Sounds like you got that one resolved. I always found BB stores to have friendly people and was pretty sure the manager you got was the exception. I asked my wife about this (she's been with them nearly 20 years) and she didn't know for sure about any official policy, but the stores she's worked in were always dog-friendly. Hopefully corporate will communicate this down the chain.

District Manager went to Corp for me and anyone else that wishes to take their babies in. She did speak to the Manager of that store and the others in her area. There is alot more to the conversation but my fingers would not hold up and you dont have time to read WAR and PEACE.

DID I SAY ONE WORD ABOUT ADOPTIVE CHILDREN IN THE COMPARISON OF DOGS VERSUS CHILDREN??? NO!! I said you cannot compare a dog to a child! YOU CAN'T BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT A CHILD!!!

A manager of a store and also the FEDERAL/STATE/LOCAL GOVERNMENT WILL NEVER state that an animal be it dog, cat, cow, horse, whale, monkey ext. is EQUAL to a human being.

Sorry that's just the truth of it. I'm not being insensitive to people that have dogs because they don't want, can't have, or didn't have children. I'm 100% fine with that and think that's a wonderful thing. I did it myself for 2 1/2 years because I needed something to keep me from being depressed and lonely and my dogs were wonderful friends and family members to me. BUT they aren't human children. They are furry children that I love to pieces but I don't expect them to be able to go where ever I go because they aren't my children they are my dogs and not everyone on earth will see them as the family members that I see them as. I can't expect others to bend the rules because i love my dogs like family. BECAUSE they are not human children they are at the end of the day still doggies.

Please stop putting words into my mouth. you have no idea what i feel about adoption, surrogacy, or any other form of having a child outside of having a birth child. If you must know I actually have considered adopting my next child even though I am capable of having my own children because I feel that I can and should give a child a home with me and a family to love them when their birth family couldn't do that for them.

I also think surrogacy is a beautiful and wonderful thing. It's a miracle gift that some people are able to give to others. I think it's fantastic that someone is able to carry a child for another mother to love. I don't totally agree that the surrogate carries no emotion for the baby they birth. There is emotion and attachment in any pregnancy and birth, but I agree that you are not a bad person for having the strength and courage to carry someone else's baby and turn that baby over to their new mother and/or father.

ANYWAYS this isn't even about children, it's about being rude to a store clerk for telling you the rules of their store. As the front desk clerk at the local community center. We are just following the rules we are told to enforce. We don't allow dogs and until the government says that dogs are equal to children we probably won't change our rules. And we don't want to be treated nasty over asking you to leave with your dog.

{{my responses as a member}}

I really hope you didn't mean this.

My dogs don't fill a void left by children, nor do they replace children (unless simply loving them, for love's sake alone, is considered the filling of a void). While those opinions regarding voids and substitutes for children may be true for you, they are not true for others. It is wonderful that you're having a baby. However, living creatures having different meanings for all people - whether human or otherwise.

Other than one tiny thing (I think dogs are superior to humans, in spirit, unconditional love, and conduct :D!), I agree COMPLETELY with you, Brit.

Yes Yes Yes. :thumbup:

***Back to the topic, I honestly have no opinion one way or another where my dog is allowed, unless it was a service dog or therapy dog or emotional support dog. This concern is so far down the chain of priorities, I've never really thought about. I do understand the desire to have these little loves w/ you at every moment, however.

^^^^ Rachel, this is a perfect example of filling a void. Can you see that maybe your opinion about 'filling a void' with animals is your experience, and that you were perhaps projecting that on others?

Nothing wrong with that, but not everyone has a void that is fulfilled by pets. :)

Comment as a Mod now (geez, sorry for being verbose!): if anyone needs it, take a few deep breaths...this is just a discussion, not a war. :)

A lot of you are taking this statement way out of the context in which I meant it to be. LET ME REPHRASE IT HOW I MEANT IT:

I feel bad/sorry for people that want to have human children but are unable to do so. It's a sad thing to want a child and not be able to have one. PAUSE THERE....then read on to the next thought which was....sometimes people in these situations choose to have dogs rather than choose to adopt children. I totally understand and agree with people doing this because yes adoption can be expensive and a long process and dogs can bring the joy that children bring when children are not an option or even a desire sometimes for some people.

That entire sentence was not meant to flow into one long thought as it seemed like it did. It was not meant to mean that I feel sorry for people who choose dogs OVER adopting children. It was meant that I feel bad for people trying desperately to have a child and can't for whatever reasons AND that often times those people will get a dog INSTEAD of adopting/surrgogacy/other forms of having human children.

I hope that makes more sense to everyone so you stop freaking out over a misunderstood statement.

I still stand by the fact that dogs are not people so for the argument that they should be allowed in a store that doesn't allow them just because they are "like" children to a person isn't a valid excuse since currently the rules do not include those types of situations.

By void I actually mean more or less the natural human instinct to "love unconditionally" another living being (that may/may not depend on you for care). Does that sound a little less insensitive because that's more what I'm meaning here.

Dear Wylies Mom,
This is obviously a very touchie subject,I learned it the hard way last week.
Thank you for putting how some of us feel about our furbabies in such a nice way. To have them to love,just for loves sake. Our furbabies do seem to be able to love us unconditionally,where as our children will need to grow up and move on,that is how it is supposed to work. They wont love us less,it is just different.
We are all here on the forum to cast our opinions and civility sometimes hard to hang on to.
You have a tuff job as the moderator. Thanks for your gentle words.

I'm glad you brought that up, Ann. I was going to mention it, but didn't want to seem argumentative with Brit. You worded your response beautifully, so I'll just tag along with you.

One thing that Brit's comment brought to mind was this...

We need another and a wiser and perhaps a more mystical concept of animals. Remote from universal nature, and living by complicated artifice, man in civilization surveys the creature through the glass of his knowledge and sees thereby a feather magnified and the whole image in distortion. We patronize them for their incompleteness, for their tragic fate of having taken form so far below ourselves. And therein we err, and greatly err. For the animal shall not be measured by man. In a world older and more complete than ours they move finished and complete, gifted with extensions of the senses we have lost or never attained, living by voices we shall never hear. They are not brethren, they are not underlings; they are other nations caught with ourselves in the net of life and time, fellow prisoners of the splendour and travail of the earth......Henry Beston

That was quite interesting Woogie. Thought provoking for sure. I like the part "they are not brethren, they are not underlings, they are other nations..."

They aren't equal to human, but they aren't beneath us either, they are their very own unique and beautiful creatures.

Absolutely beautiful quote - it captures it perfectly!

Reminds me of my fave Milan Kundera quote, which is kind of on the same note (here we go, quote junkie addicts :p):

"Humanity's true moral test, its fundamental test, consists of its attitude towards those who are at its mercy: animals. And in this respect humankind has suffered a fundamental debacle, a debacle so fundamental that all others stem from it."
— Milan Kundera

I'm glad you enjoyed that, Rachel. It helps me to keep things in perspective and Beston put it perfectly.

BTW, congrats on your pregnancy! My 2 are grown now, but without a doubt, raising those boys is the best thing I've ever done with my life. Wishes for much happiness as you start your (skin :)) family!

all i know is i'm really sorry if anyone was offended by me, my wording still has much work ahead. i'm bad about not proofreading to see if i'm actually saying what i'm meaning.

i'm going to go to bed now and snuggle with my two beautiful pups who lay right up against my pregnant belly so they can be closer to their new human brother/sister

added: sometimes I wonder if i'll ever kiss my human little one as much as i kiss these doggies or if i'll say i love you as many times a day as i say it to the dogs, or if i'll snuggle up and hold on tight to the baby like i do my fur babies. i really do love my dogs almost like children. but having this baby growing proves to me that there will soon be something that i will love in a whole new way that i've never loved or experienced before.

Beautiful quotes. :) One of my favorites and a link to many more:

As long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be battlefields.
Leo Tolstoy

Notable Quotes about Animals and Humanity