Aborting Kittens

[Pixle_Catholic]

A devout Catholic told me that animals don’t hold the same value as humans. Because of this, there is no moral shame in killing them for our benefit; food, fun, and convince.

I have always understood the first two, (food, fun), but this last one gives be an uneasy feeling. The context in which it was placed is, if there is ever nothing else you can do and it seems to be the only option, you can abort unborn animals in the womb of a pet.

Can someone explain this to me? It seems like it should be true, but it feels so wrong.

 

[Vico]

A devout Catholic told me that animals don’t hold the same value as humans. Because of this, there is no moral shame in killing them for our benefit; food, fun, and convince.

I have always understood the first two, (food, fun), but this last one gives be an uneasy feeling. The context in which it was placed is, if there is ever nothing else you can do and it seems to be the only option, you can abort unborn animals in the womb of a pet.

Can someone explain this to me? It seems like it should be true, but it feels so wrong.

Respect, kindness, and not killing them unnecessarily are called for.

Catechism of the Catholic Church

2415 The seventh commandment enjoins respect for the integrity of creation. Animals, like plants and inanimate beings, are by nature destined for the common good of past, present, and future humanity.194 Use of the mineral, vegetable, and animal resources of the universe cannot be divorced from respect for moral imperatives. Man’s dominion over inanimate and other living beings granted by the Creator is not absolute; it is limited by concern for the quality of life of his neighbor, including generations to come; it requires a religious respect for the integrity of creation.195

2416 Animals are God’s creatures. He surrounds them with his providential care. By their mere existence they bless him and give him glory.196 Thus men owe them kindness. We should recall the gentleness with which saints like St. Francis of Assisi or St. Philip Neri treated animals.

2417 God entrusted animals to the stewardship of those whom he created in his own image.197 Hence it is legitimate to use animals for food and clothing. They may be domesticated to help man in his work and leisure. Medical and scientific experimentation on animals is a morally acceptable practice, if it remains within reasonable limits and contributes to caring for or saving human lives.

2418 It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly. It is likewise unworthy to spend money on them that should as a priority go to the relief of human misery. One can love animals; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons.

 

[F_Marturana]

The only time I’ve heard of this is when a pregnant cat was discovered so at the time of her spaying.

 

[Julius]

I’m pretty sure abusing animals is a sin. Though it is true they do not hold the same value, we owe them kindness and respect.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Animals do not have souls, and we are called upon to be good stewards of them.

In some cases, this means aborting kittens when there is an oversupply or when the health of mama cat is threatened. We are also allowed to euthanize animals when they are very sick or even to spare them from a worse death (example, an army is invading, you must run away, you can’t take your pet and you don’t want it to be killed by the enemy or starve, so you humanely kill it yourself). And we are allowed to sterilize our animals to prevent further litters. None of this would be okay for a human.

Having said that, I know plenty of people who are squicky about aborting litters of puppies or kittens. It is okay if they don’t want to, as long as they are prepared to find homes or otherwise care for all the offspring and also spay/ neuter as that’s being a good steward. But they are not sinning if they do abort the litter. They would be expected to do it as humanely as possible, using a competent veterinarian.

Edited to add, you do know that every time you’re eating an egg, you’re eating an unborn chicken or other bird, right?

 

[F_Marturana]

Edited to add, you do know that every time you’re eating an egg, you’re eating an unborn chicken or other bird, right?

That’s not true.

Eggs available commercially aren’t fertile.

Hen’s lay eggs almost daily. They only have chicks if they mated with a rooster.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I’ll admit I’m not a farmer, but it’s close enough as far as I’m concerned, and I also don’t look into where everybody sourced the eggs I eat at restaurants. There’s plenty of farm-to-table places around here.

I don’t really see a difference between eating a fertilized and unfertilized animal reproductive product. It’s not like a soul enters the egg if the hen mates with a rooster.

My point is that we do a lot of things with animals that we don’t do with humans. Actually I could have just pointed out that we eat animals in general.

 

[JanR]

Killing animals for food is one thing, but killing them for fun or for convenience is quite another. If a pet can no longer be cared for, rehome it to a GOOD new home. If kittens or puppies are going to be a burden or unwanted, find good homes for them. Better yet, spay or neuter the pet so it can’t breed in the first place.

Watch out for people who kill animals for fun or convenience. They’re only one step away from killing humans for fun or convenience.

Even lower animals like fish deserve to have a good home when kept in captivity (aquariums). I recently rehomed all of mine when I decided to tear down my tanks and sell them.

 

[Agnus-Dei]

I will leave the morality of the decision to you.
Here is my only (name removed by moderator)ut:
-anima-, root. (Of the word “Animal”)

1. -anima- comes from Latin, where it has the meaning "spirit, soul.’’ This meaning is found in such words as: animate, animated, animosity, animus, inanimate.

If they are without soul, why is this the root, and definition of the term? I will not accept they are without soul.
DRB ECC 3:21 Who knoweth if the spirit of the children of Adam ascend upward, and if the spirit of the beasts descend downward?
No spirit, why the mention?
Ecc 3:19 19 For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity.
NIV similar.
(These verses deal with “from dust we are made, and to dust we return. Describing the “fate” of man and animal. Also relating to “no one really knows the destination of said spirit/soul” but we can only guess. Those are the footnotes)
CCC 2456-2457. Re: animals “man must show them kindness”.
So, we both have spirit, soul, and breath. Close enough to require kind treatment.
Ill get back to this later.
Dominus vobiscum

 

[Freddy]

I’ll admit I’m not a farmer, but it’s close enough as far as I’m concerned, and I also don’t look into where everybody sourced the eggs I eat at restaurants. There’s plenty of farm-to-table places around here.

I don’t really see a difference between eating a fertilized and unfertilized animal reproductive product. It’s not like a soul enters the egg if the hen mates with a rooster.

My point is that we do a lot of things with animals that we don’t do with humans. Actually I could have just pointed out that we eat animals in general.

You should check out balut, a S.E. Asian street food. I’ve eaten most things but I passed on balut.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I actually was thinking when I wrote the above reply that there was something like balut, but I didn’t know what the name was, I just remember reading about it or somebody mentioned it at the office once.

Yeah, I think I’ll pass on the balut just like I’ll pass on the monkey brains, another “delicacy” that bored people liked to mention around the office decades ago. We had a lot of ex-military folks who’d served in some weird parts of the world.

 

[EmilyAlexandra]

there is no moral shame in killing them for our benefit; food, fun, and convince.

I cannot see how it is moral to kill an animal purely for fun. However, I guess it cannot be prohibited for Catholics, as Spain is a Catholic country notorious for its abuse of animals, often in the context of religious festivals.

 

[JanR]

Pixle_Catholic:

there is no moral shame in killing them for our benefit; food, fun, and convince.

I cannot see how it is moral to kill an animal purely for fun. However, I guess it cannot be prohibited for Catholics, as Spain is a Catholic country notorious for its abuse of animals, often in the context of religious festivals.

Bull fighting comes to mind. Spain and Mexico are both notorious for that.

 

[Agnus-Dei]

Oh yes. That’s a thing in the Philippines too. I’ve been told it is a strange taste, and gristly texture. Not on my menu.
My own feelings are “don’t eat baby animals”. At least try and let the animal reach adulthood for a while.
I have the usual bias many people have. Unless it’s beef(limited), pork, chicken, or turkey, it’s not my type of thing. I wouldn’t eat the type of animals I have as pets. “Don’t eat your friends”
Dominus vobiscum

 

[runningdude]

Killing an animal is only moral acceptable if done for a good purpose. This may include population control if stray cats are creating unsafe or unsanitary conditions.

It is not directly irrelevant whether an animal is born or not.

 

[tuffsmurf]

Most animals are killed for “fun”, meat is not really a necessity, but something we eat because of our enjoyment.

 

[EmilyAlexandra]

Up to a point. Clearly there is a difference between killing an animal to eat it and killing an animal for the pleasure of torturing it, e.g. throwing a live goat off a church tower, pulling the heads off geese, setting fire to a bull’s horns, etc.

 

[JanR]

Most animals are killed for “fun”, meat is not really a necessity, but something we eat because of our enjoyment.

This is too bad.

I have no objection to hunting, so long as the meat is used. Trophy hunting simply to get a pair of antlers or horns to hang on the wall, and letting the corpse rot is wasteful and therefore immoral.

Hunting for the purpose of eating is fine, if done properly.

I do have a serious problem with people who kill animals just for the fun of it, or have pets euthanized simply because they’ve become inconvenient for their owners while there’s nothing really wrong with the animal (no terminal illness or life threatening injury that would justify euthanizing it as an act of kindness).

Pets that can no longer be kept can and should be rehomed.

If people would spay or neuter their pets, there wouldn’t be all these feral cats running around that aren’t socialized and cannot be adopted. And rather than euthanizing feral cats, there are programs whereby they can be spayed or neutered so they can’t breed anymore.

Killing an animal should only be done for a justifiable purpose. We must remember that animals are gifts, and that God also created them, and they should be treated kindly. Killing them just for fun is abusing God’s gifts.

When we do have to kill an animal, it should be done as humanely as possible, so as not to torture the animal or subject it to any avoidable suffering.

 

[SlavaIsusuChristu]

This isn’t a dogmatically held position for the faith. Roman Catholics believe animals have souls, but not immortal souls like humans. And when they die they simply cease to exist. Eastern Catholics, however, do not share this view (necessarily). We believe that when God comes to judge the world and all of creation is renewed, this would imply that animals/plants would be renewed as well (as they are part of creation). So while we won’t say that there are certainly animals in Heaven, we don’t take the Roman position that no, they are not.

This is part of what makes Eastern Christianity so appealing to me. It’s less legalistic and places much more emphasis on hope.

 

[Baho]

IMO the way that secular anti-life culture has promulgated the idea that it is our moral responsibility to sterilize animals and prevent life has affected our view of life in general. It’s inconvenient, it’s more moral to prevent it because it’ll be tough or inconvenient, it’s something to be controlled and decided upon. I think it’s bad, man. Most breeds of dog when neutered are actually more aggressive. When I say most I mean well over 95% of dogs, the stats are plainly available. Additionally some breeds have up to a 3x higher risk of developing osteosarcoma because of neutering, and the rate is far more significant than testicular cancer if they’re unneutered. The veterinarian industry is a lot like PP, they make money off these sterilizations. Dogs were meant to be in tact, animals were meant to reproduce and fill the earth. We’re seeing people terrified of the fact that the world has lost 70% of it’s wildlife in 50 years and at the same time mutilating their pets. It’s nuts, man. I’d say its bad to abort kittens. Not the same as aborting a person for sure, not even close. But I don’t think that it’s good.