Drive fast, live hard, no regrets... Sorry Penske - Page 255

mmm3587 · 09-02-2005, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
But here's the thing, you have a problem with what others are doing- what are you doing? Not with the current catastrophe, but to help get people on their feet. You remember, the problem you brought up last night. Eliminate poverty.

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.

notcasesensitive · 09-02-2005, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mmm3587
Right! Like, for example, what is anyone doing about all those poor animals? Like you, I'm fine with poor people suffering, but I can't stand to see a wet kitty that doesn't have a warm blanket and a saucer of milk nearby!

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.

bold_n_brazen · 09-02-2005, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mmm3587
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.

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?

Hank Chinaski · 09-02-2005, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mmm3587
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.

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.

spookyfish · 09-02-2005, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mmm3587
Isn't this your schtick?

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

notcasesensitive · 09-02-2005, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
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.

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

mmm3587 · 09-02-2005, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by notcasesensitive
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.

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.

Penske_Account · 09-02-2005, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
No. You're trying to count Adult- and it's not certified because its not open to all. But, good try! You do have a solid work ethic.

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

Hank Chinaski · 09-02-2005, 05:31 PM

Quote:

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

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

Penske_Account · 09-02-2005, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by NotFromHere
Don't worry, it can't last long. Once that poor child goes to class and says "Hillary is satan - my foster daddy says so," she'll get get out of the state.

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.