YABU for assuming a crack team of ninja animal supporters are going to come and tie you to a seat and force you to watch films about puppy farms.
Charitable giving (whether by financial or practical support) is a hugely rewarding activity, and should be encouraged. Other people's charitable choices should be supported, not mocked, though every individual has the right to have their giving respected and for those choices to be private.
I try hard to make my charitable giving as effective as possible, I tithe my after tax income, give regularly (albeit small amounts) to the charities I support and do a lot of voluntary work. This means i am much less likely to give to one-off appeals such as CIN, but it doesn't mean I can't or won't help a range of charities if I can. For instance I am donating some hand stitched goodies to a friend's Christmas school fair, some cakes for a bake sale and am just going through the process of charity registration with a friend who's brilliant at doing things but not so hot on paperwork. It' really not an either/or split, but I suspect that wasn't your point in posting.
Also, many animal charities are also hugely beneficial to people. Example - one of the charities I support is the Brooke - they do a huge amount of work in the developing world to support working equids. So far, so fluffy. Wrong. By doing so, they are helping families in poverty, as the loss of a working equid to a poor family in Ethiopia can make a huge difference to their crop yields for instance, thus affecting the whole family's income. Supporting a working donkey or horse, means supporting an entire family, often living in brutal poverty. So, again, not so black and white.