The Dog Delusion

There was a time when “Dog is my co-pilot” was merely a fun slap at the “God is my co-pilot” bumper sticker, and it was funny precisely because nobody would ever think to elevate their dog to such a height. Within the past decade, however, pets—primarily dogs—have soared in importance. (“Dog is my co-pilot” is now the slogan of Bark, a magazine of dog culture, and the title of an anthology—published by Bark‘s editors—billed as essays, short stories, and expert commentaries that explore “every aspect of our life with dogs.”) Canines, with their pack instincts and trainability, are by far the most likely pet to be anthropomorphized as a family member, a best friend, or a “fur baby,” treated accordingly with gourmet meals, designer apparel, orthopedic beds, expensive therapy, and catered birthday parties. Some people even feel (and in some cases, demonstrate) that their dogs are worth dying for. Others say the animal lovers are going too far.

In a Pew Research Center study, 85 percent of dog owners said they consider their pet to be a member of their family. However the latest trend is to take that a step further in seeing the animal as a child. A company that sells pet health insurance policies has dubbed the last Sunday in April is “Pet Parents Day.” Glance through magazines like Bark, Cesar’s Way (courtesy of “Dog Whisperer” Cesar Millan), and other mainstream publications, and the term “pet parent” crops up regularly. The “my-dogs-are-my-kids” crowd isn’t being tongue-in-cheek, either. They act on their beliefs, buying Christmas presents, photos with Santa, cosmetic surgery, and whatever-it-takes medical care for their animal. In fact having a puppy, claimed one “mother,” is “exactly the same in all ways as having a baby.” And while pushing a dog around in a stroller would have gotten you directions to a mental health facility twenty years ago, today it’s de rigeur to see a canine in a stroller (or a papoose), and some passersby are downright disappointed to discover a human infant inside.

Who’s to say what a pet’s value is (aside from the purchase price)? Shouldn’t people be free to spend whatever they want on things for their dog? What real harm is there in believing one’s schnauzer is a “child who never grows up?” The implications are more ridiculous and far reaching than you might expect. Take the widely held notion that dogs give us unconditional love and nonjudgmental loyalty. Praising dogs for being incapable of acting like bad people is not only junk logic, it turns the animal into an idealized (godlike?) version of ourselves, to be rewarded with all manner of pampering. How can the comparatively complex human being compete with creatures said to exude unwavering faithfulness, forgiveness, trust, love, and innocence? Pets are pegged as more loving, more pure, more giving, more devoted. They are implied to be our moral superiors for not stealing money, starting wars, or judging people by their physical appearance. They accept us for who we are, while we come across as scheming, judgmental malcontents who love on condition only. I have quite a collection of misanthropic utterances from dog lovers, most along the lines of “I’ll take dogs over humans any day,” and “dogs love without having an agenda!” It’s no surprise that many dog lovers would rather be stranded on an island with a dog than with their spouse (or with any other person for that matter). Then there’s the CEO who said he doesn’t trust clients who don’t have pets. How sadly similar to the religious who say they don’t trust nonbelievers.

Further undermining humans, dogs trained for various tasks are routinely referred to as soldiers, officers, actors, therapists, heroes, or athletes. But a police dog simply can’t know the moral difference between a stash of cocaine and an old sock. One of the most absurd examples of anthropomorphism I’ve seen was a funeral for a drug-sniffing dog. The sheriff’s department went all out with a motorcade, flag-draped casket, bag pipers playing “Amazing Grace,” a eulogy from a pastor, and a rose-adorned easel on which the dog’s portrait rested. Officers from all across the Western United States paid their respects, and the service received heavy local media coverage. All this for an animal that couldn’t even grasp what a “law” was.

“Dogs are for people who can’t have kids,” a gay newspaper columnist told me recently. It’s true that homosexual (and straight) couples who can’t or don’t want children of their own often migrate towards dogs as child substitutes and view the arrangement as a different kind of family, but a family nonetheless. Such dog-based “families” may at first blush seem benign or even beneficial. After all, people with a family mentality are more likely to form stable, safe neighborhoods and have a vested interest in the community. Those without children may benefit from nurturing a living creature and learning to be less self-centered. But doesn’t it make more evolutionary sense to want to care for the young of your own species over another species? Couples without kids for whatever reason could still opt to be foster parents, mentors, or Big Brothers/Sisters to make a positive difference in a child’s life instead of funneling all their concerns into dogs. And what about devoting one’s time to saving endangered species of animals (whose survival also affects that of humans)?

Yet each day dogs gain more and more importance, protection, and access to realms once reserved for humans. Michigan is considering a bill that would allow pet care as a tax write-off. What’s next? Dogs counted as residents in the U.S. Census?

This shift in the status of dogs hasn’t gone unnoticed by animal rights advocates. Already thirteen U.S. cities have ordinances that ditch “pet owner” for “pet guardian.” The change is intended to be merely symbolic, its fans claim. If so, why make the effort? I worry it’s a foot in the door to gradually desensitize society to the outlandish idea of pets being the equals of minor children. Allowing ourselves to glance down the slippery slope, we might foresee absurd lawsuits over injuries to pets, murder charges for those suspected of negligence in a pet’s death, and laws requiring guardians to strap their fur kids into car seats, or to walk them twice a day, or giving any number of rights to the animals. Recently dog owners have begun to demand off-leash beaches and trails, under the premise that dogs have a “right” to run free. What’s next, making spaying or neutering a crime, because pets should have the right to reproduce? Or allowing dogs to bite people or chase livestock in order to fulfill their right to behave as predators? Where would the “pet” line for special status be drawn? At gerbils? Ferrets? Canaries? Hermit crabs? The funny part is, not even the pet industry can decide if pets are children or property. In ads hawking pet supplies, dogs and cats are promoted as family members, loved ones, and babies. Yet the defense strategy, if sued over, say tainted pet food or a defective squeaky toy, is to focus only on the economic aspect of the pet.

Viewing dogs as our children extends to risking life and limb to save them as well. What would evolutionary psychologists make of healthy people of reproductive age leaping to their deaths into scalding hot springs, icy rivers, or smoke-filled infernos in an attempt to rescue a possibly neutered animal? Among surveyed pet owners, 93 percent, which includes the young and childless, would do just that. Of course, most dog owners fully expect their pet to save them, Lassie style, should the need arise. But if not trained for rescue work, most dogs would simply stare, hide, or eat the contents of their owner’s picnic basket as their master sinks under the lake’s surface. Cases abound where pets happen to save people from perilous situations, but they, the pets, were acting as animals, not as humans.

One can always argue that, from an environmental perspective, the pets-as-kids thing makes sense. With the human population reaching unsustainable numbers, pets can fill our desire to nurture without adding to the surplus of humans. Even so, dogs still eat a lot and produce a lot of waste (which has to be cleaned up unless the status lift requires potty training). And don’t forget that dogs have to come from somewhere, and parents will show preferences for certain breeds. Puppy mills would be happy to meet the increased demand for dogs, if it can be considered ethical in the best of circumstances to take puppies away from their mothers and litter mates and give them to another species to raise them. Interestingly, our popular pets such as the domestic dog play no balancing role in any ecosystem; they are human-developed and human-maintained. Even feral dogs prefer to hang around our villages, urban areas, and garbage dumps instead of returning to the woods to dance with wolves. And if too many people opted against having children in favor of pets, the result couldn’t be good for economies; children are the future workforce, consumers, voters, tax payers, innovators, you name it.

Let’s outsmart dogs a little by cutting back on the over-the-top stuff. The dogs won’t notice. Funds spent on a dog’s blueberry facial or in-room canine massage at a swanky hotel ($130 an hour) are about as close to setting a pile of cash on fire in front of a destitute person as I can imagine. Ditto on buying a sweater for an animal covered in fur, or a carob-coated eclair for a scat eater, or personalized cookies for the species that can’t read (that would be all species except us). Certainly dogs can’t visualize themselves as Homo sapiens of any age, and are becoming obese and even ill-mannered at the hands of their besotted owners. It makes no sense whatsoever to pour so much time, money, and emotion into an animal whose main “goal” in life is to leave its scent on a tree. Think about it—how would you like to be a dog? To be unable to talk, write, or question. To look upon a masterpiece of art without an ounce of admiration, to gaze at the starry night without an iota of wonder, to see a book and have not the slightest inclination to open it, or stare without comprehension at a voting booth.

It’s fine to enjoy a pet. I’ve had several myself, including a cat that lived eighteen years. When his kidneys failed, a $12,000 kidney transplant was off the radar (a case can be made that such surgery on an animal is unethical anyway), and I didn’t consider him to be my son. This need not diminish pets. We can enjoy them for what they are, without the anthropomorphic delusion.

  • Jigsawnovich

    What a refreshing article! Long live Debra Sweet!

  • This is the first time I have ever read such a pellucid writing against US policy. Truth is bitter but you evinced it meticulously. I loved reading the segment in which you mentioned about Taliban, Pakistan and relevant stuffs. Kudos.

  • Dane

    Though you fight for just causes such as women’s rights; with which I agree (women shouldn’t be used as pornographic objects for the evil desires of men), you undermine your own position when stating the following

    “How do we do it? We stand up and say that women’s bodies are their own.”
    “All of this matters because (need it be said?) these women are human beings.”

    All of what you have said is true but these women too were all once a foetus and whether you like it or not a foetus is a human being. They are not truly part of there mother’s body, hence not her own (DNA has proved this as has the mother’s own antibodies which try to destroy the child) But I thank God for the enzyme that protects that child and give that child life.

    You fight honourably for what you can see but you choose to ignore what exists in the inner most parts of a woman’s womb from the moment of conception, life.

    That child is life and whilst you fight for women’s rights you knowingly stand for the murder of innocent women. Such hypocrisy will not stand, a hypocrisy that even fools can see. God willing your eyes will be opened to the miracle that is life. You are a miracle. A beautiful creation of the Almighty who lovingly fashioned you in your mother’s womb. I thank God you were given life and pray you will know how much He loves you.

    Blessed be your life from this day forth.

    In Jesus name, Amen


    This certainly is a critical article and it motivates other people to be critical, but it doesn’t lay out a lot of alternatives. Take Sweet’s solution to the problem of pornography as an example: “We stand up and say that women’s bodies are their own.” That’s very vague. What does “standing up” even mean in this context. Should women tell their boyfriend when they don’t feel like having sex? That should be a given. Should they protest against pornography? I don’t think that would make a big difference. Should they join arms with evangelical politicians and try to ban pornography or at least make it less available for teenagers? How would such a law look like? Would in infringe on the rights of the female porn-actors who want to keep working in this industry? Could pornography be comparable to alcohol, indicating that porn-prohibition wouldn’t work either? Such questions would be interesting questions to ask and answer.
    A different example: Sweet’s paragraph about women’s rights under the Taliban and in Islamic societies in general. I agree that the US-military hasn’t improved the situation significantly. These wars were just a huge waste of money that could have been spent to really make a big difference. But again, Sweet offers just critique, no solutions. Should the UN get involved in countries, in which women are treated so badly? Or should the US get involved (maybe also militarily), but with a different agenda and on a smaller scale? Should more money be spent on foreign aid? Should it only be given to countries who respect women’s rights? Or would that only make the situation of those women who have no rights even worse? I believe, instead of just saying “this is wrong”, humanists should also point out what would be better and I’m afraid that oftentimes there’s no perfect solution.

  • Kay Nishiyori

    I am in one-hundred percent agreement with April Pedersen. Can’t abide the way dogs are coddled and allowed to bash their way through public areas. As much as I loathe dogs, creatures with meat constantly on their minds, beasts that crawl on their bellies or rip kids’ faces off, I loathe equally the owners who parade their mutts in public and let them off-lease at state parks, as long as the ranger isn’t looking, to trample vegetation and harass wildlife.

    • TraineeAngel77

      COULDN’T AGREE MORE (Romans 1:23)

  • KaD

    Dog worship has reached INSANE levels particularly in the US. Entitlement minded dog owners think nothing of dragging ill trained, poorly behaved, and dangerously aggressive dogs they see as their ‘furbabies’ everywhere. Even when dogs KILL or cause severe injury they are defended viciously while their victims are blamed. By the way, ‘pet parents’ was a phrase made up by the pet products advertising agency to DUPE people into spending more on their animals. Worked pretty well, didn’t it? Every neighborhood in America sounds like a kennel and reeks of dog feces.

    • e small

      It gets worse as you well know. When a dog attacks a child, the child is often blamed for the dog’s actions. In the case of the pit bull epidemic, we are losing a person to a pit bull attack every 14 days. This is a terrible offshoot to this insanity.

    • TraineeAngel77

      Just couldn’t agree MORE!!!!!!!!!

  • Sancho Rodríguez

    I hate people who compare having a dog to having a child. The levels of responsibility, liability, and culpability are different by several orders of magnitude. If, even through the most unintentional and oblique form of neglect, you allow your child to come to harm you will be facing a serious court case, and very likely a long visit as a guest of the state. Possibly on death row.

    On the other hand, you can legally pay a medical professional to kill your dog because you don’t want it anymore.

    If you lose your job, and your home, and you wind up on the streets with a dog, people will chip you a few extra bucks while you beg for money. Try the same thing with a kid, and the authorities will rightfully take the child away.

    Your dog will never share a thought that changes the world. Your child might.

    Your dog will show affection for you, in exchange for food, and a place in the ‘pack’. But it won’t understand the cancer eating away at your liver. It will stay with you until the end, but it will never hold your hand, choking back the tears in its eyes, with any real understanding of what you are facing.

    Dogs can make wonderful companions for those with the space and energy to raise them. But they are no substitute for a human.

    • Pat Dwyer

      no you’re right. they’re not a substitute for a human child. they’re much better than that.

      • Dan

        That’s a great point Pat. I would have personally preferred your parents to have adopted a dachshund over choosing to give birth to you. That would have done the world a great service.

        Think about that next time you’re advocating dogs are better than humans. You are a human!!!!!! You can never and will never be a dog.

        • Pat Dwyer

          I have no problem saying that I prefer dogs to human children. I don’t know why you do.

          • Rob

            You’re sick and demented.

          • Pat Dwyer

            I’m actually in quite good health these days and Always had outstanding marks during university, but I appreciate your concern nonetheless.

          • Rob

            I’m not concerned and I wasn’t talking about your physical health.

          • Pat Dwyer

            Oh? So you’re just a very rude and hateful person then. There seem to be a lot of those in comment sections of articles dealing with animals vs human children, and in my experience, the vast majority of the hate overwhelmingly comes from one side of this argument. I hope you are nicer to your child than you were to me during this interaction. Have a good rest of the day.

          • Rob

            Oh please, the drama, are you going to cry next as well?

            Anyone that says and believes that dogs are better than human children and that they prefer the first to the latter is sick and demented. If pointing that out makes me rude and hateful in your eyes then so be it.

          • Pat Dwyer

            yes actually. going out of your way to call someone names behind the anonymity of your keyboard is what makes you rude and hateful. you could have just kept scrolling down the page but you didn’t. you were so offended by my opinion that you just HAD to say something about it, as if my life choices and preferences somehow actually effect you in some negative way.

            i also prefer hockey over baseball, winter over summer, fish over steak, Led Zeppelin over the Beatles, and jogging over riding a bike, but the minute I say that I like dogs better than children, parents lose their effing minds and get offended for some reason. if my preferences on the matter offend you that much, you must be a pretty insecure person to begin with. grow up.

          • Rob

            Preferring one band over another or a sport over another is nowhere the same as preferring dogs over humans. I don’t have kids so I’m not even a parent as you’re trying to suggest. Your disregard for humans offended me more than my words could have offended you.

          • EnSopH

            He’s rating his own comments.

          • calgarth

            Famous Last Words:

            On her Facebook page, Rita Ross (aka Rita Woodward) of Corpus Christi, Texas, wrote: “I have been dragging strays home ever since I was about 5 years if [sic] age. (that’s [sic] the term my dad used) I have found the animals appreciate a helping hand a lot more than people. I am sticking to animals with dogs being my heart, especially APBT.”

            Ross was involved in numerous dog rescue organizations and not only owned several dogs (including pit bulls) of her own, but fostered dogs (including pit bulls) for a dog rescue called For the Love of Strays.

            On Monday, December 15, 2014, Ross was discovered dead at her home after being attacked by her pit bulls. (Apparently, they didn’t particularly “appreciate” her “helping hand.”) At the time of her death, she had 17 dogs in her care. The person who found the body said there was “blood all over the house.”

          • Pat Dwyer

            It seems like having 17 dogs in one spot, with little to no knowledge of their past histories, would be a bad idea. This was a very dumb thing for her to do. I prefer having only 1-2 dogs at a time if i’m by myself. maybe 3 if i’m in a relationship and we live together, but anything more and it becomes pretty hard to control all of them and give them individual attention and training that they need.

            It’s a good thing that all kids are perfect precious little snowflakes though, because as it turns out, if you raise 17, or let’s say 19 kids in a tightly-controlled, strict religious environment, you don’t get any deaths from it. All that happens it the oldest one molests several of the younger ones.

          • TraineeAngel77

            Please read Romans 1:23 where women prefer DOGS over GOD (I am a Christian) and how judgement day is very close). End times are now here and all unbeilevers will be judged especially those who have worshipped ANIMALS. Seriously molestation happens because the evil one wants to destroy us. Btw I like dogs and cats, just that I do not WORSHIP these things but my deity called Yahweh. Also I was a humanist pre 2009 so CAN see both sides??? (In case you feel the need to attack me)

          • Pat Dwyer

            this has to be a troll post, right?

          • EnSopH

            Good riddance, one less germ to infect this planet. Sounds harsh, but I’ve seen these misanthropic dog ‘lovers’ say and do far worse. Karma?

  • Enaj

    I watched a news story last night about a dog being resuscitated 3 times! The dog was having surgery on a broken leg and was pronounced dead after 30 minutes of no heart beat. I found this story so ridiculous it caused me to “Google” dog worshiping –just see if I was crazy.
    I agree our society is moving to far into the direction of placing way too much value on the dog life over human life. I imagine coming from another county to the US and watching television with all of the dog stories and SAVE an animal commercials must be stocking! Knowing there are places in the US and world where there isn’t any running waters, paved roads, kids attending schools with outdate curriculum or underpaid teachers. This is amazing.

  • M Love

    Ughhhh Im glad this has been addressed. Thanks. I couldnt agree more. AND I own four large dogs
    (German Shepherds and a Shiloh Shepherd) with plans to purchase a fifth in the foreseeable future. Yes, purchase a dog. My next dog will again be from a breeder with high quality animals who have undergone extensive health testing. I do have two “rescue dogs” that I also paid $$$ to purchase second hand. I cannot stand the “rescue dog” push that has developed in the last decade. People routinely feel the pressing urge to inform me of the fact that their dog is a “rescue” and in a particular condescending tone of superiority. I. Dont. Care.
    I do love my dogs. I spend a good deal of money caring for them. I take them hiking with me regularly. They go to the vet if needed. I even cook a stew of meats, brown rice, greens and sweet potatoes and buy treats for them.
    BUT. They are NOT my “children”. If one of them ever decided to display aggressive behavior towards my 9 year old daughter they are likely to be finding a new home. If one ever bites her or her friends, they will be put to sleep. IF they end up with a terminal illness that requires thousands of dollars to treat I will opt for hospice type care and give my pet a pleasant last few days. I will not be doing extensive hip replacements on an animal that may only live another few years at best. The things I see people doing to accommodate annoying or potentially dangerous behaviors in “rescued dogs” particularly is astounding.
    If accommodating the needs of a dog requires a big sacrifice of my time and energy, its not going to happen. My dogs also do not sleep in bed with me. Nor are they allowed on furniture. Having these limits has resulted in nicely behaved animals that obey and know their place. I can take these huge shepherds anywhere and constantly get compliments on how well behaved they are.
    I enjoy them. I love hiking in the mountains with them. They do bring me a type of companionship that is rather enjoyable. But there is no question in my mind that they are not equal to my family. And don’t even get me started on those who are continuously advocating for and pushing the pit bull agenda…..

    • Bob Rtarp

      wow a sane pet owner. 🙂

    • kafkaBro

      It is really refreshing to read this, thank you. I couldn’t agree more.

    • TraineeAngel77

      Like the other commentators, WELL DONE and from a dog owner to!!!! You should hang your head HIGH sis 😉

    • EnSopH

      I hope the sentiments you shared with the dog attacking your children would also hold true if it was your husband, otherwise that would be sad. Not trying to knock you as I agree with your statements, but I’m curious to know if you also would protect your husband, which seems to be rare sadly.

    • Nadrolob

      100% cosign. I’m an icu veterinary assistant and i sure don’t see my dog as my child or husband/ mate. All this pet (dog) worship is the product of social egeneering, the american diet and animal planet are turning peoples brains to mush, they a

      • EnSopH

        Absolutely this! This is exactly what it is. RIP humanity. Let the bombs fall. Humanity has become a disease.

    • EnSopH

      Would you protect your husband if a dog attacked him or he’s a ‘man’ and can ‘take care of himself’?

  • Bob Rtarp

    FINALLY!! this dog worship needs to called out for what it is, a sickness.

  • Janvier Li

    I really enjoyed your last point, April! If these people are such extreme advocates for dogs, wouldn’t it be something if they could all spend a week living as dogs? Unthinking, unable to express themselves as you said? Hearing them bark would almost be music to the ears compared to the rivers of idiocy constantly flowing from their mouths……

  • Space King

    Much as I hate to see people painting their pup’s claws pink and pushing them around in mesh-armored strollers, I think this article’s point gets lost in a sea of hate and sensationalism.

    • Dan. J

      I disagree. If you don’t see the validity in every single point mentioned in the article then you are most likely one of these two scenarios.

      1. Dog Worshiper
      2. Never met a true dog worshiper.

      No one is hating on dogs. We’re just saying that people are forgetting that they are animals. Humanizing dogs is a real disease that should be treated with medication and therapy.

  • the pinch

    Came home the other day and lay on my new lawn. Dog next door started barking – furiously – for 2 hours consecutively. I mean it was screaming. I was wearing headphones but my ears hurt. Neighbours ignored it. I think it has separation anxiety, but I’d just had minor surgery. Dog trumps human.

  • Burr

    Thank you for exposing this. Also, don’t forget this is America, where contradiction runs rampant. These same people, who worship dogs and place dog’s welfare over that of humans, have no qualms whatsoever about chopping off puppy tales and pegging ears – essentially mutilating these animals to make them look how they want them to.

    My wife and I were thinking about getting a dog, but the way adoption centers and breeders treated us (like we were getting a child) was pathetic – the questions, the interviews, the home visits. The last straw was making us sign away our rights to the dog meaning that if we were deemed unfit at any time for any reason, they could take it back with no financial reimbursement. So we got a cat instead… for free… with no paperwork, no interviews, no judgement, no $500 deposit for not wanting a docked tail.

    These people are sick.

    • EnSopH

      hahaha, so they place a dog’s value higher than any other animal or human. This just BOILS MY BLOOD. If humans gave one shit about their own species the world would be a much better place, but instead they worship one of the lowest animals in the world – a dog (man’s creation).

  • Anna

    I couldn’t agree more with this well-written article. Kudos for bucking the insane tidal wave of animal worshipping. I own six beasts (cats, dog, tarantula) of my own, and we all know our place in the hierarchy.

  • TraineeAngel77

    Admittedly I am actually a Christian and I am heartily SICK and TIRED of dog worshipping in the US and UK. Even Paul said in Romans: “And changed the glory of the incorruptible GOD
    into an IMAGE made like to CORRUPTIBLE man, and to BIRDS [caged birds as pets],
    and four footed beasts [women’s obsession with dogs], and creeping things” (Romans
    1:23)So the scary part is that BOTH TRUE Christians and HUMANISTS can see that dog worship is just WRONG. I respect the author of this article as it applies to humanists and Christians alike. I agree with the comments already made on this article. Sure dogs an cats make good pets but worship is a different matter.

    • EnSopH

      People place dogs above their spouses these days. Sickening. You should see the comments I read of a woman who talked ill of her husband, even threatening to kill him while she made fun of him behind his back, yet would die for her pet Pitbulls ( a breed that kills children). Turns my stomach.

      • Nadrolob

        That woman is sick and may be “sleeping” with those dogs, this type of garbage is on the rise. Disgusting!

        • EnSopH

          oh she does sleep with her dogs and that may not be all she does, as you alluded to. In fact, I’m willing to bet she likes to get it up hers from her ‘sexy’ dogs while she makes fun of and HATES the man she CHOSE to marry (probably to use him for monetary gain, which is typical in today’s syck society).

          I don’t get it. Why marry someone you hate? To use him probably. I posted her comment on here but it didn’t show up.

  • Rick

    I believe it was Einstein that said matter never ceases to exist, it just changes form. As both a scientist and a person of faith I believe that all living sentient creatures have a soul. Now, I would not consider the animal soul the same as the human soul, but it is a soul none the less. Dogs are sentient, perhaps not on the same evolutionary level as apes or dolphins or humans but none the less they do experience emotion. They can love and they can feel sorrow, they know when they’ve done wrong and they can be remorseful. They cannot comprehend larger concepts philosophy or theocracy, but they By nature have no need to worry about such matters. That being said, when a dog dies, i do believe their soul continues on just as a humans soul would. I hate to use the term “doggy heaven” but for lack of a better term, I believe that the essence of the creature continues on into another plane of existence, one fitting for the the individual species. Because the body dies does not seem logical to me that the spirit died with it, but rather changed form into another plane of consciousness. Do I believe that when I die I will see my pet dog?! Probably not, because the afterlife for her will likely be different from the afterlife for me. But I do believe she will continue on in a state of joy and peace where there is no pain and she can run the fields with other dogs who’ve died. Does this make me a dog worshipper? No way in hell! Dogs are not Gods, they cannot comprehend the concept of God they cannot perform miracles or heal the sick, but I am not a god either, just a regular human person. I believe there is one God and I believe all living creatures where blessed by God and their evolutionary process and creation was guided by God and the inspiration of Gods spirit. Could I be wrong? Perhaps, as I said I’m not God, and I’m not arrogant enough to say I know for certain that my beliefs on this matter are fact or perhaps just a hopeful ideology. None the less, I choose to believe that God is good and that Gods love for creation surpassing the physical realm and is eternal. If I am incorrect, I suppose I’ll find out once I’m dead, but til then I will remain hopeful that my beloved pets who’ve died are in a better place.

  • Rick

    For those Christians on here who speak ill of dogs, please keep in mind that according to Genesis dogs were created before humanity and God does not make mistakes. I am enraged by people posing as Christians that believe they have authority to abuse animals or treat animals cruelly. They may not be at the same level as humans intellectually, but they are a part of Gods creation and they should be respected and treated with love and care. Do not be so arrogant as to dismiss dogs or animals in general as being nothing more than tools of service or play toys, they are living creatures blessed by God and endowed with a soul, not a human soul, but a soul none the less, to show disdain for a creature with a soul, a creature created by God, is a sign of poor moral character. As humans our job is to be stewards of this world, to care for the animal kingdom, not to abuse them. Those who believe that we have the authority to abuse animals because we are higher on the evolutionary ladder are buying into a myth perpetuated by hatred and cruelty.

    • Nadrolob

      God created the wolf. He created the wolf along side the lion, eagle and othe najestic creaters, after the fall, when sin entered the word man was forced ojt of Eden, then, by man’s hand, by his rendering was the dog made from the wolf.