Puppy Forum and Dog Forums banner

1 - 20 of 93 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Please note: While I stand behind what I say, it is extra spicey to spark serious discussion. So rather than simply say you agree or disagree, or toss names like cynic, cold, etc - please take the time to really think it over and provide reasons for your stance.

Against:

People domesticated dogs for work and companion reasons - mostly work.
The wolves never asked or needed it - we just did it. And today we have an insane number (ie. severe overpopulation) and kinds of breeds to choose from.

We claim to love dogs, but most originate from puppy mills - very few are prepared to pay the high cost of reputable pure bred breeders - and whether you got/get your dog from a rescue, spca, previous owner, street, friend - most of those came from some form of puppy mill (big or small) where conditions are horrifc and absolutely inhumane. So on the one hand you can tell yourself you are rescuing/saving/helping a dog, but once you know the real story.....More of a dilemna for those with a conscience and pricipled.

Then many people are in love with the IDEA of a dog, rather than the actual nitty gritty of owning and caring for a dog. But dogs aren't goldfish. Do you think a quick outside to relieve themselvelves, then gone all day at work, and then home to relieve again and hang out is enough? Is it proper care? Absolutely not! But some form of this picture is the norm. And then we are surprised when they develop serious behavioural problems. They can't walk on a leash without pulling everywhere and darting at all moving and smelly things. They bark too much. They are aggressive and over-excited with other dogs at the dog run. They turn in circles obsessively. The kinds of behaviours are too many to name here. And if this wasn't cruel enough, they throw up their hands in wonder and declare this dog is impossible and off they go back to spca, rescue, pound, etc; But even if they stick around, is this fair to the dog? Is this humane? Is this right?

What category do you fall into? I see a few that can be a fit for dogs - but even here, it is far too easy to be a bad dog owner. Retired couples or singles who are around during the day and have the time and interest to spend with dog. People who work at home. A stay at home partner - as long as they are on board with the dog idea. That's about it. Short-term situations don't cut it - like university student, unemployed, etc because they may be suitable for a time, but then you could well end up in the category above which isn't fair to the dog.

And even among those who are in a position to properly care for dogs, many are not prepared/willing/interersted/able to take the time train, exercise, groom, feed good food, socialize, dog run, etc;

Now you can say, "well I get home at the end of the end and she is so happy to see me - we hang out and get along and all is well" Thing is, she HAS to be happy to see you - you are the one that feeds and provides water - you take her out to go - she has been alone, bored, and probably anxious all day so of course your return is big news - a lot of it is instinctive also. That doesn't make it ok for you not to care for the dog in a humane way. The fact is, many if not majority of owners and future owners want a dog and feel they have a right to a dog. That it will be happy - or at least happier than at a pound, rescue, or wherever. But they SHOULD NOT GET ONE. It is a selfish and inhumane act - if they fall into the category described here. It ends up supporting the puppy mills generally indirectly (is it better if the dog is once or twice removed from a puppy milll or smaller puppy mill operation?)

Some basic pop psychology. Many people, in all categories listed above, get a dog to replace or fill a gap in their lives. Particularly when one is alone, it's often to be a replacement for a partner, a friend that's always at home for you when you need it, a reason to get outside and exercise (although often doesn't turn out that way) a comfort when you go to bed at night, even someone(thing) to talk to, cry with, etc; They are spoiled, allowed to do what they want, over-fed, treated like people - but often denied essential DOG needs and attention.

Ultimately, the entire business of domesticating, breeding, and owning dogs, is a selfish, self-serving, and inumane act.

Discuss...........
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,131 Posts
Please note: While I stand behind what I say, it is extra spicey to spark serious discussion. So rather than simply say you agree or disagree, or toss names like cynic, cold, etc - please take the time to really think it over and provide reasons for your stance.

Against:

People domesticated dogs for work and companion reasons - mostly work.
The wolves never asked or needed it - we just did it
. And today we have an insane number (ie. severe overpopulation) and kinds of breeds to choose from.

We claim to love dogs, but most originate from puppy mills - very few are prepared to pay the high cost of reputable pure bred breeders - and whether you got/get your dog from a rescue, spca, previous owner, street, friend - most of those came from some form of puppy mill (big or small) where conditions are horrifc and absolutely inhumane. So on the one hand you can tell yourself you are rescuing/saving/helping a dog, but once you know the real story.....More of a dilemna for those with a conscience and pricipled.

Then many people are in love with the IDEA of a dog, rather than the actual nitty gritty of owning and caring for a dog. But dogs aren't goldfish. Do you think a quick outside to relieve themselvelves, then gone all day at work, and then home to relieve again and hang out is enough? Is it proper care? Absolutely not! But some form of this picture is the norm. And then we are surprised when they develop serious behavioural problems. They can't walk on a leash without pulling everywhere and darting at all moving and smelly things. They bark too much. They are aggressive and over-excited with other dogs at the dog run. They turn in circles obsessively. The kinds of behaviours are too many to name here. And if this wasn't cruel enough, they throw up their hands in wonder and declare this dog is impossible and off they go back to spca, rescue, pound, etc; But even if they stick around, is this fair to the dog? Is this humane? Is this right?

What category do you fall into? I see a few that can be a fit for dogs - but even here, it is far too easy to be a bad dog owner. Retired couples or singles who are around during the day and have the time and interest to spend with dog. People who work at home. A stay at home partner - as long as they are on board with the dog idea. That's about it. Short-term situations don't cut it - like university student, unemployed, etc because they may be suitable for a time, but then you could well end up in the category above which isn't fair to the dog.

And even among those who are in a position to properly care for dogs, many are not prepared/willing/interersted/able to take the time train, exercise, groom, feed good food, socialize, dog run, etc;

Now you can say, "well I get home at the end of the end and she is so happy to see me - we hang out and get along and all is well" Thing is, she HAS to be happy to see you - you are the one that feeds and provides water - you take her out to go - she has been alone, bored, and probably anxious all day so of course your return is big news - a lot of it is instinctive also. That doesn't make it ok for you not to care for the dog in a humane way. The fact is, many if not majority of owners and future owners want a dog and feel they have a right to a dog. That it will be happy - or at least happier than at a pound, rescue, or wherever. But they SHOULD NOT GET ONE. It is a selfish and inhumane act - if they fall into the category described here. It ends up supporting the puppy mills generally indirectly (is it better if the dog is once or twice removed from a puppy milll or smaller puppy mill operation?)

Some basic pop psychology. Many people, in all categories listed above, get a dog to replace or fill a gap in their lives. Particularly when one is alone, it's often to be a replacement for a partner, a friend that's always at home for you when you need it, a reason to get outside and exercise (although often doesn't turn out that way) a comfort when you go to bed at night, even someone(thing) to talk to, cry with, etc; They are spoiled, allowed to do what they want, over-fed, treated like people - but often denied essential DOG needs and attention.

Ultimately, the entire business of domesticating, breeding, and owning dogs, is a selfish, self-serving, and inumane act.

Discuss...........
The whole argument against kinda falls apart with the first line I bolded. Because we as humans did not domesticate the wolf, the wolf domesticated it's self. Cave people did not go steal wolf cubs and attempt to raise them as pets. Wolves started living with humans due to the drive to survive and humans provided food waste for them too eat so the tamer the wolves got the more they were able to eat and the more likly they were to have offspring who in turn were even tamer. Fact is dogs will exsist weather we breed them or not because of the symbiotic relationship we have.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter #4 (Edited)
Keechak:
Fair enough - let's call the wolf/human thing a mutual unfolding. It does not however take away from the rest of the thread.

hulkmaniac:
Well if dogs weren't domesticated, they would just be plain old wolves that live in the wild. Which we would still hunt and kill, but at least it would take away the ethical dilemna of dog ownership and the dog industry as a whole.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,623 Posts
I'm not really sure what you're arguing here. In terms of dogs, they're already domesticated, there really is no domesticating unless you go out and get dingo or wolf. Dogs are really not wild animals. A lot of their tools/instincts for survival have evolved to make them able to coexist in a human world, to interact with humans. Studies have been done that suggest dogs have evolved to read human facial expressions. While some breeds may be able to hack it in the wild- most probably would die in a TRUE natural environment away from urban sprawl.

Secondly there are many scientists who believe that dogs played a crucial role in the development of modern man. Like it or not dogs and humans evolved together. Dogs are not wolves any-longer. To compare the two is ridiculous. Without humans there would not be dogs- and without dogs there would not be modern humans.

Your argument is full of assumptions, a lot of which is just not factual. Most people here do not support puppy mills or backyard breeders. Also I don't see a single idea on a solution posted. Do you think every dog on the earth should be rounded up and euthanized?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,977 Posts
People domesticated dogs for work and companion reasons - mostly work.
The wolves never asked or needed it - we just did it. And today we have an insane number (ie. severe overpopulation) and kinds of breeds to choose from.
I find it hard to believe that we could do anything to a wolf that the wolf wouldn't want as well. Maybe the two species found they work for each other and decided to cooperate, then we discovered how to further that with domestication and over time, the dog was born.

As far as overpopulation, that's a good thing taken to extreme. That doesn't mean the dog should never have existed. That doesn't even make sense. And really, number of breeds? So what? Should we have just 2 breeds to choose from or something? Besides, some breeds developed largely from natural selection before contact with humans. Cotons are one. Border Collies are said to be another (a theory as to why BCs have like 358930253 kinds of markings but are all still pure BC)

We claim to love dogs, but most originate from puppy mills - very few are prepared to pay the high cost of reputable pure bred breeders - and whether you got/get your dog from a rescue, spca, previous owner, street, friend - most of those came from some form of puppy mill (big or small) where conditions are horrifc and absolutely inhumane. So on the one hand you can tell yourself you are rescuing/saving/helping a dog, but once you know the real story.....More of a dilemna for those with a conscience and pricipled.
I did rescue Wally. Period. Or do you think he'd be better off fearful and matted and wasting his potential being stuck with his byb having seen nothing of the world outside his backyard? There's one thing for making an argument, another to tell people who actually rescuing dogs that "they are just telling themselves that."

And no, I did not buy Wally. He was acquired with zero exchange of money or goods. My mom's friend basically shut down the byb herself (she knows the byb) and gave Wally to my mom and I because of his issues and that we had a quiet, peaceful home which Wally needed.

As far as puppy mills - that's the fault of the money-making-at-all-costs mentality of some in our society and the ignorance of lawmakers (though that's changing) to do anything about it that has teeth (often, again, citing money). Also the general public that doesn't understand where that doggy in the window comes from.

Then many people are in love with the IDEA of a dog, rather than the actual nitty gritty of owning and caring for a dog. But dogs aren't goldfish. Do you think a quick outside to relieve themselvelves, then gone all day at work, and then home to relieve again and hang out is enough? Is it proper care? Absolutely not! But some form of this picture is the norm.
That's the way it is with all this sort of stuff. Take kids - as long as they are being fed and housed and not getting beat up or other visible signs of harm, they are "properly cared for".

Mental/Emotional issues just don't get enough attention, be it kids or animals.

And then we are surprised when they develop serious behavioural problems. They can't walk on a leash without pulling everywhere and darting at all moving and smelly things. They bark too much. They are aggressive and over-excited with other dogs at the dog run. They turn in circles obsessively. The kinds of behaviours are too many to name here. And if this wasn't cruel enough, they throw up their hands in wonder and declare this dog is impossible and off they go back to spca, rescue, pound, etc; But even if they stick around, is this fair to the dog? Is this humane? Is this right?
Nope, but that's not "the industry"'s fault. No more is it the car maker's fault of people buy cars and then not maintain them, or they abuse them and wonder why it only lasted 3 years.


What category do you fall into? I see a few that can be a fit for dogs - but even here, it is far too easy to be a bad dog owner. Retired couples or singles who are around during the day and have the time and interest to spend with dog. People who work at home. A stay at home partner - as long as they are on board with the dog idea. That's about it. Short-term situations don't cut it - like university student, unemployed, etc because they may be suitable for a time, but then you could well end up in the category above which isn't fair to the dog.
Oh, so I guess if someone works they aren't suitable for a dog? What if they train the dog and spend time with him when they get home? What if they train him before they leave for the day and then spend time in the evening? What if the dog is still happy and mentally stimulated even with having an owner that works? It's not impossible and it's really pretentious to say "only X Y Z people are good for dogs". The reality is you can be stay at home - and just leave the dog crated. You can be retired - an lack the energy to stimulate a BC or JRT or just an energetic and active dog.

Being a good owner doesn't mean you can be someone who can make a living without working. Again, doesn't even make sense. Being a good owner is someone who can have a fulfilled dog, and you can do that with a variety of mental and physical activities and the dog will love your companionship and doing things with you just the same.


Now you can say, "well I get home at the end of the end and she is so happy to see me - we hang out and get along and all is well" Thing is, she HAS to be happy to see you - you are the one that feeds and provides water - you take her out to go - she has been alone, bored, and probably anxious all day so of course your return is big news - a lot of it is instinctive also.
Wrong.

A dog can be scared of their owner, the same one who feeds and waters and takes them out. The dog can be bored, but that doesn't mean that if the owner someone who's cruel to them - they will be like "oh look at my cruel master, I'm going to get beat! What fun!"

In fact, if what you say was true, we wouldn't have to caution against punishment when the dog makes a mess or does something while you're gone. Because the punishment is connected to your arrival and not to the event you're actually mad at because we humans can make past associations, but dogs are often in the now.


That doesn't make it ok for you not to care for the dog in a humane way. The fact is, many if not majority of owners and future owners want a dog and feel they have a right to a dog. That it will be happy - or at least happier than at a pound, rescue, or wherever. But they SHOULD NOT GET ONE. It is a selfish and inhumane act - if they fall into the category described here. It ends up supporting the puppy mills generally indirectly (is it better if the dog is once or twice removed from a puppy milll or smaller puppy mill operation?)
What then, about the dogs in the puppy mills? Is it humane to say "oh well, screw you, dog?" You've been going on about what's fair for the dog, so how is it fair to those dogs in the mills to get people to say "oh well, sorry dog, but you have to stay in these horrid conditions." Is that fair to that dog? What did that dog do to deserve such treatment and indifference? Future, future, future - sure we don't want to support the mills, but what about the dogs NOW in mills? What do we do about those dogs?


Some basic pop psychology. Many people, in all categories listed above, get a dog to replace or fill a gap in their lives. Particularly when one is alone, it's often to be a replacement for a partner, a friend that's always at home for you when you need it, a reason to get outside and exercise (although often doesn't turn out that way) a comfort when you go to bed at night, even someone(thing) to talk to, cry with, etc; They are spoiled, allowed to do what they want, over-fed, treated like people - but often denied essential DOG needs and attention.
That applies to everything under the sun. Many things have been used to fill gaps from getting dogs to having kids to shopping to gambling to drinking to whatever. That's not a fault of the dog industry. That's a problem within the individual that they need to work on. The dog world could be PERFECT but it won't make those people better owners.

Ultimately, the entire business of domesticating, breeding, and owning dogs, is a selfish, self-serving, and inumane act.
Only if the people involved are inhumane, selfish, and self-serving.

Those of us who are doing right by our dogs (even by your definition) are not selfish, self-serving, and inhumane. Nor are the breeders who do their due diligence and are breeding quality pups that can fulfill their form and function. Nor are the rescues who take in dogs that are roaming the street from someone who was indeed thoughtless - but how are they being selfish, self-serving, and inhumane?

Painting with broad brushes doesn't paint the truth. It paints an agenda. The truth is there are problems in the dog world just like in any industry, but it doesn't mean the WHOLE THING is just pure crap and should be done away with. Attack the problems and those that create them, not everyone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,296 Posts
Good grief. The whole argument sounds like a teenager screaming to a parent, "I didn't ask to be born!"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,307 Posts
Keechak:
Fair enough - let's call the wolf/human thing a mutual unfolding. It does not however take away from the rest of the thread.

hulkmaniac:
Well if dogs weren't domesticated, they would just be plain old wolves that live in the wild. Which we would still hunt and kill, but at least it would take away the ethical dilemna of dog ownership and the dog industry as a whole.
I've never faced a dilemma about my dog ownership, I am what I am. The only real problem I have is when I read some of this stuff. That also is easily cured, I'm gone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,997 Posts
I'm not really sure what you're arguing here. In terms of dogs, they're already domesticated, there really is no domesticating unless you go out and get dingo or wolf. Dogs are really not wild animals. A lot of their tools/instincts for survival have evolved to make them able to coexist in a human world, to interact with humans. Studies have been done that suggest dogs have evolved to read human facial expressions. While some breeds may be able to hack it in the wild- most probably would die in a TRUE natural environment away from urban sprawl.

Secondly there are many scientists who believe that dogs played a crucial role in the development of modern man. Like it or not dogs and humans evolved together. Dogs are not wolves any-longer. To compare the two is ridiculous. Without humans there would not be dogs- and without dogs there would not be modern humans.

Your argument is full of assumptions, a lot of which is just not factual. Most people here do not support puppy mills or backyard breeders. Also I don't see a single idea on a solution posted. Do you think every dog on the earth should be rounded up and euthanized?
This is a very good point. Humans and dogs have lived and worked together for 10 - 15 thousand years or longer. It's a relationship that has been very beneficial to both species for all of that time. Even today the two species both benefit from said relationship.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,710 Posts
People domesticated dogs for work and companion reasons - mostly work.
The wolves never asked or needed it - we just did it.
as keechack hinted at..UTTER BS. most of the paleoarcheological evidence points to the precursor of dogs following around the camps of hunter gatherers and rooting in their trash piles. the less skittish animals would be more successful at this and have a larger food supply, producing less skittish pups with more consistent nutrition. that sets the stage for a gradual MUTUAL integration of the two highly social species..who as social species were already predisposed towards communal life. and not only did dogs get domesticated...evidence shows that humans are techinically domesticated..biologically speaking.
We claim to love dogs, but most originate from puppy mills - very few are prepared to pay the high cost of reputable pure bred breeders - and whether you got/get your dog from a rescue, spca, previous owner, street, friend - most of those came from some form of puppy mill (big or small) where conditions are horrifc and absolutely inhumane. So on the one hand you can tell yourself you are rescuing/saving/helping a dog, but once you know the real story.....More of a dilemna for those with a conscience and pricipled.
supporting evidence for this rather spurious claim please.

Then many people are in love with the IDEA of a dog, rather than the actual nitty gritty of owning and caring for a dog. But dogs aren't goldfish. Do you think a quick outside to relieve themselvelves, then gone all day at work, and then home to relieve again and hang out is enough? Is it proper care? Absolutely not! But some form of this picture is the norm. And then we are surprised when they develop serious behavioural problems. They can't walk on a leash without pulling everywhere and darting at all moving and smelly things. They bark too much. They are aggressive and over-excited with other dogs at the dog run. They turn in circles obsessively. The kinds of behaviours are too many to name here.
um. this isnt an argument. it shows a clear lack of understanding of dog behavior. everything...EVERYTHING you mentioned is NOT a behavior problem...its a matter interspecies communication so to speak. We alter our behaviors to accomodate their natural proclivities and reciprocally, we ask that they develop some manners needed to function in our society. but the behaviors you mention are ALL NATURAL dog behaviors. they are NOT behavior problems. they are the result of communication issues which by extension..is a result of lack of education on behalf of the human.

if this wasn't cruel enough, they throw up their hands in wonder and declare this dog is impossible and off they go back to spca, rescue, pound, etc; But even if they stick around, is this fair to the dog? Is this humane? Is this right?
what the heck does this even mean? how can you ask such objectively natured questions regarding a highly subjective subject? Sometimes it is, sometimes it isnt..it depends on the peculiarities of the situation.
What category do you fall into? I see a few that can be a fit for dogs - but even here, it is far too easy to be a bad dog owner. Retired couples or singles who are around during the day and have the time and interest to spend with dog. People who work at home. A stay at home partner - as long as they are on board with the dog idea. That's about it. Short-term situations don't cut it - like university student, unemployed, etc because they may be suitable for a time, but then you could well end up in the category above which isn't fair to the dog.
coulda woulda shoulda..Im a college student. My dog gets a max of 7 hours of exercise a day. Im also a single mom. my dog is highly involved in almost everything we do. do i give her up because Im low income? umm..that would kill her...literally...because of the peculiarities of the situation. None of what you're saying makes any sense whatsoever.

And even among those who are in a position to properly care for dogs, many are not prepared/willing/interersted/able to take the time train, exercise, groom, feed good food, socialize, dog run, etc;
again..im a low income single mom, full time college student and i work..yet my dog gets 7 hours a day tops exercise. She's well trained, eats a raw diet, is socialized to the full extent possible..you're throwing about wild and crazy judgements.

someone could be rich as heck, have acres of fenced yard, spend all day at home and the dog could still be the victim of piss poor care and totally miserable. generally, your situation is IRRELEVANT. what matters is YOUR determination, creativity and ability to adapt that determines your fitness as a dog owner.

Now you can say, "well I get home at the end of the end and she is so happy to see me - we hang out and get along and all is well" Thing is, she HAS to be happy to see you - you are the one that feeds and provides water - you take her out to go - she has been alone, bored, and probably anxious all day so of course your return is big news - a lot of it is instinctive also. That doesn't make it ok for you not to care for the dog in a humane way. The fact is, many if not majority of owners and future owners want a dog and feel they have a right to a dog. That it will be happy - or at least happier than at a pound, rescue, or wherever. But they SHOULD NOT GET ONE. It is a selfish and inhumane act - if they fall into the category described here. It ends up supporting the puppy mills generally indirectly (is it better if the dog is once or twice removed from a puppy milll or smaller puppy mill operation?)
YES it is better. and no she doesnt have to see ME. as long as i take steps to provide care for her..it doesnt matter who she sees as long as her needs are met. when im at school, my sister has her. when im at work, she hangs out in the office with my boss. when im out of town, she goes and stays with my grandfather and his hounds. and it IS better that they are removed from a puppy mill situation. adopt a dog seized from a puppy mill....that's a serious loss on behalf of people who dont care about dogs and a GAIN on behalf of the dogs. what do you suggest we do? just kill them all and throw them in a dumpster behind a piggly wiggly? :suspicious: the adoption fee from that seized mill dog will go to help other dogs. what you seem to be saying is that we should just give up on all of them. that's not humane, that's the position of a sadist. Or should we just set them all free? do you know ANYTHING about ecology and how utterly disastrous that would be for both the dogs AND the environment, considering the numbers?

Some basic pop psychology. Many people, in all categories listed above, get a dog to replace or fill a gap in their lives. Particularly when one is alone, it's often to be a replacement for a partner, a friend that's always at home for you when you need it, a reason to get outside and exercise (although often doesn't turn out that way) a comfort when you go to bed at night, even someone(thing) to talk to, cry with, etc; They are spoiled, allowed to do what they want, over-fed, treated like people - but often denied essential DOG needs and attention.
there's a reason it's called POP psychology. popular does NOT equal TRUE. i got a dog because my ex had one. when we broke up, it was clear that he would mistreat her and that she would both benefit herself and my and my son by staying with me. My son has aspergers and he would not have come as far as he has socially without her. She would still be a dog aggressive spastic wreck without me. MUTUALLY beneficial

Ultimately, the entire business of domesticating, breeding, and owning dogs, is a selfish, self-serving, and inumane act.
horse puckey. and here's why.

we've coevolved. Dogs and humans are well on their way to a type of symbiosis. Biologically speaking, they have evolved the survival skills of being able to read human social gestures. their hormones are stimulated by our touch. Conversely, humans WOULD NOT be where they are today if dogs had not taken the first steps to integrate themselves into our lives. it would be cruelty in the EXTREME to leave off now when their very bodies and minds are biologically adapted to be with us.


jeez...read something valid before you start on this kind of ridiculous tangent next time..please?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,710 Posts
Also, I have heard that dogs didn't evolve from wolves but that wolves and dogs diverged from a common ancestor.
debated. the DEFINATE common ancestor as far as i know was Tomarctus...you also have to remember that what a wolf is today..is not necessarily what a wolf was back then. There is some debate about WHICH wolf type was the common ancestor...but it's pretty much a given that it was some kind of wolflike canid.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,997 Posts
debated. the DEFINATE common ancestor as far as i know was Tomarctus...you also have to remember that what a wolf is today..is not necessarily what a wolf was back then. There is some debate about WHICH wolf type was the common ancestor...but it's pretty much a given that it was some kind of wolflike canid.
We should ask wvasko. He probably remembers it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
689 Posts
Ultimately, the entire business of domesticating, breeding, and owning dogs, is a selfish, self-serving, and inumane act.
Soooo in other words you think all people who own dogs are selfish and all dog owning should be outlawed?
I'm not exactly sure about what your getting at here. Sure there are people who go out and get a dog for the wrong reasons but thats life, we don't live in a perfect world and its stupid if we try and make it perfect because it is never going to be. There are always going to be people doing SOMETHING for the wrong reasons.
Most of the people who go out and get a dog to have as a companion or to "replace or fill a gap in their lives" mean well but they just aren't educated. That means that it is our responsibility as responsible dog owners to teach them how to take care of a dog. We shouldn't go off on them and say "You SHOULD NOT own a dog you have no idea what you are doing and you know nothing!!!" that is going to get them no where.
 
1 - 20 of 93 Posts
Top