Contraception for pets

[Pup7]

Felt compelled to point that out based on your own comment, seeing as how I’m certain you knew precisely what I meant anyway.

 

[Seeksadvice]

As Bob Barker always said: Spay or Neuter your pets.

There can be some rather… unfortunate consequences to not doing so that go well beyond populating the Earth with half-breed mongrels. Large male dogs can mate with small/toy female dogs, and the results aren’t pretty for the female dog should pregnancy occur.

Spaying/Neutering isn’t contraception; it is sterilization. For a moment there I thought you were asking about condoms for cats…

Also, agree on the pet store thing. I have had two dogs in my life. One was a Bichon from a pet store (I didn’t make the purchase), and while she was OK, she had personality issues. The other was a half-breed mongrel Schnauzer/poodle accident. I have seen the difference between hunting dogs that you get from reputable breeders, and “hunting” dogs like the lab you buy from a pet shop. I’ll take a dog from a breeder that is part of the North American Versatile Hunting Dog Association any day over a pet shop (in the market for a non-AKC breed that a pet shop wouldn’t carry anyway).

 

[AlNg]

Animals do not marry

Does that mean if you do not marry, then it is OK to use contraception?

 

[Norseman82]

Maybe we should teach them NFP? Of course, Fido and Miss Mittens would need a just / serious reason to use it…

 

[Fauken]

Does that mean if you do not marry, then it is OK to use contraception?

Actually, yes. So long as you’re practicing abstinence. Women, for example, can use birth control pills while practicing abstinence to regulate their hormones.

 

[mVitus]

Does that mean if you do not marry, then it is OK to use contraception?

It means you’re over thinking this. To use some simple ideas: Human morality applies to humans. Animals aren’t humans. So animal morality applies to animals. And animal morality isn’t human morality.

Example: You walk into your a room and find a human in the corner. It is wrong to kill the human because that is murder.
BUT
If you walk into a room and find a spider in the corner, you may kill the spider. That’s because the spider is not human.

Example 2: You’re hungry and walking through a forest. You see a deer so you shoot and eat it. That’s okay because we have dominion over animals and hunger is a valid reason to kill them.
BUT
If you shot a human to eat, that’s cannibalism and wrong.

If you say a human, it’s wrong because it violates human morality by violating their human dignity. But animals don’t have human dignity. They have animal dignity and are subject to human dominion. We can sterilize them.

 

[AlNg]

Example: You walk into your a room and find a human in the corner. It is wrong to kill the human because that is murder.
BUT
If you walk into a room and find a spider in the corner, you may kill the spider. That’s because the spider is not human.

Suppose that you walk in a room and see a beautiful small kitten in the corner. He appears to be hungry and asking you for food. You then get out a gun and shoot the beautiful young kitty cat for no reason or you kill the cat with a knife, stabbing him several times. Is that OK? Is there a difference between killing the beautiful kitten and killing the spider?

 

[Allegra]

I know I’m I the minority about this, but I actually think there is validity to the concern that the entire “pet industry” is immoral. Originally, dogs were domesticated by training them to work in ways that came natural to them. (hunting, protection, herding, retrieving, etc) As far as I understand, those behaviors are natural to dogs and are exhibited by wild dogs. That’s sort of a far cry from using genetics to create pets for the sole purpose of companionship and intentionally breeding them for traits we find stylish or convenient but aren’t what is best for the animal. A couple of issues that concern me morally are the practice of breeding dogs that can no longer hunt or defend themselves and that suffer from manmade health conditions, the issue of intentional over-breeding for profit, then euthanasia for convenience, and the unnatural alteration of animals for our purposes. On the other hand, since our generation has more or less inherited this practice, I’m not sure what could be done about it at this point. The whole thing makes me feel a little “icky” when I think about it. I donate to the wild canid foundation and I don’t intend to ever own a dog. I don’t know what else can be done.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Why in the WORLD would you give an animal - who has no comprehension of what you’re doing or why - an OCP over neutering/spaying?

My guess is, if this exists, it may be targeted towards breeders who would like to breed their animal sometimes so don’t want to spay or neuter, but do not want the animal constantly going into heat every month. Cats in heat are not comfortable and not all that pleasant to be around.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Legally, you won’t be charged with murder or homicide for killing any animal. This is a favorite question for US bar exams; they make an animal sound very cute or very “human” (e.g. an ape who can read) and then someone kills it and there is a question about charging them with homicide. The response is always that you can’t charge them with homicide because they didn’t kill a human.

Animal cruelty laws generally don’t cover insects because they are considered household pests, and also their deaths are fairly quick (smash a spider and it’s dead instantly). For animals that aren’t household pests, you’re expected to call animal control or take the animal in to animal control, who will deal with it “humanely” in whatever way that locality has decided is “humane”. In some cases, animal control has decided it’s “humane” to just shoot the animal or bop it on the head with a brick. (People tend to object to this, but only if they find out it is going on - often they don’t.)

If you stab a kitten, you may be charged with animal cruelty in USA.
If you shoot a kitten, you may or may not be charged with animal cruelty in USA. Depending on where you live, people may be more upset about you shooting a gun in a house than the fact that you killed a kitten. But if you live in a gun-friendly part of the country, you’re pretty much allowed to shoot unwanted animals that wander onto your property. You might get a lawsuit if the kitten or dog or whatever turns out to belong to your neighbor and it just got loose and wandered over to your place and you shot it.

It’s a complicated area, but usually the animals have very few rights and most of the law is set up to protect humans from harm from having to be around a gun going off, losing their valuable “property” if their dog gets shot (the dog is considered a property item), etc.

 

[pensmama87]

Reading late 19th century fiction has given me the impression that drowning kittens was a preferred method of killing them and viewed as more humane than other options. It’s pretty grim, but cats (and other animals) are just not going to decide to stop reproducing because it’s not something they can decide.

 

[goout]

AlNg:

phil19034:

Animals are not sentient creatures

I don’t believe that is true. Dogs and cats show awareness and responsiveness. They can smell, see, and hear.

Well, it really depends on the definition used. I guess I was referring to it the way it’s often used in science fiction (referring to life capable of rational thought).

I was using the term to refer to creature capable of rational thought - which are only humans, on planet Earth.

So I will revise by saying: “Animals are not capiable of rational thought.”

To say it another way:
Morality evaluates human acts. Contra-ception is an act that is chosen. (yes of course, we can get into full knowledge, consent, and culpability etc…)
Animals are not capable of evaluating their acts morally, and so moral principles cannot apply to animals.

 

[goout]

mVitus:

Example: You walk into your a room and find a human in the corner. It is wrong to kill the human because that is murder.
BUT
If you walk into a room and find a spider in the corner, you may kill the spider. That’s because the spider is not human.

Suppose that you walk in a room and see a beautiful small kitten in the corner. He appears to be hungry and asking you for food. You then get out a gun and shoot the beautiful young kitty cat for no reason or you kill the cat with a knife, stabbing him several times. Is that OK? Is there a difference between killing the beautiful kitten and killing the spider?

Evaluate this act with moral principles, and what do you come up with?
We should all be able to do this.

 

[Gorgias]

Gorgias:

God did tell the animals to “be fruitful and multiply”,

Yes, So it appears that contraception of pets is frustrating the word of God?

Way to selectively quote my response…

To repeat: although God commanded the animals to be fruitful, He commanded us to be good stewards of creation. Therefore, if we determine that animal sterilization is good stewardship in a particular situation, then it doesn’t frustrate the word of God!

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Evaluate this act with moral principles, and what do you come up with?
We should all be able to do this.

Good luck with that. My experience has been that people, including people on this forum, have wildly different “moral principles” concerning what can be done with animals, and if you start differentiating by type of animal, it gets even worse.

I don’t kill kittens. I also leave spiders alone if they aren’t black widows or brown recluses that could kill me (those, I would kill because they’re dangerous to my life). Any bug that isn’t threatening my life or swarming my kitchen, I usually just leave it alone or put it outside.

 

[Gorgias]

You then get out a gun and shoot the beautiful young kitty cat for no reason

So… you’ve already answered the question with your stipulation “for no reason”. It’s all about stewardship, remember?

 

[goout]

Gorgias:

God did tell the animals to “be fruitful and multiply”,

Yes, So it appears that contraception of pets is frustrating the word of God?

Simple questions:
Do you agree or disagree:

1. pets are not human beings
2. morality is the evaluation of human acts
3. pets are not capable of moral evaluation, and cannot choose contraception, so it is not even proper to use the word in regard to sterilizing pets.

it seems you do not accept something in there.

 

[mVitus]

You then get out a gun and shoot the beautiful young kitty cat for no reason or you kill the cat with a knife, stabbing him several times.

For no reason? I’d say don’t do it. I’d also say it’s generally easier to find nonlethal ways of removing a cat than a spider so consideration there might be good, especially depending on the laws in your area. But shooting is a kitten is not objectively wrong.

Side question: Are you a PETA member? Or at least very sympathetic to them?

 

[goout]

AlNg:

You then get out a gun and shoot the beautiful young kitty cat for no reason or you kill the cat with a knife, stabbing him several times.

For no reason? I’d say don’t do it. I’d also say it’s generally easier to find nonlethal ways of removing a cat than a spider so consideration there might be good, especially depending on the laws in your area. But shooting is a kitten is not objectively wrong.

Side question: Are you a PETA member? Or at least very sympathetic to them?

Shooting a kitten is not intrinsically immoral, and at the same time the intentional destruction (as an end in itself) of God’s creation is immoral. This would apply to dumping carcinogens into the river as well as wantonly shooting a kitten.
Circumstances apply.
Intent also.

 

[ZMystiCat]

Animals do not marry

If you aren’t married, you shouldn’t be having sex, so even considering contraception in that regard already shows that there’s a problem even without contraception. Of course, though, animals don’t need to marry to have sex. That’s another thing that separates humans and animals in terms of morality.

As far as I understand, those behaviors are natural to dogs and are exhibited by wild dogs.

Dogs are also social animals, and in the case of domestic dogs, humans are essentially part of the “pack”. We wouldn’t have domestic dogs if some wolves thousands of years ago weren’t inclined to work with humans and be companions. Even today, wolves with frequent contact with humans may be less “wild” around humans. So even an emphasis on companionship is still bringing out natural behavior that made humans and dogs fit for each other.

That said, there’s definitely some breeds (e.g. pugs) that we could probably do without, and the puppy-mill industry is a travesty. However, not all dogs come from puppy mills, and not all domestic breeds have the problems pugs do.