animal rights people, please help me with a question

[AmandaRuth]

i work in a small pet shop. the other staffer i will be working with today is a freeper type, and a doberman breeder. she likes to scream at me that the 'animal rights loonies (her words) ultimate goal is the complete elimination of any private pet ownership. this would include peta and the humane society. i have looked on snopes and searched the peta website, but i do not see this addressed either to promote or deny. can i get some help here, please? mucho mucho thanks.

[DrWeird]

1. Ask her if she runs a puppy mill

and if that's what she means by "private pet ownership."

[AmandaRuth]

5. actually she is fairly well known in

the dog world, and has buyers all around the world. i think that what she raises her dogs ethically, she is convinced, however that all animal rights peoples are lunatics and truly the ultimate goal is no more pet ownership. what i am wondering is, is this just another disinformation campaign run by the right wing, i would really like to believe it is. i would like to have some information to counter her continual attacks.

[DrWeird]

8. She's a world reknowned doberman breeder?

How'd you find that out? She told you?

Have you seen her place?

[AmandaRuth]

12. i would never go anywhere with her she is a freeper

however, i do see her ribbons and medals she wins, and have read articles about her in trade mags, also the distributors in the biz (pet products) know her quite well, and she does spend alot of money on her dogs, i mean alot. i understand your questioning, i personally don't like the idea of breeding myself, but she is legitimate. and beleive me, in my shop we see a lot of backyard breeding, and it is sick and wrong.

[Unperson 309]

29. Tell Her That Like Every Group,

AR folks come in all stripes. Some AR (animal Rights) people are against pet ownership, but the VAST majority of AR supporters DO have companion animals!

The difference between a "pet" and a "companion" is that a pet is property and considered so by the owner. A companion animal is considered a friend and family member with rights inherent in its station as companion.

Our own cat, Chamisa, is a companion. The rights she has include the right to warmth, shelter, comfort, good healthy food, play, undisturbed sleep and health care. IOW, she has the right to be as free as she can considering that she is a domesticated animal living with humans. Her responsibilies are to behave, play gently with us, to remain within the house and generally to be a "good kitty". We will enable her to fulfil these responsibilities with such tools as gentle distraction and modification. If she bits our fingers in play, we will not punish her, but instead offer a toy and the words "No bite!" If these methods do not work, we may NOT punish her (it would do no good, anyway) but we may, in defense of ourselves, gently scruff her and place her in her room or on the floor until she calms down.

She, as a companion and as a sentient (although not sapient) being, has lesser capacity to comprehend and understand than would a dog or another human, therefore her requirements are not nerarly so strict as ours are. After all... WE know better! IOW, if I were to cross the boundaries and actually pull her tail (accidentally or on purpose, as she cannot gauge intent as we can) she is well within HER rights to bite me! I've got no kick coming! I pulled her tail!

Our responsibilities are to provide her with shelter, comfort, good food, company, play, but most of all, SAFETY. What that means is that we, who know more than she does about nutrition, do not give in to her appetites and give her poor quality food, or g to her desire to go outside and let her out. She might WANT Tender Vittles, she might WANT to stay out all night, and (when she's old enough) to have a zillion kittens, but these things would NOT work to her long term benefit. So these things are forbidden.

Who enforces her rights? Well, we do, according to AR principals. It is not an easy thing to do, sometimes.

We had a companion dog that we had rescued from an abusive situation. He was a 7 lb terrier mix who had been left in a backyard, unneutered, badly socialized, untrained... we had him for a year and we rehabilitated him. We took him to obedience classes, worked with him exhaustively, had him altered, etc. Then he met his "forever friend"! The dog fell paws over tail in love and the man did, also. It was instataneous and total, with the dog languishing by the front door, nost to the crack when the guy left him... and the guy phoning us in tears asking if we would consider giving the little guy to him! NEVER in my life had I seen such a thing!

We gave our sweet little dog to him, along with all his touys, bed, foode, etc, and they are ecstatic together. Why did we do it? Not to "get rid of" the dog! We LOVED him! We gave him to his new friend because AS a companion animal, the dog had a RIGHT to be loved! he actually was ABLE to choose his human guardian! That being the case, and we, understanding his wishes as he was able to communicate them, made the decision to relinquish our sweet little guy to his new friend.

We still miss him terribly, but we know we did the right thing. His new human sends us pictures of him. They are inseparable, going to work together, etc, and he is glowing with joy.

THAT is the principaled stance of many AR folk.

309

[MissB]

2. I think you may be looking at this from the wrong direction!

Make her prove her assertion! Make her back it up.

It is hard to prove what doesn't exist.

[AmandaRuth]

7. true true

we dems shouldn't always come from the defensive!!!!!!

[lukasahero]

9. I agree

I'm tired of having to debunk all the frickin' lies these people tell. Make her prove what she says.

I financially support HSUS, ASPCA and a variety of smaller animal protection groups and most are trying to get animals INTO homes and out of shelters. Or out of abusive homes and into humane no-kill shelters if that's the case. They then go on to prosecute these frickin' sickos. (And they really need more financial support in that area.)

[ohiosmith]

3. The president of PETA once stated in a speech that their goal is

the complete elimination of all animal exploitation and their total liberation or words to that effect.

[lynx rufus]

22. PETA is to animals what the ACLU is to humans: essential

PETA is pushing for extremely stringent requirements
in the private ownership licensing of 'wild' species
such as lions and tigers. This would eliminate the ongoing
horrible abuse of animals in circuses and zoos. This would eliminate
the breeding of wild species for profit.
As owner of a Wild Cat sanctuary I am all for that.
We work with both The Humane Society and PETA.
Both organizations do great work in the service of animals.

[jedicord]

4. That has to be a crock!

I donate to the Humane Society, and their literature promotes healthy pets. What does this lady think PETA wants us to do with domesticated animals - set them free?

JEEZ these people make me crazy!

[ronabop]

34. No, in the long run, Peta wants to eliminate domesticated animals.

So, short term, adopt domesticated animals, but prevent them from breeding, and do not buy animals from breeders.

See:
http://www.peta.org/mc/factsheet_display.asp?ID=29

-Bop

[lapfog_1]

41. I did see

and you are not correct to state that they want to "eliminate
domesticated animals"... what was actually stated was that they
wish to eliminate the status of "pet". But explicitly and
implicit in the whole document was a respect for animal companion.
And they go on in great detail as to the difference (as they see
it) in the two terms.

[RebelOne]

6. In the eyes of animal rights people,

we do not own our pets, we are their guardians.

[shadu]

10. Patently absurd. What she really means is this:

"I have the right to do whatever I want to the animals
I 'own.' This includes, but is not limited to, declawing, shocking, choking, and 'kenneling' for months at a time (in a cage too small for
the animal to turn around, if I so chose). Attempts at 'stemming animal cruelty' in any shape or form are nothing less than an attempt to eliminate private pet ownership!"

She is full of shit.
Both The Humane Society and PETA encourage responsible
private pet ownership.

[Straight Shooter]

11. Ultimate goal is elimination of irresponsible, negligent, cruel ownership

Caring and responsible people are good for animals. My neighbor has a couple horses who run to greet her when she comes out, and not just at feeding time.

My dog is a rescue dog, neglected by its previous owners. She has a really good life, a hike every morning, sometimes another hike in the afternoon, plus a short walk in the cool of the evening. Her food is top grade, no 4D (dying, disabled, diseased, dead). Do I think she'd be better off without me? No, I don't. And the same holds true for most of my friends with dogs. It's a relationship where they are better off with each other than on their own.

As for depriving people of pet "ownership," I damn straight would like to take away animals from people who abuse them. No one deserves that kind of treatment, not a kid, not an adult, not a pet.

BTW, I'm a member of our local Humane Society and I've never heard anyone express such a radical belief as elimination of private pet ownership. And I much prefer the term "guardianship," as long as we're on the subject.

[napi21]

13. I don't think PETA is after pet owners.

And YES, I agree with the poster who said we are their guardians not thier owners. PETA has been fighting the use of animals for scientific research like squirting face cream or masscara in a rabbit's eyes to verify safety of the product. Sometimes PETA does go a little overboard, but they have never been in support of giving up the family pet.

[ronabop]

36. Not immediately, no.

In the long run, they (Peta) don't want any "pets", or animals that depend on humans to survive.

http://www.peta.org/mc/factsheet_display.asp?ID=29

-Bop

[blindpig]

14. this much I think I know

That the humane society wishes to eliminate private ownership of exotic animals such as reptiles & amphibians. While I would like to see the elimination or severe restriction of the taking of these animals from the wild for the pet trade I have little problem with captive bred specimens in the trade, subject to regulation for the animal's health.

[mopinko]

15. i wouldn't lump peta with humane societies

but she is right about peta.
penn and teller did an edition of bullshit! about them.
http://www.sho.com/site/ptbs/topics.do?topic=peta
and i have seen that quote and worse.
and i have had encounters with "rescues" that are really hoarders and nut cases. she may be a freeper, but there are, in fact, animal rights loonies out there.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

18. Wrong about PETA....

as an organization. Read below.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

16. HSUS...

http://www.hsus.org

From the Humane Society of the United States:

The human-animal bond is as old as human history. We cherish our animal companions for their unconditional affection and acceptance. We feel a thrill when we glimpse wild creatures in their natural habitat or in our own backyard.

Unfortunately, the human-animal bond has at times been weakened. Humans have exploited some animal species to the point of extinction. Research animals suffer pain and distress in laboratory tests considered necessary for human health or well-being. Animals killed for fur fashions endure unimaginable agony in inhumane traps or on fur "ranches." Animals used by the food industry live on factory farms where they are treated as unfeeling commodities rather than as sentient beings. The use of animal parts for traditional medicines has contributed to the disappearance of some species worldwide.

The Humane Society of the United States makes a difference in the lives of animals here at home and worldwide. The HSUS is dedicated to creating a world where our relationship with animals is guided by compassion. We seek a truly humane society in which animals are respected for their intrinsic value, and where the human-animal bond is strong.


That doesn't sound like an organization that is trying to do away with any type of "private pet owndership" such as having a pet.

Putting mills out of business and making sure breeders care for their animal charges with the highest of standards? Yup, I suspect they do support that -- as do I.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

17. And from PETA themselves....

http://www.peta.org/about/faq-comp.asp


“Does PETA believe that people shouldn’t have pets?”

The earliest fossils that resemble the bones of modern dogs are about 12,000 years old, so we know that humans’ fascination with domesticated wolves began at least that long ago. About 5,000 years ago, Egyptians became the first to tame cats, whom they used to control the rodent population. Since then, the breeding and care of cats and dogs has exploded into a love affair, a sport, and a booming business. This international pastime has created an overpopulation crisis, and as a result, every year, millions of unwanted animals suffer at the hands of abusers, languish in shelters, and are euthanized. Adopting a cat or dog from a shelter and providing a loving home is a small but powerful way to prevent some of this suffering. The most important thing that animal guardians can do is to spay or neuter their animals and avoid buying animals from breeders or pet stores, which contribute to the overpopulation crisis.

[MaryH]

20. I have heard disturbing things about Peta but

the trouble is knowing what is true.

Like the eco terrorists who break into labs and just set all the animals loose. Or break into mink farms and set them lose.

The end result is that the animals die. They don't have survival skills.

I have heard of them sneaking into dog shows and letting all the dogs out of their crates.

Most PETA people are vegetarian - which is fine. But I don't think all of them are so extreme - but some are. I have heard that they are against "pets."

[Hell Hath No Fury]

21. That sounds more like ALF...

than PETA. The Animal Liberation Front has engaged in acts like those you describe, not PETA.

[Unperson 309]

30. Many Of Those Stories Are Lies!

"I have heard of them sneaking into dog shows and letting all of the dogs out of their crates."

UH-uh! Never happened. PeTA has also been accused of putting antifreeze in dogs' water at shows, releasing guide dogs from hteir harnesses, turning lab animals loose into the country (minks, chickens, dogs etc)... NEVER HAPPENED!

First of all, PeTA is frequently confused with ALF (Animal Liberation
Front) which is like confusing Greenpeace with Earth First! or confusing the NAACP with the Black Panther Party.

Second of all, while ALF *has* liberated lab animals, EVERY animal they have taken goes STRAIGHT to a veterinarian, is checked for health problems, and then placed IN a SANCTUARY or REHOMED with caring persons! I have *first hand* knowledge that this is true!

How does one become a member of ALF? There are no cards, no dues, no official membership rolls. One becomes a member by ACTING in defense of animals. Thus membership could be 1, 10, 39, 114, 5,000 or more/less depending on what's needed.

One strict tenet of the ALF, however, is that NO BEING (human or animal) is EVER HARMED!! That means NO wild releases, NO setting "pets" free, NO action that will result in an injury to either an animal OR a human being!

Since setting minks free in the wild is harmful (they do not have survivial skills!) poisoning show dogs (really! THINK about that for a moment!) "freeing" guide dogs (again, no survival skills!) etc HARM the animals, it is counter-intuitive that ANY Animal Rights person would DO such things!

Some of the positive things that the Missus and I have done WRT companion animals, as AR people, include:
Setting up a program with the San Francisco SPCA to treat homeless persons' animals for free, introducing Episcopal congregations to animal welfare from a Biblical prospective, reworking some training requirements at Guide Dogs For The Blind in San Rafael so that the dogs' emotional needs are better net, working with many local shelters, doing cat rescue and many other things. Hardly the credit-sheet of people who would release minks into the wild or other reported (and false) shenanegans!

309

[RhodaGrits]

32. You give me hope. Thank you for your posts.

Almost all my recent contact with those who claim to be AR people have been with wackos who have lost all touch with reality. You have an obvious and commendable sense of what we *can* do to help the living creatures with which we share this planet and you act on those beliefs. There *are* misguided people who release animals who are incapable of fending for themselves - I am glad to hear that that is something that ALF never condones. I worked in a psychopharmacology lab long long ago as part of work study in college - I saw occasions of terrible abuse of the lab rats occur - usually due to the irresponsibility and carelessness of the grad students who were supposed to be responsible for them. I do know that there have been huge changes in how lab animals are cared for in the research environment and things are better now than they were then. Are they ideal? Absolutely not and people do need to continue to advocate for these animals because they cannot do so for themselves.

Since you seem to have first hand knowledge of AR issues, would you care to expand on what you think would be a way to resolve the legal ramifications of the "guardianship" vs. "ownership" issues? I participated in an ethical society's discussion of the matter several weeks ago and there are going to be no easy answers. (They immediately got bogged down by trying to define a "pet" for example.)

[Stew225]

19. Nuke the whales!

kidding, of course.

[Kolesar]

23. I have misgivings about feeding my dog another animal

I understand that dogs need to eat meat protein. My dog is here now, and I have to feed her something. I have know way of knowing if the feed animals have been treated well during their lives or treated badly like those animals that are fed to humans. I became a vegetarian last year after reading about unpleasant practices at "farms".

[lukasahero]

24. You don't have to

While your dog IS a carnivor and it is a natural behavior, there are alternatives and you can feed your dog a strictly vegetarian diet. Go here http://www.vegetariandogs.com/

[Kolesar]

27. I have heard there is one enzyme they need from meat

And that there is a synthesized substitute for it. Just to make things complicated, the old dear has kidney disease, so we need to feed her a very special diet (Canine K/D by Science Diet). She is actually my girlfriend's dog, so I don't make the decisions. I just worry about the chickens.

Thanks for the advice. I'll be thinking about you when I see the dog next.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

35. Actually humans need some meat also.

It's a main source of vitamin B12. Vegetarians tend to suffer from B12 deficiency.

I think in general people should eat less meat but the only primate that's a pure vegan is be the mountain gorilla.

[MisterP]

38. B12 deficiency is almost invariably caused by absorptive errors,

not nutritional deprivation--my anatomy book says the liver stores 3-5 years' worth of B12, and accidental pickup by plants from freshly-decayed animals in the soil should provide sufficient B12--it's a trace of a trace (and my near-vegan sister--almost 7 years--has nary a sign of deficiency, unless occasional sourness is a sign).

[AmandaRuth]

26. there are some very good

vegetarian dog foods on the market, usually used to feed dogs with allergies due to being overfed single source protein. using euthanized dogs and cats in pet food is one of the industries dirty little secrets.

i am leaving for work now, so i wont be able to post anymore, if you are interested in what i would recommend for dog food, vegetarian or otherwise, pm me. thanks to all for the information. knowledge is power, unless you watch fox, which my coworker does.

[PatriotGames]

25. That's bull dinky. Peta loves people to have pets...

Peta strongly advocates companion animals as long as they are not exploited in any way such as having to perform tricks.

Peta is a little over the top, but they do a lot of good as far as animal welfare is concerned.

Where do you think the Burger King Veggie Burger came from?

They put the screws to KFC over the chicken abuse at one of it's suppliers. KFC no longer uses them.

Petco has been in a lot of hot water over Peta's findings.

What she is saying is typical freeper's spouting off when they haven't done any research at all.

[RhodaGrits]

28. PETA believes in anti-speciesism. They believe that animals

are equal to humans and that we should not enslave them or exploit them in *any* way. This is an extreme radical agenda which is held by the organizers but not necessarily all its members. PETA's agenda is not an animal welfare movement. They do not believe we can "own" animals.

Property laws in the U.S. state that human beings are not property but everything else is - even your own thoughts (intellectual property). If animals are given the same legal status as people (if we are their "guardians" not their "owners") - who determines what is in their best interests? A government oversight board? Who is responsible for their care and feeding? If you are their guardian and not their owner, can your neighbor sue for guardianship because he has a bigger yard and can afford a better quality diet? If your veterinarian thinks it needs medical treatment you are declining, can they sue to have your removed as guardian? Can anyone elect euthanasia for an animal? Meat, animal fibers, furs, animal products (including some animal-derived medicines) would all become illegal or impossible to obtain. And what would become of all these domestic animals that were bred and housed for production? If laws are changed making animals "wards" and not property, will you be compensated for the loss of your property? Is this a violation of your 5th Amendment rights under the Constitution?

I think the issues are going to need to be discussed by society as a whole. Most people agree that sentient property is not the same as a coffee table and they want laws that protect the welfare of animals and punish cruelty and negligence. Most people want the human-animal bond protected and see us as animal stewards living in a mutually beneficial relationship. Anyone who thinks a guide dog is "enslaved" and should be freed from that exploitation is seriously misguided. (Which has been stated by some PETA voices). I may be a vegetarian but I cannot expect a society of omnivores to change overnight.

There are terrible animal abuses that go on in agribusiness and in our own backyards. Extremist groups like PETA are not what we need for real change. I do not believe that HSUS has an anti-speciesism agenda but PETA does.

On the other hand, I think your fellow staffer is using this to dismiss many of the good things that the *real* animal welfare movement is trying to change - Like ear cropping (IMHO).

[Unperson 309]

31. PeTA and Guide Dogs

In answer to my questions, PeTA's answer IRT guide dogs, was "So long as the dog is not overwoked, worked in dangerous or abusive situations, and so long as the dog's emotional, physical and nutritional needs are met, we have no problem with it."

That's STRAIGHT from the organization, itself! Not from "well, I heard..." or "Someone said..." PeTA's stance is that while they *wish* guide dogs were not used, they can understand why people would train them and work with them.

What they also understand is that with working breeds, such as Shepherds, retrievers, etc, the dog's need to WORK, cooperatively, with their human companion IS met through guidework!

As both the Seeing Eye and Guide Dogs for the blind have stated many times, you can NOT "force" a dog to guide a blind person. If a dog is coerced, they are NOT SAFE! At some point during the training, a "light" goes on in the dog's little skull and they pick up on the fact that the human holding the harness handle cannot SEE! When the dog experiences that "click", you can see their work CHANGE! The dog suddenly goes from "OK, turn right, turn left, wait for next command..." to "The curb is HERE. Stop! I'll take you where you want to go, just let me know! It's OK, I can see it!"

Once that light comes on, the dog has a mission in life and they take it SERIOUSLY! To say that a dog who understands her role in life and welcomes the work is "exploited" is simply misunderstanding of the complexity of the dog's mind and the nature of her reasoning and training.

PeTA understands this.


309

[ronabop]

33. Depends on how you define "private pet ownership"?

The long term take for some of the organizations on "pets" seems to be the following: If an animal is not chained, shackled, caged, or restrained, and can safely move about or leave at will, that's a good thing. If the animal is being controlled, exploited, or is locked up for selfish purposes, that's a bad thing.

So, if you have a wild bird that flies in and out of your house: good, if you cage that bird, bad. If your dog can leave at anytime, good, if you always keep the dog on a chain or on a leash or inside a fence or locked in a house, bad.

IOW, if you have an animal companion that choses to hang out with you, that's fine. If you consistently *force* an animal to be near you for your own selfish purposes, that's bad.

As far as whether or not this affects "private pet ownership", that would depend on the relationship between the animal and the person. I've had a great number of companions in my life that hung out with me, but they were always free to leave. I didn't "own" them in a property sense, but in the eyes of others, I'm certain that some people thought of them as being "mine" somehow.

From:
http://www.peta.org/mc/factsheet_display.asp?ID=29
"In a perfect world, animals would be free to live their lives to the fullest: raising their young, enjoying their native environments, and following their natural instincts. However, domesticated dogs and cats cannot survive "free" in our concrete jungles, so we must take as good care of them as possible. People with the time, money, love, and patience to make a lifetime commitment to an animal can make an enormous difference by adopting from shelters or rescuing animals from a perilous life on the street. But it is also important to stop manufacturing "pets," thereby perpetuating a class of animals forced to rely on humans to survive."

So, as far as peta is concerned, there should be no "pets", but if you and an animal choose to spend time together, great!

-Bop

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

37. Yeah and one's liable for damages....

..if that unrestrained dog attacks and maims another dog, pet or human.

Look. Dogs are territorial. I had a German Shepherd/ St. Bernard mix who was real sweet to people but would thrash the hell out of any other dog that didn't recogmize him as the alpha wolf.

[ronabop]

40. Okay, I grew up with...

Coyotes, Raptors, Javalina, Mountain Lions, Canines, etc.

If a coyote I have regular interactions with mauled a child a mile away from my house, how could I be found responsible? It is not my coyote. It has no collar saying that I "own" it. I do not control it.

It's a tough legal issue. If a person is stung by a scorpion, and finds out that their next-door neighbor does not kill all scorpions upon contact, is the neighbor liable?

FWIW, in AZ, there have been some legal cases of this nature, where people who fed wild animals were held responsible for the actions of wild animals being, well, wild, and in other cases, plaintiffs were laughed out of court.

-Bop

[MoonRiver]

39. That's ridiculous, but typical for a brainwashed freeper.

Animal rights folk just want animals to be treated humanely. They, including moi, think abuse of animals should be a felony and the perpetrators subject to long jail time. I have no problem with responsible pet ownership. I have a dog I dearly love, but who would adamantly argue that we "own" her. In fact, the reverse is undoubtedly the case. :D

[MaryH]

42. Cruelty of any sort should be a felony

As far as I'm concerned, its all the same. Children, old folks, women, animals. Its horrible.

[MoonRiver]

43. Absolutely.

I'm a vegetarian because I don't believe sentient beings should be killed for any reason other than self defense.