KenTheDude wrote:In some cases, I will actually say yes. I'll give you an example. Which would you rather give your money to? a. Someone that is continually beating the system and mooching off of the goverment merely because they are too lazy to get a job and they feel like everybody owes them some for free. OR B. A domesticated animal that depends solely on humans for food/shelter, etc. I know I'm mixing apples and oranges because you mentioned poor starving children, but I've seen too much corruption in "human charities" to feel sorry for most of them anymore. Starving children is a great cause to want to be a part of. So like I said, you do your thing, I'll do mine. Not sure how you can say that giving MY money would better to starving children. Better is all relative to what you have a passion for.
Case in point, last time I checked, (a few years ago), the head of the Houston division of the United Way made more than $300,000 a year. At that time, that was more than the President of the United States. WHY? So when you donate $10 to the United Way, how much of that $10 is going towards the salary of that executive instead of true people in need?
This is, as you say, apples and oranges. This is the same reason I'm pissed that everyone's gonna sit there and abate their consciences by blindly giving money to "Haitians."
I still don't see how this makes animals more valuable than humans. I'm all for not helping people that scam the system/are lazy, but helping children is never a bad cause. Animals objectively cannot be valued more than humans... no way.