Comments on: Are Pet Dogs To Be Treated As Nuisance To Mankind And Be Deprived Of Good Homes In Apartments Amid Societies?

By: WP Robot: premium autoblogging plugin

WP Robot: premium autoblogging plugin — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 02:16:50 +0000

India is a totally different culture then America. In India, they consider cows sacred, whereas Americans eat them. In China, they eat dogs, whereas we adore them as pets. You cannot compare cultures…it’s like apples and oranges

By: trying to please

trying to please — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 20:25:08 +0000

All dogs deserve food, shelter and love, so if it’s in an apartment, so be it.
Not all people have large living places.
People in apartments can care for a dog just like people in a house.
My pet peeve is when people say, “You live in the country, will you take my dog.” or “FREE to good home, dog, needs country life.”
Give me a break, I just had to get that off of my chest.
Us country folks are getting tired of caring for the so called “city people’s” animals.
Thanks for letting me rant and rave.

By: Michelle B

Michelle B — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:45:53 +0000

I believe that all pets deserve our devoted affection, a warm/dry place to sleep and fresh food and water.
But…
The truth, however unfair it may seem is this… The pet owners are unfortunately not “home-owners!” I feel for them and their pets, I wish every house was “pet friendly!”
This will obviously not likely ever happen, and we as pet owners should respect and understand that in a rental… rules are subject to change.

By: Petu

Petu — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:16:46 +0000

Indians do need to be more human and intelligently use their education and upbringing, rather than take out their vengence on these poor pets and their owners. Those peverts who intentionally use their bldg’s lifts as public toilets and blame pets, need to be toilet trained themselves and indeed be taken to task. These days it’s a clever practise for majority of the culprits occupying seats in sty’s to divert people’s attention to pet dogs and owners, and smartly avoid members’ fury to any delicate issues on sty’s funds etc. posed by members in their AGM’s.

By: Malina

Malina — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 13:05:52 +0000

it’s because they don’t want to deal with the mess, and any unknown dog is a potential lawsuit, whether from noise, attacks or damage to property. they are just trying to cover their butts. it sucks, but there isn’t anything the spca can do about it. i think dogs were even banned in high rises in SF,CA.