Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
Do you remember your first dog or cat? Perhaps even your first boa constrictor? Whatever your preference, pets can play a huge role in our lives, even becoming full-fledged family members. But is domestication really in an animal’s best interest? Does pet ownership create a loving bond between human and animal, or does it only serve our own interests?
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008-2010 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
slyv
assuming the worst case is not a convincing argument
if you assume the worst case then we shouldn't allow people to have children either. Clearly that's illogical.
"How can you say you love your CHILD when you leave it at home or in a terrible daycare for 10-12 hours. You leave the house for work and are gone for hours on end and tell me that's humane! Then you feel so guilty that you've left them, that you have to bring them EVERYWHERE with you. But do you play with them, read to them; no, you leave them in hot cars to suffer. Again that's really humane. You go to a festival and there are the kids, trying to insult and fight one another because they are such good babies they don't need discipline."
I'm convinced, let's end reproduction of the human species!
- reckoner
August 25, 2008 9:16PM
Reply to this Recommend
(6)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Poor analogy
You ignore the main relevant distinction between the dog and your child in your analogy.
Your child belongs in our society. Its the only society he can belong to in a way congenial to himself and for his well-being. The dog, on the other hand, does not belong in a human society.
I believe a valid analogy would be to compare a dog in our society as a "pet" and a human child brought up by some hypothetical Martians on their planet.
Surely, such a child wouldn't be living a natural life, or find available to him means to exercise his preferences and inborn human tendencies. Therefore, it would be immoral for Martians to breed humans as "companions".
By analogy, it is immoral for us to bring animals into existence solely for the purpose of enjoying their companionship.
- Sandy
August 30, 2008 8:28AM
Reply to this Recommend
(2)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
naturalistic fallacy again
"The dog, on the other hand, does not belong in a human society."
saying this doesn't make it true. How do you determine what is natural? All of your arguments are based on this, and you haven't defined it. Please do.
- reckoner
August 30, 2008 9:53AM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
saying so doesnt make it so
You can find the answer on this very debate. I just found that Gary Francione has answered this question himself: Why "pets" do not belong in out society.
http://www.opposingviews.com/arguments/pets-the-inherent-problems-with-domestication
You seem to be hanging onto the "Nobody can prove it is so" excuse. The proof has to come from within you - do a conscientious reflection on the question whether pets really are at home in our society (or can ever be) and you can find the answers.
- Sandy
August 30, 2008 10:09AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Experts
"...Gary Francione has answered this question himself."
Even experts are not all knowing, and some questions do not have "answers" that can be known; thus you merely referenced an argument. We are unlikely to ever truly KNOW whether a individual animal, let alone a species, truly feels "at home" since that feeling is personal in nature and we have not managed to created a shared vocabulary with animals.
As for the "nature vs. nurture" question the same issues apply. Given the assumption that there is no "ideal" life that we as individuals are supposed to live then our existence is no more than the sum of our experiences and we adapt (mentally and physically) so that we may live within the experiences and environments to which we are subjected; many of which are outside of our control.
- polobo
August 30, 2008 1:02PM
Reply to this Recommend
(3)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Escapism
I referenced him cos i think there's a 1000 word limit on here. Besides, my beliefs are coincidental with GLF's. I see no point in repeating.
If you are looking for 100% proof, then probably this isn't your place. In issues like this one, we come to reasonable conclusions by conscientious reflections, upon consideration of observation, differing viewpoints, and employment of our sense of empathy and intuition.
It is perversely erroneous to hang on to the "YOu cannot prove it is so" straw.
- Sandy
August 30, 2008 9:44PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Proof
I am trying quite hard to avoid "proof", "truth", "ethical" and other absolute terms as I feel that, absent external feedback from some metaphysical we as a species are limited to what we ourselves are able to agree to and enforce. I state clearly that a personal moral may indeed be different than the society's and as long as it does not conflict then that is perfectly acceptable. I also agree that, absent the change considerations, that the non-enslavement of animals would be an acceptable enforced moral/legal code. However, I find the status-quo to be acceptable as well. I do not claim either is good or bad. I recognize that my position is not absolute nor are my assumptions about reality necessarily correct and if you wish to simply presenting alternate assumptions that are equally likely (and then insist that they are absolutely correct) then the only possible outcome is one in which others side with one position or the other and through their collective voices affect one of those positions to become reality. If you didn't feel your position is right/better then you wouldn't argue it. Claiming "moral superiority" then, in that sense, is redundant.
- polobo
August 31, 2008 8:38AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
hanging on
at this point I have no idea what your belief is based on. Right now the only thing that I've found consistent in your view is that animals should only exist outside of human society. Why I have no idea.
- reckoner
August 30, 2008 2:59PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Twisting my words
You cannot defeat me by twisting my words around to suit you. Nevertheless, I'll clarify.
I believe in what GLF says - that we have no right to use animals as our property, no matter how well or how badly they are treated.
Particularly to the issue of pet ownership, that does not imply "that animals should only exist outside of human society". What my belief leads to is this : "that animals should not be forced to exist inside of the human society". And when we breed non-human animals to serve us as companions, we due just that: Bring them into our society without giving consideration to their interests. GLF uses the word "refugee" to describe his non-human companions. I think that description is absolutely perfect.
Needless to say, what i write above does not mean that owning a stray dog or a rescued dog and caring for him/her becomes immoral.
- Sandy
August 30, 2008 9:51PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
more...
Fish, frogs, turtles, tarantulas, small (under5feet) snakes, and small(under 1foot) lizards, well, I really don't believe that they can think on a high enough level to be dissatisfied with their enclosure. As long as they have adequate food and water and an appropriate habitat , they are happy and content. I don't believe that any of them are domestic or tamed, but I believe that they can EASILY live long, happy, healthy lives in captivity. (Although I do get mad when I see fish kept in glass bubbles that don't hold two cups of water, because I HAVE taught my goldfish to rings bells and swim through hoops.)
Lizards over a foot long are usually predators near the top of the food chain in their ecosystem. Top predators and near-top predators, do not belong in people's garages. Tigers are top predators; cheetahs are near-top predators. The higher up on the food chain an animal is, the more dangerous it is and the more space it needs to be content.
Snakes that exceed five feet in length, are dangerous, and in my opinion, incapable of being properly kept in captivity due to the fact that most people can not provide what I consider adequate living space.
I believe that if an animal must LIVE in any kind of cage, then the cage must be at least big enough for the animal to stretch itself out to its full length TIMES THREE, in every direction (times 10 for flying animals). Although for snakes, since they rarely stretch out to their full length and actually prefer to be coiled up, I would consider a cage that allowed them to stretch out to half their length in every direction (except height), as adequate.
The problem is, on tv, on the internet , in petshops, and breeder facilities, people routinely keep their 10foot PLUS snakes in cages that are smaller in volume (length X width X height) than what I would keep one of my 60 pound dogs in (if they lived in cages).
Boa constrictors, (female) anacondas, and many pythons, grow to be so huge that they sometime think they can eat their owners. ANY animal species that rountinely believes that its owner is food should not be a pet !!
These huge snakes are often bought by ignorant (ignorant means not adequately informed, it does NOT mean stupid) people who are unprepared for and incapable or unwilling to care for them when they reach their full length, so they release them into the surrounding area. DID YOU KNOW THAT THE EVERGLADES IN FLORIDA HAS A BREEDING POPULATION OF BURMESE PYTHONS!!!! Burmese pythons are native to the rainforests of Southeast Asia, but so many Floridians have released their overgrown snakes, that the pythons are breeding and EATING ALLIGATORS!
- gatorgirl7563
April 14, 2009 4:40PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
the problem with some of our pets' "natural life"
I'm going to assume that by "natural life" you mean living in their natural habitat without the interference of humans.
some of our pets ' today no longer have or have never had a natural habitat. There is no "natural life" without humans available to, or even possible, for them.
Cats: Persians with their long fur that tangles easily and flat faces that hinder their sense of smell. Sphynx and Rex cat breeds with their hairlessness and curly fur. What about them? Do we let these man-made breeds die off? Or because they are man-made is it okay for THEM to be pets?
Dogs: Chihuahuas, Poodles, Dauschunds, Collies
I've never heard anyone dispute the claim that dogs came from wolves, so do we drop our Spaniels, Labradors, Schnauzers, Terriers, Greyhounds, Shepherds, Great Danes, and Retrievers off at Yellow Stone and cross our fingers, in the hope that mans' best friend will intergrate with mans' oldest enemy?
The Yorkie and Chihuahua breeds were created to catch rats. Does that make their natural habitat warehouses full of grain and corn? Because they definitely don't belong in Africa running alongside its packs of Wild Painted Dogs.
Standard Poodles (60pounds) were created to retrieve fowl from the icy waters of Germany. Do we send them to Canada and hope they can catch the geese? AND WHAT ABOUT THE TOY AND TEACUP POODLES?
The Dauschund breed was created to catch/flush rodents (rats and rabbits) out of their tunnels by going underground into their tunnels after them. What is the Dauschunds natural habitat? The rabbit burrows of Australia?
Collies are energetic, intelligent animals that have an incredible herding instinct. Do we send them to Australia, with its enormous flocks of sheep and hope they get along with the dingos? Or are they better suited to herding the bison of Yellow Stone?
Big cats like tigers and lions, definitely belong in the wild. Little cats like, servals, civets, and lynx do, too. I agree that no one should have seals and gators in their backyard unless they live on waterfront property or run a rehab facility. Monkeys belong in the jungle, not in peoples houses, wearing diapers and being a human's surrogate child.
Birds, well, honestly, I really don't like (or care too much about) birds unless they're being abused or neglected, but I do agree that the cages most are kept in are MUCH too small. They need to be able to TRULY FLY. And the larger, more intelligent birds (like macaws) need to have proper mental stimulation. Predatory birds, like eagles, hawks, and ospreys should never be pets.
- gatorgirl7563
April 14, 2009 4:39PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Arbitrary points again
"I believe that if an animal must LIVE in any kind of cage, then the cage must be at least big enough for the animal to stretch itself out to its full length TIMES THREE, in every direction (times 10 for flying animals )"
So if a woman happens to look too sexy and too beautiful, it would be ok to keep her enslaved within an 18 by 18 by 18 feet cage for everyone to gawk at?
The point is this: Keeping an animal within a cage is a violation of their rights - unless it is the only way to ensure the safety of the humans there - and cannot be made acceptable by providing a slightly bigger cage.
- Sandy
April 15, 2009 12:38AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
cages and the point of pets
I have two dogs, two cats, a ferret, a turtle, a dwarf hamster, a goldfish, and a corn snake and I am going to be a vet with I finish college .
Zorro, one of our dogs, my family rescued when our neighbor moved away and left him behind.
My cat, Tiger, I rescued as a two-week old kitten (along with the rest of her litter) that had been born in and was living in a USED pigpen behind my highschool. I got all 8 of them spayed and neutered, found loving homes for them, caught the mother, got her spayed, and released her because she was feral.
Mickey, the ferret, I adopted when I found out that one of my highscool teachers was looking for a new home for him (because both her parents were moving in with her after being robbed and shot and she felt like she wouldn't be able to give him the attention he needed) AND I had been waiting 11 months for any nearby animal shelters to receive a ferret.
Katrina, the turtle, I found when she was a newborn (umbilical cord still attached), in Buloxi, Mississippi (we drove down there with a horse trailer full of food , water , blankets, and soaps to help the people there). On my lunch break, I was walking beside a lake, when I encountered a car that had been picked up by the wind and smashed into the shore. There were a bunch of black birds around it and a horrible smell coming from it, so I decided to investigate. As best as I can figure out, after the car slammed into the shore, it sort of skidded in (and under) the soil for several feet. It embeded a ton of glass chunks and tiny pieces of glass everywhere in the sand around it. AND it disturbed a softshell turtle nest that was in the process of hatching or just a few days from hatching. What I smelled was dead baby turtles and the birds were eating the few who managed to dig themselves out. I found 18 living turtle. The 6 that were unharmed and the 3 that I felt were uninjured enough to survive, I escorted to the shore (escort= I kept them all in a box until I was satisfied I had them all, then let them out of the box near the car/nest and kept the birds from getting them while they traveled to the water.) 5 were dead the next morning from deep cuts caused by digging face-first through the glass and the birds trying to eat them and I returned them to the beach. 2 turtles had all four legs either shredded by glass or eaten off by birds and I put them on the "found pet " bus where I presume they were taken to a make-shift animal shelter and put to sleep. Lucky, which has only his front left and rear right leg, I gave to one of my middleschool teachers and Katrina, who has only her two front legs, I kept.
Bob, the goldfish, I caught in the lake behind my house, where he was released by an irresponsible owner.
Eve, the BOY dwarf hamster, my dog found in a park near our house and brought to me in its mouth after another animal mauled it. I know Zorro didn't maul it because his wounds were almost completely healed. Eve is missing both left legs and his left eye. His left ear is shredded. As a little joke, I like to say that the left side of his heart is missing too, because Eve is EVIL; he mauls anything that gets too close to his cage; he even rips into his food.
Ice, the blizzard corn snake, we found when we were cleaning out our house's gutters. We believe a bird picked him up (to eat him) and he managed to get away from the bird but landed on our roof. Corn snakes are not native to where I live and the little guy was friendly so I would have kept him even if he wasnt completely white with ruby red eyes.
- gatorgirl7563
April 15, 2009 5:35PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
cages and point of pets
I don't not believe it is okay to keep any thinking, feeling, sentient being (which includes animals , in my opinion) enslaved in a cage. My point was, if a cage is big enough, then the animal won't mind being in it (and maybe won't even know it is in a cage.)
I don't believe that any being should spends its whole life (or even half of each day) stuck in a cage, but with some animals, like birds, tarantulas, and hamsters, for the sanitation of your homes (pooping), for the safety of the other beings living in the home with it (spider bites), and for the safety of the animal (getting stepped on), it is only feasible for them to be kept as pets , if they are kept in cages when not being interacted with by humans. AND...
if the cage is big enough for them to get all the exercise they need, has enough toys to keep them properly entertained, is kept clean, THEN WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL???
Animals in captivity live longer, healthier lives than wild animals.
My TIMES THREE rule, was just a generalized rule. The minium amount of space I believe each ORDINARY (like hamsters and goldfish) animal's enclosure should have. Obviously, a cheetah, which (including the tail) measures about 7 feet long, SHOULD have a cage that measures bigger than 21 by 21 by 21; they need room to RUN.
And just for the record, I believe that only zoos and rehab facilities (if you aren't against rehabs for wild animals since it's interferring with nature and animals' natural lives; even if the animals are endangered), should be able to have wild animals.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"if a woman happens to look too sexy and too beautiful... ok to keep her enslaved... [in a] cage for everyone to gawk at? " this situation describes a "TROPHY PET" THAT'S NOT WHAT HAVING PETS IS ABOUT.
you are missing the whole point of keeping a pet .
8 out of 10 of the pet-owners I know, think of AND treat their pets as a member of the family. That statistic is better than America's average child abuse , homeless and hungry child statistics.
Pets provide a shoulder to cry on when you're sad, and you comfort them on the Fourth of July if they're afraid of the fireworks your neighbor sets off. You go to Walmart to pick up a few things and see a toy you just know they will LOVE and you get if for them, even though when you get home you know your spouse will give you a dirty look that says "you got them ANOTHER toy"; but you don't care, you want to see their tail wag.
THAT is what pets are about, LOVING and CARING
NOT PUTTING THEM ON DISPLAY.
yeah, some people get big dogs and spotted cats and fancy birds to look macho, look cool, and show off, AND some people abandon their pet when it gets old or sick or when they get a puppy or have to move, but that doesn't make ALL pet owners bad NOR does it make owning pets bad.
analogy
Some highschool teachers have sex with their student, but that doesn't make ALL teachers bad NOR does it make teaching bad.
- gatorgirl7563
April 15, 2009 6:55PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Cages are not prisons to all
Of the six constictors I keep I can open the doors and only one will leave his cage. He only does so in a attempt to see his girlfriend two cages down. Thru the advances in husbandry over decades of keeping various species we have found what they require to be calm, happy, healthy, and stress free. Non of them hide or avoid intteraction but are afforded places for privacy should they chose it. In keeping these types of animals (reptiles) the cage is for their safety more than containing any mess they may incurre. Reptiles are independent from birth and have a strong will to explore , but it is our responsability as responsable caretakers to protect them from harm while giving suppervised exploration opportunities:)
- Mcdowelli76
May 29, 2009 9:58PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Is this a response of a slave?
A huge thanks goes out to 'Clancy' for the tip about this story - one of the most amazing canine stories we've ever heard - dachshund or otherwise. Get ready to meet 2.5-year-old red smooth 'Sam,' who hails from Clarksville, Tennessee. Sam's human passed away on Monday, and Sam, who wears an electric fence collar, escaped his yard and was found 2.5 days later at the church where the funeral was being held. Sam had to cross busy highways to arrive at the church, which was six miles from his home. Excerpt from WKRN: Ever since Sam was a puppy, he rarely left his owner's side.
When owner Teddy Crockarell lost his battle with cancer last Monday, his wife Marcene believes Sam must have sensed something was wrong.
The dog, who wears an electric fence collar, ran away from the couple's home on Kimbrough Road.
Two and a half days later, after searching for Sam, the family arrived at a church on Trenton Road, over six miles from their home, for Teddy's funeral and discovered Sam was waiting for them.
Marcene Crockarell said, "He was just shivering and sitting there by the doors. We just lost it and all we were doing was hollering, 'Sam! Sam!' and here he comes and he was just all over all three of us."
There is no way to know what prompted Sam, who had never left home on foot, to run away and end up at a church he'd never seen, but is family has a theory.
"If he walked those six miles he was looking for his papa... but he found him, and that's what's good about this whole situation, he found him and he found his way back here," said Marcene Crockarell's son-in-law Howard.
or is this a response of a slave?
TOKYO, JAPAN - Loyalty, faithfulness and unconditional love are qualities that have earned dogs the title of "man's best friend". One particular Akita dog took these qualities to such an extreme, he has earned a place in the hearts of all Japanese people, and has kept that place for over sixty years!
Nestled amid hoards of harried commuters, a variety of shops and department stores, and a giant television screen that covers half a skyscraper, a life sized bronze statue of a dog can be found at Tokyo's busy Shibuya Train Station. Despite the diminutive size of the statue in comparison to the massive neon flash of the city, it isn't difficult to find. Millions of Tokyoites have been meeting at the landmark since 1934 and continue to do so today.
Chu-ken Hachiko (lit. the faithful dog Hachiko) was born in Akita in 1923 and was first brought to Tokyo in 1924. He and his owner, Mr. Eisaburo Uyeno, were inseparable friends right from the start. Each day "Hachi" would accompany Eisaburo, a professor at the Imperial University, to the train station when he left for work. Upon returning, the professor would find the dog patiently waiting, tail wagging. This happy routine continued until one fateful day in 1925, when the professor was taken ill on the job and unfortunately died before he could return home.
Despite the fact that Hachiko was less than two years old at the time, the bond between dog and owner was strong. Hachiko continued to wait each day at Shibuya station for a friend who was never coming back. At times, he wouldn't return home for days at a stretch.
The Akita became a familiar sight to commuters as he kept his vigil for over ten years. On March 8, 1935, Hachiko finally went to meet his master. He died on the very same spot he last saw his friend alive.
Both accounts smack of free will and love! So are you telling these animals that loved their humans so much that they are slaves? Animals do love as well as humans do. Have you never had a pet? My Akita of seven years behaves as if she gave birth to my son not me. She sleeps by his side and even kicks him out of bed. She is a bed hog. She is a member of our family. I prefer her company to the company of most humans.
- faithinlove September 22, 2008 2:35AM
Reply to this Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.