It was very disappointing, to say the least, to find our friend of many years, wanting to send his pet dog to the gallows. I don't know what prompted him to do so. My gf said she doesn't know or if she did, she's not telling. All I know is that SP got married, and moved from a house into a private condominium a few months ago. He used to live in the house with his parents, sibling & partner and the dog. And suddenly, the dog which he had for 3 years became an excess to be gotten rid of?
This morning, my gf sent me an SMS, crying and implying that there was no hope to help the dog. Immediately, I sent an SMS to SP asking why he's not keeping the dog in his private apartment, but I got no reply. While this is a private matter for SP and which I have no business in, I felt that the least I can do for the dog was to find out why, and it is up to SP to explain, that is, if our friendship still mean anything at all. We haven't seen much of SP or spoken with him, since he started dating early last year.
I still can't believe that our friend, a well-educated professional, would send his pet dog to be killed, which is against my principles. The thought is repulsive, and right now, I'm not sure I want to associate with such a person. Would you continue to be friends if you found out your friend is a pet killer?
Atom Feed (xml)
10 comments:
If a friend could hold you to ransom in a sense - which tantamounts to an emotional blackmail - by questioning your friendship, I'm afraid he's no friend after all. If I were him, I would instead tell you that this is after all a private family matter AND that I appreciate you respect my wishes.
By asking if our friendship still means anything (HUH?! is this a translation from Chinese?) it's almost akin to what George Bush uttered: "Either you are with us or against us." No logic there.
If it were any other private matter, I would definitely respect his wishes. However, this particular private matter involves killing an innocent dog - a sentence which the dog does not deserve, and which goes against my principles. I don't think I can "be with him" on this if it means having to put aside my principles for a moment, because that would make me a hypocrite.
And I'm not sure if I can still see him with due respect, because by sending his pet dog to the SPCA, he IS taking the easy way out (for him, that is), when he has the means to do the responsible thing and try out other options without killing the dog.
He should have tried to put the dog up for adoption first. I'm sure there would be people that he could have asked first. Asking you to do it for him is like asking you to participate in the killing of the poor dog. I have no respect for people who ask others to paricipate in this way of possibly he wants absolution for killing, private matter or not private matter. It seems he has the means to keep the dog so there is no excuse.
I search "myself" and right now, I can only send metta or loving-kindness to the dog. I hope its suffering is short and that it will reborn into a "better" state of existence, by holding onto the memory of its "master's" affection rather than hatred. But I think it will be in a state of fear as the lethal drug is being injected into its vein.
Intellectually I know that I have to send metta to SP as well but right now, it would be hypocritical if I say I do and I can. I am trying very hard to remain neutral.
I know there will always be suffering in this world, no matter how hard we try to change the external. We have to find the courage to continue acting on this conviction of a kinder world for all sentient beings.
Sometimes we don't know friends as well as we think we do.
No, I can't be friends with anyone who would kill a living thing just for convenience. Except insects, especially musquitos. And I'd let them know why. I'm fortunate in that our local shelter is "no kill". I us the quotes because, of course, there are the injured, ill and maimed who cannot be saved.
San: SP didn't ask us to send the dog to spca, and i don't think anyone of us with the right decency would agree to that! My gf is trying to help as she was the one who first found the mongrel 3 yrs ago. Subsequently SP adopted the dog.
Apparently, the dog has a biting problem and that is gonna seal his fate, although he still has 2-3 wks left before being sent to spca. My hubby met the dog perhaps 1.5 yrs ago (or earlier), and even then, he found it quite territorial. As dog owners know, highly territorial behaviour is likely to mean biting. I feel sorry that the dog was never sent for obedience training.
If the dog has a biting problem, adoption would not be possible then cos it would bite anyone else who tries to adopt it?
I'd need to know more of the friends' reasoning. Did something change that after 3 years with the dog, he'll give it up now? Well, mariage and a new home... I don't know what I'd do. ~ Victor's Mom
Auntie P, you asked bout [sic]. People put that when somefing is written wrong from the source, not from them. "I know it's wrong, I didn't do it." ~ Victor Tabbycat
Victor Tabbycat: Ahh...thanks so much for explaining. Your attentiveness is appreciated, since I'd asked about it on Catdonna's blog. :)
San: You're right, rehoming the dog would mean passing the problem to someone else...not good.
Post a Comment