LAST EDITED ON 07-30-07 AT 08:12 AM (EST)

What a whack job Amber is................

ETA: I love my cat dearly, but would sacrifice him for most people and probably a stranger.....
I would mourn the cat, but that wouldn't bother me as much as the guilt if I kept him alive and allowed a human being to perish......

Too much crack and meth............I hope she doesn't bear too many more children.

I will preface my statement with the following - I don't have any kids. I do have a dog, and I am married to a woman who loves her dog more than anything.

And for the first time this season, I was actually prepared to say, "Evel, shut the hell up." You may handle your animals and your children differently, but the bottom line is this - what's a dog other than a furry, adopted kid who loves you unconditionally? (Well, except if you beat them or starve them or something, but that's true of humans too.) And yes, people still mourn their pets on some level, maybe not as strongly because losing a pet is inevitable due to their shorter lifespans.

I mourn lost family members. I also mourn the cat I lost when I was 17. I grew up with that cat. She was my cat. I took it very hard when she became ill and died. The attachment is still there.

Would Evel try to make the same argument about loving your own biological children more than adopted children? And don't try to tell me "it's not the same thing." This world is so obsessed with this idea of passing on your genes. Those of us who cannot or are unprepared to do so develop attachments to, say, our dogs. Or our cats. Or our birds. Or our ficus plants. And those attachments don't go away just because someone newer and greater enters the picture.

If my wife is a mom "for real" here in four years, go up to her head and say, "Either your baby does or your dog dies." The first thing out of her mouth won't be, "I can never decide," nor will it be, "The dog. Save my baby." It will inevitably be, "What kind of sick bastard are you for doing this to someone?"

And don't try to tell me "it's not the same thing."

It's NOT the same thing.

A child, (biological or adopted) is not the same as a pet, even a cherished pet. It's just not.

What if the pet was a danger to the child? Would you try to find another home and get rid of the dog, or the child?

What if the pet was a danger to the child? Would you try to find another home and get rid of the dog, or the child?

The same thing as if the child was a danger. Do you sit around and put up with crap from your kids if they're a danger? Well, OK, some people do. But the only difference between dealing with an out-of-control animal and an out-of-control child is the laws and procedure with both. With a dog who bites a stranger, you can just take the dog down to the pound. With a child who attacks a stranger, there's a lot more crap to go through, and odds are, you're probably stuck with the child because the state says so.

My issue with this whole statement of Evel's is this - people who have kids tend to look down on those of us who don't, saying we don't "understand" anything to do with children. We can't possibly share anything with people who already have kids, even if we have someone, say, an animal that we love. It's a very superior, condescending attitude that I hear all the time out of parents.

Aside from that, one of us has to take the other side around here. It's just no damn fun if we all jump on the "Amber is an unfit parent" bandwagon.

For what it's worth, I don't feel superior because I have children.

My issue with this whole statement of Evel's is this - people who have kids tend to look down on those of us who don't, saying we don't "understand" anything to do with children. We can't possibly share anything with people who already have kids, even if we have someone, say, an animal that we love. It's a very superior, condescending attitude that I hear all the time out of parents.

I'm sorry you feel that way.

I didn't always have children, or pets, but I do now, and I can say that unless you do have both, you can't compare the two. A pet is simply not the same as a child. Period. I can say that, because I have both, and for someone who does not have both, I find it a bit condescending to suggest any differently.

It's not a put down, it's a fact. When you have both, you can compare the two, until then, the person with both is the authority.

The fact that Amber has both and ranks her pet on the same level as her child makes her a psycho. Then again, we all ready knew she was a psycho, so I'm not at all suprised at her reaction to Dick.

>
>It's not a put down, it's
>a fact. When you
>have both, you can compare
>the two, until then, the
>person with both is the
>authority.

I have always had pets, all of whom I treat as my "children" and love, and I have never had kids, but still, I can see that a child is more important then any pet -- even a pet like Lassie that rescues people on a daily basis and can basically talk, is not as important as a child. As much as I love my dog and cat, I would sacrifice them all day long to save a human being, if that was my (granted) unlikely choice.

Sorry, that's not a put down, that's a fact -- and you don't have to have a child to know that -- you just have to have common sense.

Well I haven't been around here in a while -- look at all I missed!

I understand that people form very strong bonds with their pets. I don't know that anyone is saying that there is anything wrong with that.

What seems so disturbing is that this woman who has given birth - which should be the strongest bond you can possibly have with another living thing - says that her dog means just as much as her daughter. The dog can not possibly understand the implications of this statement. But the daughter would. This thought expressed by Amber can be nothing but extremely harmful to the development of her daughter. And I would bet just about anything that Amber does say things like this to her daughter.

What is so ironic is that within the same episode, you hear Danielle telling Dick that he has said things which have hurt her and which she will never forget. Can't help but wonder if he said, "The dog means just as much to me as you."

LAST EDITED ON 08-09-07 AT 00:33 AM (EST)

I don't mean to defend Amber by any stretch of the imagination. I agree with most of you that you can't love an animal in the same way that you love a child (or any other human being). However, I had an issue with D!ck's tone as he continued to badger Amber about this issue. Why is D!ck so self-righteous about Amber's parenting skills when he clearly seems to be lacking in that department. I found it extremelly hypocritical on D!ck's part to criticize Amber when he's hardly the poster child for good parenting.

Well it is a very human thing to do.

It is common for people to be most annoyed about others by the things that they have problems with themselves.

She's such a stupid twat.

Dick was trying to discuss and understand her position, and she couldn't even explain it, defend it.

" I've been through alot with my dog."

Oh please!
This is just another incident that proves the girl is a nutjob, she has severe emotional attachment issues, and needs help.
But since she is on a reality show, I will mock her instead.

I agree with you Buggy. Amber is the biggest whackjob BB has ever put in the house.

She should be in therapy and not in the BB house. But since she is on my Tv screen I will join in the mocking.

imagine the tears she's going to shed when this is over and she sees how much mocking is going on. and wait until she gets wind of the nude pics. oy!