Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Dec 4, 2013 17:19:07 GMT -5
Let me slip into my flame proof suit. What I'm about to say is likely to incur the wrath of Kittensaver, Mollymouser, and others.
Why do people donate to charities that help animals when there are so many people suffering?
Don't get me wrong, I like animals. But to me, a animal life will always be secondary to a human life. Wouldn't the resources being used to help animals be better used to help people who don't have enough food, or clean drinking water, or inadequate food or shelter? I mean, I know why people do it, the plight of animals speaks to them. But for me personally, I can't in good conscience donate to help animals when there are humans out there in deplorable conditions.
To be fair though, I'd definitely donate to help animals over donating to political campaigns. Helping animals is light years more noble than helping politicians.
|
|
The Captain
Junior Associate
Hugs are good...
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 16:21:23 GMT -5
Posts: 8,717
Location: State of confusion
Favorite Drink: Whinnnne
|
Post by The Captain on Dec 4, 2013 17:32:00 GMT -5
Humans have free will and the opportunities to make choices (and yes I know there are circumstanced yadda, yadda, yadda).
Animals were domesticated by man, do not have free will, and therefore I feel a bit more responsibility to them (as I do children).
I have two shelter kitties, and they have never shown me anything but love and appreciation.
I cannot say the same for the panhandlers to whom I've given food instead of money.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Dec 4, 2013 17:35:36 GMT -5
I don't fit well in either camp - either the animal or the people lovers. Guess I'm more in the pragmatic camp.
I donate to causes where I know my money will make a long term difference and not just prolong the suffering. IMHO, too many charities and government programs actually foster the problems they are meant to solve.
But I do donate to both animal and human charities that solve problems. For animal based charities, I donate because the animals didn't have any input into their situation and are worthy of our help and protection; animal charities that spend money wisely and get my $$$.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Dec 4, 2013 18:04:11 GMT -5
Why do you have to choose one or the other? Neither are unworthy.
IMO, it's not unlike trying to choose to donate for breast cancer charities or Alzheimer's. They all need help and each person is going to donate to their pet cause (pun intended).
|
|
Abby Normal
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 12:31:49 GMT -5
Posts: 3,501
|
Post by Abby Normal on Dec 4, 2013 18:08:54 GMT -5
Humans have the ability to help themselves ( food pantries, food stamps, shelters etc) and only need to seek out those services. Animals do not.
Plus many animals end up in shelters because their humans could not/would not care for them.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 7, 2024 21:34:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2013 18:09:45 GMT -5
It's simple for me, I don't like people. My animals have never called me Helen Keller because I have had a hearing aid since I was 6 and wear glasses. They really don't give a shit. All they care about is when I feed them, pet them and love them. And whether or not I wake up when they yack on my bed in the middle of the night. I can only hear in one ear so it's a pretty safe bet I won't hear it. They don't call me Tank because I was, am, and most likely will always be fat until the fatal heart attack I am trying for takes me from this mortal coil. As previously mentioned, people are capable of doing for themselves, animals are not. Mountain lions and snow leopards notwithstanding.
|
|
dannylion
Junior Associate
Gravity is a harsh mistress
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 12:17:52 GMT -5
Posts: 5,212
Location: Miles over the madness horizon and accelerating
|
Post by dannylion on Dec 4, 2013 18:10:59 GMT -5
1. My reasons begin with those already expressed by Miss Margarita and thecaptain and others who posted while I was typing. Animals, especially dogs and cats, are not "just dumb beasts" to me. They are fellow creatures with purer souls than humans. They feel pain and joy and sorrow and probably pretty much everything humans feel, just in their own ways. They have value just as humans have value. Animals in need are not there because of choices they have made. They are there because of choices humans have made. I feel a duty to do whatever I can to alleviate the suffering of creatures other humans have harmed. There are too many humans in need because of their own choices or actions. I do not feel responsible for fixing the problems they caused for themselves.
2. It's my money. I can support whatever causes I value.
3. The fact that I choose to support animal-related causes does not mean that others cannot use their money as they choose. If others choose to help humans, then more power to them. I would certainly never try to tell them what to do with their money, and they don't have the right to tell me what to do with my money.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 7, 2024 21:34:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2013 18:15:19 GMT -5
1. My reasons begin with those already expressed by Miss Margarita and thecaptain and others who posted while I was typing. Animals, especially dogs and cats, are not "just dumb beasts" to me. They are fellow creatures with purer souls than humans. They feel pain and joy and sorrow and probably pretty much everything humans feel, just in their own ways. They have value just as humans have value. Animals in need are not there because of choices they have made. They are there because of choices humans have made. I feel a duty to do whatever I can to alleviate the suffering of creatures other humans have harmed. There are too many humans in need because of their own choices or actions. I do not feel responsible for fixing the problems they caused for themselves.
2. It's my money. I can support whatever causes I value.
3. The fact that I choose to support animal-related causes does not mean that others cannot use their money as they choose. If others choose to help humans, then more power to them. I would certainly never try to tell them what to do with their money, and they don't have the right to tell me what to do with my money. not to mention that animals have a lot more worth than some so called humans.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Dec 4, 2013 18:49:12 GMT -5
Humans have free will and the opportunities to make choices (and yes I know there are circumstanced yadda, yadda, yadda).
Animals were domesticated by man, do not have free will, and therefore I feel a bit more responsibility to them (as I do children).
I have two shelter kitties, and they have never shown me anything but love and appreciation.
I cannot say the same for the panhandlers to whom I've given food instead of money. You want the panhandlers to meow and rub up against your leg?
|
|
kittensaver
Junior Associate
We cannot do great things. We can only do small things with great love. - Mother Teresa
Joined: Nov 22, 2011 16:16:36 GMT -5
Posts: 7,983
|
Post by kittensaver on Dec 4, 2013 18:50:14 GMT -5
No flames or wrath from Kittensaver! You've pretty much gotten your answer from everyone else on this thread. I believe we are all drawn to different "causes" for a reason. Personally I don't see any one cause as inherently any more worthy than any other cause. Individuals' passions for causes are necessary to ensure that everyone ("the big everyone") gets taken care of. I just happen to have an interest in the welfare (and the plight - created by humans, by the way ) of urban pets. I personally do not give much money to animal OR human causes - instead I donate my time and energy. And for me, that is directly to the rescue of the most vulnerable critters: orphaned bottle feeders. We all make our choices, and that just happens to be mine. Many people cannot do or have no interest in doing what I do, and that's fine by me. I can't or won't do a lot of what other people are passionate about. Personally, I believe every living creature inhabiting this planet has an equal right to be here. I think that might earn me some flames from the Fundie Right, but there you go. I say this because the human race would die off without animals, pure and simple. Our interdependency goes back to the dawn of time. It is a biological fact, not a religious perogative (religious as in - the biblical notion many carry that man is at the top of the heap and he is allowed to "subdue" the earth and the animals in it). Plus - like others - many times I just like animals a whole lot better than some people .
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Dec 4, 2013 18:54:55 GMT -5
1. My reasons begin with those already expressed by Miss Margarita and thecaptain and others who posted while I was typing. Animals, especially dogs and cats, are not "just dumb beasts" to me. They are fellow creatures with purer souls than humans. They feel pain and joy and sorrow and probably pretty much everything humans feel, just in their own ways. They have value just as humans have value. Animals in need are not there because of choices they have made. They are there because of choices humans have made. I feel a duty to do whatever I can to alleviate the suffering of creatures other humans have harmed. There are too many humans in need because of their own choices or actions. I do not feel responsible for fixing the problems they caused for themselves.
2. It's my money. I can support whatever causes I value.
3. The fact that I choose to support animal-related causes does not mean that others cannot use their money as they choose. If others choose to help humans, then more power to them. I would certainly never try to tell them what to do with their money, and they don't have the right to tell me what to do with my money. The structural integrity of my flame proof suit is holding steady. Of course it's your money and you can do what you want with it. I'm just trying to gain an understanding how the plight of animals speaks to you over the plight of humans. It's a fair point that in many cases, the animals cannot help their plight and humans can. But that's not always the case. Sometimes animals end up in the shelters because they misbehave and cannot be controlled, (not always though, I realize most shelter animals are prefectly fine). Furthermore, some humans are victems of natural disasters that are no fault of their own.
|
|
kittensaver
Junior Associate
We cannot do great things. We can only do small things with great love. - Mother Teresa
Joined: Nov 22, 2011 16:16:36 GMT -5
Posts: 7,983
|
Post by kittensaver on Dec 4, 2013 18:58:44 GMT -5
1. My reasons begin with those already expressed by Miss Margarita and thecaptain and others who posted while I was typing. Animals, especially dogs and cats, are not "just dumb beasts" to me. They are fellow creatures with purer souls than humans. They feel pain and joy and sorrow and probably pretty much everything humans feel, just in their own ways. They have value just as humans have value. Animals in need are not there because of choices they have made. They are there because of choices humans have made. I feel a duty to do whatever I can to alleviate the suffering of creatures other humans have harmed. There are too many humans in need because of their own choices or actions. I do not feel responsible for fixing the problems they caused for themselves.
2. It's my money. I can support whatever causes I value.
3. The fact that I choose to support animal-related causes does not mean that others cannot use their money as they choose. If others choose to help humans, then more power to them. I would certainly never try to tell them what to do with their money, and they don't have the right to tell me what to do with my money. The structural integrity of my flame proof suit is holding steady. Of course it's your money and you can do what you want with it. I'm just trying to gain an understanding how the plight of animals speaks to you over the plight of humans. It's a fair point that in many cases, the animals cannot help their plight and humans can. But that's not always the case. Sometimes animals end up in the shelters because they misbehave and cannot be controlled, (not always though, I realize most shelter animals are prefectly fine). Furthermore, some humans are victems of natural disasters that are no fault of their own. It appears by what you say here that you feel people are somehow inherently more worthy than animals. Many would disagree with you. Just sayin' . . .
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Dec 4, 2013 19:01:39 GMT -5
I do feel that people are "more worthy" than animals. Are you saying that if you could only save a human or an animal from a burning building, you'd choose the animal?
Note, I"m not saying animals are bad or "dumb midless beasts." In fact I like animals a lot. But I think a human life has more value than an animals life.
Others may disagree, of course. But I think many would agree with me that the loss of human life is tragic, moreso than the loss of animal life.
|
|
Rocky Mtn Saver
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 9:40:57 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by Rocky Mtn Saver on Dec 4, 2013 19:06:03 GMT -5
Why do you have to choose one or the other? Neither are unworthy. IMO, it's not unlike trying to choose to donate for breast cancer charities or Alzheimer's. They all need help and each person is going to donate to their pet cause (pun intended). This. I'm moved to help monetarily in situations where innocents suffer, no matter the genetic makeup of the innocents. For me, this usually means children, animals, and disaster victims. I feel like those are the people/beings who can't help themselves and therefore need us.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Dec 4, 2013 19:06:17 GMT -5
I do feel that people are "more worthy" than animals. Are you saying that if you could only save a human or an animal from a burning building, you'd choose the animal?
Note, I"m not saying animals are bad or "dumb midless beasts." In fact I like animals a lot. But I think a human life has more value than an animals life. Others may disagree, of course. I'd say it would depend on the human.. and the animal... True dat. I can think of a few humans I wouldn't as value as much as a pet. But still, all else being equal, I think a human life would win out in my book.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 7, 2024 21:34:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2013 19:08:24 GMT -5
I'd say it would depend on the human.. and the animal... True dat. I can think of a few humans I wouldn't as value as much as a pet. But still, all else being equal, I think a human life would win out in my book. so you would save the known pedofile over a dog?
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Dec 4, 2013 19:08:54 GMT -5
I do feel that people are "more worthy" than animals. Are you saying that if you could only save a human or an animal from a burning building, you'd choose the animal? It's never that simple. The situation is nuanced.
If the person was able to exit on his/her own and the animal was either caged or otherwise confined, I'd grab the animal.
If both the person and the animal were physically unable to exit, I'd grab the person.
There is no one answer. Just like there's no one answer for charitable giving.
|
|
Peace Of Mind
Senior Associate
[font color="#8f2520"]~ Drinks Well With Others ~[/font]
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:53:02 GMT -5
Posts: 15,554
Location: Paradise
|
Post by Peace Of Mind on Dec 4, 2013 19:10:10 GMT -5
Let me slip into my flame proof suit. What I'm about to say is likely to incur the wrath of Kittensaver, Mollymouser, and others. Why do people donate to charities that help animals when there are so many people suffering? Don't get me wrong, I like animals. But to me, a animal life will always be secondary to a human life. Wouldn't the resources being used to help animals be better used to help people who don't have enough food, or clean drinking water, or inadequate food or shelter? I mean, I know why people do it, the plight of animals speaks to them. But for me personally, I can't in good conscience donate to help animals when there are humans out there in deplorable conditions. To be fair though, I'd definitely donate to help animals over donating to political campaigns. Helping animals is light years more noble than helping politicians. Many people are morons and animals are awesome! And they are subjected to moronic people and need assistance when that happens. And they have sweet, furry, beautiful faces. Everybody else covered the other reasons.
|
|
kittensaver
Junior Associate
We cannot do great things. We can only do small things with great love. - Mother Teresa
Joined: Nov 22, 2011 16:16:36 GMT -5
Posts: 7,983
|
Post by kittensaver on Dec 4, 2013 19:10:25 GMT -5
I'd say it would depend on the human.. and the animal... True dat. I can think of a few humans I wouldn't as value as much as a pet. But still, all else being equal, I think a human life would win out in my book. In my book, who would win out would be determined only by my quick assessment of who has the best chance of making it out alive with me not dying too. It's not about the person vs. the animal at that point - it's about the best odds of survival. In my book, at that point you're playing the odds, and you just do the best that you can in the moment.
|
|
Rocky Mtn Saver
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 9:40:57 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by Rocky Mtn Saver on Dec 4, 2013 19:11:43 GMT -5
Just like there's no one answer for charitable giving.
And it's actually quite fortunate that there isn't! If everyone were moved by the same single charitable need, all the rest of the needy causes, orgs, people, creatures, etc, would never get any help!
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Dec 4, 2013 19:11:51 GMT -5
True dat. I can think of a few humans I wouldn't as value as much as a pet. But still, all else being equal, I think a human life would win out in my book. so you would save the known pedofile over a dog? No, that's not what I said. I said I know a FEW HUMANS I wouldn't value as much as a pet. AKA known pedophiles ect. I'd happily save a dog from a burning building over a known pedophile.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 7, 2024 21:34:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2013 19:13:32 GMT -5
I do feel that people are "more worthy" than animals. Are you saying that if you could only save a human or an animal from a burning building, you'd choose the animal? Note, I"m not saying animals are bad or "dumb midless beasts." In fact I like animals a lot. But I think a human life has more value than an animals life. Others may disagree, of course. But I think many would agree with me that the loss of human life is tragic, moreso than the loss of animal life. Bet your ass I'd save the animal. They don't talk back and they wouldn't sue me if their back got thrown out out when I pulled them from the burning building. So many people are suing "Good Samaritans" these days that it just makes me loathe them more and more.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Dec 4, 2013 19:17:02 GMT -5
I do feel that people are "more worthy" than animals. Are you saying that if you could only save a human or an animal from a burning building, you'd choose the animal? Note, I"m not saying animals are bad or "dumb midless beasts." In fact I like animals a lot. But I think a human life has more value than an animals life. Others may disagree, of course. But I think many would agree with me that the loss of human life is tragic, moreso than the loss of animal life. Bet your ass I'd save the animal. They don't talk back and they wouldn't sue me if their back got thrown out out when I pulled them from the burning building. So many people are suing "Good Samaritans" these days that it just makes me loathe them more and more. Well, from my first aide/cpr class, they said there are laws in place to help good samaritans. That you have legal protection, for example, if you tried to do life saving cpr/first aide on someone and they died. However, defending yourself in such a case, even if you win, can be expensive.
|
|
dannylion
Junior Associate
Gravity is a harsh mistress
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 12:17:52 GMT -5
Posts: 5,212
Location: Miles over the madness horizon and accelerating
|
Post by dannylion on Dec 4, 2013 19:18:57 GMT -5
I do feel that people are "more worthy" than animals. Are you saying that if you could only save a human or an animal from a burning building, you'd choose the animal? Note, I"m not saying animals are bad or "dumb midless beasts." In fact I like animals a lot. But I think a human life has more value than an animals life. Others may disagree, of course. But I think many would agree with me that the loss of human life is tragic, moreso than the loss of animal life. I often wonder whether the perception of the relative "worthiness" of humans and animals would change at all if it could be proven conclusively that animals are sentient. I am of the opinion that animals possess a sentience that we simply have not made the effort to understand.
Animals suffer in natural disasters, too, but they are usually excluded from any sort of organized aid not specifically designed for animals. There are plenty of generous people who donate to the mainstream disaster-relief organizations that help people. I donate to the ones that send personnel and resources to disaster areas specifically to help animals. Again, my money, my choice. It seems to me that humans, even in the face of a disaster, have the ability to help themselves while animals do not, especially when they are deliberately excluded by aid organizations.
|
|
The Captain
Junior Associate
Hugs are good...
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 16:21:23 GMT -5
Posts: 8,717
Location: State of confusion
Favorite Drink: Whinnnne
|
Post by The Captain on Dec 4, 2013 19:23:52 GMT -5
Humans have free will and the opportunities to make choices (and yes I know there are circumstanced yadda, yadda, yadda).
Animals were domesticated by man, do not have free will, and therefore I feel a bit more responsibility to them (as I do children).
I have two shelter kitties, and they have never shown me anything but love and appreciation.
I cannot say the same for the panhandlers to whom I've given food instead of money. You want the panhandlers to meow and rub up against your leg? That would be better than spitting on the ground in front of me and looking me straight in the eye as you toss the food I just gave you in the trash...it wasn't cheap McDonald's either but a cornery bakery breakfast sandwich and small OJ. More than I usually spend on myself for bfast. Only happened once, but that was the last time for me.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 7, 2024 21:34:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2013 19:24:48 GMT -5
I do feel that people are "more worthy" than animals. Are you saying that if you could only save a human or an animal from a burning building, you'd choose the animal? Note, I"m not saying animals are bad or "dumb midless beasts." In fact I like animals a lot. But I think a human life has more value than an animals life. Others may disagree, of course. But I think many would agree with me that the loss of human life is tragic, moreso than the loss of animal life. I often wonder whether the perception of the relative "worthiness" of humans and animals would change at all if it could be proven conclusively that animals are sentient. I am of the opinion that animals possess a sentience that we simply have not made the effort to understand.
Animals suffer in natural disasters, too, but they are usually excluded from any sort of organized aid not specifically designed for animals. There are plenty of generous people who donate to the mainstream disaster-relief organizations that help people. I donate to the ones that send personnel and resources to disaster areas specifically to help animals. Again, my money, my choice. It seems to me that humans, even in the face of a disaster, have the ability to help themselves while animals do not, especially when they are deliberately excluded by aid organizations.
I can't imagine how anyone could believe they aren't. look at all the stories of dogs mouring the loss of their owner or their companion.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 7, 2024 21:34:03 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2013 19:30:15 GMT -5
I don't usually respond before reading everything, but, caveat, this time I am.
I want to teach my kids to donate, and to learn the pleasure in helping other living beings. For the younger kids, we always "adopted" an animal they felt a great affinity with, and adopting that animal was one of their Christmas or Hanukah gifts. (We celebrate both, I am Jewish, DH is Christian.)
For the older ones, we gift a Kiva gift card. I LOVE Kiva, it's the "gift that keeps on giving", but in a good way lol. We started getting involved in that when DS1 (the humanitarian aid worker) went to college, and volunteered his summers. We got more involved in it when he went to grad school and got his first internship managing microloans in one of the Stans.
I don't see why it has to be either-or. But if you feel it does, no problem, Phoenix! Choose whichever you prefer to give to, and give (time or money) to that cause. The important thing is to give, IMO, whether it's money or time, to a cause you feel strongly about.
As far as the animals go, when you "adopt" an animal, you usually get a photo, a letter, and an "adoption" certificate. Obviously on some level that is a "waste" of the money, and it always makes me cringe to some extent. But at the same time, it makes it concrete for younger kids, and younger kids NEED things to be concrete, otherwise they don't "get it". To me, donating to animal causes for my younger kids helped teach them the importance of donating to those who don't have it as easy as they / we do.
Think about it ... when you were little, and you didn't want to finish your dinner, maybe your parents told you, you need to finish your dinner, because there are starving kids in Africa. Most kids say, but I don't want to finish my dinner, let's just send it to Africa. LOL. And some of those kids got sent to their rooms for being rude / mouthy, when all they did was react like a typical kid.
So hopefully, over time, giving to charity teaches kids that since they are privileged (globally speaking, maybe not on YM lol), so (IMO) they need to learn to "give back". I personally believe that giving to animals helps kids learn that, because it's cool to get the letter and the photo, and have "your" seal (or orangutan, or gorilla, or whale) up on your wall.
It's a start.
ETA We give to both humans and animals, so this is just my perspective.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Dec 4, 2013 19:30:28 GMT -5
I suppose it would depend on how you define sentience. I think of sentience as self awareness. And animals certainly fit that bill. And they clearly posses the capacity for emotion.
If we define sentience as being able to control your actions. I honestly don't know. Do animals really have a choice in certain matters of their behavior? Or are they diriven by instict? As I said, I don't really have an answer.
|
|
dannylion
Junior Associate
Gravity is a harsh mistress
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 12:17:52 GMT -5
Posts: 5,212
Location: Miles over the madness horizon and accelerating
|
Post by dannylion on Dec 4, 2013 19:41:33 GMT -5
Further on the topic of disaster assistance, and somewhat off topic (sorry Phoenix), but not too much: I have always felt that excluding animals when providing help in a disaster area is nothing less than gratuitous cruelty, not just to the animals but also to the people. Why do they think it is appropriate to heap more trauma on already traumatized people by forcing them to abandon their beloved pets? I find that incomprehensible.
|
|
Gardening Grandma
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:39:46 GMT -5
Posts: 17,962
|
Post by Gardening Grandma on Dec 4, 2013 19:41:58 GMT -5
I agree with those who say it isn't an "either/or" situation. I donate to both: Because of my mother, I donate especially to the Alzheimer's foundation Because of my granddaughter, I support the developmentally disabled Because of my furkids I donate to animal funds
All are close to my heart.
|
|