Letters to the Editor
-
Animal Cloning vs. Fertility Treatment
People spend thousands of dollars cloning animals instead of choosing from the thousands of pets available at an animal shelter for the same reason people spend tens of thousands of dollars for fertility treatments instead of adopting one of the multitude of unwanted children in the world.
Nature always wins out over nuture for people of means.
-
They're animals, not trinkets
I was a groomer for over 10 years and worked in many kinds of places. I figured, making dogs more comfortable -- what could be a more enjoyable way of making a living for a 36- year-old animal loving single woman w/out kids; who enjoys people also?
If I were able to filter out the shenanigans dogs are put through (especially the long-haired that don't shed per se and knot like crazy.
Groomers aren't mean but it's their job to make the dogs look like their owner wants then to and for far too many of whom no matter what the dog has to go through (not to mention the groomer).
However, "We wouldn't have any dogs if humans over the course of thousands of years hadn't selected certain characteristics," "We'd be living with wolves."
is reasonable. What confuses me is what that has to do w/cloning dogs or breeding for profit (which is what makes 'disreputable breeders", duh). We wouldn't be living w/wolves cause they'd all have killed us but didn't because of our intelletual nature, which doesn't include greed, btw, it does however include recognition, care and dare I say, love. The more id-bsed emotions are for physical survival.
My main objection to cloning dogs or anything else:
Contrary to ever more popular belief, the world is no one�s oyster.
Emotion happens. It makes us grow as we age and has somthing to do w/building civilization.
To wit:
>Fiester points out that spending $30,000 on an animal that may live 15 years works out to just a couple hundred dollars a month. We often spend that on other so-called luxury items, like going to the movies or dining out. And at the end of a month of fine dining, you aren't even left with an object -- let alone one that loves you unconditionally. "In principle it is not irrational to want a later-born twin of a beloved pet," Fiester says. "Clients can say, 'At least I have something left, a little bit of my animal for me to cherish.'"
I can't stand it!! Dog aren't luxuries. They're companions and workers.
Ya know, a friend of mine who recently began a new career as a teacher and recently
related to me a lecture by a teacher she was observing about the importance of introducing metaphor to children as a way of negotiating the world and learning in
general. Maybe her early reachers didn't know that or care, but more likely she learned it (prusumably she thinks) but has never made that adult connection between emotion and metaphor.
Not that I believe for an instant that it�s easy. I have an ostomy and have since I was 30 so I now from metaphor.
I was a dog groomer for over 10 years and worked in many differemt kinds of places. I figured, making dogs more comfortable -- what could be a more enjoyable way of making a living for a 36- year-old animal loving single woman w/out kids, who enjoys people also?
Oh boy, was I wrong.
If I were able to filter out the shenanigans the dogs are put through (especially the long-haired kind that don't shed per se -- as opposed to deciduous dogs, so to speak. Not that groomers are mean but it's their job to make the dogs look like their owner wants then to look; and for far too many of whom no matter what the dog has to go through (not to mention the groomer).
However, "We wouldn't have any dogs if humans over the course of thousands of years hadn't selected certain characteristics," Venta says. "We'd be living with wolves."
is a reasonable statement. What confuses me is what that has to do w/cloning dogs or breeding for profit (which is what makes 'disreputable breeders, duh). We wouldn't living w/wolves cause they'd all have killed us but didn't because of human nature, which doesn't include greed, btw, it does however include recognition, care and dare I say, love.
Which brings me to my main objection to cloning dogs or anything else.
Contrary to ever more popular belief, the world is no one�s oyster. The best laid plans of mice and men and all that (w/apologies and gratitude to John Steinbeck nd Robert Burns)
Shit happens. Emotion happens. It makes us grow as builders of civilization
To wit:
>Fiester points out that spending $30,000 on an animal that may live 15 years works out to just a couple hundred dollars a month. We often spend that on other so-called luxury items, like going to the movies or dining out. And at the end of a month of fine dining, you aren't even left with an object -- let alone one that loves you unconditionally. "In principle it is not irrational to want a later-born twin of a beloved pet," Fiester says. "Clients can say, 'At least I have something left, a little bit of my animal for me to cherish.'"
I can't stand it!! Dog aren't luxuries. They're companions and workers.
Ya know, a friend of mine who recently began a new career as a teacher and recently
related to me a lecture by a teacher she was observing about the importance of introducing metaphor to children as a way of negotiating the world and learning in
general. Maybe her early reachers didn't know that or care, but more likely she learned it (prusumably she thinks) but has never made that adult connection between emotion and metaphor.
Not that I believe for an instant that it�s easy. I have an ostomy and have since I was 30 so I now from metaphor.
Which brings me to my main objection to cloning dogs or anything else.
Contrary to ever more popular belief, the world is no one�s oyster.
Cloning dogs may have a place in buiding civiization. nothing I've read in the piece reflects that.
But, as democracy as defined by the Ps that B, if you can pay for it, you got it. Legality??? Feh.