Boycott pet breeders!

[compassionategirl]

I don't know if it's the same other places, but here they do a freakin background check on you and every other animal you own. You have to provide vet records, shot records, prove you have a stable source of income, that you've never committed a felony, stupid crap like that.

 

but sinister, can you honestly not see the soundness in that? It seems to me that being prudent and very cautious about whom you adopt out an animal too is a good idea from the animals perspective. I wouldnt want an animal abusing or neglecting individual to be able to walk into the SPCA and be able to walk out with an animal at all, let alone do so easily.

Know what I mean?

 

If I was subjected to all those checks, I wouldnt be annoyed at all. I would be happy to see that kind of caution and prudence for the animals sake, even though it would be a personal pain the ass for me.

 

What really annoys me is I sometimes feel like saying to some of these SPCA people "All this background check and crap for pets, yet you still go home and thoughtlessly eat other animals?"

[sinisterkungfu]

I don't know if it's the same other places, but here they do a freakin background check on you and every other animal you own. You have to provide vet records, shot records, prove you have a stable source of income, that you've never committed a felony, stupid crap like that.

 

but sinister, can you honestly not see the soundness in that? It seems to me that being prudent and very cautious about whom you adopt out an animal too is a good idea from the animals perspective. I wouldnt want an animal abusing or neglecting individual to be able to walk into the SPCA and be able to walk out with an animal at all, let alone do so easily.

Know what I mean?

 

If I was subjected to all those checks, I wouldnt be annoyed at all. I would be happy to see that kind of caution and prudence for the animals sake, even though it would be a personal pain the ass for me.

 

What really annoys me is I sometimes feel like saying to some of these SPCA people "All this background check and crap for pets, yet you still go home and thoughtlessly eat other animals?"

 

Alot of it is unnecessary. I've even heard of cases where they come several weeks after you've gotten the animal and take it back, which is ridiculous.

[compassionategirl]

Hmm...well I dont think that the SPCA wants animals sitting in its cages where there are GOOD homes for them. If the SPCA takes an animal back, I suspect it believes it has good cause to do so. They arent in the business of housing animals forever.

 

Also, I have called the SPCA here several times to report "chained backyard lonely miserable bored neglected never walked dogs." Unfortunately, they go out to investigate and are powerless to do anything if the dog has food, water and some pathetic excuse for a shelter. So after seeing case after case of neglect, and powerless to get animals out of that situation, I can understand why they would go to what seem to us (who would never abuse animals) to be extreme lengths to protect animals where they do have the power to do so.

 

i didnt articulate that last sentence very well but hopefully you all get my point.

 

So unless you can articulate why doing so is a bad idea from the animals' perspective, we are going to have to agree to disagree about this SPCA issue.

 

I think extreme caution is a great idea. I know too many dogs that are spending their entire lives at the end of chains, and the SPCA (at least the one in Ontario) is powerless to do anything about it. So I think it is best to be proactive about it instead of trying to rescue dogs from such situations after the fact. It is so hard to do so, and here there are no laws protecting "chained forever in the yard and never walkeed dogs."

[violet13]

willpeavy said <>

 

I am sure most serious vegan/animal rights activists view pet breeders exactly same way you do.

There is no way for decent people with clear conscience to keep bringing more animals knowing horrible tragedy of pet population explosion problems and millions of animals are crying in pain.

[Guest]

the cringe factor in your posts is off the scale.

[Jay]

Any vegans who disagree should of course never have children, as there are tons of people starving to death all over the place that they could adopt instead.

 

There are tons of vegans who have decided to not have kids for that very reason, among others. SOme young vegans have even gone as far as having vascetomies (spelling?).

I know and I suppose the vast majority are against breeding so that means they are at least being consistent. But that they aren't breeding is really NOT a good thing. If all vegans quit having children, veganism doesn't have a chance.

 

Without endorsing or rejecting the above stance, I do think either way that the species of animal that there is too much of on this earth is homo sapien. And I can assure you all that I am not alone in that sentiment.

I disagree. With communism and veganism there would be plenty of room on this planet for twice as many humans. With capitalism (and meat eating) we will always be overpopulated.

[Jay]

Jay, difference is we never execute children no matter how over populated and there are not enough food and shelter to keep children but animals are quickly executed when nobody adopt.

I don't see this difference as meaningful. Starve to death or be executed. Which would you choose?

 

Of course there are such place call 'no kill shelter' but they take only very limited numbers of animals.

About 30-40% of purebred animals from pet breeders end up in shelter.

If people are looking for purebred animals these people can find what they are looking for in animal shelters or rescue organization.

Many rescue organizations specialize all kinds of different breeds of dogs or cats and they are looking for good homes for purebred animals.

After you make breeding illegal, these rescue organizations aren't going to be able to specialize for very long.

 

Many people who truly love children adopt starving children to save them and comfort them instead of having their own children.

Yes, so? I know this and was just pointing out that many vegans are being hypocritical.

 

Don't you see similarity between true animal lovers and people who truly love children?

Yes of course I do. Why are you even asking?

 

I just cannot understand people who support pet breeding in our society where we execute millions of unwanted surplus animals while other millions are starving on the street!!

Errr, well I just gave a reason in this thread. What part didn't you understand?

 

I am sure you don't want to say to starving dehydrate animals who are slowly dying "you are not kind of animal I am looking for therefore I cannot save you."

Yes of course not.

Only selfish people who don't have true love for animals support pet breeders who aggravate pet population explosion problem and maximaizing horrible suffering of unwanted surplus animals.

Wrong.

 

I am sure you are intelligent enough to understand tragedy of pet population explosion problem.

http://bcrescue.net/long_walk.htm

www.spotsociety.org/fatedog.html

Please forgive me for repeated post of these links.

No that's fine.

 

I don't feel like discussing this with you though. I don't think you are really listening to what I'm saying, so we're just wasting each other's time.

 

I don't have a problem with pet breeding. I don't think that is the real problem. I think the problem is just a general lack of compassion. I think it best to focus on the meat eating and how unnecesary it is than to go on about pet breeding or talking about things like "specieism" or whatever. I think that stuff just makes meat eaters dismiss us.

[sinisterkungfu]

I think that stuff just makes meat eaters dismiss us.

 

It also makes us rational vegans dismess them.

I absolutely can't take people like her seriously.

[willpeavy]

I think that stuff just makes meat eaters dismiss us.

 

It also makes us rational vegans dismess them.

I absolutely can't take people like her seriously.

 

Go easy on her. I think she means well. Judging by her posts she's probably new to the whole vegan/animal rights thing and still learning and figuring things out

[Jay]

Sinister, try to see things from her point of view. I don't agree with her but I remember a time when I could literally feel like I was that cow or whatever that was about to be slaughtered. And IF I could feel that way all the damm time it (which I never did) I would certainly be A LOT more emotional about things. I would certainly always get very angry, etc. I don't think someone telling me that I was nuts would have done any good.

[Jay]

Having a kid that is from your own flesh and blood isn't the same as adopting

In terms of reducing suffering it's the same. From the anti-pet breeding argument, you've condemned a third worlder to starvation Will. But I'm not anti-pet breeding, so you've done nothing wrong in my book.

[compassionategirl]

Responses in blue Jay (we all know by now that I cant break up quotes. It doesnt end up working out for me and it just stresses me out!) So see blue text below

 

 

Any vegans who disagree should of course never have children, as there are tons of people starving to death all over the place that they could adopt instead.

 

There are tons of vegans who have decided to not have kids for that very reason, among others. SOme young vegans have even gone as far as having vascetomies (spelling?).

But that they aren't breeding is really NOT a good thing. If all vegans quit having children, veganism doesn't have a chance.

 

Yes, I recognize the force of this argument. I have thought about this too and it makes a great deal of sense. In fact, I am always HAPPY to hear about vegans having kids and raising their kids vegan because it just means that the number of people on the animals' side has increased (assuming the kids stay vegan). So Jay, I dont disagree with you.

 

 

Without endorsing or rejecting the above stance, I do think either way that the species of animal that there is too much of on this earth is homo sapien. And I can assure you all that I am not alone in that sentiment.

With communism and veganism there would be plenty of room on this planet for twice as many humans. With capitalism (and meat eating) we will always be overpopulated.

 

 

Well, I do agree that that if the world was filled with herbivorous homo sapiens, there would be more room for people and certainly less of an environmental impact caused by the homo sapien population (i.e. sustainability, etc).

 

[compassionategirl]

I think that stuff just makes meat eaters dismiss us.

 

It also makes us rational vegans dismess them.

I absolutely can't take people like her seriously.

 

Go easy on her. I think she means well. Judging by her posts she's probably new to the whole vegan/animal rights thing and still learning and figuring things out

 

Yes, she does mean well.

 

Clearly, she tries to appeal to the emotional, compassionate, empathetic side in people, and I think she is very much these things herself (which is not at all a bad thing - we need more of these traits among the human population in the world). Sadly, though, Violet, you will soon realize that unfortunately, many non-vegans (even vegans) simply lack enough of those qualities to be persuaded by emotional arguments, which is why you always need a "plan b" in advocacy. I think that very sad and disheartening realization comes with increased experience in ar. Lord knows I've been there myself.

 

At any rate, I dont see why we need to add to her stress by calling her nuts. To some meat eaters, we are ALL nuts simply by virtue of the fact that we are vegan! Treating her the same way that a meat eater would treat us??? Advocacy on behalf of those that are least (if at all) valued by society at large is hard, hard work, and it is very noble work, so I dont think Violet deserves to be treated so harshly, especially on a VEGAN board which is supposed to be an outlet and a safe haven for vegans!

 

Honestly, Sinister, because Violet's ar views fall outside of the box that you are accustomed to thinking in, they seem outrageous to you and you dismiss them out of hand as a result as essentially "loony." To hard core meat eaters, hardcore animal exploitation is the rational, True paradigm and anything that casts doubt on that "Truth" is automatically wrong/outrageous/irrational/nuts.

[offense74]

Without endorsing or rejecting the above stance, I do think either way that the species of animal that there is too much of on this earth is homo sapien. And I can assure you all that I am not alone in that sentiment.

I disagree. With communism and veganism there would be plenty of room on this planet for twice as many humans. With capitalism (and meat eating) we will always be overpopulated.

Yeah, right. I'm afraid I'm going to need proof.

The animals are suffering because people choose to eat them and the fact that we don't protect them by law.

 

There are lots of great arguments to go vegan, here are two:

 

Health:

Go and take a bloodtest. Print it out. Shove it in peoples faces. Bombard them with the undisputed facts about the benefits of a fully vegetarian diet.

 

Opression:

Much like we don't think that another human being or a *fictious* other organism that is higher than us in the foodchain has the right to take our freedom or kill us for food, we don't have the right to do it to the ones who are lower than us in the foodchain. Unless it is necessary, which is where you shove your bloodtest printout in their faces.

 

I don't understand why vegans like violet get caught up with the bambi-argument (i.e. "I think animals are cute so we shouldn't touch them") all the time. It's a dead end. Farmers will argue and have valid points. Hunters will argue and have valid points. More often than not you will lose this battle and gain nothing.

 

Just my 2 cents.

[Jay]

Yeah, right. I'm afraid I'm going to need proof.

The animals are suffering because people choose to eat them and the fact that we don't protect them by law.

I guess you're talking about the communism part. Do you want to start a thread and discuss it? I'm happy to.

[compassionategirl]

Offense:

 

I dont think that Violet is saying that "animals are so cute and that is why we shouldnt eat them."

 

She is saying, if I understand her correctly, that our choices cause animals to suffer immensely and that is why we should change. The first part of that is a fact. The second is what should follow for any compassionate, merciful, unselfish person.

 

No? Unless I missed something in her posts?

 

Certainly I havent met anybody whose argument is that we shouldnt eat animals because they are so cute.

[willpeavy]

Having a kid that is from your own flesh and blood isn't the same as adopting

In terms of reducing suffering it's the same. From the anti-pet breeding argument, you've condemned a third worlder to starvation Will. But I'm not anti-pet breeding, so you've done nothing wrong in my book.

 

That whole analogy is going over my head...

 

From my perspective:

 

A dog breeder is related to a dog shelter

 

as

 

A hired surrogate mother and sperm donor are related to an adoption agency

[madcat]

I can see how controlled responsible breeding is a good thing, although first we need to find a way to stop reckless breeding. In my mind “responsible” breeder are the one who check their dogs for genetic defects, takes their dogs in for regular check ups, keeps them vaccinated, and is not in it for the money.

 

I think more dogs end up in shelters because if selfish and irresponsible breeding, or because the dog ended up not being what they were looking for. It would be easier to find a match (people w/ animal) if the dog came from a long line dogs with the same traits.

[madcat]

Also “responsible” breeder will take back a puppy who’s new home didn’t work out, and keep them until a new home is found.

[offense74]

CG:

There are hunters and farmers who claim that they are animal lovers and it's not all nonsense. If you say that you don't want to kill animals because you are compassionate they will say that they kill animals becuase they too are compassionate. Both, according to me, have valid points.

 

If you go for this argument it will only be a lot of head bashing. You show a film of an animal getting shot, which will of coarse get the audince going. Then the hunter says that last year we chose not to kill animals at *insert location* and it turned out that they instead died by the thousands of pest.

Who is more compassionate (who loves bambi the most)? This always seems to be the question.

And as always if you get pissed of by not having the easy win and by that starts to insult your apponent, you will always lose.

 

You here means in general.

[compassionategirl]

Madcat:

 

There is no such thing as 'responsible breeding' where MILLIONS (got that - millions) of HEALTHY, ADOPTABLE animals are being euthanized each year. Breeding animals for profit, in order to satisfy the vain selfish desires of other people is IRresponsible.

 

And that MILLIONS figure is in North America alone. And some of the methods of euthanization arent humane at some county shelters either.

 

I am 100% with Will in his sentiment "Breeders suck." Why would any ethical vegan support commercial pet breeding?

[offense74]

Yeah, right. I'm afraid I'm going to need proof.

The animals are suffering because people choose to eat them and the fact that we don't protect them by law.

I guess you're talking about the communism part. Do you want to start a thread and discuss it? I'm happy to.

Yeah, ok. It's always good to show newcomers that there are diversion amongst strict vegetarians, don't you think ! Go!

[compassionategirl]

CG:

There are hunters and farmers who claim that they are animal lovers and it's not all nonsense. If you say that you don't want to kill animals because you are compassionate they will say that they kill animals becuase they too are compassionate. Both, according to me, have valid points.

 

If you go for this argument it will only be a lot of head bashing. You show a film of an animal getting shot, which will of coarse get the audince going. Then the hunter says that last year we chose not to kill animals at *insert location* and it turned out that they instead died by the thousands of pest.

Who is more compassionate (who loves bambi the most)? This always seems to be the question.

And as always if you get pissed of by not having the easy win and by that starts to insult your apponent, you will always lose.

 

You here means in general.

 

okay, but i disagree that it is hard to decipher who REALLY loves "Bambi" the most when you are talking about an animal rights activist versus a hunter. I think hunters use a lot of "compassionate" arguments in an attempt to dilute the force of the compassionate arguments that go against hunting.

 

I think that a genuine celebration of life recognizes that the best gift we can offer to and receive from animals is their continued lives (Carol Adams in her eco-feminist critique of Hunters Discourse).

 

but certainly, offense, I can see the (unfortunate) limits of emotional arguments in favour of veganism. I have been confronted with that harsh reality many many times. This isnt easy though for a sensitive and empathetic person to accept, and Violet seems to be sensitive and empathetic to suffering.

[Jay]

 

That whole analogy is going over my head...

 

From my perspective:

 

A dog breeder is related to a dog shelter

 

as

 

A hired surrogate mother and sperm donor are related to an adoption agency

Any dog breeding causes a dog to go to the dog shelter and/or die.

Any human breeding causes a human to go to the adoption agency and/or die. The whole point of being against breeding is to stop these deaths. What does it being your own flesh and blood have to do with it?

[veggymeggy]

I've tried to read this whole thread, though I'll admit some parts I skimmed less thoroughly.

 

I'm not against RESPONSIBLE pet breeding. I am absolutely against puppy mills and the pet stores that sell the animals they produce.

 

Like JZA was saying, people will go to great lengths to get a dog they desire. My parents own two purebred Tibetan Spaniels, both former show dogs, both having won shows, and far more papers than any dog needs to document their lineage - and it cost them at least a grand per puppy as I recall. May have been more.

 

I own two rescue cats. Someday I'm going to own a rescue Chihuahua. I know it's going to be a Chihuahua because that's the type of dog I want, and I know it's going to be a rescue one because saving it is more important to me than its papers.

 

But, in defense of the breeders of my parent's dogs, they are NOT jerks. Their dogs are meticulously cared for. I have been to the breeders home on several occasions. The dogs have the most luxurious and spacious set up I've ever seen. Also, my parents had to sign a contract that if they are ever unable to keep the dogs, they will be returned only to the breeder and no one else. They had to have the dogs spayed/neutered to insure they would not breed and try to profit from them. And, when my parents go out of town, they have the dogs 'dog-sat' at the breeders, and nowhere else.

 

My sister went through similar things with her dog, which she went all the way to Texas to get because that was the closest breeder.

 

Rescue pets are more than good enough for me - but legitimate breeders aren't evil. It's the a-holes that run puppy mills for pure profit that are evil.