Ok now my previous post isnt showing up…I think there are little gremlins in my computer trying to drive me nuts. Little do they know…I’m already there…….one more time:
“Is someone who takes a cat to a no-kill shelter because they have lost their job and their home “abandoning” their cat?”
Yes.
Granted, a no kill shelter is a much better option than a death camp (kill “shelter”) or leaving a pet who hasnt learned how to survive outside like ferals, where they are without someone to care for them.
But this B.S. about “Oh, I lost my job, or home, blah blah yadda yadda, so I cant keep my cat or dog” is just a cowardly, irresponsible, excuse.
You’ll notice that these frauds arent abandoning their human kids, dropping them off somewhere, forever leaving them heartbroken and missing their family, yet they do it to their four legged babies because alot of society has a severe case of ignorance (technical term: Headupthebuttitis), in which the four legged souls of this world are considered “disposable”, whether they are murdered and thrown away in death camps, or dumped off somewhere, it is simply WRONG to violate the promise that one essentially makes when adopting a pet:
To always love them, care for them, protect them, be there for them, and to NEVER abandon them.
If you have money to afford food for your chubby kids, you have money for your cat(s), period.
I once emailed a woman who wanted to give away her cat because “she didnt have money” and reminded her that she was online, paying a monthly fee for having an online service,and that she would save enough money to take care of her cat, if she sold the computer, and thus saving on the monthly fees, and kept her cat.
She had nothing to say.
Because she knew I was right.
If you arent leaving your kids behind, dont leave your cats behind. Period.
If a hotel doesnt accept cats, dont accept the hotel, and find one that DOES accept cats. Many many do.
Adopting a cat is like giving birth: You are FOREVER responsible for your new baby.
There is a double standard that deadbeat pet parents cling to, and it is rooted in the same prejudice that shelter killing is rooted in: Speciesism.
When searching for the right answer to any question, we must put OURSELVES in the position of OTHERS (Treat others the way YOU want to be treated), and in this case, we must ask ourselves this question: “If I was in Morris’s or Fluffy’s situation, would I want my family to abandon ME?”
If the answer is “No” (if you’re honest, it IS “No”), then dont abandon your cat, because they are equally as important and precious as You, I and the rest of us.
Now, if an old 89 year old woman who is confined to a wheelchair and has degenerative
arthritis, is unable to care for and feed her cat properly, then that is a different situation, and a NO kill shelter might actually be better for the cat’s well being, even though He or She would badly miss their loved one.
But using money as an excuse for abandoning your cat or dog, while you still spend money on your human kids, is cowardly and wrong.
Bottom line: If you can take care of, and have room for 190-225 pound human family members, you can take care of, and you have room for a 10-15 pound cat.
To say otherwise is to condone abandonment.
Abandonment is wrong.
Just put YOURSELF in the pawprints of the abandoned, and tell me, how would you feel if YOUR family abandoned you?
Your cat would feel the same way.
Treat others like you would want to be treated.
Society must stop finding excuses to kill and start finding ways to save lives, and society must stop finding excuses to abandon pets, and instead find a way to keep them.
They love you, and need you.
Ask not what our pets can do for us, ask what we can do for our pets.
P.S. If I were the head of a No Kill Shelter, I would tell anyone who wanted to dump their pets off at my shelter, what I just told everyone else, but I would MAKE CLEAR that if they STILL wanted to abandon their cat, I’d glady take Him or Her and show them what having a TRUE loving family feels like….a family who will love them, like cats love us….unconditionally, forever.
“We humans could learn alot from the higher animals”
Comment by Matt — June 24, 2011 @ 8:28 pm
Matt, your arguments are simplistic and unrealistic.
First of all, it would be ILLEGAL for a parent to just “drop their kid off somewhere” and leave them behind. You CAN legally do that with an animal. You CANNOT legally do that with a child. You may believe that is wrong, but that’s YOUR value system speaking out. Whether or not YOU agree with it, the LAW grants a higher standard of protection to children than to animals, and legally, leaving a child behind is just not something a parent can generally do.
Second, a good share of the programs put in place to help those in need (homeless shelters, food kitchens, etc.) prohibit animals. If you feel THAT is wrong, you’d be in good company with many others here. But presently, that’s the way it is. And if a family in dire financial need wants to get the available help, their pets become a hindrance in this situation, so many make the decision to leave their pets at a shelter in order to obtain shelter for their children.
(And no - someone without a steady source of income cannot simply go blithely “hotel-shopping” to find one that accepts pets the same way a person with a dependable income can. The unemployed person is looking for whatever they can afford, and that’s not likely to include allowing animals. Again, if you think this policy is wrong, you’d be in good company, but so far, that’s the way it is.)
You say “Society must stop finding excuses to kill and start finding ways to save lives, and society must stop finding excuses to abandon pets, and instead find a way to keep them.” and I certainly agree with you there. Take the example of FEMA and Hurricane Katrina.
We all remember the tragic images of pet owners having their beloved animals pulled from their arms before being pushed onto the evacuation buses, and other images of owners sitting on their rooftops with the animals they refused to leave behind - hoping either for rescue or the receding of the flood before they ran out of their food and water.
Congress took note of the human cost resulting from FEMA’s inflexible “no pets” policy and passed the “Pets Evacuation and Transportation
Standards Act of 2006” and so now the FEMA policy says “The Post-Katrina Act amends the IHP provisions of the Stafford Act by authorizing search, rescue, care, and shelter of pets and service animals as a type of essential assistance to be provided after a major disaster declaration.”
In other words, in a disaster, pet owner may no longer be forced by FEMA to leave their pets behind.
It’s a start, and we need to keep up the pressure to get homeless shelters, hotels, motels and landlords to end their “no pets” policies and find ways for food providers (so-called “soup kitchens”) to accomodate pet owners without running afoul of Health regulations.
But we’re not there yet, and so in today’s world with today’s realities of life after catastrophic financial loss, families with pets are put at a MAJOR disadvantage (in addition to those they already face). Rather than having THE ENTIRE FAMILY continue to starve and be homeless, the RESPONSIBLE thing to do is to provide shelter for the pets by leaving them somewhere safe which permits the rest of the family to seek the available help and resources that are out there. That way ALL of you can survive.
And if THAT isn’t an example of “FOREVER responsibility”, then I don’t know what is.
Comment by The OTHER Pat — June 25, 2011 @ 6:07 am
No comments:
Post a Comment