Quote:
Originally Posted by Starina   This. Access to information. The ability to offer and discuss differing points of view without the conversation degenrating into "my-way-is-the-right-way' camps and snarky comments. |
I totally agree with this, as it pertains to ALL discussions here. We should be able to have 2-sided+ discussions without the need to weaponize our words, in my humble opinion. It's SO EASY to get your point across *without* hurting anyone...I don't know why that proves so difficult here at YT, at times.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lisaly Sorry, Jodi, this is such a low blow, and it's unacceptable to me, no matter how passionate you are. Reading this really hurt me, and it would have been the case, even if it wasn't written about such a dear friend. I guess getting your point across is more important than caring about the feelings of a highly respected, contributing member of our community. We are all infallible; I don't think anyone, including Gail, would disagree with this. She took full responsibility for Zoey's illness, and she has been vocal about it. With everything I know about Gail, I would trust my adored little girl with her anytime. Her love for her pups is truly admirable, and she epitomizes what it means to be a devoted pet owner. I am so grateful for everything she does to educate our board and to contribute to the "heart" to YT.
I believe I am a very responsible pet owner, yet I have made mistakes. We all have. I do everything I can to learn how to do the very best I can for my little one. I have spayed all of my Yorkies through the years, but I appreciate this research and all of the information shared. I hope posts like yours don't deter others from posting. I know you are passionate about dogs. So am I, but I believe it is beyond reproach to bring up something so hurtful. I love dogs, and I will strongly advocate for them, yet I also live by a code of ethics that respects the feelings of both people and animals. Gemy earned my respect long ago, and that respect deepened when she shared Zoey's story and advocated for heart worm prevention. |
I too think Gail absolutely
epitomizes a truly loving and devoted pet Mom, without a doubt.
I'll be totally honest here - I don't think Zoey should've been brought up. Zoey has nothing to do with this thread, so it
appeared as if she was being used as a dig toward Gail. I stress appeared bc I can't speak to anyone's true motives or intentions. If a correlation had to be made btwn spay/neutering and heartworm prevention as they relate to responsible owners, it could've been expressed as "Even responsible owners end up with tragic issues like cases of heartworm, unintended pregnancies, a yorkie dropped on its head, xyz example etc". I think it could have been said in such a way that was less personal. Just my opinion. Take or leave. Blah blee. No skin off my back if you think I'm a nutball.
As far as s/n - I'm thrilled that Gemy started this thread and I always think it's an important conversation. Heck, to be a huge devils advocate -- there are some that say that s/n very clearly does NOT work -- bc if it actually DID work, we would not be killing 4-6 million animals EVERY SINGLE YEAR without apparent end. There are countries all over the world who do not advocate for spay/neutering -- rather, they have the kind of respect for other living creatures that should put Americans to shame, in my opinion. The end to overpopulation is WAY more complicated than s/n our pets. Should we still s/n? Yes, we should in many cases bc s/n is an arm of the solution toward ending overpopulation...but it will never, ever be an end-all be-all solution to this problem. Not even close.
So, while I believe in s/n in most cases - I also fully support responsible ownership of intact pets whose owners prefer they maintain their natural and very important hormones. The choice to s/n or not and why/why not is a great discussion - so thanks to all in this thread
!