Is it immoral to keep pets?

[Tiamattt]

Ok lets say for the sake of argument OP is absolutely correct and somehow the entire world agrees. From tomorrow on keeping pets becomes illegal and all of them are set free, and not allowed to come back since that would make them pets again. And that results in a 100% chance of A LOT of them getting killed/severally injured due to a large number of reasons.

And while this is stretching things: in order to believe that keeping pets is immoral you would have to believe that the end result of those animals no longer being pets is moral. So OP do you believe the mass deaths/suffering of a large number of animals to be moral?

 

[lacktheknack]

Don't use cats for examples, people. Cats suck hard.

Anyway, on topic, I have one issue with your post, OP.

The aliens have far longer a lifespan than humans and so when you get old and too expensive to keep, they have you euthanatised, cry a few crocodile tears and then forget about you when they go buy a new pet human. That is your life.

Were this in a different setting or site, where civility wasn't praised, I would have said some very nasty things to you about this sentence.

Your implication that my love for my late dog wasn't real, that my tears shed while she died in my arms was fake, or that I have forgotten anything about the girl that I spent twelve years of my life with despite having a new dog that I love just as much...

Any words that I could say to describe how I take that implication would get me banned outright.

Fuck, I'm in tears just from typing that.

Goddammit. I miss Holly =(

<img width=300>http://nextlol.com/images/91159-i-know-that-feel-bro.jpg

Jojo claims that he has "better perspective" than pet owners on the issue as he has never had a pet and is thus unbiased, but then he has the nerve to try to project emotions onto said owners. He'll never know the emotions, which seems like a decent curse and punishment to me.

 

[Luna]

I don't think the analogy fits.

I think my dog is happy to be my pet. I think most people's animals are happy to be pets if their owners are not abusive. This would not apply to humans. We are too smart to know we are not pets. We have evolved beyond the contentment of being happy just because we're alive, fed and warm. We need more. Other animals don't have this. Their stupidity makes the analogy not fit.




Think about it like this: a Government that imposed significant breaches on individuals freedoms would generally be considered morally wrong, but parents limit children's freedoms everyday and it is generally seen as much more acceptable. This is because adults are smarter than children, and to a greater extent humans are smarter than animals.

 

[Something Amyss]

Also, my dog seems very happy with her life.

To be fair, this was often argued of negroes as well.

While I won't say slavery and pet ownership are identical, it's worth being mindful of our arguments.

 

[platinawolf]

Is it moral to keep dogs as pets? As all your doing is take on the role of alpha, you are still acting within its natural set of behaviors. That and dogs look to humans for help with getting delicate stuff done (such as getting a treat that they cant reach or dig for). I don't know how cats came to us but the choice was theirs in the beginning, we didn't adopt them as much as they adopted us.

 

[cynicalsaint1]

I think its probably fair to point out that regardless of intelligence the relationship between say dog and human is a symbiotic one, and that there is a lot of evidence that suggests that dogs evolved in a way to specifically make them adept at working with humans.

 

[Smithburg]

Not to pick on you in particular but I was anticipating this point coming up and I have to ask: how do you know they like being a pet? It's not like they can tell you in words and as a university biology student I can tell you that body language isn't universal across species, for examples chimps "smile" when they're angry.

Maybe by not looking at individual characteristics and read into their overall behavior. A chimp may smile when angry, but I'm pretty sure they're probably doing other things as well that makes their anger very apparent.

Anger isn't the only negative emotion. It's not surprising that pets often don't appear to show dislike towards their owners when they're conditioned strongly via rewards and discipline to react in a way their owners desire. What's interesting is the similarity between many of the arguments on this thread and the arguments made by slave owners several centuries before: "they aren't like us", "they have a better life as a...", "they couldn't survive on their own".

There are animals that will do the same to people they have never met. Dogs and cats may walk up to someone wagging their tail or purring. Pets view the people they are with as family, and how many stories are there of stray pets going to peoples homes and such, then get taken in and make no attempt to leave? I don't think you understand animals. And if the only pet you've had was a goldfish you really have no basis to know

 

[Darkmantle]

pets are not sentient. they are sapient yes, but they are not sentient. To compare them to humans is a false equivocation.

 

[ThePenguinKnight]

Nearly everything I have to say has already been said

Dogs, Cats, Fish, Reptilians, Arachnids, ect. should not be compared to human beings.
Pets are fed food more that's healthier and safer for them than what they'd find in the wild.
Being a pet takes away all the danger of living out in the wild all together.
To this day I think about how much I miss our dog Juno, nothing can replace her.

 

[Frostbyte666]

I'd also think that two years so far studying biology at university would be more of a qualification to speak about animals than simply owning one individual animal, not currently owning a pet also allows me to take an objective viewpoint without letting emotions or justifications get in the way.

A degree in animal pyschology (if such a thing exists) would be far more helpful in understanding their behaviour than biology. Hmm there probably is something to do with animal pyschology if your planning on working as a vet to recognise various animal mannerisms. But biology is more for understanding how their body works not how their mind works, there may be a little overall with hormone production and various things but it doesn't get down to serious discussions on their cognitive behaviour. Also no just because you may be studying for a degree in biology doesn't give you more authority than people with say ACTUAL experience in raising a pet, there are plenty of educated idiots who believe their degree trumps someones elses years of experience in the field. Granted a degree will help more often than not but don't dismiss others because of it. Also by your logic someone who has raised pets AND done a degree in biology would have more authority than yourself which I am sure there are many. Your also not showing an objective viewpoint without emotions more an apathetic viewpoint with little justification.

For the OT I will say you can't judge pets and humans as the same, as previously mentioned the pets are a result of domestication, breeding over 1000's of years and though some could survive in the wild they are better off in loving homes. My cats seem to enjoy life and have me wrapped around their pinky claws, it is very easy to tell if they like or dislike something and it is very easy for them to run away if they didn't like the life they are living...nope still here.

 

[Vegosiux]

...you know, a cat is not your pet. You're your cat's human. They have us right where they want us, them felines. Now, if it's not obvious, I have a history of cat ownership.

And while I could argue that there's no "love" in the same way between a human and a pet as there is between two humans, since animals don't "love" as we do, there's certainly still is an attachment. The lil' rascal will show me when he's upset, hungry, just wants to cuddle or in the "FFS, leave me alone, I'm sleeping" mood. And I'll be able to calm him when he's nervous when I take him to the vet (where he ended up because he got into a fight, of course), for example. I don't see anything immoral in it.

Yeah...i'm pretty sure more than a few people won't appreciate you comparing pet-owning to the slave trade...just sayin'.

Well, if they don't like it then that shows I've hit a tender nerve yes? ;-)

No. That just shows you're being cheap and have no clue what you're saying.

Do you really want to go there? I mean, I could call you something really really nasty, say, a drug dealer who makes his sales on teenage kids. Now, we both know you're likely not one of those, right? But still, would you like it if I called you that? You wouldn't? Oh, guess I'm on to something then! I'm watching you.

So no, you don't want to go there. "You not liking what I'm saying means I'm right" just makes you look like you don't have a case and also failed to find a witty exit.

 

[The Human Torch]

Yeah...i'm pretty sure more than a few people won't appreciate you comparing pet-owning to the slave trade...just sayin'.

Well, if they don't like it then that shows I've hit a tender nerve yes? ;-)

So, what exactly would you have pet owners do?
Release domesticated animals to suffer and die in the wild?

It's just not really a valid conversation to have right now. As already stated, domestication having already taken place kind of kneecaps any survivablity these animals might have.

Also, another note on the whole `abduction` thing... one of our cats was given to us pregnant and when she had her kittens she rejected them. In the wild they would have died. So I'm pretty sure the kittens were probably happier that we kept them.

To be honest this is more of a hypothetical discussion than a manifesto or actual proposal, if measures were taken to reduce or ban pet owning then likely what to be done would vary by species. Feral cats and dogs exist in many countries though, and more recently pets such as parrots or rabbits have barely changed from their ancestors so I reckon they'd have a good chance of reintergrating into the gene pool.

You don't have a pet, I'm afraid you just don't understand.

I'd argue I understand better than most pet owners, since my judgement isn't clouded by bias or justifications of my own past actions to do with the subject.

Some posters already completely discreted your OP, and have proven you wrong entirely. Yet, I don't see you quoting those posts, but continuing to argue with other posters, in who's comments you see things to nitpick on.

The great, wild outdoors is not so great. It's cruel, unforgiving, most animals die before they turn are even 6 months old. Every day is a constant struggle for food, water and survival.

My cat loved being my pet, he literally jumped in my arms after I came back from a holiday. He slept on my stomach while I lay on the couch, watching TV and the amount of chasing after him in a playful manner gave me so much exercise that I gained almost 10 kilo's after he died.
My cat fucking loved me, and I loved him.

That pet was the best thing that could ever happen to me, and I like to think that I was the best thing that could happen to him. Since I fed him, cleaned his litter box, took him to the vet, brushed him and gave him truckloads of attention. Don't you dare call that very special relationship with him, immoral.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

And the thread is already over.

Dogs don't think the way we do, they don't reason the same. All of my dogs think we're all a big pack, and they obey us because to them, we're higher up in the chain of command. And they don't resent us, they all fucking love us. So, yeah, not the same situation.

This is important. Often when we walk my friends puppy we keep her on a leash while around cars to keep her safe but release her in the park. We can wander whereever and no matter how far excited or interesting something is she will NEVER stray far away or fail to follow us when we move on. Because shes a baby. And we are the pack leaders. She trusts our jugdement. We treat her kindly and reinforce the idea of the pack and the fact we look after eachother. Since we are all naturally so much bigger than her and her temperment is basically not aggressive at all she accepts we will protect her. And when she sees a huge dog she always hides behind us (which is hugely adorable).

And the arbitrary rules thing? Other than a few weird things she cant do (like go in the roads) she understands when shes naughty. You cant claim a dog is ignorant of that. When i pretend to chew her toys she growls and whines and wants them back because its hers. When she chews my shoes a little and i fake growl she jumps back and stares at me all guilty looking. Dogs know when they violate pack law after growing up a little. And since every pack will have different "rules" depending on where they live for survival, dogs are used to taking orders they dont always understand. Its just genetic.

"Pet owners tend to give way too much human emotion to animals which only "care" about their owners because they provide food. It's just an extension really of how ducks in parks will swim up to those who feed them bread, and now we humans use that to our advantage."

Dogs aren't that intelligent at-all, they're dumber than pigs by most measures, and I'm not just talking about dogs either in this thread, but all pets. Pet owners tend to give way too much human emotion to animals which only "care" about their owners because they provide food. It's just an extension really of how ducks in parks will swim up to those who feed them bread, and now we humans use that to our advantage.

I'd also think that two years so far studying biology at university would be more of a qualification to speak about animals than simply owning one individual animal, not currently owning a pet also allows me to take an objective viewpoint without letting emotions or justifications get in the way.

I dont own this dog of my friends. I didnt see it for 4 weeks once. I came back and she cried and whined and jumped at me for an hour to make me pet her and hug her. Ive never fed her in my entire life. All ive ever given her is attention and kindness. And a bond formed. Im part of the pack. How could she love me for food when ive never provided anything for her? The display of emotion in a PACK creature is incredibly important! Cmon fellow biologist! Social behaviours? The reinforcement of social bonds within a group. Monkeys groom and play and dogs want to be petted and play. This reinforces the "friendship" like bond. It links empathy. And empathy unites packs creature to work together to ensure survival.

You say a chimp smile means anger, how can you say a dog jumping at me and rubbing her head on my legs then rolling over so i can rub her tummy is anything but a display of the social behavior used to bond members of a pack. When i take part in this behavior by stroking her or playing with tug of war with her she wags her tail. She only does this when taking part in positive behaviours she initiates or willingly takes part in. As such i think it must be a sign of happyness.

 

[lord canti]

I for one believe animals can feel love. Have you ever seen a dog who lost someone before? It's a pretty heart breaking scene. While they are no where near as intelligent as humans. They are smart enough to feel love orat the very least strong loyalty.