how I would suggest that it’s the interest of humans which should be our focus and that our interest in the baser animals should be limited to their maintenance and care, certainly, but that Herculean expenditures of time and money are best reserved for the aid of people?”
No, no I can’t, Chris. Because, simply put, there is no reason you have given, and no proof that you can offer, that supports your claim that people are more deserving of compassion and rescue than any other creature on earth, and that we should reserve it all for us as a species and none for them. Simply being a human being, and feeling as though you’re better and more deserving, doesn’t cut it.
And pray tell, who set this authority upon you, that you feel it’s your obligation to tell anyone who has saved a life that they are wasting their time? It is absolutely never appropriate, your opinion or not, to tell someone else where and how to spend their time and energy in saving a life or supporting a cause. Never. You are not the authority, you are not the great white hope, you are not any god or all knowing, all powerful being on this earth. You are a man. Simple as that. And while you can state your opinions and provide reason for them, you have gone far beyond that here. You have stepped upon your pedastle of righteousness and so-called higher humanity to tell everyone here that they are wasting their time on something that simply doesn’t not deserve their energy and does not deserve help. All the while claiming that you are a humanitarian. I am all at once confounded that you cannot see the irony and perhaps hypocrisy in this claim, and saddened that someone who has done such a marvelously wonderous thing as save a life is being treated and talked to the way you are treating and talking to her. You sit there and point your finger and condemn someone else’s actions as better reserved for something else, and all the while, tell everyone here how good of a person you are and how much time and money and effort you spend in helping people. If ever there was a more hypocritical situation, Chris, I do not know of it.
I dare say, as well, that to many people, your efforts are naught but a waste of time. After all, the human species causes most of it’s own pain, sorrow and problems. What else can be more of a waste of time than trying to offer aide to a life that only throws it back in your face on purpose? That causes all of it’s problems itself, that is often so useless that it cannot even prevent problems for which it has every means to do so?
A waste of time indeed.
February 21st, 2007 at 2:23 am
“Oh, Blaidd, come on, now. You don’t believe a word of anything you just said. You’re just being contrary for the sake of contrariness. This is going to be a little cumbersome, but I’m interspersing your words with mine (in quotes), the better to respond.”
Different does not equal greater, Chris. I wonder how much you really know about animal intelligence and behavior.
“Undergraduate degree from Furman University in biology. You?”
Did you know that dogs have shown the ability to reason?
“True, animals are capable of basic reasoning, in that if I were to put a wall in front of one, it could probably figure out how to back up and go around. Yes. And they can be trained to do repetitive tasks or signal when exposed to a particular stimulus. Yes. I meant higher reasoning. You know—philosophy, debate. But that’s neat about the fast-map, and I’ll be waiting with bated breath for your dog to begin speaking to you, if it doesn’t already.”
Many species of animal have shown a sense of self, something else that was thought only to be a human trait. And this isn’t relegated to just chimpanzees, elephants or dolphins. These same species have shown remarkable traits of empathy - I’m sure you’ve heard of elephants and their sense of death and ability to mourn.
“What are elephants? We didn’t cover that in class.”
And unless you can build skyscrapers, paint a world class portrait or find a cure for cancer, well, I’m afraid, in this line of logic, that would make you less important and worthy than those who can. And that’s without mentioning those human beings who have none of those qaulities of reason, sense of future, appreciation of art or the ability of scientific thought. They, too, would be less worthy, if everyone were to abide by this line of logic.
“When I named all those nice qualities about people, I was referring to humanity as a whole. We are unique in that we all as a group have the capacity to cultivate any of those traits. Of course, I never meant that any one human is any better than another human. Rather, I meant that any one human is better than any other animal.”
Fortunately for you, this isn’t the case with everyone, and I’m sure you mean something to someone out there, despite all of your flaws.
“Shucks, Blaidd. That’s sweet.”
And even if I were the kind of person who followed your line of thinking, and believed in it, nothing about your insistence that saving any life is a waste of time would make sense to me. Nothing. It’s nonsensical, and hints of perhaps some kind of dislike for any creature that isn’t of your species. Perhaps you were scarred as a child or perhaps you simply have no love of non-human animals. Whatever the case may be, Chris, you would not be where you are today were it not for the domestication of dogs and various other animals. I dare say that there would be no art to appreciate, no science to be thought of and no lingering need to think of the future if it weren’t for the dog, which made it possible for man to evolve into what he has today. You owe your life to these animals, whether you like it or not.
“Oh, I like animals plenty, but in their place, as subservient to man. Not carted around like the Prince of Sheba to the neglect of a needy person.”
can’t you see how I would suggest that it’s the interest of humans which should be our focus and that our interest in the baser animals should be limited to their maintenance and care, certainly, but that Herculean expenditures of time and money are best reserved for the aid of people?
No, no I can’t, Chris. Because, simply put, there is no reason you have given, and no proof that you can offer, that supports your claim that people are more deserving of compassion and rescue than any other creature on earth, and that we should reserve it all for us as a species and none for them. Simply being a human being, and feeling as though you’re better and more deserving, doesn’t cut it.
“You don’t believe this. You know you’re a life form superior to a dog. I hope. If you don’t, you must have terribly low self esteem.”
And pray tell, who set this authority upon you, that you feel it’s your obligation to tell anyone who has saved a life that they are wasting their time? It is absolutely never appropriate, your opinion or not, to tell someone else where and how to spend their time and energy in saving a life or supporting a cause. Never. You are not the authority, you are not the great white hope, you are not any god or all knowing, all powerful being on this earth. You are a man. Simple as that.
“I think everyone has a duty to engage everyone else in thoughtful conversation, and this little exchange *almost* rises to that level.”
And while you can state your opinions and provide reason for them, you have gone far beyond that here.
“I’ve gone beyond stating my opinion and providing a reason for them here? Are you sure? I believe stating my opinion and providing support is actually all I’ve done. I mean, this is a blog. What other expressionistic flexibility do I have, really?”
You have stepped upon your pedastle of righteousness and so-called higher humanity to tell everyone here that they are wasting their time on something that simply doesn’t not deserve their energy and does not deserve help. All the while claiming that you are a humanitarian. I am all at once confounded that you cannot see the irony and perhaps hypocrisy in this claim,
“From dictionary.com: hu•man•i•tar•i•an:
1. having concern for or helping to improve the welfare and happiness of people.
2. of or pertaining to ethical or theological humanitarianism.
3. pertaining to the saving of human lives or to the alleviation of suffering: a humanitarian crisis.
4. a person actively engaged in promoting human welfare and social reforms, as a philanthropist.
5. a person who professes ethical or theological humanitarianism.
Hmm. What’s the common denominator? See anything about helping animals in there?”
and saddened that someone who has done such a marvelously wonderous thing as save a life is being treated and talked to the way you are treating and talking to her.
“Just because I advance a different point doesn’t mean I’m being abusive. This is just an open dialogue.”
You sit there and point your finger and condemn someone else’s actions as better reserved for something else, and all the while, tell everyone here how good of a person you are and how much time and money and effort you spend in helping people. If ever there was a more hypocritical situation, Chris, I do not know of it.
“Again, I’m not condemning anyone. I just recognize another person with a charitable disposition, and I’m trying to persuade her to direct that nature away from animals and onto people.”
I dare say, as well, that to many people, your efforts are naught but a waste of time. After all, the human species causes most of it’s own pain, sorrow and problems. What else can be more of a waste of time than trying to offer aide to a life that only throws it back in your face on purpose? That causes all of it’s problems itself, that is often so useless that it cannot even prevent problems for which it has every means to do so? A waste of time indeed.
“Dear Lord, substitute my little brother’s name in place of “human species” in that preceeding paragraph and you’ve just stated, word-for-word, what his previous foster families told me about him. You have a lovely view of yourself and your fellow man, and you must be great company in person. Are you on Zoloft, Paxil, or Prozac?”
February 21st, 2007 at 3:56 am
Oh you silly thing, you. I never once said I believe humanitarian causes are a waste of time. Note the words “that to many people.” I’m sure you only accidently missed them, however, and wouldn’t be the kind of humanitarian to ignore them in favor of not only insulting another human being, but further driving home just how special you are for helping one out and not helping some filthy creature of another species. For shame.
And I’m glad you posted the definition of the world for all of us to see. It helps illustrate the difference between you and a real humanitarian. Someone who is compassionate towards people, and their causes, not someone who belittles them, talks down to them, and tries to dictate what they should do with their lives.
And now that you’ve gotten the attention you so desperately craved in two different blogs, are you quite done, sir? The fact remains, some of us can actually open our minds to something beyond ourselves and work for more than one cause, and our opinions and beliefs will not be changed by the likes of you. So, well and grand, you’ve stated your opinion, you’ve given a good ol’ college try at making people do what you want them to, but it’s not working, and it isn’t going to work. Whatever else you’ve done here, you’ve amused some, insulted many, changed nothing and only harmed your cause. Now you’re just wasting your time. Might I suggest adopting a dog? I hear they go a long way to alleviating loneliness and the need for attention. The lowly, subservient beings that “god” created them to be, of course.
February 21st, 2007 at 4:07 am
Oh, come on, man. Don’t take yourself so seriously; I was just messing with you a little to match the tone you took in your last post. Levity—-another good human trait I left out.
February 21st, 2007 at 4:19 am
I see it did not take long for mature debate to begin to erode. Chris, it isn’t good form to bring personal attacks (i.e. insinuating a person has low self esteem and requires medication) in debate. As far as I’m concerned, once personal attacks enter debate the debate is over and the person attacking has lost that debate.
Your attacks do nothing to help your cause — in fact, they do great harm.
Your words, while disappointing and disheartening, have inspired me. I will continue to donate my time and money to animal rescues and organizations for there are far too few persons willing to do so.
Thank you for strengthening my convictions.
February 21st, 2007 at 4:24 am
I only match what I get, Chris. Once you resort to being unable to support your claims beyond “because it’s just the way it is” and insulting people, you’ve lost. It’s over.
You’ve harmed your cause by coming here. You’ve certainly not made yourself look like the humanitarian you claim to be, and at this point, there’s no one out there who’d take you seriously. It’s unfortunate, because there are many causes this world could pay more attention to, but by trying to convince anyone that they should focus on one thing and only one thing, you’ve only managed to prove to those people that they should focus harder on the causes they fight for. If nothing else, I congratulate you for that. Animal rescue could use more help.
February 21st, 2007 at 4:28 am
P.S. Chris, Do you by chance work for Willkie Farr and Gallagher?
February 21st, 2007 at 5:44 am
I’m sorry, Roz. I thought Blaidd and I were just bantering back and forth. He was picking on me and I was picking on him; I didn’t mean that to be a substantive part of the conversation. But, with all due respect to you, I don’t believe your personal feelings about me as a speaker invalidate my point. Just because I vear off topic to razz a guy doesn’t mean I “lose.” (Though I’m not that clear on how you can lose a discussion. Has someone been keeping score?)
Blaidd–No, I have a real estate practice of my own down south. I did the corporate law thing in Virginia for a while, but it was the most boring thing I’d ever experienced. I was in merger and acquistions.
February 21st, 2007 at 12:15 pm
[...] I noticed on an online friend’s blog that a heartwarming effort has raised an issue that has me sort of surprised. [...]
February 21st, 2007 at 12:27 pm
I believe humans are smarter than any other animals.
But I do not think that means humans are the great or greater being.
We keep destroying this environment for our greed.
We are smart enough to know how to do it.
But if we keep doing this, eventually we all have to die with it.
Then what kind of great being are we?
We live in the wealthiest nation and its president is opposed to Kyoto protocol and said “It will hurt our economy and the Global warming is not scientific.”
We elected him twice.
Yeah, we are the great being.
On the other hand, the nature is designed for co-existing.
all animals know how to co-exit.
They do not consume others more than they need.
Yeah, we are the great being.
What we all really have to learn about is the human EGO like yours.
I simply wonder why you are doing that here.
Spending your time and energy to try to destroy animal-loving people’s value, idea and identity.
I say, usually this kind of behavior comes from his own stress, insecurity, some sort of mental trauma or sexual problems
(hehehe, last one is just a kidding).
After reading all these, I am more interested in that.
February 21st, 2007 at 1:48 pm
I didn’t read anymore past this sentence and Blaidd & Saigh are much more articulate than I am but this - this is the train of thought that makes me believe that you, Chris, don’t really care what any animal lover has to say:
“When I observe an individual like you commit precious hours of their lives to something so trivial, commit money which could be used to advance human interests, I think it’s high time to take that individual aside and argue the point.”
Saving and helping dogs (or any animal) is not trivial. Not to me, not to Jenna, not to Jenna’s sister or Blaidd or Saigh or the thousands of people that all of us together know in the rescue/transporting world. There are enough people in this world that only care about humans and not animals. I’d rather spend my time and money on animals. And it is heroic. And damn important that there are people like us. I care a lot more for dogs than people.
February 21st, 2007 at 3:29 pm
Prajantr–Thanks for your consideration.
Blue and Chile–I don’t understand the bitter opposition on this board toward the view I’m espousing. There’s nothing radical about saying human are different from and superior to lower animals. It’s the basis of our civilization.
And, Chile, you seem plently articulate and thoughtful, and I don’t believe for a second that you care for dogs more than people. If you were stranded at sea in boat with a dog and another person, and one of you had to be sacrificed as sustenance for the other two, would you nominate the dog, the other person, or yourself?
Chile–I consider myself an animal lover, too. I have two shepherd dogs and five horses.
February 21st, 2007 at 3:48 pm
I say, usually this kind of behavior comes from his own stress, insecurity, some sort of mental trauma or sexual problems (hehehe, last one is just a kidding).
“Blue–Well, first off, ouch. Second–it’s the mental trauma. All those years of football as a youth.
Third, ‘why I’m doing that here’: I read this blog; I like it; there’s a section set aside on it for comments from readers; I had a comment I wanted to share; I posted it in the comment section; and here we are.”
February 21st, 2007 at 4:21 pm
“I don’t understand the bitter opposition on this board toward the view I’m espousing.”
Chris - I can’t speak for everyone but I would be more open and understanding of your view if you weren’t so demeaning towards the animal savers. If you didn’t belittle us for how we spend our time, our effort and our money. I can match you item to item for volunteer and charity work but I go above and beyond for animals. And one of my dogs is living proof of that. If you were more accepting and understanding of how most of us feel about dogs (or any animal), then maybe we’d be more willing to discuss with you. But when you come in here and spout that saving Kaos was wasted time/money/effort and that dogs are soulless, my own hackles will raise. I dare you look into my dogs’ eyes and tell me they are soulless. And who are you anyway to declare they don’t have souls? I believe *all* animals have souls but not all humans have souls.
And yes, I do care more for dogs. I have yet to meet a dog who has let me down, loved me conditionally,judged me, shunned me or betrayed me. As for your scenario, if I was in a sea on a boat and depending on who the other person was with me…99% of time I’d save the dog. Maybe that makes me inhuman, but I don’t care. I don’t feel that I’m superior to any animal just because some god along the line gave me the ability to walk upright.
I’m an animal lover. But I’m also an animal champion and that’s where you are much different from us. And I do it for the dogs, I do it in honor of my two dogs and all dogs that I have had the opportunity and pleasure to know and love.
February 21st, 2007 at 4:35 pm
Wow. Chile. I was just writing a response to Chris and you basically covered everything I was going to say!
Chris, you would have received a much more positive response if you had avoided using phrases such as “something so trivial,” “some soulless, uncomprehending creature, and “the immaterial life of Kaos or any animal.” Insulting something I care about (animal welfare) - and assuming that is all I care about - hasn’t won you any fans or friends here.
I am in awe of the commenters on this post… so many well-spoken, intelligent, and compassionate people. Thank you so much for sharing in the conversation.
However, I believe the conversation has reached the end of its usefulness, therefore, we’re done.
Y’all come back now, y’hear?