MONEY MORAL DILEMMA: Should Anne put the animals down?

pippitypip wrote: »

In which case, if you take your own advice, that people are entitled to their own opinions, isn't Enchantica entitled to the opinion that it's wrong to put an animal down in this scenario?

Absolutely, I am all for open debate and of posting of one's opinion and at no point have I called for this thread to be locked or deleted and suggested my opinion is the only one.

I agree with Martin that this is certainly a worthwhile discussion to highlight the options to people in dire financial straits who have pets, but I also agree it should have been worded better, "to kill or not to kill" (paraphrasing "Should Anne put the animals down") isn't a helpful debate at all and preys on people's sensitivites. imho, it's almost inevitable that at some point this thread will need to be closed because of offence caused.

pippitypip

I think people are spending too much time trying to debate the wording of the question rather than looking at the underlying issue for discussion.

Yes their are animal charities as has been pointed out countless times already, but the animals in question are old and in need of medical treatment. I for one can see issues in trying to rehome a sick elderly donkey that will come complete with extensive vet bills. Also pet euthanasia is a legal and valid option, but some on here seem to feel this compares with killing a child.

It's disappointing that people seem to get 'upset' when offered the opportunity to debate something with a bit of substance and would rather have a happy fluffy discussion about should Tina buy the blue shoes or the green ones...

Can I just ask if any of the people here, who are saying how many shelters and charities will always help, ever donate to or help those shelters or charities?

Please remember they are usually totally dependent on help and donations from the public to keep running, especially the small localised ones. Perhaps a timely reminder to give a little even in hard times?

Clive_Woody wrote: »

...... but some on here seem to feel this compares with killing a child.

It's disappointing that people seem to get 'upset' when offered the opportunity to debate something with a bit of substance and would rather have a happy fluffy discussion about should Tina buy the blue shoes or the green ones...

For some people, their animal is their child.

Others believe they have no right to end the life of another living thing, no matter what it is.

So personally I can understand the comparison.

As for the debating opportunity, if this was anywhere other than the MSE Arms, I would agree it would make for a provactive and interesting discussion. This isn't 'that' kind of site though, as can be shown by the amount of deletes usually required here.

claire5005 wrote: »

Enchantica, save your breath he is just winding you up. You will not win because he will argue black is white if necessary. I am with you 100% and struggling with a disabled GSD but I will never give up on her. Keep up your good work and ignore the plebs

If you are referring to me then I can assure you I am not on a wind up, but simply trying to stop Enchantica from derailing this discussion by claiming hers is the only option.

I hope this is clear.

Clive_Woody wrote: »

Indeed, but for others it is simply a pet and they make no claims about it having equal rights to that of a human.

Does that make their opinion less valid?

No, not at all. I was simply offering a reply to your earlier comment.