Animal Charities - Do you give to them?

perri winkles

recylingbin wrote: »

People who give to animal charities are selfish imo.

Or bitter because someone has caused them pain so they have turned to animals to show them love guaranteeing that they won't get hurt again.

Or both.

That's actually the most ridiculous thing i've seen so far on this thread!!

Becuase I like animals, I've been hurt in the past? I rely on them to give me love? What a load of crap.

I'm not even going to argue with you on it, or give you reasons as to how wrong you are. Not worth the time to be honest.

recylingbin

perri winkles wrote: »

That's actually the most ridiculous thing i've seen so far on this thread!!

Becuase I like animals, I've been hurt in the past? I rely on them to give me love? What a load of crap.

I'm not even going to argue with you on it, or give you reasons as to how wrong you are. Not worth the time to be honest.

That's ok.
Ignore humans.
Tell your cats about it. They'll understand.
They get you.

AssaultedPeanut

Funny how the the people who don't give to animal charities because they think animals are useless or undeserving of help, are the ones who keep cracking stupid jokes because "wahwahwah you don't agree with my opinion".

Yet the "nutters" who are bitter and twisted and talk to their cats (apparently) are able to hold a proper argument and debate their points without lame "jokes"....


On topic: I give to both charities. I love animals and don't see why they shouldn't get our help. If I think a charity is deserving, whichever it may be, then I will give what I can. But like someone else said, animal charities don't get any other help from the government or otherwise, so I will always check my pockets for cash when walking by an animal charity

Sizzler

Apart from that lad Mutley & Poochy who did a cameo in the simpsons for an episode there ain't many dogs I know who can talk so I would choose an animal charity everytime.

Speak to any person who works in the ISPCA or in one of the pounds and it might change your mind somewhat, dogs, cats, horses etc getting treated abysmally :mad: All charity's are obviously good by their very nature but as a few people have already said, animal lifestyles are a byproduct of human behaviour and if someone just happens to be a c*nt and doesn't give a toss the animal will suffer, its only right theres people there to help and fair play to them.

liah

JayeL wrote: »

Animals are neither innocent or guilty, they're not capable of being so. They're just animals. And they don't rely on us at all, there's just tons
of people out there who want them as pets (enforcing on these animals an artificial reliance on humans) and project their human morals on non-humans.

You obviously don't know much about animals if you think they don't rely on us.

Only certain breeds and certain animals in the domesticated world would be able to survive now without any assistance. We've evolved alongside them for so long and done so much interference with their natural state that we've forced them to rely on us.

Toy dog breeds like chihuahuas or maltese would never be able to survive if someone just abandoned them. They're too small and weak. Giant breeds wouldn't survive, they wouldn't get enough food and they have a lot of health issues. Hell, most normal dogs wouldn't be able to survive now as we've shaped their diets and ruined their natural immunities. Purebred dogs would have a massively decreased life span. Mutts would be most likely to survive, and even then, it's not hugely likely.

Cats, well, cats are cats. They're hardy. So they'd mostly be alright as a collective species, but it doesn't mean that individually they wouldn't need our help.

Horses have ridiculously delicate immune and dietary systems and unless they're a wild breed to begin with wouldn't have a hope. Not in a million years.

If they don't rely on us they will go extinct. If everyone just up and set their pets free, they would die. They're not used to being without us. We've spent too long together and shaped their evolution far too much for it to be reversible now. With domesticated animals it just doesn't work like that.

Besides, we rely on them, and take them for granted. Some provide billions of people with food. Others provide billions of people with happiness and joy. Others still are used in in hospitals for mental health purposes and for the blind as guide animals. We've even used them as war props, like the anti-tank dogs in WWII, attack dogs in general. We use them for testing our medicines and our hygiene products. And these are just their modern uses.

They do a lot for us, put up with so much abuse, and don't ask anything in return. They've ensured our survival as a species to this point, and yet you think they're lesser than we are and that we don't owe them anything? We owe them everything.

I don't understand why some people are so utterly selfish and have no sense of compassion or empathy for other things that feel pain just like we do.

plein de force

i love animals so i try to give to them if i have some spare change

but i'd be more inclined to give to a cancer charity myself as i did had a family member who died at a young age from it so it seems more deserving in my eyes

SEPT 23 1989

I always give a few quid to the donkeys

Irishcrx

I'd give to an animal charity before I'd give money to junkies who have made their own bed.

Some people hate animals and wouldn't see why they need help, some like me love animals and have several themselfs and see how loyal they are, how loving and realise that through our own faults we have put them in situations where they are in need and give something back.

RichTea

perri winkles wrote: »

I ONLY give to animal charities.

Why only animal charities though? It's not as if the Irish Cancer Society or others are out to get animals.

liah wrote: »

I would if I had surplus income, over an adult human charity.

animals are the least deserving of the abuses they receive and the situations they end up in. They don't hurt us (excluding the incredibly small minority, who are often ruined by us humans in the first place) or abuse us or show us anything other than devotion and loyalty, and we as a species have consistently spit their complete, utter trust back in their faces.

Adult humans I've a lot less sympathy for. I would still donate if I was well off, but if I had to choose between an animal one and a human one? Yeah, animals hands down, thanks. They've fúcked me over an awful lot less, got me through an awful lot more, and are just, imo.. more deserving of help.

There are people starving and dying. I can't understand how you can prioritise giving money to help abandoned dogs instead of funding a well in some African village.

rantyface

But what about all the thousands of animals that are slaughtered for food all the time? Why do dogs and cats get such preferential treatment?

Is it simply because they are pets and people have an irrational emotional response to them suffering or being put down?

Can anyone please explain?

And why would you give money to a dog charity when it means that lots of animals have to die to feed the dog? Why are dogs so much more important than herbivores?

I don't think anyone agrees with animal abuse here, just against silly inconsistent pet lovers who kill other animals for no good reason.

RichTea

rantyface wrote: »

But what about all the thousands of animals that are slaughtered for food all the time? Why do dogs and cats get such preferential treatment?

Is it simply because they are pets and people have an irrational emotional response to them suffering or being put down?

Can anyone please explain?

And why would you give money to a dog charity when it means that lots of animals have to die to feed the dog? Why are dogs so much more important than herbivores?

I don't think anyone agrees with animal abuse here, just against silly inconsistent pet lovers who kill other animals for no good reason.

Never understood that either. Double standards ftw.

StormWarrior

The only charities I give money to are those for elderly war veterans. I firmly believe that all animal charities should be forcibly closed down. Animals that aren't wanted should be put down, it's a bloody waste of money to keep them in shelters and try and rehome them. I don't donate to overseas charities as it's fuelling the vicious circle, give them money so more will live, reproduce more, and carry on overpopulating the world with destitute peasants. If I was dictator of the world, I would order that crop sprayers be filled with a chemical that sterilises people, and I would have them flown over all third world countries, sterilising everyone there. I also don't donate to childrens' charities as I hate kids, and the little brats probably brought their problems on themselves by their bad behaviour anyway. We should institute a one-child policy immediately.

rantyface

Was that a bad attempt at irony?

Explain why dogs have rights and cows and bunnies they eat don't.

toiletduck

This thread reminds me of the old chestnut "We spend X amount on space research, people are dying..." It's not an either/or situation! You can give to both! And just because you give to one over another, doesn't mean you're uncaring about the others issue.

Personally I'm glad that there are animal charities and I know of some great work. But I'll give to a human one over them everytime and make no apologies about it.

Whispered

Personally, I'd be very very careful of what charities I give money to. A very good friend of mine lived in various parts of Africa for a year as an aid worker. The corruption is so bad that when she came home, she cancelled her DD's with all but ONE charity.

Now she's not mean, she brought a few thousand with her to pump into local projects. But coming home she realised that most of the money is taken at a local level. For instance, the director of the local orphanage dressed up "like a pimp" with a car (in a region where decent cars are rare) while the kids get one meal a day and no schooling because a teacher "couldn't be afforded".

Or a local builder provider who charged a certain amount per brick for the first half of a building project, then, when it was aparant the project was close to completion, tried to up his prices tenfold. (something along the lines of a brick going from 10p - £1, only in their currency obviously).

That of course is no reason to not give to charity, but I hope people are careful about who they give to.

With the animal charities, I am actively involved and can see exactly where the cash goes. (There are some animal charities which are best avoided). I know that the volunteers work tirelessly 24/7 while keeping down jobs and looking after families. It is very demanding work and there is always more to do.

I think it's wrong that people question that while they donate a few euro a month or whatever.

Whispered

rantyface wrote: »

But what about all the thousands of animals that are slaughtered for food all the time? Why do dogs and cats get such preferential treatment?.

You could have a whooooole other thread on that (actually I think there was one recently)

liah

RichTea wrote: »

Why only animal charities though? It's not as if the Irish Cancer Society or others are out to get animals.



There are people starving and dying. I can't understand how you can prioritise giving money to help abandoned dogs instead of funding a well in some African village.

I never said only animal charities. I'd donate to children's charities. Or any charity that funds the helpless or those without a voice.

Adults can get themselves out of situations. They have a voice and a fully-formed brain. As for the African village thing-- I'm not going to get into that. Suffice to say it's not something I'd feel comfortable donating to.

RichTea

Four legs good, two legs bad!....

liah

rantyface wrote: »

Was that a bad attempt at irony?

Explain why dogs have rights and cows and bunnies they eat don't.

Who on earth said only pets have rights? As far as I'm aware the thread is about animal charities, not dog charities. The term "animals" does tend to encompass anything. To be honest, it looks like you're a vegan looking for another argument or to "expand our minds" with your knowledge about the abuses in the food industry. 99.9% of people are aware of these abuses. This thread isn't about that either. It's about whether or not you donate to animal (not just dog) charities, and why/why not.

Whispered

RichTea wrote: »

Four legs good, two legs bad!....

Oh no - you get much more in donations if you say the dog has only 2 legs.....:p

RichTea

helena.ryan wrote: »

Oh no - you get much more in donations if you say the dog has only 2 legs.....:p

:eek:

aDeener

whens the next PETA convention?

Whispered

aDeener wrote: »

whens the next PETA convention?

FYI most animal charities are not happy to be associated with PETA.

EDIT: woooo name changed!

Gang of Gin

Onesimus wrote: »

but we should always make sure we are not putting them before people.

Should we? I think we can be perceived something verminous when in my own dark-hearted thoughts. Mere infestations. And we wince at the thought of rodents and parasitic creatures - look at us sometimes.

sheesh

It does not really matter which type of charity you give to.

Irishcrx

rantyface wrote: »

But what about all the thousands of animals that are slaughtered for food all the time? Why do dogs and cats get such preferential treatment?

Is it simply because they are pets and people have an irrational emotional response to them suffering or being put down?

Can anyone please explain?

And why would you give money to a dog charity when it means that lots of animals have to die to feed the dog? Why are dogs so much more important than herbivores?

I don't think anyone agrees with animal abuse here, just against silly inconsistent pet lovers who kill other animals for no good reason.

Because dog is a mans best friend :cool:

brummytom

Whispered wrote: »

So people who help animal charities are nutters but because you give a few pence every now and again and spend a day on a stall or fundraise in school I can't dare question that. Do you know how prissy the phrase "don't you dare" sounds btw . FYI most people in school are involved in charities in some way.

No, most of my charity work is outside of school, I wasn't including any done in school because that's to be expected. I don't care how it sounds.

Like I said, I give similar amounts of money to both, but more time to animals. Who are you to question that? Why would you even want to question that? Shouldn't the title be "Charities - do you give to them?"

I wanted to see other people's opinions on this particular topic, and I have.

StormWarrior

sheesh wrote: »

It does not really matter which type of charity you give to.

Because they are all a bloody waste of money, and your cash is better off spent down the pub.

rantyface

liah wrote: »

Who on earth said only pets have rights? As far as I'm aware the thread is about animal charities, not dog charities. The term "animals" does tend to encompass anything. To be honest, it looks like you're a vegan looking for another argument or to "expand our minds" with your knowledge about the abuses in the food industry. 99.9% of people are aware of these abuses. This thread isn't about that either. It's about whether or not you donate to animal (not just dog) charities, and why/why not.

No I'm not vegan or anything like that. I just dislike hypocrisy. One person on the thread said "who says humans are above animals anyway", which really encompasses what giving to animal charities is about.

Most people say humans are above animals. Anyone who eats meat, uses medicine, uses cosmetics, supports cancer research, wears leather believes that humans are above animals.

A token gesture of a couple of thousand euro a year to keep some donkey alive is riduculous when we kill animals constantly because they taste nice, because they annoy us when they're in our house and because it's essential for our health to test chemicals and drugs on them.

If you could convert two people to veganism you'd probably save more cutesy wutesy animals than you could with your entire life savings.

*Unless you're really rich and they didn't eat much meat to begin with...

AckwelFoley

Yes, i would give occasionaly o animal welfare charities.

Why?

You see, we are human, animals are animals. Humans are cause of most of animals problems, starving strayed dogs, neglected donkeys and raped sheep.

We therefore have a duty to these animals as humans to try to fix what or fellow scumbag humans are responsible for.

PETA, on the other hand are 98% fcuking idiots 2% misguided souls

starbelgrade

rantyface wrote: »

No I'm not vegan or anything like that. I just dislike hypocrisy. One person on the thread said "who says humans are above animals anyway", which really encompasses what giving to animal charities is about.

Most people say humans are above animals. Anyone who eats meat, uses medicine, uses cosmetics, supports cancer research, wears leather believes that humans are above animals.

A token gesture of a couple of thousand euro a year to keep some donkey alive is riduculous when we kill animals constantly because they taste nice, because they annoy us when they're in our house and because it's essential for our health to test chemicals and drugs on them.

If you could convert two people to veganism you'd probably save more cutesy wutesy animals than you could with your entire life savings.

*Unless you're really rich and they didn't eat much meat to begin with...

The same could be said of all charities really - a token gesture to keep a starving kid alive for a few more months, doesn't really address the root problem. If anything, it just makes it worse.

Whispered

snyper wrote: »

Yes, i would give occasionaly o animal welfare charities.

Why?

You see, we are human, animals are animals. Humans are cause of most of animals problems, starving strayed dogs, neglected donkeys and raped sheep.

We therefore have a duty to these animals as humans to try to fix what or fellow scumbag humans are responsible for.

PETA, on the other hand are 98% fcuking idiots 2% misguided souls

I was reading thinking that I have rarely seen a post by snyper that wasn't in some way depraved..... then I got to the sheep bit

MickShamrock

I don't give money to any charity.

perri winkles

RichTea wrote: »

Why only animal charities though?

I mean if people are collecting on the street, I tend to only give to animal charities, as most of the ones out there would be ones I'd be familiar with.

I've volunteered in Sierra Leone and have given money to the sisters who work there. I'm very wary of charities that are said to help 'Africa'.
Half of it goes on administration costs.

perri winkles

recylingbin wrote: »

That's ok.
Ignore humans.
Tell your cats about it. They'll understand.
They get you.

:rolleyes:
That's exactly why I couldn't be bothered getting into a discussion with you about it.

FYI, I have dogs not cats :cool:

shurl

The only two charities I would/regularly do donate to is the ISPCC and the ISPCA.

The way I see it is that these are the two groups/species of our society who have no control over their fate.
That fate is usually decided by those who should know better.

Might sound harsh but I can't see the point in donating money to those who more then likely (granted not all!) have decided to screw up their lives and continue to do so!

S.

wtgorilla

brummytom wrote: »

I know I might be attacked by a few of the animal-loving nutters people here, but is it just me who finds animal charities pointless?

I was just in a shop, with a woman collecting for some dogs home, standing in front of a community noticeboard with a poster about a fun run for Breast Cancer; I couldn't help but think, 'why would anyone give their money to a bunch of bloody dogs when there's people suffering a lot more?'.


Does anyone agree or am I just a heartless bastard?



Also, I'd class a charity for 'dogs for the blind' as a charity for people, not animals

Think about it this way: - Anytime you give to a charity that (actually) helps animals then you'll be doing something good, or a good.

Can an injured animal find its' way to casualty! The answer is no, by the way.

Don't think about the person holding the pot, just think how that donation could actually help save an injured animal. Or one that has been so mistreated it is close to death. Donations does makes a difference.