trianglekitty
Trianglekitty
trianglekitty

It's very interesting to me that you would judge his choice to film even if it *had* only been about getting money to live on after he knew he would be kicked out. So living a lie in order to get money is okay and in fact, is *encouraged* by you, but being honest and than asking for help from folks who understand and

Huh. Thank you for being open to new information...that's rare online. Honestly, I'm more angry with the HSUS than Vick. While Vick's crimes were awful and I *don't* and never will forgive him, the HSUS affects far from animals by pushing for legislation that has been repeatedly proven to increase kill rates in

There's also great potential for some poor streamer's dog to get shot. I'm really surprised it hasn't happened yet in one of these situations.

As I said to another poster, Vick never served any time for animal cruelty. Once released, he teamed up with the HSUS, an organization that uses less that *1%* of it's multimillion budget on actually aiding shelter animals. The same organization that advocated for the destruction of the dogs that survived Vick. I

He was released to house arrest after 18 months, not 21. There's no debate that he went to prison, but the charge was for "Conspiracy to Travel in Interstate Commerce in Aid of Unlawful Activities and to Sponsor a Dog in an Animal Fight Venture". In other words, he served time for betting on dog fights across state

My cat has been through all manner of crap in his life, including the loss of both eyes, and I truly think he does know I'm only trying to help him when I pill him or stick him with needles. I handle all of his medical care, which at times has included medication 14x a day and daily baths. Yet I'm the only person

He served no time in prison for what he did to those dogs, so no, it doesn't count. And the charity Vick worked with, the HSUS, does shit all for animals. They're a money making machine and little more. In fact, they advocated to kill ll the dogs that managed to survive Vick's cruelty. So yeah, not impressed.

Yes, this, and it's absolutely enraging. I've had primary care of my mother since I was 13. I take her to doctor's appointments, try (unsuccessfully for the most part) to get her to take her medication correctly, manage her memory loss by answering the same three questions endlessly, calm down her panic attacks,

Being that the folded ears of the Scottish fold are linked to major health issues...I find it hard to find this as cute as I want to. :(

As a kinky sort who leans toward being poly, I would LOVE if more relationships were accepted. It WOULD solve a lot of problems, like the depression and fear that many poly people experience. I just disagree that it would in any way solve cheating. It's like saying the war on drugs could be won by making alcohol

It *needs* to be that cut and dry, because otherwise there is *always* an excuse. This is one of the things that plays into my decision not to date. With how people treat cheating, I could never truly trust my partner. I see advice all the time that if you only cheated once and truly regretted it, don't even tell

Then leave the relationship. There's your solution to being stuck in a shit marriage. "I'm not happy, so I'll expose my partner to STDs without their consent, as well as the massive, life-upending consequences that could come if I get my new partner pregnant or become pregnant" shouldn't be an option. That type of

I'm not convinced it would make a difference. That presumes that if non-monogamous relationships were more supported by society, people who would otherwise cheat would simply seek out an open relationship. But cheating is at its core a form of entitlement...a belief that what you want is more important than your

I don't at all think monogamy is for everyone, or even perhaps most. But cheating is still a choice, and the cheater doesn't get to brush off their actions 'because society'. I have zero patience or tolerance for cheaters...putting aside all of the emotional issues it raises, cheating is dangerous to the health of

Would the same risk apply equally to organ donation, though? Why would the rules be different if so?

Truth be told, I don't really want them to lose credibility...at least I *think* I don't. Obviously they have, and if they continue this sort of behavior, obviously they deserve to. But I believe the concept is sound enough, and it's clear that sometimes we *need* a group like Anonymous to force government

Anonymous needs to police themselves. Dox an innocent person? The rest dox you and release your information. If they had repercussions, even from within, maybe they'd be more careful.

Doggie kissing booths are a TERRIBLE idea for this reason. It doesn't matter how stable the dog seems, you're asking them to sit through something that most dogs find threatening on some level. If that dog snaps, they may very well lose their life...why put an animal in that situation?

This is the first game to make me even consider getting a PS4. Can't wait to see how it actually plays.

I'm with you. I don't think everyone understands how salaried jobs work.