Dogs are not people, does anyone else find it weird how some seem to equate the two?

[Orrex]

221. I wasn't replying to you.

So, you get upset when you feel that I've misattributed a claim to you, but when I reply to someone else, you respond by assuming that I was replying to you? Kooky.

It's clear that you're devout in your belief, so I don't think that I'm going to convince you. And just like anyone's religious belief, I don't care, nor do I see any reason to respect such belief simply because it's devoutly held. As long as someone's religion doesn't harm anyone else, it means nothing to me.

But when people assert--as many in this thread have done--that dogs are better or more important or more worth saving than humans, then we've moved into the realm of of real potential harm. That's why I keep "hammering away."

In your recent post down-thread you reveal that you would in fact save the human in preference to the non-human, and I applaud that sensible thinking. But others are less clear about it, coming up with all sorts of reasons why dogs are superior, while the people who disagree are dismissed as angry or uncompassionate or the like. That's why I keep "hammering away."


Make of that what you will. Consult your dog about it, for all I care.