You don't have enough compassion in your heart for all those things at the same time? Don't get me wrong, I'm with you on the idea that it sickens me when people grant the level of compassion to animals that should be afforded to humans alone, but I don't think we're doing one at the expense of the other.

 

I knee-jerked before I read this post first! :thumb:

If this woman's will had been carried out how would it be any different from aything Michael Vick did or financed?

 

Fighting dogs are literally tortured..hung and beaten.. to increase their aggression and train them for fighting. A mating females teeth are ground down or removed so she can be mated whether she wants to or not. I can go on. The cruelty and atrocities by the people that fight dogs is sickening and sub-human. If you want to understand why anyone would be upset about this, I suggest googling information about the dog-fighting business. Those who would do this are the lowest form of life....I don't care how well they can play a sport...they are missing a chip.

Fighting dogs is especially violent and cruel. In the end, killing an innocent thing for sport or because it's simply convenient for you isn't great, but at least the dog would've received an injection and not felt any pain.

 

Fighting dogs are literally tortured..hung and beaten.. to increase their aggression and train them for fighting. A mating females teeth are ground down or removed so she can be mated whether she wants to or not. I can go on. The cruelty and atrocities by the people that fight dogs is sickening and sub-human. If you want to understand why anyone would be upset about this, I suggest googling information about the dog-fighting business. Those who would do this are the lowest form of life....I don't care how well they can play a sport...they are missing a chip.

 

 

I get all of that but at the end of the day a human's wish to kill a dog for selfish reasons is still on the table. For me personally, I think they are the same.

Ah, leave my boy Vick out of this! He paid his debt to society!

 

 

I ain't mad at Vick and he paid his debt to society. I just feel like he and this woman are the same. I'd hope people who are/were outraged at Vick are just as outraged at this woman. There is no way her will should be honored.

I get all of that but at the end of the day a human's wish to kill a dog for selfish reasons is still on the table. For me personally, I think they are the same.

 

Philosophically maybe, but in actuality if you were kidnapped, and the kidnapper told you that he could either shoot you in the head or torture you and cut off your body parts, which would you choose. It is about that different from the dog's perspective.

Philosophically maybe, but in actuality if you were kidnapped, and the kidnapper told you that he could either shoot you in the head or torture you and cut off your body parts, which would you choose. It is about that different from the dog's perspective.

 

 

Very true. No argument there.

And good news for the dog, dog make it to the no kill shelter in Utah

 

Dog willed to die finds life at Utah no-kill shelter - Cincinnati News, FOX19-WXIX TV

What am I missing, how are the courts allowing the dog to not be put down if that is what the will states?

What am I missing, how are the courts allowing the dog to not be put down if that is what the will states?

 

I think the will had both options but the estate said it was not financially responsible to send to no kill shelter so they chose to put dog down.

I get it that pets are considered property. And when I first read about this my opinion was with the deceased's wishes. Of course the dog will miss it's owner and if the dog wants to grieve itself to death no matter what, so be it. But if the dog is a friendly loving dog, why not try to place it with a friendly loving family? Let the dog decide.

I think the will had both options but the estate said it was not financially responsible to send to no kill shelter so they chose to put dog down.

 

Didnt know that, all I had heard was the first option.

I have a problem with any pet being considered simply property of the owner. If so, if Michael Vick owned all his dogs, what is the problem with them being involved in the horrific fighting he put them in? They are his property. If he wants to kill them however he wants, it is his right as they are his property.

 

Obviously, I don't think he should be able to torture and kill his dogs. But I don't think this lady should either. If she is able to, why can't she just put down her healthy dog BEFORE she dies? Should the owner of a dog have the right to just kill it (even with no pain to the animal) just because he/she is tired of owning it or wants another one instead??

I have a problem with any pet being considered simply property of the owner. If so, if Michael Vick owned all his dogs, what is the problem with them being involved in the horrific fighting he put them in? They are his property. If he wants to kill them however he wants, it is his right as they are his property.

 

Obviously, I don't think he should be able to torture and kill his dogs. But I don't think this lady should either. If she is able to, why can't she just put down her healthy dog BEFORE she dies? Should the owner of a dog have the right to just kill it (even with no pain to the animal) just because he/she is tired of owning it or wants another one instead??

 

Exactly.

I have a problem with any pet being considered simply property of the owner. If so, if Michael Vick owned all his dogs, what is the problem with them being involved in the horrific fighting he put them in? They are his property. If he wants to kill them however he wants, it is his right as they are his property.

 

Obviously, I don't think he should be able to torture and kill his dogs. But I don't think this lady should either. If she is able to, why can't she just put down her healthy dog BEFORE she dies? Should the owner of a dog have the right to just kill it (even with no pain to the animal) just because he/she is tired of owning it or wants another one instead??

 

Sadly, yes an owner can.

Should the owner of a dog have the right to just kill it (even with no pain to the animal) just because he/she is tired of owning it or wants another one instead??

Yes, she should.