|
|
|
|
|
|
by colonwqbang
597 days ago
|
|
|
I agree that keeping pets is probably immoral. But even if we accept that, there are multiple problems. - There may not be much of a "wild" left to release animals into. - Some animals have been bred for hundreds of generations and are now dependent on humans. - Who has the right to speak for these animals? How do they divine what their client wants? It's not reasonable that any person on the street can bring a motion of habeas corpus on behalf of your dog. |
|
|
Watching the foxes and squirrels that live near humans has suggested to me that domestication is two-way. The animals want what we have: spare food, shelter. Some of them are brave and willing enough to interact with us, some aren’t. Over time, more of them become brave and willing enough to interact.
Anyone that considers a cat their pet will observe that cats are mainly in it for themselves. They (try to) go out when they want, they’ll make it clear when they’re not in the mood for attention. They spend hours each day ignoring us whilst making use of the shelter we provide. They’ve been known to leave their humans and return to their familiar territories when their humans move house.
I don’t think pet “ownership” is inherently immoral, but some people’s implementations of it, and the terminology, probably are.