 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsCat AnecdotesHealth and BehaviorRescue CatKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Cat Forum / Health and Behavior / September 2004partial spontaneous abortion
Hi, my 14-month-old cat is pregnant (about six weeks). Today she has had a miscarriage and has expelled two foetuses. The vet says there is another in her womb, but that it must be dead and she will probably expell it before tomorrow. If not, I must take her to the vet to have the third foetus removed by surgery. Is it true that it must be dead? Can't it be alive and well and the queen able to carry on her pregnancy? She looks alright now and I would hate to have her operated unnecessarily. I do not trust this vet very much, for when my cat was bleeding this morning and I took her to him, he said she had cystitis! Then she miscarried, I brought her to him again and he admitted he had been wrong... Thanks for any advice. Alessandra (from Italy) > Hi, > my 14-month-old cat is pregnant (about six weeks). Today she has had a [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Alessandra (from Italy) It's impossible to know without seeing your cat if that fetus is alive. However, she is at risk for infection, and if it were my cat, I would have her spayed right now.  Signature-Kelly kelly at farringtons dot net www.kelltek.com Check out www.snittens.com > > Hi, > > my 14-month-old cat is pregnant (about six weeks). Today she has had a [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > However, she is at risk for infection, and if it were my cat, I would have > her spayed right now. I second this thought. The chances of the kitten being alive is pretty darn slim. I had a foster abort her kittens and one remained inside. It is pretty dangerous to leave her like that > > Hi, > > my 14-month-old cat is pregnant (about six weeks). Today she has had a [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > However, she is at risk for infection, and if it were my cat, I would have > her spayed right now. If the third kitten were alive, wouldn't the vet be able to detect a heartbeat, at 6 weeks gestation (considering 8+ weeks would be full term)? Cathy > Hi, > my 14-month-old cat is pregnant (about six weeks). Today she has had a [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Alessandra (from Italy) I would guess the vet is right. I hope all goes ok. Could be dangerous if she does not get it out. In the fine newsgroup "rec.pets.cats.health+behav", Karen Chuplis <kchuplis@alltel.net> artfully composed this message within <news:BD5A769F.3EB1F%kchuplis@alltel.net> on 31 Aug 2004: > I would guess the vet is right. I hope all goes ok. Could be > dangerous if she does not get it out. I'd also have the female tested for FeLV when the procedure is done. SignatureCheryl > In the fine newsgroup "rec.pets.cats.health+behav", Karen Chuplis > <kchuplis@alltel.net> artfully composed this message within [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > I'd also have the female tested for FeLV when the procedure is done. Definately agree to this one. It's the #1 reason for spontaneous abortion in cats. Either way, she needs spaying as emergency surgery. There is something wrong with the pregnancy, and the liklihood of the remaining kitten being a) viable, b) normal is minute. The longer you wait, the more chance the cat dies. Thanks to all who have kindly replied to my post. I should have said that the cat had disappeared for two days previous to the miscarriage. She probably fighted with other cats or dogs and had a trauma. Anyway, I called my vet this morning (I am out of town, so the vet who visited her is not her 'regular' one) and he said I can bring the cat to him when I am back in a couple of days. She is taking antibiotics now, so she should not be at high risk for infection. I'll keep you updated anyway. Thanks again. Alessandra > Hi, > my 14-month-old cat is pregnant (about six weeks). Today she has had a [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Alessandra (from Italy) My cat's regular vet has visited her today. She has no more kittens to deliver (another mistake of the other vet). He gave her an injection against worms (hope that's the correct medical term in English). On the whole, she seems to be fairly well, although a bit depressed. Thanks again to all who replied! Alessandra > Hi, > my 14-month-old cat is pregnant (about six weeks). Today she has had a [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Alessandra (from Italy) > My cat's regular vet has visited her today. She has no more kittens to > deliver (another mistake of the other vet). He gave her an injection against [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Alessandra I hope she feels better soon. Are you planning to have her spayed? > > My cat's regular vet has visited her today. She has no more kittens to > > deliver (another mistake of the other vet). He gave her an injection [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > I hope she feels better soon. Are you planning to have > her spayed? Not for the moment. The kids would love to let her have a litter of kittens (we can easily find good homes for them). My vet too has advised to let her have kittens once before spaying. Cheers, Alessandra In the fine newsgroup "rec.pets.cats.health+behav", "Danval" <danval@tiscali.it> artfully composed this message within <news:chc0iv$l0k$1@lacerta.tiscalinet.it> on 04 Sep 2004: > My vet too has advised to let her > have kittens once before spaying. What an incredibly irresponsible vet. Yeesh. SignatureCheryl > In the fine newsgroup "rec.pets.cats.health+behav", "Danval" > <danval@tiscali.it> artfully composed this message within [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > What an incredibly irresponsible vet. Yeesh. He's in Italy, for Christ's sake. The most deeply sexist nation on earth, perhaps, although it is the insidious kind of sexism that finds females cute and cuddly for the most part. The vet probably thinks the cat will be unfulfilled as a female unless she reproduces, and I'll bet he feels the same way about human females. > > In the fine newsgroup "rec.pets.cats.health+behav", "Danval" > > <danval@tiscali.it> artfully composed this message within [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > will be unfulfilled as a female unless she reproduces, > and I'll bet he feels the same way about human females. That should be "she." >From: "Mary" rosefan@email.com >He's in Italy, for Christ's sake. The most deeply sexist >nation on earth, perhaps, although it is the insidious >kind of sexism that finds females cute and cuddly >for the most part. The vet probably thinks the cat >will be unfulfilled as a female unless she reproduces, >and I'll bet he feels the same way about human females. I was thinking that's what the .it in his ISP meant. Poor kitty :( ________ See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html Declawing Info: http://www.wholecatjournal.com/articles/claws.htm > > I hope she feels better soon. Are you planning to have her spayed? > > Not for the moment. The kids would love to let her have a litter of kittens (we can easily find good homes for them). My vet too has advised to let her have kittens once before spaying. You could just as easily have her spayed and adopt some homeless kittens. Your vet is disgusting and so are you if you follow this asinine advice. Regardless of where you are in Italy, I guarantee there are kittens that need homes this minute. (I've seen these pathetic, sickly strays everywhere from Sicily to the Northern Lake Region.) Explain where babies come from to your kids, then tell them about the millions upon millions of cats and kittens that are destroyed because people will not spay their animals. Teach your children the GOOD lesson--responsibility--not the old crappy one re "the miracle of life." > > > My cat's regular vet has visited her today. She has no more kittens to > > > deliver (another mistake of the other vet). He gave her an injection [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Alessandra I find your vet's recommendation to be really strange. Cathy << I find your vet's recommendation to be really strange. Cathy >> You wouldn't think there would be such a discrepancy in veterinary medicine in different countries, would you? I mean, I'm sure it's been a couple of decades, at least, since US vets have believed cats should have a litter...maybe 4 or 5 decades. Or, I wonder if there are any US vets who ever advise that? Then again, US vets often advocate or at least willingly perform declawing so I guess the argument could go both ways as to who is the most "progressive." Candace (take the litter out before replying by e-mail) See my cats: http://photos.yahoo.com/maccandace "One does not meet oneself until one catches the reflection from an eye other than human." (Loren Eisely) > << I find your vet's recommendation to be really strange. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Then again, US vets often advocate or at least willingly perform declawing so I > guess the argument could go both ways as to who is the most "progressive." Yep, different cultures often provide for interesting - & sometimes surprising - contrasts. And not just in this context. Cathy >From: "Danval" danval@tiscali.it >Are you planning to have >> her spayed? > >Not for the moment. The kids would love to let her have a litter of kittens >(we can easily find good homes for them). I see, stress out the cat so kiddies can see the "miracle of life." Better idea, take kiddies to the local shelter when they can learn all about it. >My vet too has advised to let her >have kittens once before spaying. Exactly what is your vet's reasoning? Is he just agreeing with his client, or can he truly believe this is best for the cat. ________ See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html Declawing Info: http://www.wholecatjournal.com/articles/claws.htm I can see I have stirred up a hornet's nest with my message... >> My vet too has advised to let her >> have kittens once before spaying. > > Exactly what is your vet's reasoning? Is he just agreeing with his > client, or can he truly believe this is best for the cat. Actually, when I asked him about spaying, he suggested I let her have kittens once. Anyway, not all Italian vets thinks alike, for the other vet (the one that was wrong twice) is definitely in favor of spaying as soon as possible. Although I love debates, especially among people of different cultures, I have to let this matter drop for now, for I fear the debate would be endless. Thank you all for your advice. Alessandra > I can see I have stirred up a hornet's nest with my message... > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Alessandra Or for fear that you don't have a leg to stand on. There is nothing fearful about a debate unless you are full of crap. If you let this cat have kitten, you are full of crap and worse. Set the right example for your children. Spay this animal and perhaps foster a pregnant stray one year until she has her kittens, if you want your children to see the birth and experience the kittens. Do the right thing. You have the choice. Millions upon millions of lovely cats and kittens destroyed all over the world every day. Don't make more. Save some. >> I can see I have stirred up a hornet's nest with my message... >> [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] >destroyed all over the world every day. >Don't make more. Save some. Alessandra is right. There can't be a debate with you. The second and third sentence of your response indicates that. Those vitriolic remarks were uncalled for. my 2 ¢ > >> I can see I have stirred up a hornet's nest with my message... > >> [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > > my 2 ? Sure there can be a debate with me. I never try to silence anyone. All you have to do is have a justifiable position and be articulate enough to present it and defend it. If strong opinions scare you this much, you may be too delicate for Usenet. Anyone who attempts to justify allowing a cat to breed when there are so many living cats who need homes is full of sh.t. Not only that, but they are contributing to the problem of overpopulation of unwanted animals. Don't like my language? Well, I don't like pansies who can't stand strong clear language and are too polite to take a stand. And I DON'T like idiots who are so selfish they will ignore the plights of the many cats who need homes and allow their pet to breed "Because it will be such FUN for the children." Isn't free speech grand? >> >> I can see I have stirred up a hornet's nest with my message... >> >> [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] > >Isn't free speech grand? It is not your language that bothers me, believe me, I can stand it. I just don't prefer to use that language in public or in private even on the Usenet. It is the lack of civility in your speech and the vitriolic tone. I don't mind the fact that you think that you have the ace of spades up your sleeve. I do object to the fact that you think the hand of God put it there. A debate can happen between opposing views without the use of profanity and degrading into name calling. Try it you just might like it. I am just wondering if you use this language in your everyday conversations with people or do you just save it up for the Usenet? > >> >> I can see I have stirred up a hornet's nest with my message... > >> >> [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > >Sure there can be a debate with me. I never try to silence anyone. All you > >have to do is have a justifiable position and be articulate enough to present it and defend it. > >If strong opinions scare you this much, you may be too delicate for Usenet. > > > >Anyone who attempts to justify allowing a cat to breed when there are so > >many living cats who need homes is full of sh.t. Not only that, but they are contributing to the > >problem of overpopulation of unwanted animals. Don't like my language? Well, I don't like pansies who > >can't stand strong clear language and are too polite to take a stand. And I DON'T like > >idiots who are so selfish they will ignore the plights of the many cats who need homes and > >allow their pet to breed "Because it will be such FUN for the children." > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I just don't prefer to use that language in public or in private even > on the Usenet. It is the lack of civility in your speech and the vitriolic tone. Why would I want to be civil to people who advocate or are contributing to the suffering and death of millions of animals? It makes me angry. And, as one poet put it, "this is a battle worthy of our weapons." > I don't mind the fact that you think that you have the ace of spades > up your sleeve. No clue as to what you're talking about. Do I know I am right that people who love cats should abopt the ones that are already here rather than allow a cat to breed "because the kids will love it?" You bet. Are you arguing against this? >I do object to the fact that you think the hand of God > put it there. Here is what you know about what I think: exactly what I tell you I think. If I am wrong, tell me how. In your measured and oh so "civil" words. > A debate can happen between opposing views without the use of > profanity and degrading into name calling. Anything can happen. Even really outlandishly ridiculous things, like a jerk like you critiquing the language and tone of a post, when it is the content that matters. > Try it you just might like it. You are so full of ASSumptions. So typical for an idiot who values form over content. > I am just wondering if you use this language in your everyday > conversations with people or do you just save it up for the Usenet? Well, let me just clear that up for you. I use the language that best expresses what I am thinking and feeling, when I write and when I speak. Very simple. Tight-assed control freaks like you are not even blips on my radar screen. Have anything to say about CATS, genius? Think responsible pet owners should allow them to breed indiscriminately, do you? > > >> >> I can see I have stirred up a hornet's nest with my message... > > >> >> [quoted text clipped - 73 lines] > Why would I want to be civil to people who advocate or > are contributing to the suffering and death of millions of animals? Because, by being civil, & calmly explaining your position & why you hold it, you are more liable to hold the other person's attention. Otherwise, they're more likely to fluff you off as merely a disagreeable person who's viewpoints aren't worth their time. In this case, I think it's even more important because there appears to be a cultural difference going on, plus on Usenet - being an international forum, one is sort of an ambassador for wherever you're posting from, like it/consciously or not. Cathy > > > >> >> I can see I have stirred up a hornet's nest with my message... > > > >> >> [quoted text clipped - 85 lines] > they're more likely to fluff you off as merely a disagreeable person who's > viewpoints aren't worth their time. Nonsense. And, even if this is true at times, I am just not this contrived. I am not even going to limp before the lame, even if it means that my efficiency at advocacy suffers. There are more than enough of you who bite your tongue and tiptoe around the often thick-skinned idiots who post as though animals are here expressly for their pleasure. > In this case, I think it's even more important because there appears to be a > cultural difference going on, plus on Usenet - being an international forum, > one is sort of an ambassador for wherever you're posting from, like > it/consciously or not. Italy is not mysterious to me, nor is the very typical and widespread callousness toward domesticated animals and females of all species. As for this "ambassador" horseshit, anyone stupid enough to think that any single American speaks for all Americans is really not worth my time. I'm not going to weigh myself down with the imaginary baggage created by some so that they can avoid getting a backbone and speaking plainly and forthrightly about what they know to be right and wrong. I'm here to empress my opinons and share information--not to babysit self-centered idiots who contribute to the abuse and neglect of animals. Strong opinons expressed in strong language is not assault. It just feels that way to the timid. So you and Pickering feel free to indulge your own style of communication and I will continue to indulge my own. If my posts are "too" *whatever* for anyone, there's the killfile or the apparently elusive concept of self control. As in don't read my posts. A simple solution for everyone--except control freaks who would regulate expression in the group to a certain "tone." That is not going to happen in a free and open forum like Usenet. And it should not. >> >> >> I can see I have stirred up a hornet's nest with my message... >> >> >> [quoted text clipped - 78 lines] >> I don't mind the fact that you think that you have the ace of spades >> up your sleeve. You think that you are always right. >No clue as to what you're talking about. Do I know I am right that >people who love cats should abopt the ones that are already here >rather than allow a cat to breed "because the kids will love it?" >You bet. Are you arguing against this? No. It is your vitriolic and "holier than thou" attitude. >>I do object to the fact that you think the hand of God >> put it there. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >things, like a jerk like you critiquing the language and tone >of a post, when it is the content that matters. You can have content without profanity. >> Try it you just might like it. > >You are so full of ASSumptions. So typical for an idiot who >values form over content. I value form and content together. In my opinion a person who uses profanity and name calling in order to get their point across in a discussion has lost what little there is of civility left in this world. >> I am just wondering if you use this language in your everyday >> conversations with people or do you just save it up for the Usenet? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >speak. Very simple. Tight-assed control freaks like you are not even >blips on my radar screen. So this makes you outspoken, or what? "Tight-assed control freak" I haven't ever been called that before. I am not a "tight-assed control freak" as you put it, not by any stretch of the imagination. If I am not a blip on your radar screen then why are you responding to me? >Have anything to say about CATS, genius? Plenty to say about them. I have three boys with claws and no balls. They go outside and come in as they please. Before you get on the outdoor thing, I live in a small quiet community with little traffic on the street and a big back yard and two lots with trees for them to enjoy. They are in at dusk. >Think responsible >pet owners should allow them to breed indiscriminately, do you? Humans do and we are supposed to be the "intelligent" species. > >> >> >> I can see I have stirred up a hornet's nest with my message... > >> >> >> [quoted text clipped - 80 lines] > > You think that you are always right. Do you think so? Well I don't think so. Meanwhile, will you learn to snip? I find it amusing that someone who is so concerned with manners and civility consitantly fails to engage in this basic "Netiquette." . > You can have content without profanity. Sure you can! You do all the time. I, on the other hand, will post as I like. > I value form and content together. > In my opinion a person who uses profanity and name calling in order to > get their point across in a discussion has lost what little there is > of civility left in this world. A noble opinion. Admittedly simpleminded, but spendidly highminded. I disagree. Those who are just a tad more than one-quarter-inch deep may see more than "civility" in my content. Don't even try--you might hurt yourself. > >Well, let me just clear that up for you. I use the language that best > >expresses what I am thinking and feeling, when I write and when I > >speak. Very simple. Tight-assed control freaks like you are not even > >blips on my radar screen. > So this makes you outspoken, or what? Why does it have to make me anything? > "Tight-assed control freak" I haven't ever been called that before. > I am not a "tight-assed control freak" as you put it, not by any > stretch of the imagination. Sure you are. It is not enough that you control the way you express what you think. You would control the way I express what I think. Except that I will not let you. If you were not a tight-assed control freak, you would have thought "Jesus, what a vulgar person, what is she so angry about?" Then just moved on. Maybe killfiled me. All of that is fine by me, and your right. What you do not have a right to do is suppress expression you do not like--and I really think you are especially asinine for choosing to take issue with a post the content of which is pretty damned irrefutable. If you care about the big picture with regard to the overpopulation problems of cats and dogs, you do NOT allow your pet to breed for any reason, and especially not because "the kids will just LOVE it." If you are going to expend this kind of effort to shut someone up, why not try to shut up the ones who advocate heinous things instead of those who use bad words you find offensive to your delicate sensibilities? Perspective, man! > If I am not a blip on your radar screen then why are you responding to > me? Simply put: you will not change the way I express myself. I will not conform to your likes and dislikes. I know it bothers you that I do not care about the fact that you disapprove of my language and my "tone," but it is a fact. I can't apologize for this. It just is. > >Have anything to say about CATS, genius? > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Humans do and we are supposed to be the "intelligent" species. So you think people should allow animals to breed indiscrimantly? You did not answer the question. This question is what this thread was about when you decided to turn the topic to Emily Postian matters of form. <snipped> > > >Think responsible > > >pet owners should allow them to breed indiscriminately, do you? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > So you think people should allow animals to breed indiscrimantly? > You did not answer the question. I thought s/he (HD) *did* answer the question, via sarcasm. (IOW, no was the answer, but the most "intelligent" species goes ahead & does it anyway; go figure.) Cathy > I thought s/he (HD) *did* answer the question, via sarcasm. (IOW, no was > the answer, but the most "intelligent" species goes ahead & does it anyway; > go figure.) Which means that his sole objection to my post is based upon style, not content. Which was my point. It is my opinion (and I will defend your right to hold and express yours, and Pickering's right to hold and express his, forever) that this basis for objection is horseshit. Or, expressed in the innocuous terms Pickering prefers, (you know, the ones that allegedly preserve What is Left of Human Civility) this basis for objection is shallow, precious, and beside the point if the point is the health and welfare of cats. >> >> >> >> I can see I have stirred up a hornet's nest with my message... >> >> >> >> [quoted text clipped - 93 lines] >to snip? I find it amusing that someone who is so concerned with >manners and civility consitantly fails to engage in this basic "Netiquette." Why should I in this case? It would take all the fun out of reading this repartee. >. >> >> You can have content without profanity. > >Sure you can! You do all the time. I, on the other hand, >will post as I like. That is correct, I do it all the time. Post as you wish. I can't stop you. You can't stop me. >> I value form and content together. >> In my opinion a person who uses profanity and name calling in order to [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >one-quarter-inch deep may see more than "civility" in my >content. Don't even try--you might hurt yourself. Thank you for thinking that my opinion is noble and yes it does not have any subtlety in it. I did see more than civility in your comment. I saw anger, disgust, and bitterness just to name a few. I never hurt myself. >> >Well, let me just clear that up for you. I use the language that best >> >expresses what I am thinking and feeling, when I write and when I [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Why does it have to make me anything? NO it does not. I was just wondering how you perceive yourself. >> "Tight-assed control freak" I haven't ever been called that before. >> I am not a "tight-assed control freak" as you put it, not by any [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >of those who use bad words you find offensive to your delicate >sensibilities? My sensibilities are not that delicate. I am not taking issue with the content only the way you presented your argument against the cat having a litter of kittens. I am not tying to control what or the way you think. I was just curious as to why an intelligent individual resorts to profanity and slander(name calling) to get their point across. >Perspective, man! > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >about when you decided to turn the topic to Emily Postian matters >of form. I did answer it! > Why should I in this case? > It would take all the fun out of reading this repartee. Personally, I think Netiquette was devised by tight-assed control freaks. > Post as you wish. I can't stop you. You can't stop me. Yes. > Thank you for thinking that my opinion is noble and yes it does not have any subtlety in it. > I did see more than civility in your comment. > I saw anger, disgust, and bitterness just to name a few. I do not suffer fools gladly. I do not understand stupidity or laziness that actually amounts to cruelty. These things disgust me and make me anger. Bitterness is another thing. Hope springs eternal here. > >> So this makes you outspoken, or what? > > > >Why does it have to make me anything? > > NO it does not. I was just wondering how you perceive yourself. In this case, "genuine" will do. I have not chosen a category to stuff myself into in order to make it easy for you or anyone to "peg" me, and I don't express myself in order to bolster my ego. I just say what I mean. > >the big picture with regard to the overpopulation problems of > >cats and dogs, you do NOT allow your pet to breed for any [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > My sensibilities are not that delicate. > I am not taking issue with the content only the way you presented your argument against the cat having a litter of kittens. And I have made it abundantly clear that expression, not your idea of "civility" is what I am interested in. I am not sorry that I have offended you with my language. I do not wish I could be sorry that I have offended you with my language and tone. There is vitriol behind the message. That you take issue with this stylistic matter leads me to suspect that you lack passion, depth, and/or genuine concern for the plight of the millions of cats and dogs who suffer every day. I think you must lack balls, bigtime. And heart. I like vivid language and strong feelings and people who take a stand. > I am not tying to control what or the way you think. I >was just curious as to why an intelligent individual >resorts to profanity and slander(name calling) to get their >point across. I call an idiot an idiot. Profanity is a natural expression of my anger at people whose laziness and negligence might just as well be maliciousness in the way they affect the very creatures who depend upon us. The measure of a society is in how it treats its weak, sick, afflicted, old. Cats and dogs. I don't need to justify my language or my feelings to you or to anyone. There is a great deal of thought behind everything I do--and in some cases an great deal of feeling. This is a battle worthy of our weapons. And you are one of those people who like neat little tidy categories in which to file the people you encounter. This is for your ease--but don't you know that comfort enters the home as a guest and winds up the master? If you cannot hear what someone is saying when their language offends you that is your problem--same with you, Cathy Friedman--not mine. Allessandra's vet is an idiot, and she is an idiot for considering allowing her cat to breed "because the children will love it." A big, flaming, Italian idiot. (Although someof my favorite people have been Italians, I don't appreciate some of the old world ideas that come with that old world culture.) And while I enjoy debate, I am now disgusted with the fact that I have spent this much of my life niggling at your closed little mind and the flimsy edges of your neat little categorized world. Pfffft! > >Perspective, man! > > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > > I did answer it! >> Why should I in this case? >> It would take all the fun out of reading this repartee. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >actually amounts to cruelty. These things disgust me and make me anger. >Bitterness is another thing. Hope springs eternal here. Waste makes my angry too. There are a lot of injustices in this world that make me angry, sad, and just plane incensed. I do what I can to make this place a little better. >> >> So this makes you outspoken, or what? >> > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >for you or anyone to "peg" me, and I don't express myself in order to >bolster my ego. I just say what I mean. OK. >> >the big picture with regard to the overpopulation problems of >> >cats and dogs, you do NOT allow your pet to breed for any [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >And heart. I like vivid language and strong feelings and people who take a >stand. Don't worry about it. I was not offended by your choice of words. In my entire life have never before been accused of not having any passion, depth or concern for my beliefs. I got two, they are big and brassy! I like people who believe strongly in their causes too, but you can always catch more flies with sugar than vinegar. >> I am not tying to control what or the way you think. I >was just curious >as to why an intelligent individual >resorts to profanity and slander(name [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >the people you encounter. This is for your ease--but don't you know that >comfort enters the home as a guest and winds up the master? Southern Comfort maybe. I do not categorize people they do that themselves by their actions and words and use of them. This is where you and I differ. Profanity is not and never will be an expression of my anger, at least in a public forum. >If you cannot hear what someone is saying when their language offends you >that is your problem--same with you, Cathy Friedman--not mine. Allessandra's >vet is an idiot, and she is an idiot for considering allowing her cat to >breed "because the children will love it." A big, flaming, Italian idiot. >(Although someof my favorite people have been Italians, I don't appreciate >some of the old world ideas that come with that old world culture.) I heard exactly what you said. Profanity does not offend me. I believe that its use degrades the person using it more than it degrades the individual it is targeted at. I guess I am just a little old fashioned that way. >And while I enjoy debate, I am now disgusted with the fact that I have spent >this much of my life niggling at your closed little mind and the flimsy >edges of your neat little categorized world. Pfffft! 1. My mind is not closed it is open to many and varied things and experiences and ideas. 2. My world is not categorized, if it was my house would be neat and the IRS would not be on my case. I have enjoyed this little conversation that we have had today. Good luck, and take care. > I like people who believe strongly in their causes too, but you can > always catch more flies with sugar than vinegar. Heh - I posted mylast reply before reading this! Cathy > Waste makes me angry too. > There are a lot of injustices in this world that make me angry, sad, and just plaim incensed. > I do what I can to make this place a little better. Well, good. Really good. I'm happy to know that. > I got two, they are big and brassy! Even better! > I like people who believe strongly in their causes too, but you can always catch more flies with sugar than vinegar. Granted. But you have to admit, cussing beats just whapping people upside their heads. > > I do not categorize people they do that themselves by their actions and words and use of them. > This is where you and I differ. Profanity is not and > never will be an expression of my anger, at least in a > public forum. I respect that. > I heard exactly what you said. Profanity does not offend me. I believe that its use degrades the person using it more than it degrades the individual it is targeted at. I guess I am just a little old fashioned that way. Old fashioned is not bad. Avoidance of profanity for the reason you state is not bad. But just as you believe that the use of profanity degrades the user, I believe that maintaining a "middle of the road" stance due to timidity, and valuing form over substance denigrates the person indulging in these stances. > 1. My mind is not closed it is open to many and varied things and experiences and ideas. > 2. My world is not categorized, if it was my house would be neat andthe IRS would not be on my case. OK. > I have enjoyed this little conversation that we have had today. Good luck, and take care. Thank you. I want to say this: you are an older soul than I. Regardless of your chronological age. What I lack in subtlety and patience I make up for in passion and courage. I admire gentle people--but I am afraid of the lure of disconnecting even just enough to be comfortable. I want to stay angry. I don't want certain things to ever, ever seem to be okay with me--to the point that I cannot remain silent and/or polite and risk the assumption of tacit acceptance. It's a short ride, this life. I want to get the important stuff right. And I really do think that shaking people up is one way of getting their attention. Want to see my cats? I just made an album. Please see the thread Cheeky, Boo, and Gnarly: Cats of My House, Cats of My Heart. > If you cannot hear what someone is saying when their language offends you > that is your problem--same with you, Cathy Friedman--not mine. Hey, as you say it's your choice if you want to risk offending those whose minds you'd like to possibly change, re: one idea or another. I was just explaining the rationale behind the saying about flies, honey, & vinegar. Cathy > I can see I have stirred up a hornet's nest with my message... > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Alessandra Regardless of culture, I would be very concerned of letting a cat that had this bad of a first time get pregnant again. I would think she could easily get an infection and die or have a VERY difficult time. It just does not seem a smart thing to do if you care about the cat. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.