Quote:
Originally Posted by Toy Soldier
Right, and that's basically all I've said other than in the last post where I made a few counter-points as to a possible sequence of events, mainly in response to other people's adamant claims that it "must" have been planned, that covering it up is "cold and calculated", or the somewhat ridiculous notion that the dog would have been torn limb from limb and disembowelled in order to locate a sub-dermal microchip.
For the mostpart all I have said is exactly what you just said, only with the (correct) addition that becoming temporarily unhinged and carrying out an otherwise unthinkable act is something that can happen to literally anyone.
People don't like that.
And of course that it is quite obviously less serious because it's JUST A DOG, and whilst it is sad, it's not comparible to the killing of a human. Morally, psychologically or in the eyes of the law.
People really don't like that.
|
It may be less serious to you and the law yet the moral and psychological juries are out, while the act of killing a pet to a person is not comparable legally they are no more shocking and unacceptable in a spiritual sense.