Breeding animals to sell. - VeggieBoards
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 Old 12-11-2009, 12:48 PM
Veggie Regular
 
stanie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,282
This debate happened in the snakkkkkke thread, but the defenders of breeding animals as pets ran to the mods, because its not something they want to deal with, so, its had to come here.



How do you justify an animal being bred solely for the purpose of a humans ego?
stanie is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 Old 12-11-2009, 12:53 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Semicharmed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,801
Errrr, I don't.



Rescuing animals that have already been bred and they are headed to be killed? Yeah, I get that, as long as it's coupled with neutering animals and advocating against breeders to anyone who might see/ask about your pet (so you don't reinforce some people's ideas that we should be breeding more domesticated animals)...



So, yeah. I don't try to justify it. I don't think it CAN be justified, but I'd be interested to see if someone can give an intelligent argument advocating it. I have an open mind, so go for it!
Semicharmed is offline  
#3 Old 12-11-2009, 12:53 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,160
Can we leave the snarky comments out of it please? You know that you can also report things to the mods rather than bringing the drama llamas out?



In response to your question, I don't know how anyone justifies it. To force an animal to go through reproduction, pregnancy and giving birth for your own material gain? I don't know how anyone can't see that that is wrong. And the last thing we need in this world is more domesticated animals, or non-domesticates being kept as pets. I wish the breeding would stop
Earthling is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#4 Old 12-11-2009, 01:23 PM
Veggie Regular
 
stanie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,282
well i always tell people when they talk to me about ox, that he is rescued, and i always (if i can) show them that he has scars from cigarette burns on his head in the hope that people will understand why its very important, if you truly care, to take in rescued animals.
stanie is offline  
#5 Old 12-11-2009, 01:24 PM
Veggie Regular
 
unovegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 8,022
I really don't see a good justification for it. Selfishness is all it is.

The Big Bad.
unovegan is offline  
#6 Old 12-11-2009, 01:27 PM
Newbie
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
I dont support the breeding of animals. I think it's selfish.

I do have animals that a lot of people think "shouldn't" be kept as pets, such as snakes and turtles, but they were adopted.
GhostUser is offline  
#7 Old 12-11-2009, 01:39 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanie View Post

well i always tell people when they talk to me about ox, that he is rescued, and i always (if i can) show them that he has scars from cigarette burns on his head in the hope that people will understand why its very important, if you truly care, to take in rescued animals.



I read that as "my ox" but I'm guessing Ox is a dog?
Earthling is offline  
#8 Old 12-11-2009, 01:40 PM
Veggie Regular
 
unovegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 8,022
Quote:
Originally Posted by Earthling View Post

I read that as "my ox" but I'm guessing Ox is a dog?



Yeah, putting out a cig on an ox would be a very risky venture!!

The Big Bad.
unovegan is offline  
#9 Old 12-11-2009, 01:42 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Semicharmed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,801
Quote:
Originally Posted by Earthling View Post

I read that as "my ox" but I'm guessing Ox is a dog?



Ha! I read it that way too... I think because "ox" was not capitalized, thus registering in my head as a noun instead of a proper noun.
Semicharmed is offline  
#10 Old 12-11-2009, 01:42 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Beancounter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,339
Playing devil's advocate...



Animals are here for human exploitation

It's not against the law

I can make money doing it, and I have to pay the bills like everyone else.

I'm making other people happy.

If I'm not doing it, someone else will.

Happiness is not the result of a mathematical equation comparing the good times and bad times someone has had. It is a state of mind.
-nomad888
Beancounter is offline  
#11 Old 12-11-2009, 01:43 PM
Newbie
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanie View Post

well i always tell people when they talk to me about ox, that he is rescued, and i always (if i can) show them that he has scars from cigarette burns on his head in the hope that people will understand why its very important, if you truly care, to take in rescued animals.



wow, I missed this post before. That is heart breaking. I'm assuming ox is a dog, and thank you for giving him a good home!
GhostUser is offline  
#12 Old 12-11-2009, 01:45 PM
mlp
Banned
 
mlp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,995
I don't see any justification for breeding animals to sell. Further, I think that certain animals should not be bred, or be allowed to breed in captivity, period. An example would be birds. I have five rescued birds, and the longer I live with them, the more forcefully I am driven to realize that, no matter how much time I spend with them or how much freedom and stimulation I try to give them, their lives are a sad, constrained shadow of what they should be and would be if they had been born in the wild. My heart hurts for them, and they live pampered lives compared to the great majority of companion birds.



I too make a point of telling people that all my animals are adopted. I usually take one or more of my dogs with me wherever I go, and so we have a lot of opportunities to "convert" people to the idea of adopting, since little Jack in particular is very approachable, and people tend to coo over him. I always mention that you can find any personality type and any physical type in rescue.



Please give Ox a hug for me.
mlp is offline  
#13 Old 12-11-2009, 02:04 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Kellye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,814
I think rescue is commendable, but hit-and-miss; most people who adopt rescue animals without realizing the challenges involved in dealing with "secondhand companions" end up bailing on them due to the same training/disposition issues which sometimes caused the animal's first owner to abandon them. (I know, I have seen this happen to several animals I've known personally.) These rescues and fosters are passed from home to home, becoming less and less adoptable as they go and often picking up new psychological issues in the process. Which is worse - to be euthanized, or to be passed around from family to family, waiting for them to get tired of the habits that landed you in a pound in the first place?



Not every family is suited for an adopted rescue, particularly not new pet owners. Behavioral problems can be difficult to turn around in a full-grown animal, and not everybody is equipped to handle them. But I don't think that just because someone is unable (or unwilling) to deal with the issues involved in a rescue animal that they don't have the right to own a puppy, kitten or whatever, as long as its well cared for. The rescued animals I've owned have been difficult to deal with across the board - the animals I've bought and raised from infancy I have never had a serious problem with.



But do I think people should be breeding indiscriminately at random? No. If you don't have a waiting list lined up before your litter is even born, you're not doing it right. If you're breeding for money, you're really not doing it right - I think breeders should break even, or close to it. Breeding is expensive and if you're turning over any kind of real profit, you are not providing adequate care (unless you are breeding $20,000 dollar animals, such as in the ball python world).



That's just my non-AR opinion, as someone who has known a handful of breeders personally and plans to breed pythons in the future. For those of you who rescue animals, I applaud your efforts. As far as breed fanciers go, as long as their animals are loved and well cared-for, I don't have a problem with them (except in the case of dogs and cats, since they are wildly overpopulated).



I judge the dozens of people I've seen surrender their animals to the pound because they got tired of their "toy". That is not the breeder's fault, that is the owner's fault.
Kellye is offline  
#14 Old 12-11-2009, 02:15 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,160
None of what you said is a justification for breeding though, Kellye. If we stopped breeding the problems of adopted animals would go away too.
Earthling is offline  
#15 Old 12-11-2009, 02:20 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Kellye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,814
Quote:
None of what you said is a justification for breeding though, Kellye. If we stopped breeding the problems of adopted animals would go away too.



I'm not trying to justify it - just trying to explain what I consider responsible breeding versus irresponsible breeding, and why I feel not everybody can adopt a secondhand pet. All of my rescues have been very difficult to handle, and that's not what most people are looking for in a 15-80 year member of the family (which, let's be honest, is what domesticated pets are typically bred for).



If you are AR, it stands to reason that no argument for breeding will be justifiable because they are all (as far as I know) species-biased arguments.
Kellye is offline  
#16 Old 12-11-2009, 02:21 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,160
Would you like to offer some justifications anyway? Lots of people on VB, probably the majority, are AW and not AR.
Earthling is offline  
#17 Old 12-11-2009, 02:23 PM
mlp
Banned
 
mlp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,995
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kellye View Post

I think rescue is commendable, but hit-and-miss; most people who adopt rescue animals without realizing the challenges involved in dealing with "secondhand companions" end up bailing on them due to the same training/disposition issues which sometimes caused the animal's first owner to abandon them. (I know, I have seen this happen to several animals I've known personally.) These rescues and fosters are passed from home to home, becoming less and less adoptable as they go and often picking up new psychological issues in the process. Which is worse - to be euthanized, or to be passed around from family to family, waiting for them to get tired of the habits that landed you in a pound in the first place?



Not every family is suited for an adopted rescue, particularly not new pet owners. Behavioral problems can be difficult to turn around in a full-grown animal, and not everybody is equipped to handle them. But I don't think that just because someone is unable (or unwilling) to deal with the issues involved in a rescue animal that they don't have the right to own a puppy, kitten or whatever, as long as its well cared for. The rescued animals I've owned have been difficult to deal with across the board - the animals I've bought and raised from infancy I have never had a serious problem with.



But do I think people should be breeding indiscriminately at random? No. If you don't have a waiting list lined up before your litter is even born, you're not doing it right. If you're breeding for money, you're really not doing it right - I think breeders should break even, or close to it. Breeding is expensive and if you're turning over any kind of real profit, you are not providing adequate care (unless you are breeding $20,000 dollar animals, such as in the ball python world).



That's just my non-AR opinion, as someone who has known a handful of breeders personally and plans to breed pythons in the future. For those of you who rescue animals, I applaud your efforts. As far as breed fanciers go, as long as their animals are loved and well cared-for, I don't have a problem with them (except in the case of dogs and cats, since they are wildly overpopulated).



I judge the dozens of people I've seen surrender their animals to the pound because they got tired of their "toy". That is not the breeder's fault, that is the owner's fault.



None of the literally dozens of "second hand" cats I've adopted have had behavioral issues. None. (Except much later in life, when health issues have made some of them unreliable as far as using the litter box, but that happens with certain physical conditions, and had nothing to do with why they were discarded many years previously.)



The birds haven't required more work than would have been needed to socialize them in the first place, despite having been neglected and/or abused. Most people just shouldn't have birds, ever, under any circumstances.



With respect to dogs, I've had a higher than average percentage of dogs with "problems" because, when given the choice, I adopt less "adoptable" animals, the ones with issues because of past mistreatment. Eli, the dog I still grieve for intensely two years after his death, and who I will miss and grieve for until I die, was a blessing in my life like none other, and he had many phobias because of how he had been abused by people who just had to have a purebred puppy. To have him, or any of my others, disparaged as "secondhand" because of the abuse and/or neglect they suffered at the hands of people who look down on "secondhand" animals makes me want to punch the speaker in the face.
mlp is offline  
#18 Old 12-11-2009, 02:26 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Kellye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,814
Quote:
Would you like to offer some justifications anyway? Lots of people on VB, probably the majority, are AW and not AR.



I will think on it and get back to this thread after I've had some time to contemplate. It's a decidedly complicated topic.



Quote:
To have him, or any of my others, disparaged as "secondhand" because of the abuse and/or neglect they suffered at the hands of people who look down on "secondhand" animals makes me want to punch the speaker in the face.



I was just using secondhand as a descriptor describing an animal that has been passed from one owner to another - it wasn't used to have any negative connotation.



Edit: I don't think I'm going to debate this after all. I just can't see getting anything out of it and I have no desire to play devil's advocate if it's just going to lead to a fight.
Kellye is offline  
#19 Old 12-11-2009, 02:44 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,160
I just don't think there is a justification whether you look at it in terms of AR or AW. It's always going to be a parasitic relationship, not symbiotic, however you spin it.



The only way it's justified is if you're of the opinion that humans are entitled to do whatever they like with animals.
Earthling is offline  
#20 Old 12-11-2009, 02:49 PM
Ankle Biter
 
Poppy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Central Virginia, USA
Posts: 9,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kellye View Post

I think rescue is commendable, but hit-and-miss; most people who adopt rescue animals without realizing the challenges involved in dealing with "secondhand companions" end up bailing on them due to the same training/disposition issues which sometimes caused the animal's first owner to abandon them. (I know, I have seen this happen to several animals I've known personally.) These rescues and fosters are passed from home to home, becoming less and less adoptable as they go and often picking up new psychological issues in the process. Which is worse - to be euthanized, or to be passed around from family to family, waiting for them to get tired of the habits that landed you in a pound in the first place?



Not every family is suited for an adopted rescue, particularly not new pet owners. Behavioral problems can be difficult to turn around in a full-grown animal, and not everybody is equipped to handle them. But I don't think that just because someone is unable (or unwilling) to deal with the issues involved in a rescue animal that they don't have the right to own a puppy, kitten or whatever, as long as its well cared for. The rescued animals I've owned have been difficult to deal with across the board - the animals I've bought and raised from infancy I have never had a serious problem with.



But do I think people should be breeding indiscriminately at random? No. If you don't have a waiting list lined up before your litter is even born, you're not doing it right. If you're breeding for money, you're really not doing it right - I think breeders should break even, or close to it. Breeding is expensive and if you're turning over any kind of real profit, you are not providing adequate care (unless you are breeding $20,000 dollar animals, such as in the ball python world).



That's just my non-AR opinion, as someone who has known a handful of breeders personally and plans to breed pythons in the future. For those of you who rescue animals, I applaud your efforts. As far as breed fanciers go, as long as their animals are loved and well cared-for, I don't have a problem with them (except in the case of dogs and cats, since they are wildly overpopulated).



I judge the dozens of people I've seen surrender their animals to the pound because they got tired of their "toy". That is not the breeder's fault, that is the owner's fault.



Our shelter has a fantastic record of animal placement. Sure, every so often an animal is returned, but it's very rare. There are all kinds of reasons people give up animals, not just for behavior issues at all. It's most often money, job loss, having to relocate, losing the home etc. The 9-year-old Chihuahua I'm fostering now was turned in to the pound because her elderly owners could no longer afford her in this economy. The man who is driving 2 hours down 95 tomorrow to meet her is going to get a very loveable, well-adjusted, housebroken "secondhand" animal.



Of all of the fosters I have had in my home, only one has been a behavioral challenge. We worked very hard to find a suitable home for him. His new owner was educated and ready for his energy and dominance. This is not unusual. Shelters across the nation are implementing behavioral assessments and suitability testing before animals are adopted.



There are plenty of puppies in rescue facilities as well. There's absolutely no reason for someone who wants a puppy to buy one.



While millions of perfectly wonderful animals are euthanized every year because they have not found homes before their time runs out, breeding additional animals is simply unconscionable.

It is our choices that show what we truly are far more than our abilities. ~A. Dumbledore
Poppy is offline  
#21 Old 12-11-2009, 02:58 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Kellye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,814
Animal welfarist position: That it is morally acceptable for humans to use non-human animals, provided that adverse effects on animal welfare are minimized as far as possible, short of not using the animals at all.



How is a breeding program not justifiable under that standard? AR cares about the nature of the human-pet relationship. AW just cares how the pets are treated. Or at least that's my understanding of it so far.



I still think that if AR individuals were seriously concerned with the long-term cessation of animal breeding they would simply not own animals, rescued or not. They are just as guilty for perpetuating the parasitic human-pet relationship as breeders or any other pet owner is. I think if an individual really thinks the keeping of domesticated animals is wrong, they shouldn't own them. Period. It all depends on whether your goals are to save individual animals in the short-term, or liberate species in the long-term. These two goals are inconsistent to me.



Obviously, I don't think owning pets or domestication is wrong, or I wouldn't own them.



The problem with that is that most AR people are animal lovers and do own pets, which puts a kink in the whole "we shouldn't subjugate other species" argument.



Quote:
Our shelter has a fantastic record of animal placement. Sure, every so often an animal is returned, but it's very rare. There are all kinds of reasons people give up animals, not just for behavior issues at all. It's most often money, job loss, having to relocate, losing the home etc.



Do you think any reason to give up an animal to a shelter is justifiable? (This really doesn't have anything to do with the topic of the thread, so pardon the hijack, I'm just curious as to the opinion of another shelter-worker. Many of the reasons people gave for surrendering their dogs and cats were infuriating to me.)



In any case, I don't support the breeding of dogs in any capacity. When you can go on Craigslist and get a free puppy from one of three litters, there really is no need for it.



But lots of responsible breeders will require a spay/neuter contract on any animals they sell out. Of course, you can't do this with snakes, but the animal shelters are not exactly overrun with them...
Kellye is offline  
#22 Old 12-11-2009, 03:00 PM
Veggie Regular
 
unovegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 8,022
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kellye View Post




The problem with that is that most AR people are animal lovers and do own pets, which puts a kink in the whole "we shouldn't subjugate other species" argument.



True that.

The Big Bad.
unovegan is offline  
#23 Old 12-11-2009, 03:04 PM
Newbie
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poppy View Post

Our shelter has a fantastic record of animal placement. Sure, every so often an animal is returned, but it's very rare. There are all kinds of reasons people give up animals, not just for behavior issues at all. It's most often money, job loss, having to relocate, losing the home etc. The 9-year-old Chihuahua I'm fostering now was turned in to the pound because her elderly owners could no longer afford her in this economy. The man who is driving 2 hours down 95 tomorrow to meet her is going to get a very loveable, well-adjusted, housebroken "secondhand" animal.



Of all of the fosters I have had in my home, only one has been a behavioral challenge. We worked very hard to find a suitable home for him. His new owner was educated and ready for his energy and dominance. This is not unusual. Shelters across the nation are implementing behavioral assessments and suitability testing before animals are adopted.



There are plenty of puppies in rescue facilities as well. There's absolutely no reason for someone who wants a puppy to buy one.



While millions of perfectly wonderful animals are euthanized every year because they have not found homes before their time runs out, breeding additional animals is simply unconscionable.



You said it perfectly, as always, Poppy.
GhostUser is offline  
#24 Old 12-11-2009, 03:04 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,160
AR people neuter/castrate, do not breed, usually encourage others not to breed or buy from breeders and do an awful lot to try and stop the breeding cycle. You can do all that whilst having companion animals, as long as they are neutered and you don't breed from them. No AR advocate would breed animals just because they're animal lovers and want to have pets. They're merely making the best of the bad situation humans have created and saving their companions from euthanasia.



From an AW position, the negative effects on the species of breeding them far outweighs the positive aspects. In fact, there really are no positives to breeding animals for their welfare - you endanger the females who are forced to become pregnant, carry and give birth to their offspring, and the likelihood is that their offspring will suffer at the hands of humans whether in a typical abusive setting or just because the "owners" are misguided and misinformed. Animals who are never born cannot have poor welfare, so there is no justification for bringing them into the world.



The fact is that breeders are never, ever doing it for the animals. They do it despite the thousands and thousands of animals suffering in shelters and being euthanised daily. Breeding is for their own pleasure or profit, and that cannot be justified in terms of AR or AW.
Earthling is offline  
#25 Old 12-11-2009, 03:07 PM
Kiz
Veggie Regular
 
Kiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,132
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlp View Post

None of the literally dozens of "second hand" cats I've adopted have had behavioral issues. None. (Except much later in life, when health issues have made some of them unreliable as far as using the litter box, but that happens with certain physical conditions, and had nothing to do with why they were discarded many years previously.)

It happens, though. My cat Melly had severe behavioral issues when I got her. She'd been abused, rescued, but the people who rescued her could not keep her/cope, so she was given to a loving schizophrenic lady who adored cats but had little experience. Cat who was nuts from mental/physical abuse + nutty lady from mental illness = cat with severe behavioral issues. She was just nutty, and ended up at the shelter where I was working. I'm sure being in a couple of different homes contributed to her lack of confidence, and not just the abuse. In cases like Melly, though, there is no way she would have gone straight to the public, though. She was tagged special needs and went to a shelter worker with experience (me, thankfully ) and not someone looking for a cute kitty for their kid.



There can be problems with adopting "second hand" animals, yes, but it should not be hit and miss. All adopters should be carefully vetted to match cat to home.

Love the post? Why not buy the T-shirt!
http://www.kiz-shop.de/index.php?page=categorie&cat=8
http://www.kiz-shop.de/index.php?page=product&info=94
Kiz is offline  
#26 Old 12-11-2009, 03:09 PM
Ankle Biter
 
Poppy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Central Virginia, USA
Posts: 9,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kellye View Post

I still think that if AR individuals were seriously concerned with the long-term cessation of animal breeding they would simply not own animals, rescued or not. They are just as guilty for perpetuating the parasitic human-pet relationship as breeders or any other pet owner is. I think if an individual really thinks the keeping of domesticated animals is wrong, they shouldn't own them. Period. It all depends on whether your goals are to save individual animals in the short-term, or liberate species in the long-term. These two goals are inconsistent to me.



The problem with that is that most AR people are animal lovers and do own pets, which puts a kink in the whole "we shouldn't subjugate other species" argument.



Do you think any reason to give up an animal to a shelter is justifiable? (This really doesn't have anything to do with the topic of the thread, so pardon the hijack, I'm just curious as to the opinion of another shelter-worker.)



In any case, I don't support the breeding of dogs in any capacity. When you can go on Craigslist and get a free puppy from one of three litters, there really is no need for it.



But lots of responsible breeders will require a spay/neuter contract on any animals they sell out. (Of course, you can't do this with snakes, but the animal shelters are not exactly overrun with them...)



I think the best position is this - neuter every single domestic animal and then take care of all of them. The problem of overpopulation will take care of itself.



Are there good reasons to give up an animal? Of course. But I do believe that people should exhaust all possibilities for re-homing before they take their family member to the pound. Our return policy is that we will take any and all animals back. We make a commitment for the life of the animal.

It is our choices that show what we truly are far more than our abilities. ~A. Dumbledore
Poppy is offline  
#27 Old 12-11-2009, 03:10 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Alicia Avocado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,469
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanie View Post

This debate happened in the snakkkkkke thread, but the defenders of breeding animals as pets ran to the mods, because its not something they want to deal with, so, its had to come here.



How do you justify an animal being bred solely for the purpose of a humans ego?



Let me rephrase this in a way that gets this debate started without your personal judgements and opinions laced into it:



If you agree with animals being bred for sale, what is your logic and/or opinions behind it?
Alicia Avocado is offline  
#28 Old 12-11-2009, 03:12 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poppy View Post

I think the best position is this - neuter every single domestic animal and then take care of all of them. The problem of overpopulation will take care of itself.



This, I think, is the general abolitionist stance and is compatible with adopting and looking after companion animals.
Earthling is offline  
#29 Old 12-11-2009, 03:13 PM
Kiz
Veggie Regular
 
Kiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poppy View Post

I think the best position is this - neuter every single domestic animal and then take care of all of them. The problem of overpopulation will take care of itself.



Are there good reasons to give up an animal? Of course. But I do believe that people should exhaust all possibilities for re-homing before they take their family member to the pound. Our return policy is that we will take any and all animals back. We make a commitment for the life of the animal.



Agreed with all of that. "I'm moving to a small apartment", "I am having a baby", they don't cut it for me. I've vetted every single place I've ever lived at before I move to make sure they can take animals. You can have babies, dogs and cats, my parents proved that for me. As to "I can't afford a dog anymore" I am very iffy about it. What have they given up first... eating out? Cigarettes? Cable TV? Internet? New clothes (instead of thrift shop)? I'm not saying it never happens, just never personally seen it happen where the person cannot make other sacrifices first.

Love the post? Why not buy the T-shirt!
http://www.kiz-shop.de/index.php?page=categorie&cat=8
http://www.kiz-shop.de/index.php?page=product&info=94
Kiz is offline  
#30 Old 12-11-2009, 03:14 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Kellye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,814
Quote:
AR people neuter/castrate, do not breed, usually encourage others not to breed or buy from breeders and do an awful lot to try and stop the breeding cycle. You can do all that whilst having companion animals, as long as they are neutered and you don't breed from them.



Yet they still subjugate another species. That's my point. Even if you have the best intentions and your rescued shelter mutt lives in a mansion that caters to his every whim, you are still involving yourself in a parasitic relationship with a domesticated animal. I just can't see how that is AR.



Quote:
They're merely making the best of the bad situation humans have created and saving their companions from euthanasia.



But by encouraging a parasitic relationship with another species, they are dooming countless more unborn animals to euthanasia. Unfortunately, the "no pets, ever!" position doesn't fly with non AR/AW folks, and would never get off the ground as a movement. Humanity has had domesticated animals since we first saw a wolf hanging out around the bonfire.



Quote:
In fact, there really are no positives to breeding animals for their welfare - you endanger the females who are forced to become pregnant, carry and give birth to their offspring,



How are they any more endangered than they would be if they were breeding seasonally in the wild? (Talking about responsible breeding here, not people who breed animals like machines.)



Quote:
and the likelihood is that their offspring will suffer at the hands of humans whether in a typical abusive setting or just because the "owners" are misguided and misinformed.



Do most of the people you know mistreat their pets? Because none of the people I know do, and none of them own rescue animals. They were all purchased. I think it's a fallacy to assume most animals acquired from a breeder will be poorly treated to begin with and even more poorly treated with a new owner. Maybe I just don't travel in dog-kicking circles, but I don't think animal abuse is a direct result of breeding. It's the result of ignorance on the part of the pet owner.
Kellye is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the VeggieBoards forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in


Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off