WHY though? Exactly why is it worse when it happens to an animal -- creatures we hunt, eat, wear -- then when it happens to us? I like animals! Since when are they as important as us humans though?

WHY though? Exactly why is it worse when it happens to an animal -- creatures we hunt, eat, wear -- then when it happens to us? I like animals! Since when are they as important as us humans though?

I for one am happy the damn dog will die. I HATE pets on soaps. And I agree, but killing a human is much worse. Now people saying it isn't, do you mean just on fictional tv or in real life as well?

WHY though? Exactly why is it worse when it happens to an animal -- creatures we hunt, eat, wear -- then when it happens to us? I like animals! Since when are they as important as us humans though?

Hunting for food is different, at least it serves a purpose, to continue to eco-cycle and the survival of humanity.

Killing an animal just to kill it is cruel. Animals don't have the mental capacity that humans have, they don't know what they're doing in relation to humans. For a human to kill an animal for the sake of it is just wrong, IMO.

Well... Cara Mia, I see your point, and I agree. I guess many Y&R fans have never seen "Old Yeller". IT's not as if it's a plot device that's not been used before. Good grief, I ahve an episode of Isis on DVD that uses it.

I am saying it's RIGHT for someone to kill animal but I am asking why it's WORSE? I am just trying to understand why for some people a murderer or a rapist could be redeemable but an animal-killer would not.

People cut MJ slack for one reason. SH is an inherently sympathetic presence. And it's NOT about talent. Judith Chapman is very talented but she is not inherently sympathetic. SH is able to sell this wretched villain but I can understand quite easily why she was once cast as All-American sweetheart Lana Lang. To see her is love her. Once again, this quality of being sympathetic, likable/lovable has NOTHING do with talent. Instead of making MJ so dark, I wish the writers would capitalize on SH's underlying sweetness and move MJ away from monster and towards conflicted anti-heroine. It's not in the cards though I think, which is too bad.

I think it is too late for that. I think Patty is an inherently sympathetic character, but I don't find Patty as MJ sympathetic. She also has only been on screen for a short time which can explain why people want to root for a good actress new to the show. I like Stacey's potrayal but maybe it is because I don't find her that much better than many of the other good actors and actresses on the show, some of whom are backburned, that I feel little sympathy for her character. MJ, I find a good and intriguing villain, but I don't want her to be turned into a nice character after all she has done just because of some health issue or mental problem. In the end, I want her to get hers just like I want Adam to pay for his crimes.

Edited July 3, 200916 yr by lmfan

I like animals! Since when are they as important as us humans though?

WHA-WHA-WHAAAAAAAAT?!

Edited July 3, 200916 yr by y&r_fan

I am saying it's RIGHT for someone to kill animal but I am asking why it's WORSE? I am just trying to understand why for some people a murderer or a rapist could be redeemable but an animal-killer would not.

I think that is just how the human psyche works for many. Children and cute animals like cats, certain dogs, and birds are seen as innocents. They can't fight back or defend themselves if a person wants to truly harm them. MJ has now tried to kill a child and has killed two animals and people will be offended by that. It doesn't make much sense but that is a line that writers should know not to cross. Look at how prisoners treat fellow inmates that are pedophiles or child abusers. I personally find what she did to Summer worse, but people will not sympathize with an animal killer.

Edited July 3, 200916 yr by lmfan

I think that is just how the human psyche works for many. Children and cute animals like cats, certain dogs, and birds are seen as innocents. They can't fight back or defend themselves if a person wants to truly harm them. MJ has now tried to kill a child and has killed two animals and people will be offended by that. It doesn't make much sense but that is a line that writers should know not to cross. Look at how prisoners treat fellow inmates that are pedophiles or child abusers. I personally find what she did to Summer worse, but people will not sympathize with an animal killer.

That's my point. MJ nearly killed a child. That is MUCH WORSE than what she did to Mr. Kitty.

Mr. Kitty.

I believe Kitty is female!

LOL!

That's my point. MJ nearly killed a child. That is MUCH WORSE than what she did to Mr. Kitty.

I think MJ nearly killing Summer put her on the edge with many viewers, her killing anymore innocent animals will push her over the edge. I have to say, I am more interested in how Paul will react to finding out MJ is Patty than anyone else. Paul has been such a straight shooter for so long and the way they were raised by Mary and Carl, it will be hard to understand how this person could have been part of his family.

That's my point. MJ nearly killed a child. That is MUCH WORSE than what she did to Mr. Kitty.

No. What she did to Mr. Kitty was worse because she didn't nearly kill him - she DID kill him.

I believe Kitty is female!

LOL!

So was Kitty supposed to be around when Patty was with Jack initially based on her dream? I wonder how old Kitty is and talk about continuity, living Kitty in MJ's dream looked nothing like stuffed Kitty.

WHY though? Exactly why is it worse when it happens to an animal -- creatures we hunt, eat, wear -- then when it happens to us? I like animals! Since when are they as important as us humans though?

I don't know anyone that hunts, eats or wears domesticated animals (there are animal cruelty laws), but I haven't seen anyone say they are more important than people.

Edited July 3, 200916 yr by Juliajms

I just watched Friday's US episode...

After seeing Thom Bierdz's scene in Friday's US episode, he's atrocious. God, even with two pieces of dialogue, he was horrendous. It was like he was doing some really bad parody. Also, I must say, whatever little they gave him this far hasn't been impressive. He was also pretty bad in those two Melrose Place episodes he was on from back in the day. I'm not impressed by him AT ALL.

I'll comment more on Friday's episode later...

Edited July 3, 200916 yr by Y&RWorldTurner