NOLA
 

Isn't this your schtick? Saying that I can't talk about how bad it is, because the problem is still there even if I talk about it, so I must not be using all my resources to fix it because I'm busy talking. You don't have any idea what I'm doing outside of the time I've spent fucking around on message boards.

I'm not criticizing what other people are doing, or if they're not talking about what they are doing, unless they are talking about helping fucking animals. I love animals. I have several. But the idea of "helping" in a natural disaster by donating money, time or resources to help displaced animals seems absurd to me.

I shouldn't criticize the charity of others. I appreciate whatever people do, and helping displaced animals is better than doing nothing at all. It just strikes me as hopelessly misguided and contrary to my personal morality. Given the person in question's previous comments, I think it's very illustrative.

NOLA
 

I really don't understand what problem you could have with people giving to animal charities and helping to find homes for the animals that were victims of this catastrophe as well. The people who are being evacuated to Houston and other points are not being permitted to bring their pets. Are people not supposed to care about the starving and dehydrated animals also? Or just not as much?


ETA: Now that is see your above post, I guess I know your position. I find it sad, but so be it. I don't think people were saying do this instead of worrying about the people, but if you don't care about helping all these people's former pets, so be it.

NOLA
 

I wouldn't want to run contrary to your personal morality, especially since I don't seem to have any of my own.

And please tell me, what does it illustrate?

NOLA
 

It isn't schtick. I personally find it terrible that people do so little to help kids have a chance at a better life. Doing something more than writing a check. Maybe you do something in that regard. If you do you are about 1 in 1000. I bet not, because if you were that 1 in 1000 you would realize that criticizing others doesn't help. That is, if you aren't putting time into kids in need you really shouldn't criticize other (including society in general), and I just think those that are quick to criticize aren't helping, because if they were helping they would realize how few people help and how futile criticism is. Sore topic, and I'm off my soapbox- oh, and I think you went down the road before anyone posted about saving dogs.

NOLA
 

If I had a schtick right now, I'd beat you with it.

NOLA
 

Actually I posted about saving dogs on Tuesday and Wednesday also. I am that big of a heathen.

NOLA
 

It's a resource allocation issue. Of course, people are within their rights to use their resources wherever they want to. Enough Americans do nothing for charity (our charity giving rates are among the lowest in the first world) anyway, so I am happy with whatever they do. I'm just shocked that people, seeing massive suffering of humans and animals, choose to use their resources to make the lives of the animals better. It is incomprehensible to me. That is me. If the alternative is that people do nothing, I guess these people addressing the needs of suffering animals relieves that burden on other charities and governmental agencies.

NOLA
 

It is open to all, some just choose not to opt for it. Same playing field, same rulez. You lose.

NOLA
 

Can one give to save dogs but let cats die? Could you post a link?

NOLA
 

If she said that you are correct. The school is private, of course, I don't believe in public education (pb topic), and is so liberal it makes Ty look like a republican. I am deep deep undercover with my politics.

NOLA
 

If tiger Woods wanted to play at your country club, you'd vote no wouldn't you?

NOLA
 

It is? Why don't I see it?

NOLA
 

What about the bats?

NOLA
 

girls don't get to play under Penske's rules.

NOLA
 

Depends on my draw for the pro-am, Ty@50, did I get Tiger?