Hmm... I hadn't thought of it that way. But I find it much more horrific that people are comparing loving animals to children. You don't agree? That's why my comment is made as a follow-up to theirs.
I mean, we eat cows and pigs, and all sorts of other animals. What makes cats or dogs particularly special, other than being cuter and perhaps a little more social? It seems for these people arguing their animals are to be as revered as human beings are, they would also have to be vegan, which most are not.
You're missing the point. If someone says they love their pet, you just don't ask that kind of question. It's like showing up at a church with a Dawkins book; who cares if you're "right," you still look like an asshole.
Or, to be more obvious, it'd be like asking a happily married person if they really thought they picked the best person or if they just settled for the best they could get.
No, I don't. You're searching for some total order ranking function where there isn't one. People love who they love and a lot of that is based on proximity and shared experience. I demonstrably care more about my dog than I do any random child in the third world, as demonstrated by the fact that I fed my dog this morning and I haven't donated to a feed-a-child-in-the-third-world charity today. By your logic, since humans rank higher than dogs, am I morally obligated to exhaust my financial resources helping needy humans before I can take care of my dog?
I mean, we eat cows and pigs, and all sorts of other animals. What makes cats or dogs particularly special, other than being cuter and perhaps a little more social? It seems for these people arguing their animals are to be as revered as human beings are, they would also have to be vegan, which most are not.