Contraception for pets

  • Thread starter Thread starter AlNg
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
@AlNg
yes anything un-naturals is not from God and he said to multiply,its man made and a sin Contraception for pets.futhermore but if it’s interferes in humans well-being or harms us then killing is not a sin.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a7.htm

Respect for the integrity of creation

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.195 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.196

2416 Animals are God’s creatures. He surrounds them with his providential care. By their mere existence they bless him and give him glory.197 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.198 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.

Psalm 36:6 Your righteousness is like the mighty mountains, your judgments are like the great deep; you save humans and animals alike, O Lord

Matthew 6:26 Look at the birds of the air; they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they?

Luke 12:6 Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies? Yet not one of them is forgotten in God’s sight.
 
Last edited:
Francis said:
yes anything un-naturals is not from God and he said to multiply,its man made and a sin Contraception for pets.
Click to expand...
So you do think that it is a sin to use Contraception on pets, since it is unnatural and not from God?
 
Last edited:
@AlNg yes, God had ordained it,Genesis 1:26 Then God said, “Let us make humankind[c] in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth,[d] and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.”

27 So God created humankind[e] in his image,
in the image of God he created them;[f]
male and female he created them.

28 God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.” 29 God said, “See, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit; you shall have them for food. 30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food.” And it was so. 31 God saw everything that he had made, and indeed, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.Genesis 2:15 The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it
 
Last edited:
Fauken said:
Actually, yes. So long as you’re practicing abstinence. Women, for example, can use birth control pills while practicing abstinence to regulate their hormones.
Click to expand...
As far as I know, married women are also permitted to use medications of that nature for that purpose as long as it’s for a bona fide medical reason, and without abstinence.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
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.
Click to expand...
That does make sense, but I’m thinking more of the average Joe/Jane Owner. Why would you do that to a house pet? Just getting Trifexis down my dog is a major undertaking, and that’s only once a month.
Anicette said:
Ha…!
In the hope to have kiitens one day!
Click to expand...
I take it the cat is a purebred, then. That makes a bit more sense, but I hope she’s either good about taking pills or you have leather gloves that go up to your elbows when you give it.
 
Last edited:
I understand that the reason that dogs were even able to work with humans is because they have a natural pack instinct, but I don’t think that anyone would argue that a regular dog pack is insufficient for the needs of a dog. Dogs don’t natuarlly need humans to be healthy socially. However, we have selectively bred dogs over the centuries to emphasize traits that make dogs both physically and socially dependent on humans, for our own purposes many of which might be considered vain. That’s what I think is immoral about the whole thing. Pugs are a good example of a dog breed that has purposefully been bred for unhealthy traits, but they certainly aren’t the only ones! Most domesticated breeds have had the traits necessary for independence from humans bred out of them. I’m not saying that individual modern-day pet owners are necessarily personally culpable for this situation, but I think it’s something that ought to be considered when discussing the morality of breeding animals for our own purposes.
 
generally cats hate to receive a medication… so it’s generally a fight…

And this pill are unhealthy for pets on the long term.
 
Allegra said:
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.
Click to expand...
I don’t own any dog with papers, would never buy a dog from a breeder, and don’t believe in breeding for looks. I think the AKC is borderline evil incarnate.

I agree with a lot of what you’re saying, actually.

My boy IS a purebred, but from a working line, meaning he was bred for the very traits that make him what he is. (His ears aren’t perfect, his ‘constitution’ is a bit off - he’s not a textbook AKC version of the Mali, so I know from experience he’s a working line.) He also came from a no-kill shelter and pretty much picked us (we wanted a little one and left with one that’s now 87 pounds of pup, LOL). We paid a whopping $35 for him and got a dog that many would pay much more for. Wouldn’t trade him for the world.

But as a former dog handler who has seen the difference between German German Shepherds and American German Shepherds…and the Malinois (which the AKC, thankfully, doesn’t consider a breed at all) and a Shepherd…I know what you’re saying.
 
Last edited:
I remember reading about dog sled drivers spraypainting their female dogs as a warning to other owners and drivers to keep their male dogs away from them. They don’t want them spayed because they may want to breed them eventually and I think spaying them can negatively effect their racing potential. However, an unplanned dog pregnancy can really mess up their racing season too. If such a thing as dog contraception existed, I would imagine they would be the ones to use it.
 
Allegra said:
I remember reading about dog sled drivers spraypainting their female dogs as a warning to other owners and drivers to keep their male dogs away from them. They don’t want them spayed because they may want to breed them eventually and I think spaying them can negatively effect their racing potential. However, an unplanned dog pregnancy can really mess up their racing season too. If such a thing as dog contraception existed, I would imagine they would be the ones to use it.
Click to expand...
Another good thought on a more valid use of it.
 
Allegra said:
That’s what I think is immoral about the whole thing. Pugs are a good example of a dog breed that has purposefully been bred for unhealthy traits, but they certainly aren’t the only ones! Most domesticated breeds have had the traits necessary for independence from humans bred out of them. I’m not saying that individual modern-day pet owners are necessarily personally culpable for this situation, but I think it’s something that ought to be considered when discussing the morality of breeding animals for our own purposes.
Click to expand...
yes commercialization pet breeding business,money is the motive
 
We have three kitties. All are fixed. Two came to us from rescues and were already done when we adopted them, the third we had done recently (he is male). I insisted on it. Spaying and neutering not only reduces unwanted pregnancies, it reduces behaviour issues and health issues. Intact females whine A LOT when they go into heat (had a couple females when I was a kid who went through a couple of heat cycles before they were spayed). Intact males can spray. We did wait until our little guy was 8 months before we had him done to allow him to mature.

I do not consider this to be immoral because we do not intend to breed our animals. They are inside animals, but there is always the potential for them to get out.

As far as animals being domesticated, our two male cats would not have made it without human intervention. Our older male is lovely but a bit thick. (Case in point: the little guy recently bent a screen and he and our female got outside. Biggie simply sat in the house. He does not like outside unless there is snow.) He also will not eat human food - not even tuna, though he likes the water. He has virtually no hunting instinct and will not chase toys. We adopted Biggie from a shelter so do not know his history; it’s possible they didn’t know. Our little guy was rejected by his mother at birth and was hand reared by friends of ours. We adopted him at 2 months of age. We are not sure why he was rejected; he has had no health issues and was only at the vet once to be neutered. Ironically only he and his brother (also rejected and hand reared) survived; the other kittens who were raised by the mother didn’t make it.
 
AlNg said:
40.png
Francis:
yes anything un-naturals is not from God and he said to multiply,its man made and a sin Contraception for pets.
Click to expand...
So you do think that it is a sin to use Contraception on pets, since it is unnatural and not from God?
Click to expand...
The Church’s teaching about the morality of contraception applies to human beings.
Everyone take note:
Morality is the evaluation of human acts.
 
I am aware that you are basically the first poster here that would say something like this and that there are many others on this thread who would say the same.

I volunteer weekly at our local animal shelter. I clean cages and play with the dogs and even sometimes pigs. It is an utterly sad thing to see. I make a very good friend in a dog, and 2 weeks later she is not there anymore.

Now who do I blame? The shelter? They already have too many animals to care for with very little support. That is a fact in front of my very eyes.

Three times as I was volunteering, a car rocks up and 4 to 5 puppies gets put into a cage and luckaly I said I would clean it before that happened (don’t blame the shelter, they literally do not have the manpower to do it). Now tell me how many of these puppies would make it anywhere? I am not aware that any of them did!

Point is. Once one realised the implications of this first hand, it is not so easy if you have a heart. Seeing the beautiful loving animals just being dropped of at a shelter for no good reason (letting them reproduce for God would then seem like an utter joke) just makes me agree so much more that this is not right and God expected more of us!

Regards
 
I’m starting to think you asked the question not to address the morality of sterilizing animals but to question and challenge the Catholic teaching on contraception.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top