Ian -
Thank you for taking the time to look at a different perspective. I
truly appreciate it when others stop and really try to understand.
I don't think the loss of a pet is comparable to the loss of a loved
one...but both are losses, differing more in degree than kind.
I wish you well, Ian.
Shalom
David Lind
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ian J Greely wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> I find this hard to believe though, if you say it's so, I guess I
must
> accept you at your word. If someone suggested that they knew how I
> felt because of the death of a dog I believe I should probably
> endeavor to lose that persons phone number and never again allow
them
> to sully my world.
>
> It is a wonder to me though. In my life I have lost loved ones and I
> have lost pets. The loss (of anything one holds dear) is painful by
> degrees. Yet, for myself, I must say that there is a void in my life
> where each of the people I have loved and lost rightly fit.
>
> "Some holes you don't fill".
>
> That's not to say that my life is an agony of grief over the loss
but
> that, occasionally, I stumble across a void in whom I am become. The
> pain of loss is cathartic and the psyche actually grows but there
are
> still the missing parts.
>
> No other loss has this same effect. Not betrayal of love. Death of
> love. Loss of financial security. All of them pale behind this
common
> event.
>
> I was wandering down Queen Street, in the City of London, today and
> the thought intruded that not one of the people there would be
alive
> in 100 years, 'till I say a woman with a baby and though "you might
> make it kid". So very many holes...
>
> As I say, I find it hard to imagine that there are people who manage
> to fill these voids. Or that such voids might be created by the loss
> of a pet.
>
> Just my thoughts upon what you had written. You've managed to "jolt"
> my world... I guess I need time to assimilate that it isn't the same
> for everyone.
>
> slainte,
> Ian
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 00:14:49 +0000, you wrote:
>
> >Ian- I think I failed to make my point, so I'll try again. My
point
> >wasn't that budgies and humans have the same level of sacredness,
but
> >
> >that, in my world view, they are both sacred creations (well, I'm
> >assuming that budgies are a sacred creation...maybe I should say
dog
> >instead of budgie)
> >
> >If someone came up to me and said that they knew how I felt about
the
> >
> >loss of my partner because their dog had dies, I would believethat
> >they might have an inkling as to how I felt, but dogs and humans
are
> >not equal (in my world view)
> >
> >Do I think dogs are sacred? yep. AS sacred as people? nope. I
> >think there are degrees of sacredness. This is based upon my
belief
> >that everything that exists is a creation of God/Universal
> >Force/What-have-you (insert your own spiritual bent).
> >
> >Thanks
> >
> >Shalom
> >
> >David Lind
> >Trickster@pos
> >
> >
> >MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> >Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> >MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> >http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
> >
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/sub
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
