http://dbhome.dk/carlo/cat.htm

Well at least one person seems to think so:

Many pagan faiths still conclude that black cats bring ill-luck and possess demonic forces, while we have shown that it is, instead, all cats that share these perceived characteristics. Since cats were associated with the devil, could we as faithful and dedicated servants of God therefore contaminate ourselves by exposure to a 'living symbol' of satanic incarnation? How would this reflect on God's name and that of his visible, earthly organization? Would we want to be linked with a symbol of Satan, the 'god of this beastly system of things'? Black cats are lucky in Britian and Ireland. N.American is the only place that I know of that thinks black cats are 'unlucky'.

Didn't God create all creatures in his likeness?

The demeanor of a cat is seen by many honest-hearted observers as reflecting some supernatural, unnatural proclivity towards malice or evil. And, it is a well-known fact that cats are impossible to tame, teach or raise in the truth. The cat has a rebellious, independent spirit. While the animal itself may be unaware of this tragic condition, it serves only its true master - Satan, the Devil. So what should we do? Burn all cats alive as they are the decline of society?

The scriptures clearly indicate that neither Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, faithful Job, the Apostles, Jesus nor any other human bearing God's favor himself owned a cat. Should we simply assume that this is a mere coincidence? Surely not!Did they own any other animals?

Additionally, cats practice many unclean habits not befitting a Christian household: coughing up fur balls, licking inappropriate body areas on their own bodies (inappropriate handling) and even, in some cases, on the bodies of their human owners (wrongful motive?), urination on the floor, vocal and blatant promiscuity (unknown to any other species, all others being endowed with Godly chastity and decorum) and widespread sexual misconduct without the benefit or sanctity of holy matrimony, even orgiastic practices, substance abuse of catnip (an intoxicating herb) which produces conditions akin to drunkenness, stealing food from the table, producing ungodly sounds, excessive playfulness and the employment of devices not known to have been used by Jesus, the conducting of its unholy business under the cover of the darkness of night, and so on. What sort of example does this give our young ones endeavoring to faithfully serve Jehovah? The Bible clearly shows that 'neither fornicators .. nor thieves .. nor drunkards .. nor revilers .. will inherit the Kingdom.' (1 Cor. 6:9-11)Maybe we should take our cats to 'rehab' to overcome their terrible addictions. I never thought animals set examples to 'our young ones'. Do other pets abstain from sex before marriage?

This may seem like a silly topic but I do think there are serious consequences if anyone takes it seriously.

[ January 28, 2005, 11:02: Message edited by: Cesard ]

Actually it should be the other way around. Humans are the servants of Satan (if you believe in such non-sense of course), humans are the ones who cause evil. Name one evil act of a cat (and that's not scratching someone because they are annoying :p )

And please don't link any freak accidants that happens to have a cat involved. If so I can link many more human acts in that catagory :rolleyes:

This is hilarious.

vocal and blatant promiscuity (unknown to any other species, all others being endowed with Godly chastity and decorum) and widespread sexual misconduct without the benefit or sanctity of holy matrimony, excessive playfulness and the employment of devices not known to have been used by Jesus :lol:

Oh dear, I'm using a computer.

substance abuse of catnip :D

The Bible does not say that cats were not present at Herod's birthday party when John the Baptist was beheaded. History shows that cats were most likely present at this tragic party that Jehovah did not approve of. This was my favourite passage, the Bible doesn't say they weren't there, ergo they must have been there. Superb use of logic.

And, it is a well-known fact that cats are impossible to tame, teach or raise in the truth. I assure folks that my (now departed) cats were quite tame, and quite well trained. Alas, they weren't raised in the truth, but then neither were the tropical fish, our current dog, or the better halfs now sadly deceased pets, two dogs, a bat and a hedgehog.
(Though obviously with those she must be a witch and dedicated to Satan)

Yes I watched a Discovery show on cats and quite a few people can train their cats to do some amazing things. My own mother could make her cats sit, roll over and believe it or not do handstands.

Cats are evil! I am allergic to cats and everytime I go to a house with a cat the cat, even if it is claimed to not like strangers, jumps up to me and looks adorable and wants to cuddle and I am invariable to weak to resist which results in a superstuffed nose and red itchy eyes. Cats are eeeeeeeeeeevil! :evil:

In reality you're probably allergic to cat saliva.
Not that the information will help you a lot...

That or the insulation fat on the cats skin or the tiny little critters which live on the dead cat skin.

To the author of that wonderful insight into felines I will bring up an old Irish saying:

'Go n-ithe an cat thú is go n-ithe an diabhal an cat'

I hope you get eaten by the cat, and I hope the devil eats the cat!

This (http://www.chevalier.boo.pl/cat1.jpg) and this (http://www.chevalier.boo.pl/cat2.jpg) is all you need to know.

I own two cats - one is orange and the other is black with only a couple of white hairs on the chest.

Anyone who has lived on a farm can tell you that based on this type of thinking chickens are servants of Satan. :evil: :bang: :nuts:

Impressive, methinks. Some people have such screwy moral strength that the beauty of a cat's subtle endearing grace comes off as a diabolic temptation. This. Is. Remarkable.

No, cats are not evil servants of Satan. It is also very possible to train and tame a cat. I have seen cats do some very amazing things.

@Chev, the first picture makes your cat look like a zombie cat.

Anyway, arnt Cats the guardians of the Underworld in Egyptian Mythology?

Also God cant have hated cats that much if he let Noah save 2 of them when God flooded the world.

OMG LOL ROFLMAO!!!
This is hillarious...

I don't know who wrote that piece of cr*p, but it is funny to see:
1. Some people disregard history when compared to the Bible because something does not fit their description in its literary form, but when they need history to back something up? Oh, brother, not only do they use history, but they invent their own! And I wonder if they know what the Bible says about liars, perhaps I should mail them a passage...
2. Those actions not befitting a Christian household... I'm stunned... Simply stunned. It's so stupid that I cannot believe anyone actually did write that.
3. About not owning a cat. It would perhaps come as a surprise to that writer, but cats were much more popular than dogs (who were almost non-existant) in the Middle East. Cats were necessary to keep rodents at bay, and other animals would have been useless. Whilst it is unlikely that Christ would keep a cat (as he was travelling), I would say it is almost certain His Mother would have kept one. Same can be said about Abraham or Moses. Wherever there were granaries, there were mice. And where there were mice, there needed to be cats. It was as simple as that.
4. Black cats are lucky, all right. It was considered a good luck charm to bury a black cat alive in the foundations of a new house. What's most terrible about it is that some people might have believed that superstition.

One thing that is gratifying in that text -- it shows off fanatism of 'Jehovah's Witnesses.' Not that I didn't know about it, but this text is simply stunning.

Indeed, modern studies of classification of cats, while not necessarily being reliable as they may be based on the discredited 'theory' of evolution, strongly associate felines with serpents (despite some external differences in physiology and morphology, which confuse those who do not study these matters deeply). Excuse me?

Some external differences in physiology and morphology. I bet. So very few indeed. You just cant look at a cat and not be reminded of a serpent, right? There's this tail and those four legs with fur all over it.... but nevermind, it's really almost a full-blooded serpent, everyone can see it. :rolleyes:

:lol: licking inappropriate body areas on their own bodies (inappropriate handling) and even, in some cases, on the bodies of their human owners (wrongful motive?), urination on the floor, Hillarious. Anyone seen Eddiy Murphy's Dr. Dolittle II, a dog is show licking its ass all the way thru a meeting.

@toughluck
What is this 'Jehovah's Witnesses' business. Never heard of it and no idea about it.

@Shri

Jehovah's Witnesses are an overly zealous Christian Order. They do follow the basics of the bible, but refer to God as Jehovah (uncommon among all other Christian sects that I am aware of). In addition to having a very strict interpretation of the Bible, they also seek to not contaminate or change their bodies in any way. They do not smoke or drink, or consume beverages that contain caffeine, such as soda or coffee. They also do not change their bodies (for lack of a better term). So they do not get tatoos or any type of body piercing. Women do not even get the ear's pierced, and do not wear makeup.

Also, to everyone:

based on the discredited 'theory' of evolution When was evolution discredited? I must have missed the news release on that. Anyway, if it is indeed discredited, isn't then anything that follows from it also discredited - including the links between snakes and cats? Anyway, for those few who might be interested, cats are as closely related to snakes as all other mammals - in other words - not very closely.

In the classification system the order is:
Kingdom
Phylum
Class
Order
Family
Genus
species

Snakes and cats belong to the same kingdom (animalia) and phylum (chordata) but are in different classes (cats are in mammalia, and I don't know waht class snakes are in.

They also do not change their bodies (for lack of a better term).Wasn't Michael Jackson a Jehovah's Witness? (Now *there's* someone who's never changed his body...)

Cats are good...
...fundamentalist religious whako's are not...

You're preaching to the choir here. No one will even play Devil's Advocate (har har) if you, say, posted a thread ridiculing Jack Chick. After all, there are probably not many religious fundamentalists who will (or even can) play the games featured by SP.

And I wouldn't be surprised if chev had a yellow dog named Odie too.

(EDIT: I think the page might be satire, but I there are no links to its related pages, so there's no context.)

[ January 29, 2005, 05:26: Message edited by: Oaz ]

Any time you want to take Jehovah's Witness' seriously, just think of the Jackson family.

I seriously question the source of the document. As Oaz said, there are no links to related pages. There is a copy or part of a copy of a book given out to the elders of the Jehovah Witnesses and why it is published on a web page I do not understand.

I have friends who are Jehovah Witnesses. They do use alchohol in moderation and drink beverages with caffine. Women do wear make-up and dress quite nicely but not seductively. It is easy to confuse Jehovah Witnesses with other fundamentalist groups. They also do not involve themselves in politics.

As for Cats: Domestic cats are just that domesticated. Just as dogs were developed by human beings so where cats. If cats have faults blame humans not Satan.

@Joacqin, The reason cats go to the person who does not care for them is because that person is ignoring them. Therefore they do not feel threatned.

Wasn't the evil thing in FF VII called Jehova?

sorry that was a bit unrelated...as to cats being servants to the devil, well in my opinion everyone and thing could be a servant of a celestial being, even that brick staring at me from across the road right now!

OMG...its going to kill me! Ahhhhhhhhhhh! :eek:

But seriously, cats aren't servants of the devil! I've never seen one shoot flames out of its eyes! and we all know servants of dark powers can do that don't we! :D

Well, to sum it up: Oh yes. :evil: That's why we get along to well :evil:

That part really cracks me up: it is a well-known fact that cats are impossible to tame, teach or raise in the truth. The cat has a rebellious, independent spirit. While the animal itself may be unaware of this tragic condition, it serves only its true master - Satan, the Devil.Oooooooooooooooookies :rolleyes: But this one tops it: Additionally, cats practice many unclean habits not befitting a Christian household: (...) employment of devices not known to have been used by Jesus... :eek: ... like ... computers??! :eek:

[ January 30, 2005, 23:54: Message edited by: Ragusa ]

Oh good grief!! I was reading this with my cat, Buffy, sitting on my lap, purring away. * :D *

There are people in my area who claim to be Jehovah Witnesses and they try to force their way into your house to try to get you to convert.

I tell them get off my porch before I turn you into a squirrel!! Or, "Come in, you are just in time for the sacrafise..." * :D *

~UsagiRyu~

Hwahahahahahahahaha! Ah, it's refreshing to see something like that every now and then, just to remind you that humans are indeed capable of almost everything. I marvel at the mind of someone being able to spew so much garbage in so little space. It is truly incredible. And the best bit? In the very first sentence, the answer starts with that it can't give a clear "yes" or "no"!

The part about associating cats with serpents is incredible. I mean, gothmog is right, it's so easy to confuse the two that often I think I can never set them apart. After all, what's a bit of a hide, several limbs, somewhat different body structure, etc. to a true believer? Nothing, right?

But, hey, it gets even better. Some more proofs of the inherent evil of cats (found on cesard's link):
- Cats were deified in Egypt, no doubt because of their infernal mind-control powers
- Cats were probably present at Herod's party where the beheading of John the Baptist was ordered (as opposed to not being documentedly owned by any saint). The reasons for stating that? "History shows".... How? OMG, have there been several times that Herod had a birthday party when John the Baptist was ordered beheaded? I knew I missed something in ancient history class! I'm taking the course next semester, I promise!
- One of the reasons that cats are evil: "many pagan faiths still conclude black cats to bring bad luck". Well, we pity those deluded heathens and know they'll burn in the tar if they don't convert, but I guess there is hope: they have at least a part of the divine truth: Cats = bad! Of course, let's not just apply that to black cats - let's bring some equal opportunity fanaticism here, people!
- Cats can lick inappropriate body areas on the bodies of their human owners. O-kay... well, I've never owned a cat, so it has never licked me anywhere either. Mind you, I've been around a few... guess it's something cats keep for THE owner only. By the way, I can't guess which parts are appropriate and which - not. I only know one thing: dogs lick people much more than cats do. And if sniffing is included, they're going straight to hell. Anyone ever had their groin sniffed by a cat?
- Cats are "vocally promiscuous". That's interesting, people. I suppose a cat meows differently after sex, and thus boasts of its unclean exploits? Any experts on meowing, please, can you help me?
- Unlike cats, other animals are endowed with "Godly chastity". Kinda doubtful, that. Unless they reembrace asexual reproduction, too much chastity = extinction.
- Cats reproduce without holy matrimony: A runner-up for the ultimate favourite. 'nuff said.
- cats are clearly ineligible to "inherit the Kingdom". Well, I suppose they'll be content with some food under the table of the inheritors, and some catnip around when they're feeling tipsy. I haven't seen a cat that gives a bull about any kingdom. Smart of them.
- cats eat mice, which is forbidden to "Christians and their pets". Really, next time I'm reading the Bible looking for reference to animal feeding. For crying out loud, is this a religious text or an almanach?
- cats consume "undrained corpses", "filled with God's sacred blood": another pearl of ecclesiastical wisdom. Told you dogs are going to hell, at least they'll have a lot of company there. I suppose all predators are doomed, unless we find a "sacrificial lamb" to drain the corpses first. Uh, anyone know where I can get some vampire bats? I really, really love Spot (sob)!

Oh, and this really moved me: look, ma, no logic!
- A true christian should not harbor "any spirit of meanness or ill-will towards these Satanic creatures", however "mature Christians 'feel a loathing' towards those who have voluntarily or otherwise made themselves God's enemies." Yep, no ill-will at all.

Anyway, the pre-last paragraph is almost too much even for comment. You just have to read it. Only it's not so funny as the rest, it even seems a bit appaling. So much for compassion - if someone is "of this world" - give'em your cat and they'll go to Hell together! What to do with your cat? Well, to cut the bull, stone it to death because it is your dependent and is disobedient and rebellious! Ah, it oozes divine mercy and salvation with every drop of bl... uh, letter!

[ January 31, 2005, 01:55: Message edited by: The Shaman ]

Lol!!!

licking inappropriate body areas on their own bodies (inappropriate handling) and even, in some cases, on the bodies of their human owners (wrongful motive?) So, they're saying that they clean themselves and their owners with their tounges? I see no evil in that. Jesus would want us clean! It's not the cat's fault it can't use toliet paper. urination on the floor, and widespread sexual misconduct without the benefit or sanctity of holy matrimony "Do you, Puffy, take his male cat, Morris, to be you lawfull mate?" :shake: stealing food from the table, producing ungodly sounds, excessive playfulnessTo me, that sounds like every single pet I have ever had, or ever known...from cats, dogs, mice, snakes, and rabbits, each one of them had more than one of those characteristics!

the employment of devices not known to have been used by Jesus, the conducting of its unholy business under the cover of the darkness of night, and so on. What is that supposed to mean? So Jesus didn't like plaking with fake mice of balls of yarn...so what? :lol: :rolling:

"Do you, Puffy, take his male cat, Morris, to be you lawfull mate?" Well...

in september 1996, two rare “diamond-eyed” cats, phet and ploy, were married in matching pink outfits at a ceremony in thailand's biggest discotheque. it cost phet’s owner, wichan jaratarcha, 410,979 thai bhat ($16,241).

the cost of the lavish wedding ceremony was topped up by a dowry of 587,127 thai bhat (US$23,202). it was attended by 500 guests, who gave the newlywed cats about 15,183,000 thai bhat (US$60,000) in cash and wedding presents. wearing pink satin, the bride, ploy, owned by a friend of phet's owner, arrived in a rolls royce, while phet himself came by helicopter. a parrot was best man, an iguana was maid of honor, and ploy even received a kitty wedding ring. although now married, the cats live apart, each with their respective owners. both cats have a rare optical defect known as diamond eye, a type of glaucoma, which in thailand is believed to be a symbol of good luck.

This is just too plain silly... say hello to Whatnots.

Haven't read any of this topic but weren't cats revered as sacred by pagans (such asd the Egyptions) and therefore demonised by Christianity as a means of promoting itself as a religion... like goats and their assosiation of the devil( i thgink the Greeks called him Pan... there is loads of iconography that is associated with evil because of a 2000 year old PR campaign...

Pan was a man with goa's bottom. Not really a cat.

Furthermore, don't lie, Malovae. If you don't know facts, don't post assumptions. More often than not, that 'artful representations' of cats started in Protestant countries, and long after Reformation, so it's definitely not 2000 years old.

Cats were, in fact, very common in all European countries. If not because of anything else, then because of their ability to get rid of rodents. Snakes and lizards were associated with Satan (ergo: Dragons were large reptiles). Cats were not. In fact, lions (of the Felidae family!) were not only royal animals (present in the heraldics), but also a Christian symbol (St. Mark's symbol, symbol of God's strength, etc.). Snakes, lizards, owls, rats, among other creatures, served as 'familiars' to 'witches,' but never cats. The latter were so important that it was wrong to kill a cat (therefore proverbs with warning what will happen if you kill a cat).
Oh, and before you start with arguments about burning witches -- you'll go off topic. Post them to me via pm, but do not post in this thread.

@toughluck

The domestication of cats began in Egypt c.3000 BC for, as you say.. hunting and catching pests but by c.1500 BC cats were revered so highly, that is believed that killing a cat was a crime and when dead were often mummified. The goddess Bast was depicted with the head of a cat. The cat was later transported to Western Europe through the Roman Empire.

By the middle ages, the opinion on cats shifted as superstitions grew and evolved... they were seen as being endowed with black magic and embodying the devil. Where did this shift in opinion come from? Do you really believe that it would evolve independantly over the whole of what was then a Europe unified under Catholocism? My 'speculation' was an extension of what is historical fact. The early (and by early I mean pre 1215) Christian Church had to promote itself as the true and universal religion and to do that it either adopted pagan feast days and rituals (such as xmas, easter etc) or demonised them. The goat, like I mentioned before, became associated with Satan because of the pagan attatchments (btw I used Pan as an example for demonizing Pagan gods... I cannot be proved right or wrong if this particular mythical being was in the minds of possible censors). I admit I was a bit flippant (sp?) in my wording... but you can look at the Papacy's attempts at changing attitudes to ancient symbols as a PR campaign.

To make what I'm trying to say even more clearer... my thoughts that cats are percived as evil because the were viewed as sacred in pre-christian culture which lasted well into the early middle ages. The Catholic Church percieved this as a threat of sustained pagan culture and changed the image of felines to evil. This is a theory that may or may not have already been esatblished. I really don't care and cannot be bothered to research any further.

If I am wrong, I am wrong, simple as that. However, I will not be called a liar because I have thoughts on a subject contrary to anyone elses... if I am simpley misinformed which I am always eager to rectify.

Oh, and toughluck, I'll post whatever the hell I like... if you want to be a moderator why not PM Tal and ask him, otherwise don't chastise people because they have an opinion. Actually I've just done that very same thing myself - although I am justifiably defending myself.

What I meant is that I'm sick of people posting their own feelings and assumptions as 'known' 'facts.' As simple as that. Post anything you like, but know when you can be attacked for what you are saying...

As for cats -- I'm certain that they were demonised much later -- after Reformation, and it happened because of three or four things:
-- less problem with pests in cities -- brick walls made it more difficult for rodents to get past, also that there were many cats on the streets taking care of mice;
-- there were cats on the streets, which led to blaming them for anything -- the stink, the noise, bad luck (tripping over a cat, for example), all that especially at night;
-- mouse traps -- poisoned food and (later) mechanical traps, which led to redundancy of having a troublesome feline at home;
-- urban legends, like cats bringing bad luck, spread quickly, so it added up.
It couldn't have happened before the fifteenth, or even sixteenth century. And I will repeat that the early symbol of Satan was a serpent. Then it developed into reptiles (generally, but especially snakes), and not domesticated, wild, night animals -- owls and rats.

Now, now, play nice or I'll sic some Evil Servants of Satan on you. :evil:

Namecalling is against the rules here, and no amount of justification will make it right. If you can't post without resorting to that, then don't post. It's that easy. (And if for some unfathomable reason you want to argue with me on this, do it via PM, not here.)

How many snakes do you see with horns? How do many people think of satan as having horns. 15th and 16th century images of the devil with horns were widespread. It is widely believed that it is a means of opposing paganism that still dominated many early christians lives and because beliefs and because the spirital authorities in the middle ages controlled education, perceptions changed and were subsequently passed on through the generations,. The serpent was one of these icons of 'evil', but not the only one.

Its a simple thing I'm saying. Cats were associated with devil worship because of their link to paganism and therefore a threat to an infant religion. I may be wrong but try not to take it personally if I don't take your word for it.

One point though, the witch craft craze was at its height in the 16th and 17th centuries but cats were killed in large numbers centuries before such as in Metz in AD 962 when hundreds of cats were burned. This is only 500 years of Roman adoption of Christianity although Christianity was not universal. So persecution of cats started much earlier than the reformation and the witch craze.

The fact that killing off cats led to the rise of the plague subsequently ensuring the return of cats to improve the eradication of disease carrying pests. Yes, technological advancements helped... but the cats demise is often linked to the increase in plague that devastaded high and late medieval europe and thge fact they resurfaced without persecution (but still the stigma) attests to the inferiority of devices.

The cat eradication and plague were closely linked. Cats might not have been targeted specifically beforehand, but they WERE targeted once the disease started. When the latest outbreak of plague began in 1665 many people blamed cats as they were seen as witch's familiars etc. The plague was seen as a sign of the evilness of the land. As such witchs, pagans, and anything associated with it was targeted. Cats specifically

The Ironic aspect is that cats were the only animals capable of controlling this disease at that time, by controlling the rat, and subsequently the flea, populations.

Paganism covers many different religions and cats are not associated with all of them, for example Ireland. In Gaelic we do not even have a word for 'cat' so it shows you how long it had taken for cats to reach Ireland...

In Britian (and Ireland) black cats were are are still considred lucky unlike the USA. It was not only cats that were blamed for the 'black deat' but dogs and other small animals were also blamed.

As for someone thinking the link I sent was a hoax - it might be but I have read crazier things in a copy of Watchtower. For example listening to heavy metal or rap is considered evil.

This is just (hopefully) one crazy person that was probably scratched as a child and is using religion to enforce his flawed views.

I hate to double-move, but since this is getting serious again... back to AoDA with it.

How about Salem and the association of witches in America with cats, especially black ones? (Here's the part that this thread gets moved to AoLS.)
This would show that it was typical of Anglo-Saxon civilisation to accuse cats of being servants of Satan. Anyway, I'm sure that this kind of approach to cats, even black ones, was never present here in Poland, and it speaks for the entire Slavic culture. Furthermore, that cat burning in Metz? I'm yet to find a source. The only things I found were that:
-- cats were burned on Midsummer's night in druidic customs -- entire litters, thrown in bags into a bonfire;
-- burning of cats in Metz (a dozen on one occassion in the 17th century, certainly not the middle ages) for the amusement of the population;
There were more burnings, but as the ones mentioned above, they happened either in the Celtic civilisation or in European, as a symbol of witchcraft, but it happened very late -- in the 17th century, and carried well into the 'Enlightenment' in France.

I think Freya was usually accompaigned by a cat. In later times, Freya became a witch and the cat the sign of witches.

There was something I remember reading in a newspaper about people who tried to do witchcraft usually having cats. The idea behind that supposedly was that by rubbing to you a cat could "rub off" a curse or other dark magic used against you on itself. Kidna like grounding wire ;)

Aside from that, I wouldn't be surprised if in most pagan, especially shamanistic religions, the dog is much more important than the cat. Which makes sense in case of nomadic or semi-nomadic tribes: a cat's importance is in guarding a building (like a granary) from rats, which is a problem in settled areas; a dog is important for guarding the livestock, which is the main source of sustenance for a wandering peoples. I know for one that the ancient Bulgars, a Turkic tribe, often used dogs as sacrifices to Tangra, the chief deity. In fact, the khan, who also functioned as head priest, used to divine the future by "reading" the internals of the sacrifice. As an aside, in Bulgarian there is a colloquial expression for "I'm the boss" that goes "I'm killing the dog around here".

I think people have taken certain Shakespear works too seriously.

If you don't like cats then don't own one, its as simple as that.