Commies want to kill your dog?

[quintessentone]

No, it's a fact.
The left ... tax and spend liberals.
They think they deserve everyones money and that they know better what to do with it.
It's well known for decades.   This is not up for debate.

Of course it's up for debate.

All governments are the same and play the same schtick over and over again because they can't come up with any other way of doing it.

[DBCowboy]

I truly love dogs and also read history - came across this interesting video which is the point of the thread.



[Video: https://youtu.be/9sRGLyJQ_VI]


God knows what bullshit they're programming kids with these days but when it comes to the utterly racist 'critical race theory' I did read this new report:


New Rule: Loving Your Dog is Racist, According to the Left


Love your dog and don't swallow anything from these (well financed) race baiting grifters lol.

I love my doggo's.

They are the most loving, spoiled, protective doggo's ever!

My German Sheppherd even saved my life once.

So fuck those who say otherwise.

[ElitePlebeian]

Would you call a shelter Director a race baiting grifter too?

"Shelter director Kristen Hassen opines that Guenther “gets it right” in concluding that “racism, classism and the caste system are at the heart of the broken animal sheltering institution.” Arguing that laws to prevent mistreatment of dogs discriminate against “anyone in the US other than white, middle class and upper-class individuals,” Sloane Hawes, Tess Hupe and Kevin Morris of the University of Denver Institute for Human-Animal Connection cite the book in their proposal to relax enforcement of animal protection laws—a proposal that threatens to reverse decades of hard-won progress."

---------

Sure, love your dog but remember right-wing sources like this are trying to push a narrative.

What is her argument even? Not all races or economical classes have the same amount of pets so it must be discrimination?

And are you saying shelter directors are a special kind of people that cant be morons?

[Byrd]

I truly love dogs and also read history - came across this interesting video which is the point of the thread.



[Video: https://youtu.be/9sRGLyJQ_VI]


God knows what bullshit they're programming kids with these days but when it comes to the utterly racist 'critical race theory' I did read this new report:


New Rule: Loving Your Dog is Racist, According to the Left


Love your dog and don't swallow anything from these (well financed) race baiting grifters lol.

uh... the title doesn't match what's in that article.

The article says that the research linking poor treatment of animals and race, and as the author of the article says, this is just ridiculous.  In fact the author does a decent job of ripping the book apart.

[Byrd]

What is her argument even? Not all races or economical classes have the same amount of pets so it must be discrimination?

And are you saying shelter directors are a special kind of people that cant be morons?

It's actually (as the article says) a problem of resources.  People who are poor can't afford to take dogs (or anything else) to the vet, may not be able to afford much food, can't afford to have animals neutered, even when they really want to) -- and animal control gets called out on these cases frequently.  The book author claims that this is tied into racism but the article writer correctly says that the problem is poverty

[IdeomotorPrisoner]

I get what she's trying to do, but her logic is retarded and full of her projections on what the lower class is..

That doesnt even work in South Central LA, where if you have a house with a fucking yard, you're doing pretty good. YOU HAVE A YARD. And your dog will enjoy running around in it.

Baldwin Park? Jesus, honey. You mean between Pasadena and West Covina? Azuza and Glendora? Thats your projection of the lower class? The median home price in Baldwin Park is $600,000. (which is cheap for that area)  But I think the poor are renting.

argues that allowing dogs to sleep inside is a privilege reserved for the white and wealthy and that policies against keeping dogs chained up in backyards are intended to oppress people of color by imposing “middle-class norms of animal keeping in which companion animals are considered family and treated accordingly,” which ignore the fact that people of color “are themselves trapped in poverty, may have few options for legitimate income generation and possibly rely on their dogs for … status.”

She is very removed from how people live with their pets. Or what life in LA'S lower class really is.  Her world of projected yards everyone has or doesnt and ethnic people using pitbulls for status symbols in crazy, and I support some ideas in CRT..

But the world is Michael Vick to her.

And I can do a racism now.

Do you think these ghetto chained dogs she speaks of have the house/field thing going? Does the outside dog have a culture to not show obedience and "be a good dog" to be let inside like a white person dog, because then that makes them an Uncle Tom "house dog."

It actually reminds me of that joke by Warren Hutcherson about canned black olives vs jarred green olives being part of the hidden racist programming agenda.

[putnam6]

But the world is Michael Vick to her.

And I can do a racism now.

 Have to chime in here, Caucasian, Hispanic, and asian throughout multiple regions have all had/have dogfighting issues to a degree.

Vick's ring was fairly high-end, where one region would occasionally go to another for mega betting, etc., but it occurs all the way down to the dirt poor.

[PorkChop96]

If you can't afford a car you simply won't be able to get a car. If you can't afford a home the government will provide a subsidized one for you, if not, then the streets will be your new home. If you can't afford a child well that stops nobody from having a child and again the government will step in to assist. If you can afford to feed an animal but not the over-priced vet bills, that stops nobody from giving an animal a home and love. If an elderly person gets a pet to stave off loneliness then dies, then again the government is there for the animal (or our tax dollars are there). But this thread is about bashing minorities who are the culprits and abusers of animals, right?

Sadly, but not surprisingly, the first sentence you posted is the only one that is 100% accurate....

Some states, or localities, will give you assistance to buy a house. But, if you can't afford it, that won't last long until you get evicted or foreclosed on. 

Notice how I was using the word "I", but then again I have more common sense than someone who would say "Man, I can't afford to have this child, so I am going to have it anyway and make it everyone else's problem to pay for me to not raise this child".  My wife and I have wanted a child, but know we can't afford one. So, rather than have one and not be able to afford to properly take care of it, or make everyone else pay for it through snap or welfare, we don't have one until we can afford it. There will be those that will always make it happen without assistance from anyone else, and I applaud those people. I know several and they are the real deal. 


The mindset you, and plenty of other people in this country have, is why we have so many people that rely on welfare, SNAP, food stamps, etc. They would rather make everyone else pay for their way of life because they are too lazy to get a job or have just been raised on that mindset of "everyone else will provide for you, don't worry about anything".  Are all people on those programs the lazy POS losers that we are talking about in this thread, no. 

This thread is not about "bashing minorities who are the culprits and abusers of animals", but I'm  not surprised you view it that way. This thread is showing how anyone on the left will make anything about racism if they feel it will get them something or gain them some sort of "sway" with the minority population.

[Ray1990]

The Communists saw dog ownership as decadence basically. Kill the dogs, break the bourgeoisie... Not that peasants and farmers are all that rich other than in culture.

Capitalists think the poor shouldn't have dogs? So put them down? Going by this thread people have different opinions of what looking after an animal entails. I would say it includes vet visits and medical bills, you can be prosecuted for not getting your pets the treatment they'd need in the UK and the same goes for livestock too.

The problem with poor people having pets, especially cats and dogs is the fact they're hardly ever neutered. Cat's can devastate ecologies and packs of wild dogs need culling, one way or another your taxes will end up paying for other people's fuck ups. Apparently communism did a number on Romanian farmers too (probably everywhere tbh) where 1000s of dogs were abandoned as they forced whole communities into those tenament monstrosities. 

Idk. It's almost like the same conclusions are met by both sides of the fence here. People who don't need dogs and can ill afford them should not have them. I'd personally say nobody should ever have the right to tell you if you can have pets or kids barring obvious reasons like child abuse or animal abuse. I'd go one further and say government should probably have a hand in the welfare of animals and children since when it goes wrong it ultimately becomes a problem government and society will be forced to manage. 

That or just kill all the poorly raised animals and children, the owners too. Joking of course.

[quintessentone]

What is her argument even? Not all races or economical classes have the same amount of pets so it must be discrimination?

And are you saying shelter directors are a special kind of people that cant be morons?

I'm saying this particular Director is absolutely not a moron. Sorry for your disappointment.