Do you feel it’s immoral to indulge your pets when there are starving people in the world?

Posted by on . 13 comments.


Americans are currently spending really huge amounts of money on their pets.. sometimes even taking their dogs to massage therapists!



I can understand feeling like your dog is part of your family, and I can understand how spending more on dog food can actually save you money in the long run, but can anyone really justify taking their dog to a doggie spa when 779 million will go to bed hungry tonight?

Comments

  1. Whitney says:
    July 27, 2009 at 8:31 pm

    I can’t see taking dogs to spas! People who have the money to do that, should at least donate money to shelters if they love dogs that much.

  2. Dome says:
    July 27, 2009 at 8:31 pm

    well i think spending money on taking a dog to a massage place and a spa is pretty weird. i just feed, play, bathe, and LOVE my dog. thats all a dog really needs. is play time and love.

  3. Jo says:
    July 27, 2009 at 8:31 pm

    People can do what they want with their money. Realistically if they weren’t spending it on their pet, they’d be spending it on a new tv, shoes, car, etc., not donating it all to charity anyways. Better to spend it on a pet!

  4. eenie meanie says:
    July 27, 2009 at 8:31 pm

    Actually, I am quite selfish and choose not to think of others….what kind of question is this???? What kind of response are you thinking you will get? I would go on but then I would get reported….

  5. Clueless Rebel says:
    July 27, 2009 at 8:31 pm

    I think that kinda thing is hilarious (not the starving people part, but the taking dogs to therapists), I think people need to get a reality check these days, a dogs a dog, it’s not a person.
    Don’t get me wrong, I love my chocolate lab puppy to death, but the closet thing she’s ever going to get to a spa is my sister’s kidding pool

  6. Liz says:
    July 27, 2009 at 8:31 pm

    Unfortunately, we don’t have control over most of the world’s poverty issues. Sure we can make a difference (by not wasting our money on selfish things), but a majority of Americans would prefer to take their dogs to doggy salons and buy frivolous things when we could be donating to charities and such. But hey, there’s nothing we can do about the selfish majority of America, thus this is the world we live in.

  7. Maria L says:
    July 27, 2009 at 8:31 pm

    I chose my dogs so I feed them and love them

    I didn’t create the hunger in the world,these 3rd world countries if you go to their capital,I bet it looks great,they are keeping their ppl down,
    I am not going to feel guilty cause i was born in a better country,now in saying that
    every week i donate food to the food bank
    I help serve meals on wheels for the elders
    and i don’t have my dogs in spa’s or have them massaged,

  8. greeny says:
    July 27, 2009 at 8:31 pm

    Do you think it is immoral for humans to have more children because there are starving people in this world, destruction to the environment, global warming, species extinction, unwanted children in the foster care system, etc.?

    I agree excess spending is excess spending whether people spend on their pets, themselves or their children, but don’t make it a people vs. animals argument because suffering is suffering whether we confine it to humans or expand it to include animals and the Earth itself. We should all do what we can to help those outside of our own circle. We could all give a little more, whether it be time or money.

    Excess spending is part of the problem, but spending on services (doggie massage) is better than spending on "things" that clog up our landfills and put artificial chemicals into our soil, air, water and bodies.

  9. casey s says:
    July 27, 2009 at 8:31 pm

    779 million go to bed hungry every night and in the us we spend $300 million a day for the war. I am sorry but, that is sad !!!!!!

  10. chalbri says:
    July 27, 2009 at 8:31 pm

    I only have as many pets as I can be financially responsibly for, and feed them just what they need.
    Also, I just saw on animal planet an ASPCA officer talk about how she sees so many skinny starving animals, that she over-feeds hers to make sure they aren’t starving. She says her her view of too fat and the vets view of too fat are different just because of what she sees at her job.

  11. DP says:
    July 27, 2009 at 8:31 pm

    Well the way I see it.. I took on the dogs as my own responsibility.. I have to take the to the vet when they need to go, I have to feed them good quality food, and I have to make their life as enjoyable and happy as possible.. It’s my obligation.. I take care of my obligation.. Other people are not my obligation. I think people should quit having kids if they can’t afford to feed them and care for them. People need to take responsibility for themselves and their own .. I take care of myself and am responsible for my own. Why should my dogs go without because someone else wasn’t taking care of their own life? I don’t take my dogs to the spa by the way.. But if I wanted to.. it’s my own right to spend my money the way I want to. Selfish?? Maybe.. but it’s the way it is.

  12. smartblond48 says:
    July 27, 2009 at 8:31 pm

    My dog is a working dog. We live in the country and he is our security system. Anything he gets from us he has earned. He is on duty 24/7/365.
    The cat is our mouser and spider control(when she bothers to come home) and she eats very little.
    We don’t feel the least bit guilty when we feed either of them.

  13. Block Wall says:
    July 27, 2009 at 8:31 pm

    No, I do not think it’s immoral. I think it’s immoral that those people are ignored, abused, and exploited by their own highly humanitarian governments. Let them have revolutions to put in real governments rather than tin god dictators like Mugabe. Let the world (i.e., the moronic UN, do something about the Sudanese Muslim ("religion of peace") warlords who are killing hundreds of thousands of their own people.

    Why don’t you look for real causes rather than blame Americans for all the world’s woes?

Leave a Reply