Here's the part of those arguements I have a problem with (ignoring all the namecalling, because it's just getting silly)
responsible pet owners stop an animal from doing what it has, essentially, been put on the earth, procreate"¦.If people didn't keep 'pets' then they wouldn't be tame, eventually they would reassert themselves back into their rightful position on the animal cycle - be it to die out or thrive"¦.So what, its entire evolutionary history is to wake up, eat from a packet then sleep?...Ohh and yes, the 'love' thing - that is truly laughable. You might 'love' it, but it doesn't 'love' you"¦.I know how animals behave and I know how humans act towards their pets.
The animals don't 'love' you.
You are the leader (editing this part out because it is unnecessary and rude) of the pack. You are the one that provides food and protection - thats it.
So an animal's only purpose on this earth is to hump? They have no other purpose whatsoever besides hump and eat other animals? And humans shouldn't domesticate animals, because that violates their natural right to hump and eat, yet animals are not "evolved" enough to feel emotions. That's what I'm getting from this...I'm getting that humans don't have the right to have anything to do with interaction with animals, yet that animals are inferior to humans and cannot feel. That seems flawed and contradictory to me.
Of course humans interact with animals, we create symbiotic relationships in which both parties benefit, just like other animals do. Humans use animals for work/love, and animals are taken care of and have their physical and emotional needs met by their handler. To say that animals don't have emotions is just silly, and to me says that you haven't spent much time around them.
As far as evolution, dogs pretty much have been bred to live with humans and eat man-made food nowadays. That's what a thousand years of domestication will do to a species. That is now, more or less, their purpose.
As far as PETA, I think they are probably the worst thing for animal rights out there. If you advocate that animals have the right to live and be free and happy and blah blah, than "euthanasia" because it's kind to the animals should really be the last idea you want to embrace. As JCC (gasp I agree, I know) and Faith have stated, no-kill shelthers should be the norm for animal rights groups. Hell, there's even rehabilitation places for so called trouble animals that can't be placed out of no-kill shelters (I have a dog from one). Using JCC's stats (I'm to lazy to look it up right now), PETA is only placing 0.35% of the animals it "rescues". That's less than one half of one percent, and a pity.
To me, PETA demeans animals. It says they should all roam free and be allowed to do whatever they want, and that they aren't capable of having jobs and working with humans, because to put a dog to work is mean. As some know, the BF trains dogs, mainly for personal protection and sport work. PETA is vehemently opposed to dog sports, because the dogs are quote unquote forced to do things they don't want to, beaten, scared into attacking people, blah blah blah. Anyone who has watched things like Mondioring or Schutzund knows it can get a little rough some times. But here's the thing-the dogs LOVE it. You couldn't get a dog to do the things they do unless the dog wants to do it. They aren't trained to be mean or fight, they are trained to use their brains, figure out the most effective means to neutralize a problem, and get their job done.
Now, I don't avocate beating your dogs, or fighting them, or anything like that. But PETA's stance on it is that you shouldn't even give dogs complicated (and, yes, even stressful) exercises in order to stimulate and exercise their brains and bodies because it's "mean". It's alot better than letting them roam around the house (remember, it's cruel to put a dog outside) doing whatever they want and not getting any exercise other than walking to and from the food bowl.
Instead of attacking hunters and sport dog owners, PETA should be promoting responsible breeding, proper training, and spaying and neutering pets. In the wild, they need to realize that in order to promote healthy population levels, hunting is KEY. If we let certain populations of, say, deer get out of hand, then we end up with hundreds of animals starving to death. I think a bullett and ending up on someone's plate is a lot more humane than starving to death.
In short: PETA's ridiculous. This is just another instance of them proving that. It's a publicity stunt in my opinion.
