Subscribe: Comments on: Mutts and Moms Make Ellen Cry
http://www.belch.com/blog/2007/10/16/mutts-and-moms-make-ellen-cry/feed/
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade A rated
Language: English
Tags:
adopted  animals  contract  dog  ellen  issue  janetta  jim  matter  moms  mutts moms  mutts  people  pets  stand  welfare  world 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: Comments on: Mutts and Moms Make Ellen Cry

Comments on: Mutts and Moms Make Ellen Cry



I can't believe that came from your mouth!



Last Build Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 21:30:09 +0000

 



By: saimon42

Thu, 22 May 2008 00:14:06 +0000

I have a very important issue that I wish Ellen could help. It's not not about dogs or pets. But if she cared and cried about orphaned/abandoned pets, I am pretty certain she does help people also. Please help me reach her. Thanks a lot!



By: Jim

Sat, 20 Oct 2007 21:21:00 +0000

My mistake, I read the post by dogjudge who started his/her post by addressing you... I misread it and thought it was your post. Sorry about that. here is my opinion since you shared yours: Ellen is a weasel dike, Mutts and Moms are an awful organization and I hope both of them disappear forever. They are BOTH wrong... Ellen should not have accepted the contract. Mutts and Moms shouldnt have written such a contract. they dont have the right to refer to themselves as people who are out for the welfare of animals because they obviously care more about their pointless contract over the actual welfare of the pets. fuck em.



By: Janetta

Sat, 20 Oct 2007 14:03:04 +0000

My last posting....but I can't resist asking Jim, why do you keep saying that I am on both sides of the issue? I haven't taken a logics class since college 30 years ago, but I know that I can still LIKE Ellen, I can still say the folks at Mutts and Moms might be a bit over the top in their beliefs, and still say that Mutts and Moms were totally justified in adhering to their policies! So, if you need to have it laid out this way - Ellen was wrong, Mutts & Moms were right. Have a great weekend!!!



By: Jim

Sat, 20 Oct 2007 13:08:07 +0000

why are you arguing for both sides of the issue ?



By: Janetta

Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:22:02 +0000

I know I can't win here, because nearly everyone believes that they know better than Mutts and Mom as to what pet adoption involves. I am simply stating that Ellen knew the rules of this particular organization when she adopted the dog. There are many other rescue organizations out there that she could have gone to as there are hundreds of thousands of abandoned pets. So, rather than validating what Mutts and Moms stands for (THEY choose the adoptive homes - right or wrong, that is what they do!!!)she chose to publicly chastise them for not making HER case an exception. I might also suggest that the quickest way for the two little girls involved to heal, is for their parents to rescue another homeless, needy doggie. There are many.



By: Jim

Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:08:23 +0000

I cant read your tone, so I am not 100% sure, but it seems like you are arguing with someone who already agrees with you.



By: dogjudge

Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:42:04 +0000

Janetta, Please go back and look at some of the comments and actions that were taken by the folks from Mutts and Moms. Especially view them in the light of you or I adopting an animal versus Ellen. - Their first reaction was to get their lawyer involved. - At NO time did they discuss the matter with the new family, they simply went in and confiscated the dog. (As an aside, that action is extremely questionable from a legal standpoint. No matter what type of contract I sign, YOU do not have the right to come on to my property and simply confiscate an animal, or any object. You have to go through the courts.) - When questioned about this issue, one of the owners of Mutts and Moms continued to talk about how this was an issue for her, her problems, her issues, etc. At NO point in the interview did she EVER mention the dog's welfare. - Don't you find it just a little bit curious that this dog was re-homed almost instantly?



By: Jim

Fri, 19 Oct 2007 01:31:12 +0000

I am not for death threats, so I hope you dont think that I support anyone who has done so the mutts and moms (or anyone else for that matter). My stance on this is that their soul purpose is to find loving homes for pets. The dog had a better home with the family that Ellen gave him to than with Ellen and Mutts and Pets decided that they would rather have the dog living in a cage than in a happy home because of a contractual agreement that is stupid anyway. To top things off, they did this to a woman who is a talk show host and happens to empty her purse in front of the world on a regular basis. Ellen isn't acting like someone who is better than the rest of the world, she is using her medium to show how disgusting this whole thing is. I don't think there is a human in the world who would do different. I can think of multiple times that I have been wronged by a company and wished I had a national audience to share the story with. Mutts and Moms will wind up hurting from this matter if they don't do the right thing and give that dog back to that family. Not by matter of law, but because nobody in their right mind will support them or use their service.



By: Janetta

Thu, 18 Oct 2007 22:59:24 +0000

I am shocked at the so-called animal lovers who are disputing the intentions of the people at Mutts and Moms. It is totally understandable why an organization devoted to the welfare of animals wouldn't stand by while a pet is "transferred" to another home, based on the judgement of the people who originally adopted the animal. Were they to not take a stand on this matter, there would be even more abandoned animals out there who have not been qualified in a professional manner. Indeed, Ellen (whom I love as a warm personality who really makes me laugh), is a celebrity who believes that she is above the general public and doesn't need to comply with such rules. A much more rational stand would have been to promote the agency for their diligence and dedication. I give Mutts and Mom credit for standing by their policies. They are made for everyone. Although she appears to be shedding tears for the young girls, it is really the dog she is upset about. She surely must have believed in Mutts and Moms when she first adopted the dog - now she is suddenly against what they stand for - carefully placing animals in appropriate and loving homes. How sad that this organization must now go undercover until the crazies out there stop making death threats! Cukoo!



By: Jim

Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:17:55 +0000

Nobody can dispute that. Now that Mutts and Moms has been plastered across the world for essentially stealing a puppy away from 2 loving kids (see it how you wish, but that is the popular opinion) they will lose enough revenue to go out of business. My wife and I adopted a kitten not to long ago and the only thing required of us is to make sure the cat is fixed, gets all her shots and is loved ... not very difficult for a loving family. THAT is all that should be required and Batkis really screwed the pooch (pun intended) on this one.