Put people before dogs

  • Article by: Katherine Kersten
  • Updated: August 26, 2013 - 9:13 AM

On warm summer evenings in the past, we used to see families out for a stroll or playing in the front yard. These days, though, we see fewer kids — and lots more people walking their dogs. If there’s a confab at the street corner, it’s likely to be not mothers with strollers, but dog owners admiring each others’ pooches.

  • 43
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
longmemoryAug. 24, 13 6:40 PM

Ah, the good ol' days. We were so superior to the rest of creation back then. Since then we have been studying the other animals and finding fewer and fewer reasons to congratulate ourselves for our unique qualities. The one thing that is ours alone is the capacity to hate. On that basis alone humans are inferior. Even the mightiest dinosaurs never threatened to destroy the entire planet with weapons of mass destruction.

pumiceAug. 24, 13 6:43 PM

Even for you, Ms. Kersten, this article is incendiary. You express surprise that "[f]orty percent of respondents, including 46 percent of women, said they would save their dog over a foreign tourist." After years of nativist disparagement of immigrants by you and your ilk!

tituspulloAug. 24, 13 6:56 PM

KK, considering the bile you spew in your columns, I'll take the unconditional love of a dog any day of the week. Besides, they make more sense than you ever could.

pumiceAug. 24, 13 7:03 PM

You express disapproval of scientific materialism and moral relativism, while prattling on about the Founders' belief in equality. Are you not yet aware that the Founders belief in equality was limited to white, property-owning males? And that the Founders guaranteed civil rights and human rights only to white, property-owning males? Do you really think that Americans in the class to which the Founders belonged would put a slave or a pauper or an unknown woman before their favorite hunting dog or horse?!

pumiceAug. 24, 13 7:14 PM

The lack of logic characteristic of a Kersten column in on full display in this column. You write, "[W]e now take our civil rights — guaranteed by the Constitution — for granted ..." and warn that the rights may be taken away. There's been a lot of evidence to support that thesis, Ms. Kersten, starting with "emergency managers" who have toppled elected officials in several Michigan cities. Then there's the brazen voter suppression law signed by North Carolina's governor. Progressives are not the villain in either of these attacks on our civil rights, Ms. Kersten.

sanguinicAug. 24, 13 8:50 PM

So now she's anti-pet. What's next? Baseball, apple pie and motherhood?

imichelleAug. 24, 1310:16 PM

I find myself to be more and more humored by Kersten's articles. Today, she used at 40% statistic to prove that we are all going to hell, but on any other given week she will use 40% to prove that a group is a minority. Katherine, how do you know those 40% that are foreign tourist drowning observists are not in fact also against immigration and gay marriage? You often ponder about those that have self interest, yet your beliefs always center on the items that are in your own self interest. And for record, I would save even you over a dog, even putting my own self interests at risk, that is how good (bad?) of a bleeding heart I am.

imichelleAug. 24, 1310:37 PM

Its so easy to rewrite history, you just write opinion pieces. In the good old days, sure my family all walked down to the DQ at least once a summer, but the majority of the nights kids played till the streetlights came on, and dogs ran without leashes if they were friendly and tied up if they weren't...no adults in sight. In my neighborhood there are several dog walkers, they are the new way to knit a community together in contrast to the remote garage door opener that seemed to gobble up all our neighbors during the last decade. Some are doing it as a moment from their SUV full of soccer players, some are done with those years, while yet others are without any children for any number of reasons. And gosh, I don't think any of them are actually plotting how to take the world over with some evil self interested plot.

aarghmebuckoAug. 24, 1311:31 PM

The bus study is a classic "false choice" scenario. The only thing it proves is that a minority says they think they would save their dog first. But it didn't really happen, and the actual situational action could be very different than the response to a wild hypothetical. Philosophy is a great topic for discussion, and this society could benefit from great debates. Please bring in columnists who have the skills to do that instead of this drivel we are subjected to each week.

lindsaytAug. 25, 13 4:56 AM

There are few people more uninformed than somebody who devalues children so much as to refer to their dog as "my child", and it is disappointing to imagine that some of them would save a pet before a stranger. That said, I think all this nonsense about moral relativism and progressives being to blame misses the obvious fact that people who behave this way generally don't have children of their own, and have become more prevalent not because of "moral relativism" but because of both the declining birth rate and the shift to older age at birth of first child among the wealthier and more educated classes. I feel confident that nobody who's spent all night up with a sick child or changed diapers for months or gone through years of homework help or paid for college tuition, or watched a little helpless baby slowly blossom into a self-reliant, independent human being would say that a dog is anything like a child.


Comment on this story   |  


  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters