Response to Carl Fox

We think this is a good time to post the DoggyBling.com response to an article written by someone we refer to as "Monumental Idiot Carl Fox". (Abbreviated M.I.Carl Fox) M.I. Carl Fox wrote an article after Hurricane Katrina and was appalled that any attention would be given to dogs when there could be people in need. M.I.Carl's article was poorly written, misleading and yes, idiotic. We want you to read his article and then our response, afterwhich we will post M.I. Carl Fox's article in full. The reason we are posting this so long after Katrina is because we are going to write a response to another anti-dog article that was published in the June 27th issue of USA Today. We'll refrain from calling the author of that article names, because it was written by a female and we would only call a man names, or in Carl's case...a male.

Our response and M.I. Carl Fox's original article is republished with the permission of the Northwest Florida Daily News.

It may make more sense to scroll down and read M.I. Carl Fox's article and then come back and read our response. Be warned, you'll hate him too!

Our Response:

I would like to respond to a few of Carl’s brilliant (to him) assertions.

1. “People should come first”-

It will be hard to find anyone who will disagree that if the choice has to be made, a human’s life should take precedent over an animal. But, that is rarely the choice and wasn’t during Katrina. There were hundreds of images showing rescuers saving humans while leaving their beloved pet stranded on the roof. (Carl must have been watching the hunting channel and missed the footage). As a matter of fact, this was the subject of much controversy. I wrote “An Apology to the Dogs of New Orleans” about this very subject. It is posted on DoggyBling.com and is a personal apology from me to the dogs that were abandoned and neglected because humans, like Carl, only see the value their own life. For Carl to say, “Pets were treated as equal to humans” is a very ill informed and grossly inaccurate statement. For one… and the most obvious reason, they weren’t. The people did come first and were the only concern and the world saw our inhumanity. It was an embarrassment to our nation and an embarrassment to humans like Carl, although he wouldn’t agree.

2. “The Time Magazine article shows that people will use vital FEMA resources for their pet instead of saving them for humans”.

Although pets do not actually pay taxes themselves, their owners spent $35.9 billion on them last year alone. A figure that Carl no doubt thinks is ridiculous, but yet, it is a fact. The tax revenue on these purchases entitles dogs and other animals to FEMA resources. You see, compassionate people value the relationship afforded by their pets and they, as well as their pets, create tax revenue.

3. “Another difficult concept to grasp is how people who don’t seem to care about millions of babies being aborted get visibly upset when an animal goes hungry”

Exactly how did Carl know about all of these “Pro Abortion Dog Lovers”? His power of perception doesn’t seem that strong to me. This statement isn’t ill informed or ignorant, it is simply has to be defined as stupid. I believe that people who are animal lovers are more compassionate people and have a higher regard for life in general than people who are not animal lovers.  But Carl’s article isn’t about facts or truths; it’s about one person’s distorted view.

4. “I was very disappointed when our governor announced hurricane shelters would accept pets during Hurricane Wilma”.

That is because the governor is obviously cares about pet lovers. Even if the governor does not have compassion for animals, he obviously understands what they mean to taxpayers. That is what is important, not Carl’s opinion. The governor will probably thrive long after it is discovered that Carl can’t write and his opinions polarize people’s view of him and of this newspaper. When his lack of ability is discovered there is always grunt work for Carl at the animal testing labs.

I know that I seem mad at Carl and I am. I know that you aren’t supposed to call names but there is no way to respond to Carl’s article in a nice way. He is hostile toward animals and is a selfish and ignorant person. Let me break it to Carl gently. Just because you are born a human does not automatically give you “superior” status. Murderers, rapists and con artists are human, but they aren’t superior to any animal. It is your deeds and respect of others that makes a human life have value. It is what you do, not what you are, that makes you superior. It is how you value life, other than your own, that makes you superior and truly above the status of “animal”. If you research the history of every serial killer and violent offender you will find one common trait, a lack of respect for life, other than his or her own. These people are less than animals. It is the same as saying someone’s dog is afraid of “men” because a “man” mistreated it. No, a “man” will not mistreat a defenseless animal, but a “male” will. “Man” is a title you earn and it is determined by your actions. A “man” has never mistreated an animal.

Carl’s stance also sends a horrible message to children. When they get a dog or other pet, children are told how the pet depends 100% on them and how they must understand the responsibility of pet ownership. Why should the responsibility to your pet end when there is an emergency? It shouldn’t and doesn’t. Your responsibility to your pet and superiority as a human is demonstrated by how you handle yourself when your pet needs you the most. I’m not saying you should die in place of your pet, I’m saying that the dependence pets have on humans should allow them consideration in time of need. When you acquire a pet, you accept responsibility for its needs and for its safety and when you shirk this responsibility it has a very negative impact on children and a negative reflection on you. In Carl’s world, it is all about me and mine. I hate to hear that Carl has a dog. I would hope that Carl would either understand the need to be responsible for the dog or he should take it to one of the many local rescue groups where a suitable home could be found. In Carl’s article he says that he wouldn’t want to know where he would stand if his wife and daughter had to choose between him and the dog. I think Carl knows the answer to this and for what its worth, I’d choose the dog too.

Ric Eddins

DoggyBling.com

RE: Put People Before Animals

The following article was posted in the December 6, 2005 edition of te Northwest Florida Daily News. The article and our response is included with permission of the Northwest Florida Daily Newspaper editor.

  Carl Fox: Put People Before Animals (Northwest Florida Daily News  Monday, December 5)

At long last, hurricane season is over. Obviously, it was marked by a great number of storms, but I also noticed a new, alarming trend. This trend may also result in death. This trend is for people to treat pets like humans during hurricane recovery. I first noticed this trend when helicopter rescue crews reported rescuing pets along with people of New Orleans rooftops.  We know the rescue crews were getting shot at.

What a terrible tragedy it would have been to lose a serviceman to gunfire while rescuing a pet. An equal tragedy would have been if an actual person had died while the helicopter crews were spending time rescuing pets or returning to base to unload them. In an emergency situation people should come first, and the first pet should not be put on a helicopter until every house was checked for stranded people.Some may say the helicopter crew wouldn’t be able to rescue the people if they didn’t take the pets with them.

That may be true, but it would be the choice of the stranded people with pets. Another vivid image of this treatment pf pets as equal to people was on a full-page picture in Time magazine. The picture showed a woman pouring her botthed water (presumably from FEMA) into a bowl for her dog while a dead body lies a few feet away.I’m not saying she could have saved the person with her water, it just shows people will use vital FEMA resourses for their pets instead of saving them for people. Do you want to go thirsty because someone else feels the need to give water to his or her pet?Pets are great and bring a lot of joy to many people. Some studies indicate pets are good for your health. Some people love their pets more than they love their spouse or parents. I certainly wouldn’t want my wife and daughter to choose between the dog and me. I’m afraid I may lose that competetion.

I really don’t care how much you spend on your pet.You could clothe your pet in diamonds if you want. But taxpayers, money should not be spent on rescuing pets, especially at the potential cost of of the life of a person. Another difficult concept to grasp is how people who don’t seem to care about millions of babies being aborted get visibly upset when an animal goes hungry.No matter how much people love pets, thaey are not human beings.

The examples about pets being treated equal to people go on and on. Stories have been written about rescue boats picking up an owner with a dozen pets. How would you feel if the rescue boat no longer had room for your children? I even got solicited to give money to feed pets. Yes, pets!Do all the injured people have enough money for the recovery of their lives that we should be giving money for animals? This problem has even afflicted Florida. I was very disappointed when our govenor announced hurricane shelters would accept pets during Hurricane Wilma. I hope we do not adopt that policy in Okaloosa County. Do we really need a dog to bite a child in a shelter to know this pet rule is a bad idea?

Comments

[Cindy]

Hi Ric, Thank you so much for your response to the person you refer to as "M.I. Carl Fox. In my opinion, people like him have very little value. I hope you will reprint your "An Apology to the Dogs of New Orleans" peom. It meant a lot to me and I have told many people to go to DoggyBling.com to read it and I was told it was not there anymore. I verified that, but would appreciate it if you would repost it, or print it here. Thanks for the way you love dogs! Cindy

[Jenny]

Hi Ric, I loved your response to the heartless person from the newspaper. You tell em'! We need more people willing to take a stance for dogs. Jenny

[Judy]

I'm with you. Carl Fox is an insensitive idiot! J.

[Mary Lou]

Let me at him! What a jerk! Rick, thanks for telling this guy what an idiot he is. ML