Owning Pets Is Cruel Debate

[Granny5]

perhaps vets are the new 'blood-sucking' lawyers.



Different species, same genus, isn't that just a matter of semantics? Like saying a labrador isn't a the same kind of dog as a poodle, but they are both still dogs?



so, you wander around the garden all night, and leave the house open all night? I'm surprised it's only the hamster that's come in!



Another disturbing incident of men and their hamsters.



See, this is where it gets messy for me, but then perhaps that's because I fall into the 'it's okay, or it's not' camp, regardless of the species, or perhaps it's a matter of logic. Lizards, snakes, fish, etc are all kept as pets and I'm taking it from your post (but I could be wrong, no doubt you'll correct me ) that you agree that creatures such as fish, lizards, snakes, birds should not be kept as pets because they are 'wild'. But they may have lived their entire lives in captivity, so are they domestic or wild? Dogs and cats were once largely wild, but humans interfered and 'domesticated' them. So all that's left now, with the exception of a few wild breeds, are domestic cats and dogs. But where animals have been wiped out or their numbers reduced because of human interferance we are actively seeking to reintroduce them to the wild. But not dogs and cats. So this is to me one rule for one, and one rule for another.

But you didn't answer my question which was : I think that the less we interfere with other species, the better. In your opinion, is this wrong?



Granny, I don't know what your cats have been like, but I've yet to meet one that 'depends' on humans.

I don't know how to do the quote with just a line or too, sorry.
But wild animals, lions, tigers, bears, snakes, lizards, etc are always wild. They may be cute and cuddly when they are little, but they will always, according to experts, revert to their wild nature. Dogs and cats don't. Now if a cat or dog is abandoned and left to go hungry they may become wild, but with love and care they can become pets again. Cats are independent by nature but they are loving and I've never had a cat that would attack except to play. You are correct, in my opinion, that we should leave wild animals along and not interfere with them in their natural habitat except to protect them from poachers. I have a problem with zoos because of the way I feel about keeping wild animals in their natural habitat. If dogs and cats were to be let out into the wild now, there would be so many of them that we would have hunting seasons for them to control the population like they do deer. Can you imagine millions of dogs and cats running around wild?

[TheFifthElement]

By nursing to health and raising it I became it's guardian. I became responsible for it's welfare.

How can you set a baby free. Even it's eyes were not fully open. It would meant it's death if I set it free. Set it free to die? I aint that cruel.

My point here Lote was that you must have set it free eventually? I took this as implied because you said that the heron came back to you, which is fine. If you kept the heron after it was well enough to fend for itself, and this occurred in UK, then you were breaking the law. According to the law this is the situation :

It is not an offence to take a disabled protected bird for the purpose of tending it and returning it to the wild or to kill such an animal if there is no reasonable chance of recovery.

(this was taken from the Joint Nature Conservation Committee website.)

I If dogs and cats were to be let out into the wild now, there would be so many of them that we would have hunting seasons for them to control the population like they do deer. Can you imagine millions of dogs and cats running around wild?

Granny, I agree with this. I said, in response to a comment made by Petrarchs Love, the following:

Petrarch, I agree. Domestication of animals creates a problem not least of which is that there isn't a viable alternative solution for these creatures. To undo it would need to be a gradual thing but I think at the least we could agree to :

1 - not place any barriers to the animal coming and going as it chooses, i.e it does not require a human to let it in or out of the home or the grounds

2- don't interfere with its reproductive system

3- don't apply 'discipline' to it for doing things like pooping on the carpet.

4- don't separate the young from their mother until such time as the young would normally leave anyway

I'd be interested in your views on whether this would be, in your opinion, an acceptable test of the 'relationship of choice' as opposed to my concern which is that it might not be, and in the absence of a common language the inability to know. Where I find difficulty in the concept of 'relationship of choice' when this involves locked doors, along with other things which, in my opinion, overstep the mark of 'symbiosis'.

This would mean that animals which, to be kept, had to be kept in a cage of some description, tank, or so on could no longer be kept as pets. There would have to be a commitment then that those already in captivity would have to be properly cared for until the end of their natural lives, as you and Petrarch have said you cannot just release them into the wild. There would also have to be a long term and carefully managed programme of reitroducing those creatures into the wild, much as is happening with beavers and (hopefully) wolves in Scotland.

I'd be interested in your views on that point, and everyone else's, actually.

[Lote-Tree]

I took this as implied because you said that the heron came back to you, which is fine.

That is my point! Animals get attached to humans. That is why they come back. They no longer choose to go to the wild.

And this is what I am getting at. That Human-Animal Symbiotic Relationship occur in this fashion. And there is nothing disturbing about it.

If you kept the heron after it was well enough to fend for itself, and this occurred in UK, then you were breaking the law. According to the law this is the situation:

There is no Law to stop Animals forming Symbiotic Relationship with humans.

[Sweets America]

If dogs and cats were to be let out into the wild now, there would be so many of them that we would have hunting seasons for them to control the population like they do deer. Can you imagine millions of dogs and cats running around wild?

I really disagree with you here. Why would human beings have the right to consider that there are too many of this or that animal?? It sounds so wrong.
This is terrible. Why would we kill animals because of their number? Do animals kill human beings because they are too many humans on the planet?

[TheFifthElement]

That is my point! Animals get attached to humans. That is why they come back. They no longer choose to go to the wild.
And this is what I am getting at. That Human-Animal Symbiotic Relationship occur in this fashion. And there is nothing disturbing about it.

There is no Law to stop Animals forming Symbiotic Relationship with humans.

Lote, weird as this may sound I think we agree, though I'm never too sure as my 'Loteish' is improving but still a little rusty. So, let me explain.

I'm in no way uncomfortable with animals and humans forming symbiotic relationships.

Pet keeping and symbiosis are not the same. Pet keeping is a matter of ownership, symbiosis is not.

If animal/humans relations were like so :

Humans do not in relation to their animal symbiote:
1 - place any barriers to the animal coming and going as it chooses, i.e it does not require a human to let it in or out of the home or the grounds

2- interfere with its reproductive system

3- apply 'discipline' to it for doing things like pooping on the carpet.

4- separate the young from their mother until such time as the young would normally leave anyway

(and I may have missed some things, but these were the ones that struck me as being somehow fundamentally beyond the boundaries of a relationship of choice) then this would seem, to me to be evidence of true symbiosis, and if this is what is happening then fine, let it be.

Is this, in any way, clearer?

I really disagree with you here. Why would human beings have the right to consider that there are too many of this or that animal?? It sounds so wrong.
This is terrible. Why would we kill animals because of their number? Do animals kill human beings because they are too many humans on the planet?

Sweets, I completely agree with your point. You can't take the step from 'domesticated' to 'wild' in one leap and I think it would be wrong to solutionise the problem by simply killing the animals off. On the whole, I'd like them to be self-determining, not dead! It would have to be a gradual movement, responsibly and carefully managed, and for those animals that 'choose' to live with humans (as Virgil has alluded to) they should still be able to do so, subject to some reasonable ground rules (see above).

I would be interested in your views on the proposed ground rules.

[Virgil]

In the meantime it would be strange to have your wife rubbing herself against you and licking your face.

Oh she does that when i come to bed.

[Sweets America]

Oh she does that when i come to bed.

I somehow knew it. God, now I am having a strange image on my mind. Please keep the rest to yourself.

[Virgil]

I somehow knew it. God, now I am having a strange image on my mind. Please keep the rest to yourself.

Well I think you can imagine the rest.

[Sweets America]

Fifth, let me tell you something.

The thing is...if I didn't have this strong love for dogs and need to be with them, if I had not experienced the joy they give me, I would totally agree with your point. The thing is that I am so emotional on that question that I cannot be objective. I hate that I cannot be objective.

Of course everything you said is appropriate, and if I were stronger, if I didn't have this weakness of my emotional side, I would back up everything you said, and I would defend you view, because what you say is fair and you are defending freedom and you are saying that we, humans, do not have any right on other species.

But, even thought I usually make the effort to be objective and as fair as I can about everything, here, when it comes to dogs, I just cannot. It is too difficult for me to accept that my dog should be left living in the wild, because I love him too much and I cannot separate myself from him.

I think your ideas are right and fair, but I will go on going against them because I cannot help it. You are just stronger than me on this point because you can detach yourself from your feelings.
I know it is selfish to keep a dog, to take it away from its parents, but I reassure myself in clinging to the fact that my dog seems to be happy with me. I so hope he is. I give him all my love.

If for instance you could make a law saying that no one has the right to own a dog, I would think it is fair to the dogs because we never ask them their consent before taking them, but I would above all be terribly angry at you because that would ruin a great part of the joy and love I receive in my life. I just hate that this joy and love started with an act of selfishness.

Anyway, I just wanted you to know that even if I will go on defend my views according to my knowledge of my own dog and the behavior he shows me, it will not mean that I think you are wrong, because I know you are not really.

[Lote-Tree]

I'm in no way uncomfortable with animals and humans forming symbiotic relationships.

Good. Thats a start.

Pet keeping is a matter of ownership, symbiosis is not.

Now you think about this. Think how these Relationship Evolved.

Pet Keeping became extention of that.

Humans do not in relation to their animal symbiote:
1 - place any barriers to the animal coming and going as it chooses, i.e it does not require a human to let it in or out of the home or the grounds

So you want Animal-Human relationship to be on their own terms? Like animal comes to your house and poops on your carpet and leaves? But the poop might carry disease and kill you

2- interfere with its reproductive system

So you want animals breed like mad jepordising it's own survival?

3- apply 'discipline' to it for doing things like pooping on the carpet.

If a human came to your house and pooped on your carpet I bet you will be mightily unpleased. And you would severly tell him or her off - that would be classed as discipline

4- separate the young from their mother until such time as the young would normally leave anyway

In nature those young would have mostly died.

[TheFifthElement]

Fifth, let me tell you something.

The thing is...if I didn't have this strong love for dogs and need to be with them, if I had not experienced the joy they give me, I would totally agree with your point. The thing is that I am so emotional on that question that I cannot be objective. I hate that I cannot be objective.

Of course everything you said is appropriate, and if I were stronger, if I didn't have this weakness of my emotional side, I would back up everything you said, and I would defend you view, because what you say is fair and you are defending freedom and you are saying that we, humans, do not have any right on other species.

But, even thought I usually make the effort to be objective and as fair as I can about everything, here, when it comes to dogs, I just cannot. It is too difficult for me to accept that my dog should be left living in the wild, because I love him too much and I cannot separate myself from him.

I think your ideas are right and fair, but I will go on going against them because I cannot help it. You are just stronger than me on this point because you can detach yourself from your feelings.
I know it is selfish to keep a dog, to take it away from its parents, but I reassure myself in clinging to the fact that my dog seems to be happy with me. I so hope he is. I give him all my love.

If for instance you could make a law saying that no one has the right to own a dog, I would think it is fair to the dogs because we never ask them their consent before taking them, but I would above all be terribly angry at you because that would ruin a great part of the joy and love I receive in my life. I just hate that this joy and love started with an act of selfishness.

Anyway, I just wanted you to know that even if I will go on defend my views according to my knowledge of my own dog and the behavior he shows me, it will not mean that I think you are wrong, because I know you are not really.

Sweets, I really appreciate your honesty. I understand that the question is a challenging one - it's not an attack on pet owners per se, just pet owning. I think, from what you have said, that you understand this. I don't doubt for a minute that you aren't loving and caring towards your dogs. Thank you for making these comments.

So you want Animal-Human relationship to be on their own terms? Like animal comes to your house and poops on your carpet and leaves? But the poop might carry disease and kill you

Yes, I think that if you are saying that human/animal relation is symbiotic, and it is the animals choice to live with humans then it would be on both our terms. I don't have to let the animal in, and it doesn't have to live with me. If I let it in and it poops on the floor then I can clean it up, it's me that doesn't want it there after all. I think it is probably a moot point though - from my experience of cats, if the door is open they poop outside anyway.

So you want animals breed like mad jepordising it's own survival?

I want animals to decide how much they breed. I think Sweets made a similar point to this effect, here :

Why would human beings have the right to consider that there are too many of this or that animal?? It sounds so wrong.

If a human came to your house and pooped on your carpet I bet you will be mightily unpleased. And you would severly tell him or her off - that would be classed as discipline

I thought we couldn't compare human psyche with animal psyche? I don't leave my door open for humans to come in a poop on my carpet, but then most of my friend's parents taught them to use a toilet. Animals don't have toilets in the way that we do, they poop on the floor. Back to point 1 above. You probably didn't read it anyway.

In nature those young would have mostly died.

What's that got to do with anything.

So, do I take it that you don't believe animals should be self determining?

[Lote-Tree]

Yes, I think that if you are saying that human/animal relation is symbiotic, and it is the animals choice to live with humans then it would be on both our terms.

Both terms that does not kill each other?

I don't have to let the animal in, and it doesn't have to live with me. If I let it in and it poops on the floor then I can clean it up, it's me that doesn't want it there after all. I think it is probably a moot point though - from my experience of cats, if the door is open they poop outside anyway.

So why raise this point in the first place?

I want animals to decide how much they breed.

Even it is becomes deadly to others?

I thought we couldn't compare human psyche with animal psyche?

I thought thats what you were doing?

That I need to ask whether my heron wants to stay with me or not.

I don't leave my door open for humans to come in a poop on my carpet, but then most of my friend's parents taught them to use a toilet.

Yes. And like a parent we teach animals to poop correctly so that their poop does not affect either the animal or the human or others.

What's that got to do with anything.

Everything. We have compassion. Animals it's hard to see if such things exists.

So, do I take it that you don't believe animals should be self determining?

I told you. When they choose to remain with a human they have just done that.

[Sweets America]

Sweets, I really appreciate your honesty. I understand that the question is a challenging one - it's not an attack on pet owners per se, just pet owning. I think, from what you have said, that you understand this. I don't doubt for a minute that you aren't loving and caring towards your dogs. Thank you for making these comments

Thank you. The question really disturbed me, you know. Prince can tell you I spent part of the other day crying over it, because I was wondering about so many things. What if my dogs never loved me? How could I take them with me out of selfishness? Really, a lot of what you said made me feel terrible about myself because I am sure you are right if we take things objectively.

And it is just unbearable to me that I could do that to dogs. I still know (or I guess) how much my doggy loves me though, and I guess I will just go on loving him as much as I can and take care of him so that he is happy even if he is not free.
I think this is my weakness, as I said, because dogs are a source of love and happiness to me, and I just need them, I feel it in my guts.

Animals don't have toilets in the way that we do, they poop on the floor.

Well, I had a cat who peed directly in the toilets! He just sat there and did like humans!

I am thinking: do you know the French movie called Baxter? It's about a dog, we hear his thoughts and actually this dog just hates human beings. He is cynical and even a little perverse. (he kills his master, an old woman, and after that he tries to drown a baby!). It is a strange movie, I've only seen parts of it.

[TheFifthElement]

So why raise this point in the first place?

I raised the point that creatures who live with us as friends, should not be disciplined like subordinates. You're the one who's hung up about pooping

I thought thats what you were doing?

Nope, I have always maintained that I don't know what animals think.

Yes. And like a parent we teach animals to poop correctly so that their poop does not affect either the animal or the human or others.

hung up about poop

Define 'pooping correctly'.

Everything. We have compassion. Animals it's hard to see if such things exists.

So it is compassion to separate young from their mother before they are ready? This was the point you were justifying, as so:

Humans do not in relation to their animal symbiote:

4- separate the young from their mother until such time as the young would normally leave anyway

In nature those young would have mostly died.

I told you. When they choose to remain with a human they have just done that.

Indeed, so no need to lock them in, they will stay of their own volition.

Thank you. The question really disturbed me, you know. Prince can tell you I spent part of the other day crying over it, because I was wondering about so many things. What if my dogs never loved me? How could I take them with me out of selfishness? Really, a lot of what you said made me feel terrible about myself because I am sure you are right if we take things objectively.

Sweets, there is no reason to feel terrible about yourself. If you ever have kids you'll find yourself asking the exact same questions. The issue is much wider than one individual, if the social majority accepted the reasoning then it would demand complete social change, and you couldn't just toss domesticated animals onto the street. At a fundamental level human society would have to decide whether they should, or shouldn't keep animals as pets. If a decision was taken that humans should no longer do this, that doesn't mean that everyone who did keep pets before (which would be the majority) has done something wrong, because at the time it was wasn't wrong, it was accepted. In terms of 'right' and 'wrong' you could only judge how people behaved towards those animals when it was accepted that they could be kept as pets. In this respect you have treated your pets with love and care. You have not wished any cruelty on them, and in that respect, your conscience should be entirely clear.

For my own part, I don't feel that my conscience will be clear unless we opened the doors, followed a few basic principles, perhaps those that I suggested, and see if the animals stay. Perhaps that is the fault of my questioning nature, and my demand for unequivocal proof - feel free to curse it (I do!).

Well, I had a cat who peed directly in the toilets! He just sat there and did like humans!

Yes, I have also seen this on TV. One of my former cats went through a phase of pooping on the kitchen worktop, or in the sink. I have no idea why she did it, there was a cat flap so she was free to go outside. Before Lote leaps in I didn't discipline her for it, just cleaned it up, but I was quite worried about her for a while. Eventually she just stopped. I have no idea why.

I am thinking: do you know the French movie called Baxter? It's about a dog, we hear his thoughts and actually this dog just hates human beings. He is cynical and even a little perverse. (he kills his master, an old woman, and after that he tries to drown a baby!). It is a strange movie, I've only seen parts of it.

I haven't seen it. Perhaps I should look it up, thanks.

[Sweets America]

Sweets, there is no reason to feel terrible about yourself. If you ever have kids you'll find yourself asking the exact same questions. The issue is much wider than one individual, if the social majority accepted the reasoning then it would demand complete social change, and you couldn't just toss domesticated animals onto the street. At a fundamental level human society would have to decide whether they should, or shouldn't keep animals as pets. If a decision was taken that humans should no longer do this, that doesn't mean that everyone who did keep pets before (which would be the majority) has done something wrong, because at the time it was wasn't wrong, it was accepted. In terms of 'right' and 'wrong' you could only judge how people behaved towards those animals when it was accepted that they could be kept as pets. In this respect you have treated your pets with love and care. You have not wished any cruelty on them, and in that respect, your conscience should be entirely clear.

Yes but the fact that it is accepted in our society today is not really an excuse. But I still see what you mean. Anyway, I know I behave a good way with my doggy, that is a consolation.

For my own part, I don't feel that my conscience will be clear unless we opened the doors, followed a few basic principles, perhaps those that I suggested, and see if the animals stay. Perhaps that is the fault of my questioning nature, and my demand for unequivocal proof - feel free to curse it (I do!).

I am pretty sure that my dog would stay with me if I asked him today, because he has spent years with me and I think he is attached to me. The thing we cannot know is if he would have accepted to stay with me at the very beginning of his life, or if he would have preferred being as a wild animal. I wonder if dogs have a natural tendency to like being with humans since they have been with us for a long time in history.

Yes, I have also seen this on TV. One of my former cats went through a phase of pooping on the kitchen worktop, or in the sink. I have no idea why she did it, there was a cat flap so she was free to go outside. Before Lote leaps in I didn't discipline her for it, just cleaned it up, but I was quite worried about her for a while. Eventually she just stopped. I have no idea why.

Well, about your cat pooping in the sink. Did you clean your sink with bleach? Because the smell of bleach really attracts cats.