There are people in this thread who are confirming that people care more for the dog. If you think those people don’t exist, I’m not going to have to provide proof. You’ll see it in the coming days and weeks.
It just depends on what perspective you choose. Obviously human life is more significant than dog lives, but a lot of people see dogs similar to children. A life of love and innocence that does not deserve to know violence. It’s not so much comparing the value of lives but the value of innocence.
Animals don’t understand our language, they don’t understand our actions and they don’t know the consequences… So the US citizens have had so damn much time to defend democracy… but they only started when fascism was enforced and it was really already foreseeable where it would end…
With flowers against batons, tear gas, weapons in general.
As soon as the Republicans start the large-scale purge it will.
With flowers against assault rifles, tanks, etc.
So my sympathy is very limited.
Personally, I’m not sure what the point of this statement is. It’s not about whether or not it’s right or wrong. Let’s just for the sake of argument, assume that it’s objectively correct. So what? How is saying this, or identifying generically that some people inevitably have their priorities mixed up, a meaningful contribution to the topic?
At best it comes across as cynical. And then you’re thinking “it’s not cynical if it’s true”… But we’re all thinking that it’s cynical because it lacks pointed meaning.
It’s like a teenager got on the Internet, read something, missed the point entirely and instead says “but what about this indirect incorrectness thing that is otherwise unrelated” for no reason other than to be edgy or sound smart.
So it’s fucked up. Four people were shot by a terrorist, two of them have died, and there are a significant number of people who didn’t care until they learned a dog was also killed. That’s fucked up, not because people care about a dog, but that they didn’t care about the people.
Frankly I didn’t expect saying so to be met with such hostility. That bothers me almost as much as the lack of respect for human life.
It’s fucked up, but there will be people more upset that he shot a dog than that he shot four people, killing two of them.
Edit: are you downvoting me because you think I’m wrong or because you think I’m right?
You brought no proof that people care more for the dog. It’s just a nonsense post looking to talk shit about people.
There are people in this thread who are confirming that people care more for the dog. If you think those people don’t exist, I’m not going to have to provide proof. You’ll see it in the coming days and weeks.
One person said that. What a miserable cynic
It just depends on what perspective you choose. Obviously human life is more significant than dog lives, but a lot of people see dogs similar to children. A life of love and innocence that does not deserve to know violence. It’s not so much comparing the value of lives but the value of innocence.
Animals don’t understand our language, they don’t understand our actions and they don’t know the consequences… So the US citizens have had so damn much time to defend democracy… but they only started when fascism was enforced and it was really already foreseeable where it would end… With flowers against batons, tear gas, weapons in general. As soon as the Republicans start the large-scale purge it will.
With flowers against assault rifles, tanks, etc. So my sympathy is very limited.
Personally, I’m not sure what the point of this statement is. It’s not about whether or not it’s right or wrong. Let’s just for the sake of argument, assume that it’s objectively correct. So what? How is saying this, or identifying generically that some people inevitably have their priorities mixed up, a meaningful contribution to the topic?
At best it comes across as cynical. And then you’re thinking “it’s not cynical if it’s true”… But we’re all thinking that it’s cynical because it lacks pointed meaning.
It’s like a teenager got on the Internet, read something, missed the point entirely and instead says “but what about this indirect incorrectness thing that is otherwise unrelated” for no reason other than to be edgy or sound smart.
So it’s fucked up. Four people were shot by a terrorist, two of them have died, and there are a significant number of people who didn’t care until they learned a dog was also killed. That’s fucked up, not because people care about a dog, but that they didn’t care about the people.
Frankly I didn’t expect saying so to be met with such hostility. That bothers me almost as much as the lack of respect for human life.
Ok and? It’s clear you don’t even know what your own point is. That’s why you get down voted.
Sounds like work for your therapist.