Are Dogs Like Kids In A Divorce?


>>ONE CANADIAN JUDGE HAD
SOME STRONG WORDS FOR A DIVORCING COUPLE WHERE ONE PARTY
WANTED TO SEEK FULL CUSTODY OF THEIR THREE DOGS. THIS IS AN INTERESTING CASE
BECAUSE DOGS BY LAW ARE SIMPLY PROPERTY. THEY ARE PROPERTY HERE IN THE
UNITED STATES, THEY ARE LISTED AS PROPERTY IN CANADA. BUT THEY ARE DIFFERENT FROM A
HOUSE, CAR, OR CLOTHING. THERE IS AN EMOTIONAL
ATTACHMENT TO IT. THE JUDGE STARTED HIS 15 PAGE RULING IN A VERY NICE,
UNDERSTANDING WAY. BUT THEN HE CONTINUES.>>BUT WAIT A MINUTE.>>LET ME GIVE YOU MORE. I AGREE
WITH HIM, THAT IS THE LAW. BUT THINGS ARE CHANGING. DECADES AGO ANIMAL CRUELTY WAS
NOT A THING, IT WAS A MISDEMEANOR. NOW IT IS A FELONY AND PEOPLE
SPENT TIME IN PRISON IF THEY ARE CONVICTED OF
SEVERE ANIMAL CRUELTY. I DO SEE MORE AND MORE PEOPLE
BREAKING UP AND THEN FIGHTING OVER WHO WAS
GOING TO KEEP THE DOG. INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH THERE IS
SOMEONE WHO LIVES IN MY APARTMENT COMPLEX WHO SHARES
CUSTODY OF A DOG THAT HE HAD WITH HIS EX-BOYFRIEND. I DO FIND IT INTERESTING. WHO KNOWS HOW LAWS WILL EVOLVE
IN THE FUTURE TO TAKE CARE OF THIS.>>DOG LOVERS, WHAT AM I
GOING TO DO WITH YOU? ARE WE GOING TO HAVE TO COME UP
WITH A WHOLE NEW SET OF LAWS FOR PETS AND ANIMALS? THE ANSWER MIGHT BE YES. RIGHT NOW THE JUDGE IS RIGHT,
THEY ARE JUST TREATED AS PROPERTY. CUT THEM IN HALF
AND GIVE ONE TO EACH. DON’T BE SOLOMON. SHOULD THEY BE
TREATED DIFFERENTLY? I GUESS. COME ON, THEY ARE NOT PROPERTY. AT THE SAME TIME THEY
ARE NOT HUMANS. IT ANNOYS ME WHEN PEOPLE SAY
THEY ARE JUST AS VALUABLE AS A HUMAN. NO, NOT REALLY. AT THE SAME TIME THEY ARE NOT
THE SAME AS A CHAIR. IS ALSO SUPER OBVIOUS THAT
PEOPLE HAVE ENORMOUS EMOTIONAL ATTACHMENT TO THEM. EVEN IF YOU DON’T CARE ABOUT
THE ANIMAL OR THE DOG, YOU SHOULD CARE ABOUT THE EMOTIONAL
ATTACHMENT THE HUMAN HAS.>>I AGREE WITH YOU A DOG DOESN’T
HAVE THE SAME VALUE AS A HUMAN. IN A LOT OF CASES A DOG IS MORE
VALUABLE THAN MOST HUMANS I HAVE INTERACTED WITH. I GET IT, HUMAN
LIVES ARE IMPORTANT.>>BEGRUDGINGLY.>>THE REASON WHY I SAY THAT IS
THERE ARE SO MANY INSANELY CRUEL PEOPLE OUT THERE. YOU SEE THE CRUELTY OF
PEOPLE DAY IN, DAY OUT. BUT WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT DOGS
YOU THINK ABOUT HOW INNOCENT AND SWEET THEY ARE. THAT IS THE REASON WHY IT SEEMS
AS THOUGH A LOT OF PEOPLE VALUE DOGS OVER HUMANS. I’M NOT SAYING THAT IS RIGHT,
BUT I UNDERSTAND THE PERSPECTIVE. DO I VALUE MY DOG OVER
CERTAIN PEOPLE THAT WE WERE CONFRONTED WITH AT THE RNC? ABSOLUTELY. IF I HAD TO CHOOSE BETWEEN THE
TWO WHAT I CHOOSE? ABSOLUTELY. AT THE SAME TIME THERE NEEDS TO
BE EVOLUTION OF LAWS TO HELP PEOPLE HANDLE PETS
WHEN THEY BREAK UP. IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN PROPERTY.>>I’M NOT GOING TO BUY INTO
THIS LIKE SOME DOGS ARE BETTER THAN HUMANS. I PLAY THAT ON PURPOSE BECAUSE
PEOPLE THINK ANIMALS CAN’T HAVE BAD INTENT, AND HUMANS HAVE
BAD INTENT SO IT IS EASY FOR ME TO LOVE THE DOG. BUT REMEMBER IT IS EASY FOR US
TO SAY THAT ABOUT DICK CHENEY OR SOMEONE ELSE->>I’M NOT MAKING AN ARGUMENT
ABOUT THE DEATH PENALTY. I’M NOT SAYING LIKE WE SHOULD
ALLOW ONE TO DIE AND WANT TO LIVE. THIS IS ABOUT HUMANS AND THEIR
VALUE SYSTEMS AND WHAT THEY VALUE AND PRIORITIZE
IN THEIR LIVES. YES, IN SOME CASES SOME HUMANS
PRIORITIZE THEIR PETS MORE THAN CERTAIN HUMAN BEINGS.>>
WE JUST HAVE TO GET REALISTIC. I THINK OVERALL WE AGREE. THE JUDGE’S HANDS ARE BOUND,
BUT MAYBE IT’S ANNOYING BUT LEGISLATORS HAVE TO GET BUSY
COMING UP WITH LAWS THAT FIT OUR REALITY. IN THE OLD DAYS HUMANS DIDN’T
CARE ABOUT ANIMALS AS MUCH SO THERE WOULD BE STRAY DOGS AND
CATS ETC. WE STILL EAT THE HELL OUT OF ANIMALS.>>AND HIGHLY INTELLIGENT
ANIMALS, PIGS.>>IT IS NOT EASY, BUT THEY
ARE SANCTIONED CREATURES. THEY ARE CLEARLY NOT THE
SAME AS NON-LIFEFORMS. SO WE HAVE TO CREATE A NEW
CATEGORY FOR ANIMALS. I THINK VEGANS MAKE
UNFORTUNATELY GOOD CASES. I AM NOWHERE NEAR A VEGAN AND
I EAT A LOT OF ANIMALS. THE OTHER DAY I HAD BRAZILIAN,
LIKE EIGHT DIFFERENT KINDS OF MEETS. SO GOOD. NOW SOME LIBERALS ARE GETTING
SUPER MAD AT ME AND SAYING THAT I AM AN ANIMAL HATER. I DON’T THINK ANIMALS ARE THE
SAME AS HUMANS, I AM A HUMANIST. GUILTY AS CHARGED. BUT THE OTHER
EXTREME IS JUST AS WRONG.

Michael Martin

100 Responses

  1. do the salomon thing; tell em they'll each get 3 chopped in half dogs see who caves and give that person the dog … and fine the other for spite and waisting the courts time.

  2. Other animals besides humans have feelings. Shocking, I know. This judge sounds like a moron. I will only have non-human children because non-human children won't grow up to be selfish, arrogant assholes who like destroying the planet and proclaiming themselves superior to others. If someone tried to take my best friend/child away from me, your damn f*cking rights I would put up a legal battle and then some.

  3. Sorry Cenk, you're wrong. Some are better than some humans. I can prove it.   Would you prefer a Donald Trump or a dog?    I rest my case.

  4. This is on the cusp of a Dangerous conversation. I absolutely agree that animals should be seen as more than property but it just won't happen. When you start talking about this you have to consider all animals basically as intelligent, emotional beings and legal recognition of that, hypothetically, could hold huge repercussions for the meat/agriculture industry. And it should IMO, but no govt. is willing to risk that, the economically it's too scary.

  5. Dogs are just property. I can have emotional connection to cars, a home, to my cash, but doesn't mean its now needs new law protection. Next the argue the new laws for sex robots with AI. STOP, just STOP. Stop being a self-hating human.

  6. OMG! Dogs are by far better and more worthy than a lot of humans…hell yeah! Easy. Yes, they need to be treated like children.

  7. I grow up on a working farm and if my neighbours and I caught wind of any farmer abusing animals, that person or persons were guaranteed a ass kicking. NOT being cruel to animals is a ago old unwritten law that the vast majority of us follow. I've also heard of farmers loving animals a little too much (know what I mean), not a lot I can do about that. Maybe that's what this is all about, " Meatless Animal Rights" homo sapiens loving animals a little too much.

  8. You can't scale dogs and persons thats insane. Yea you like you dogs etc. But there are hundreds of reasons not to have dogs equals to humans because you dislike certain persons. You can't apply the Trolley dilema by using a human and a dog, deciding to kill the human because you like the dog, that would open up thousand of reasons to kill humans over animal solely based on reasoning that is impossible to asses in a court of law. "I had to chose between saving someone from a burning house or a dog. I chose the dog because the guys was a Trump supporter and I had instant emotional connection with the dog the moment I saw him!" says the firefighter. "Job Well done because we know that human lives are sometimes less important than a dogs life especially when they are not Christians" says the fire chief. They both agree and leave, giving the dog to the SPCA where he will be put down 3 weeks later because of a disease. Are you mental?

  9. Cenk, you don't have to be sorry for thinking humans are more valuable than animals, you're certainly right on that. If as humans we think animals are more valuable then there's a problem there. Humans do thinks like travel to the moon, do scientific research, invent stuff, lets see your dog do any of that. All it'll do is bark all damn day.

  10. I value non-human animals more than human animals. Most humans are greedy, selfish, ass wipes. Only a few are not self-absorbed, kind, and thoughtful. You know how they have these conspiracy theories saying that there is an intentional process behind the scenes that reduces the human population from the intentional idiots? (I don't mean the handicapped; I mean lazy people who never read a book, never think about things other than sex, money and food.) I kinda agree with them as I see all that problems some (actually many) humans cause and all the ways some humans seem so utterly destructive, wasteful and useless… Yeah, I'm such a bad person. No I'm actually not.

  11. Yeah. They are just as valuable as a human. We have a cat and a dog and they are my children. I have the same emotional attachment that most people have to their own kids. It kills me when I have to go out of state for work and leave them behind. I get extremely scared when they get hurt. It's unfair for you to discount that attachment.

    With that said, the judge did not make the wrong decision. It's a judge's job to make decisions based on law alone. I wish more of them would in other aspects of justice.

  12. Can someone explain the whole argument to me ? So even when the Judge goes by the law where animals are just object then he still had to make a ruling like who gets the car or the table . So what is he even saying ? He doesn't need to be emotional about it he shall just decide who will better care for the dogs like for a baby a baby is like an animal, he can't talk and walk so the law just need to make sure the baby ends up in the hope which won't abuse it .

  13. And ethics applies to dogs because they are conscious and have interests. The dogs well being should be taken into account, just like with children. To not do so is speciesism

  14. The idea of people are more attached to their pets more than other people, isn't surprising. I have only seen my father cry twice in my life and both times was because of a dog he owned. In fact he was depressed for weeks. I know another guy who often admit that most people could drop dead and he wouldn't care but if it is his dog he go nuts. In fact he did when a big mean pit bull attacked his little dog.

  15. The Supreme Court just ruled that cops can shoot your dog on your property even if you have a beware of dog sign and even if the residents on your property were not being pursued by law enforcement. Better teach your dog to bow down to intruders.

  16. My ex wife slapped a restraining order against me, stating that she feared for our dog's safety (among other fabrications). The police came about a week after we split to confiscate the dog.
     I got the order vacated in court almost immediately afterward and prepared photos and statements from people who knew us both supporting the falsification she used to obtain the order, but she chose to not appear. 
    By that time she'd already given the dog away and I was advised by several lawyers that the closest I'd get (in my state) to getting the dog back is half of what we'd paid for the dog, which would've amounted to a whole $40

  17. In Quebec the Judge's jobs is to look at the civil code and apply the law the best way he can. Unfortunately, pups, cats and any being of this nature are characterized as property under the current law. The judge applied the law as it sits like any other judge would. Is not his jobs to make up new laws. Ps. In quebec's courts jurisprudence/case law goes after the law in the civil code.

  18. I eat meat too but that's not because I believe eating meat is right, it's because I'm a bad person and I have no will power what so ever.

  19. In many cases, animal life should be more valuable than human life. Best example is the animal belong to any endangered species. Whoever is trying hurt them for their personal gains should die.

  20. These idiots are thinking for other people too much. Dogs aren't more important than humans, MY dog is more important to ME than human strangers, and other dogs, because it is mine. I don't love everybody, I only give that to a chosen few, like everybody else.

    I also don't want it to be legal for some bitch to steal my dog. The reason you share custody of children is because they take two people to make. If you buy a dog, and you train it, and provide as an owner should, its YOURS no matter who else may grow to enjoy it's company. If you want a dog so bad go get your own puppy, don't steal anyone's dog.

  21. "When have you ever heard of a rooster coming home and beating his hen? Because chickens are decent people"- Comedic Legend George Carlin

  22. Issues like this should be decided by the dogs, not the courts. Dogs are pack animals, and thus there will be an alpha amongst the humans; that human should get custody because it would be less disruptive to the dogs. Anybody who does not see this this in their relationship with their animals—or seeks to disrupt it—isn't truly an animal lover. Of course, if the alpha human doesn't want, or cannot keep, the animals, then s/he should have the decency to allow the ex-partner to have the animals;,not out of consideration for the ex-partner, but out of consideration for the dogs.

  23. It is only a subjective perspective – excellent arguements can and have been made about how humans may have little value in the grand scheme of things. We are detrimental to our environment, we are dangerous to each other and to all forms of life on this planet. I do value dogs and cats more than I do most humans. Hell…many of us are parasitic, violent scum.

  24. Animals can get emotionally attached and are parts of the family they are in. I feel they should be treated as part of the family.

  25. Judge isn't really correct. Animals are property in name only – there's no other kind of "property" that can be taken away from you if you don't take care of it. We DO have a different set of laws for animals, we just don't have a different name for those laws.

  26. Honestly, Ana is a complete SJW idiot. Cenk is in my opinion is the most logical person on a youtube channel with over 1 million subs.

  27. Animal rights laws go pretty far back. Especially in England, I think. The first child abuse case was prosecuted under the cruelty to animal law. They lawyer argued in court that since a human is a member of the animal kingdom, the perpetrator of the crime should be convicted of cruelty to animals. That lawyer won the case.

  28. We once thought the same about slaves. Now we do it to the rest of the world. We use every living creature on it as our property. We take what we want and do with it as we please! And distroy the world…

  29. I shared "custody" with my dog with my ex until he finally bought his own dog and moved on. It didn't need to be legal though. Otherwise, I was given the dog so I'd have kept it no matter what.

  30. Sorry Cenk. I am one of those people who believes that animals, plants,(ALL LIFE) is as important as humans. EVERYTHING IS DIVINE.

  31. In the UK some animal charities require prospective new owners to sign a legally binding contract with them, which states that if they can't keep the dog (or cat), for whatever reason, they must legally return the animal to the charity. They will then endeavour to find it another suitable home. I know it's not very romantic, but if a couple (married or not) decide to get a pet, then perhaps they should have some kind of binding "contract" between them to determine what should happen if they ever split up.
    BTW, I DEFINITELY prefer dogs to people! Just my opinion. A dog has never been cruel to me just for the sake of being cruel. But I totally understand & wholeheartedly accept that my reasoning is not the norm, & I'm OK with that. But, you know…dogs ARE awesome!!!

  32. watch a documentary called cowspiracy, PLEASE, i do not care about animals more then people, but im a vegetarian and going to be a full vegan as soon as i am able, so please, just understand what is the REAL cost of eating meat. PLEASE

  33. A dog is more valuable than Trump and his supporters, but really that's not saying much. I value the life of a potato more than I value the life of Trump. I would save that potato in a heartbeat.

  34. What would you expect from a society which allows gay marriages? Soon they will be able to marry their dogs and bitches.

  35. Ok Cenk, I got one for you. Donald Trump, or a stray dog with rabies. Given the possible contributions to society and threats posed to society of each, one must nonetheless be subject to the death penalty and you MUST choose. Does that juvenile authoritarian boy with access to our nukes die, or does that stray, rabid dog die?

  36. i was all 50$ says they cant get threw this story without playing the "Animals are innocent." soundbite less then 5 seconds leter lol

  37. We eat animals because we are omnivorous(that's what we do)… but still animals life are as valuable, if not more valuable than humans so i am not buying this stupid logic of yours tyt.

  38. My dog, when she was alive, was far more important to me than most of the people on this planet. I may be liberal, but I'm no bleeding heart. If someone I think is evil dies, I'm gladdened.

  39. Rules For Who Keeps The Pet After A Break-up:-
    (1) If it's a dog, FIGHT LIKE HELL TO KEEP IT!!! Dogs are awesome – you cannot live without him/her!
    (2) If it's a cat, let your partner keep it.
    (3) If, by some miracle, you've found a cat that actually loves you, or at the very least isn't actively plotting your death, fight for ownership of said cat. However, they are as rare as unicorns (back up plan – get a dog!).
    (4) If you you truly love your pet, but objectively understand your ex also loves him/her too & can offer it a better home, do what's right for the animal. This is usually more relevant to dog owners, especially if you are out all day & your ex isn't. Cats probably won't even notice you're gone.

  40. You buy a house just like you buy a dog, a car and a bread, they are not humans and one can love its house just as much as another can love its dog. Dogs are just commodities, Get over it, they are just objects you can buy and they die just like plants.

  41. Cenk isn't thinking about it correctly. It's not about dogs being more "valuable" than humans. It's about OUR dog being more valuable than a stranger. Were it my family vs my dog then yes my family. Random dog vs stranger then yes stranger. But, my dog vs a stranger? Sorry, my dog wins that priority. Anyone who says they wouldn't put their loved ones before other people is either thinking about someone they don't really care about or flat out lying.

  42. I had a puppy, Beijing was a Boston terrier / Pug. She was a daughter to us, a true family member. ill intent? Beijing was diabolical, she would literally play mommy against daddie, usually to score more food. Innocent yes, lacking ill intent, no. Beijing 4/1/03 to 10/2010, RIP Still missing her 🙁

  43. my husband would have to have full custody of our cats. A) they love him most since he hand-raised them from 4 days old and technically has been 'mom'. B) I'm not cruel enough to split my furbabies up just because I feel I need them.
    it's a shame when emotions from a break up interfere with the reality of what is best for the little ones.

  44. Dogs are very attached to their human friend. Completely cutting off one person from the relationship is wrong. Especially since the dog doesn't understand why they won't see them anymore.

  45. I love animals, but instead of putting it into terms of value, I try to put it into terms of responsibility. I think we are responsible first and foremost for other humans, then the animals under our care. You have to be able to take care of your own before you can expect to take care of the rest of the animal kingdom.

  46. It doesn't even matter how important is an animal to you compared to a human. The fact is that you can't morally acquire something that you know wasn't willingly sold, and animals don't sell their flesh, they're just bred and killed. If you don't want to go vegan, fine, but you guys absolutely have to be responsible about meat and eat as little as you can.

  47. The last part of this video was a bit awkward for me as I was eating a bacon, salami and turkey sandwich … Sandwich was delish thou.

  48. Your point is invalid, a chair could mean 10x more to somewhere than a dog. Getting personally attached to an object is quite easy actually. Let's say your little brother has this stupid old chair that millions of other people also have. Your brother would be absolutely devastated if that chair was ever crushed or tossed to the curb and do you know why? It's means so much to him because it was his best friends chair, his friend of 20 years that he met in kindergarten, the first person he met and befriended. They used to fight over who gets the chair all the time, it got to the point where the had write out a schedule and plan because his mother would lose her shit over the two of them bickering all the time. The reason it's so shitty is because your brother got to drunk and started to jump on it. I could go on for hours about the story's my brother used to tell me involving the chair…

  49. the moral relativism of the left means they value dogs more than people. how many Mohammads have to die before TYT get 5% as outraged at Obama as they were at bush, or trump.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post comment