(Courtesy Graphjam)
Your ability to enjoy this movie depends entirely on your ability—once the big SF Plot Element is revealed—to accept that the movie isn't regular drama but is, in fact, SF Lite and raise your suspension of disbelief accordingly.
Seriously. I think video game graphics peaked with HL2. Everything since has just been unnecessary bling.
No, really. Am I? Because from a sheer spending viewpoint, apparently for me dead cats rate WAAAAAY above people in tsunami-prone and earthquake-stricken third-world nations.
"Am I a bad person?"
ReplyDeleteNo, you are NOT a bad person. You should always put your family first, and that's what you did for a member of our family.
~ The Resident Murloc
Don't worry, I donated that Coke I owe you to UNICEF.
ReplyDeleteWow, inviting the internets to pass judgement on your moral character? I'm sure that couldn't possibly lead to trouble.
ReplyDeleteOf course I would never judge (especially since I don't know the circumstances/length of time involving the expenditures), but I can only relate my own perspectives. I've had 13+ furry friends (pets) during my life and loved every one of them. However, I would have great difficulty spending large amounts of money to prolong a sick animal's life, especially if it led me to significant financial difficulty.
Pets aren't people, although we are obliged to treat them with love and care for them. I think it's fine to spend a reasonable amount of money to help suffering animals (even ones that aren't pets) but even if I was a billionaire and $100,000 for Muffin's brain transplant was chump change, I think it's a fair question whether that was a reasonable use, considering the extreme needs of actual people in parts of the world.
Are you a bad person? I'm not qualified to make that judgement - only God is. In your favor, you did contribute $1000 to charity. I just dropped ~$1700 on a stupid race with crappy cars; was that unreasonable for a hobby? No animals or people were helped by it.
I think if Moxie had some life-threatening condition that required treatment, but there was still a significant likelihood that she would need it again in a relatively short amount of time, I would have a hard time justifying any significant expense. There are a lot of other kittens at the shelter waiting for a loving home.
If, on the other hand, it was something that could be cured with a reasonable expectation of living a full life afterward, then it would seem appropriate to spend more, although at this time I would probably still draw that line somewhere below $1000. I realize that these questions are never, "do you want to save your cat for $1000?" but more often "she'll live this week if you spend $50, but you might have to spend another $50 next week." At what point does another $50 constitute an unreasonable cost?
Turns out the Catechism has something to say on this issue:
2418 It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly. It is likewise unworthy to spend money on them that should as a priority go to the relief of human misery. One can love animals; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons.
The whole article contains many important things to keep in mind when considering these issues.
Also, the rest of the graphs are awesome, especially Tautography. The PBS one is why I never contribute - because they say "donate so that we can continue to show you great programs like this" but then they only show those programs when they ask you to contribute. The Simpsons treatment of this was fairly accurate.
ReplyDeleteI think HL2 was the first time a non-id engine significantly pushed the realism in a 3d engine. I agree that most improvements since then have been mostly bling, but id Tech 5 looks like another generational advance. id always pushes the bar. More here.
If you think there's a possibility that you might be inclined to spend a significant amount of money on medical care for Bastet if she should get sick, maybe you should seriously consider buying pet medical insurance for her if it would significantly reduce your costs.
ReplyDeleteI also become very attached to our animals. But before I spend serious money on their medical care I have to consider (a) what the quality of life for the animal can reasonably expected to be after treatment - the more complete the recovery and the longer the life expectancy afterwards, the more justifiable a relatively large expense might be; and (b) whether I in good conscience could take money that represented a significant number of hours of my husband's labor, and which also might be needed for my family's care, to spend on this animal.
I personally cannot justify going into debt and/or spending large amounts of money on the care of pets. I also will not spend a lot of money keeping a pet alive if the pet is still going to be suffering or leading a severely diminished life after the treatment. That's why I had to have our beloved dogs euthanized when their care would have become execessively expensive and futile. But maybe I'm just cold-hearted.
No, Mom, you're not cold-hearted. The vast number of critters both wild and tame that have benefited from your care prove otherwise. It was hard at the time (especially in Buster's case), but I didn't doubt it was the right thing to do for the dogs.
ReplyDeleteAnd let none of my arguments be taken to mean I don't think the critters are part of the family! Just a different part than the human parts.
Moxie is lucky that we feed her.
ReplyDeleteI had to stop feeding small cats to my dogs, the fur was causing heartburn.
ReplyDelete-thebluefox
I, in no way, have any qualms about the amount we spent on Isis. And if Joe hadn't spent it then I would have gone to my parents and they would have helped. In fact, they did help with some of the costs, as they feel the same way I do about trying to save a pet instead of just tossing the idea to the side.
ReplyDeleteYes, pets are not people, but goshdarnit, I see them as a part of my family, and I'll be darned if I turn my back on them.
When Isis got sick it stressed me out tremendously, especially when it was suggested that we not care for her and simply put her under, to the point where I actually lost hair (yes, I had a small bald spot for several months). I could NOT have not done something.
It's true that about every 3 months, she would have to go to the hospital for a few days. But this was during the phase where we were trying to find the right balance of medication that would help her... and it WAS helping. And the medication itself was not wholly expensive. It was the hospital stays that cost quite a bit. Even the doctor visits were reasonable for a vet. But thankfully, my parents helped with some of it, especially since they did not want us thinking any terminal thoughts.
In the end, it was simply that her little heart gave out, pretty much from one hour to the next. And I'm EXTREMELY thankful she went naturally and peacefully and not alone.
So, while I appreciate some of you not passing judgement, I am a little angered. While this might sound mean or uncharitable, I am certainly very glad none of you were part of the decision making. And I don't think ANY of the decisions we made concerning Isis were wrong.
(Dave, you're comment especially hit me hard. I feel sorry for Moxie if something, God forbid, seriously happens to her. It just sounded very callus of you when you said "I think if Moxie had some life-threatening condition that required treatment, but there was still a significant likelihood that she would need it again in a relatively short amount of time, I would have a hard time justifying any significant expense. There are a lot of other kittens at the shelter waiting for a loving home.". It's like saying "Oh, gee, this pet's broken. Lets just get rid of it and get a new one!" It's a living thing, not a freakin' car! Obviously, if the pet had been, say, run over and there was really no way of fixing the issue, I could understand the need to relieve the creature of pain. But if it was something that COULD be fixed, even if it costs a lot, I can't imagine anyone with a heart not giving it a try... even more than one try.)
I feel Isis' last 10 months with us, after she was diagnosed, were well spent, and she did have a good quality of life. We made sure of it.
Yes, this is a topic I'm very passionate about. I love animals, regardless of whether they are a part of my family or not. It's the main reason I took St. Francis of Assisi as my main confirmation saint.
~ The Resident Murloc
Due to Ruby's bizarre eating habits (she was seemingly anorexic) we got a second dog to introduce food competition, when that was insufficient for her to stay motivated to eat we switched to a raw diet.
ReplyDeleteWhile Liz has joined Raw-feeding co-ops for buying bulk animal bits to feed the dogs, I get to play butcher every night cutting up the bigger chunks into daily portions. Our latest load has been pig-neck and beef-cheek, but Ruby will only eat beef-cheek if it has been ground up by a food processor first. Sigh...
We all love them though.
-thebluefox
And good for you for doing everything you can for the puppies! =)
ReplyDelete~ The Resident Murloc