I don't want to get a family pet due to ethics

[Markinsomerset]

Hi,

My wife really wants a pet and thinks it is very valuable for the children. However ethically I don't agree as cats are responsible for distroying lots of species. Dogs I think its very unfair for as each day I'm sure they feel like they are being abandoned each time they are left alone. Can't guarantee that the suppliers are ethical.

If everyone got rid of their pets then no one would go hungry in the world. They just seem like a selfish interest IMO.

Who is right?

My medics instructed me to get kittens!

My cat is terrified of birds, especially pigeons. She will follow an ant along the floor for a good half hour, with no intention of harming it. And she's an outdoor cat. OP, if you ever come back to read the replies - not all cats are killing machines.

eat that's how I want to go - I want to be cuted to death!!

TSS did you have to put such* a bloody terrifying picture up with no warning
Luffs a black cat!

Health benefits of pets

Ethically speaking, I think we should get rid of all humans as they are responsible for the destruction of far more species and individual animals as all pets together in the whole wide world.

Op, I understand your concerns, but there is such a thing as over thinking things.

If you don't want a pet, don't get one. If you want to get a pet ethically, get a rescue.
They are a royal pain in the arse. And mine produces farts that would clear a room

Ok, I'll bite. If you are feeding a cat, they don't feel the need to catch their own food so much, surely. And no-one 'gets' a cat, as all cat people know. You might bring them home by force, but after that they choose to live with you, assuming they are not indoor-cats. If they get fed up of you, they leave home to live somewhere else, as several of my cat-loving friends have found to their great trauma

I'm pretty damn sure my dogs suffer badly from separation anxiety.

When I get home after several hours (sometimes days) away they often OPEN an eye and look at me. If they are really agitated, they may open both.....

The parrot is a good idea, though the poo might be an issue for you. What about a stick insect? Two of them, obviously, Sticky and Stick.

Sorted.

Hamsters are pretty ethical although this one did once eat a spider. Not sure she'd feed many poor people though.

may i recommend guinea pigs
they mow your lawn and people cant eat grass so you are not contributing to world starvation

How about a couple of guinea pigs, from a rescue, natch?
They don't fart either

Ha! X-post, san, great minds an'all that

Oh wait... We've had Jeffrey... Then Simon... Now... Mark?

The way my dogs fart they could be WMD.

Not a fan of cats due to their killing without reason attitude!

Get a dog from a rescue centre... Leaving them at home is going to be a lot less traumatic than being left in a crate all day.

BTW apologies if you a referral, Mark. Just that reading your OP gave me a WTAF moment.

A referral?! Another WTAF... For real (of course)

cookie your hamster is gorgeous. Definitely not one for the food bank.

My cat just refused to set a spider. My husband had to throw a slipper at it. Told the cat I'm sending a pouch of his whiskers to the little brown babies in Africa. He is suitably chastised.

Yeah, the dog farts are indeed very unethical. Biological warfare. Bastards.

Ah, heck. There can be ethical questions over pet ownership and purchasing, more in line with the whole idea of owning a living creature for your own entertainment/pleasure and wanting to be in control of it though. Not generally catching a mouse or two.

That said, the thing I found most 'strange' is the use of the word 'supplier' to refer to someone you purchase a pet from. Just seems odd. Anyone know a good dog supplier? Thought not!

Stick insects are wonderful company! Seriously I do wonder where some people come from, ethical pets, there is no answer to this, more wine called for and a psychiatrist!

In one paragraph you use the word ethical and talk about solving the worlds problems of creature extinction and hunger (both caused and perpetuated by humans) and in the next paragraph you suggest a complete global annihilation of the worlds pets. !!?? Either your yanking our chain, or you're a bit

By your logic we shouldn't have children either

Indeed. If we really wanted to be kinder to the planet, and cause less starvation, we would have far fewer children. The era when we had to have lots of children to ensure the survival of the human race is long gone: we are popping babies out far more than we need to.

Actually, the total fertility rate in the uk has been below 2.1 since the 80s. It takes a long time for actual population growth to slow, partly because people are living longer, but itcis happening. The ethical dilemmas surrounding an ageing population are more likely to be our future challenge than unbridled population growth.

Regarding pets, don't have one if you don't want one! If someone is going to dislike and resent a pet the they are better off not having it. I do think there are moral questions about keeping companion animals. I wouldn't have a dog while working full time (unless from home) because I think they need more companionship than I can give. It's quite possible to adopt an older cat who isn't a hunter, though.

I'm into horses, which are hard to justify, in that the land they graze could be used for crops or cattle. However, they contribute so much to my mental and physical wellbeing, and it would be a loss to many people if these animals were only found in zoos and a tiny handful of feral herds.

Do you not think that by contributing to the over population of humans rather than adopting one that already exists, you're sounding a bit silly talking about how pets destroy the planet? One western child causes as much environmental damage as 60 children from a third world country in its life. Dogs are highly social, emotional beings who have evolved and adapted over thousands of years to live with humans, and they're fucking brilliant. So there.