Thursday, August 3, 2017

To Roam or Not to Roam


This, I'm sure, will be a controversial subject for many people, the right to own animals. According to this article, ethicists are wondering if people really have the right to keep animals as pets? As a vegetarian, I question my own motives, as well. I used to own cats (one at a time) in my life. I know I was being a hypocrite by the fact that I still had to buy meat products to feed my cat. In the article, Dr. Jessica Pierce, a bioethicist, is disturbed with rats being sold as food for snakes Yeah, I get that. A friend of a friend owns several snakes, and feeds them rats. I cringe every time I hear about it.

That is just one part of ethicists pondering the interaction/ ownership between humans and pets. The other is, they reason we are determining how that animal lives, such as feeding, sleeping, living space, instead of the animal having a choice. One ethicist even let his parrot free, knowing it probably would not survive on its own. Yeah, this is where I get off the bus. I realize many, many people do not treat animals well. The same people who probably do not treat humans well. Do ethicists really think animals will do better on there own? How is that possible, anyway? Most of us have witnessed  when cats go feral. It is not a good life. They do not do well. I know people are also opposed to zoos, but in this day and age, I believe we need zoos to save and teach humans what is happening to animals who should be able to roam the Earth without human interference. But, I digress, since most of us don't keep zebras or lions as pets. I just don't see people ever giving up their animals. I think humans and animals benefit from the company of each other. We cannot deny that pets make us less lonely. And, there is the rub with some ethicists. They think we place emotional baggage on our companions, thereby stressing the animal. Well, that's how I'm reading this article.

It's rather funny (ironic, haha?) that ethicists think we should not interfere with an animal's, "...right to self determination."* yet,  here is the definition of ethics,

  1. moral principles that govern a person's or group's behavior: (My red highlight)

I think having pets is a win-win. I also hate that other creatures must die for others to live. The choice is whether you want to participate in the death of some for the life of your pet.

*Dr. J. Pierce

5 comments:

^.^ said...

I had of all kinds of pets all my life ... hedgehogs, cats, dogs, horses, mules, cows, pigs, pet crow, pet magpie, even pet coyote ... I figure we all live on this goddamn earth, and we all are trying to survive on food, friend Maggles ... but when I come home from work in the morning I help earth worms across the side walk to the next grassy patch ... PS: Will U be okay with Ur president being on an extended holiday??? ... Smiles and purrs ... cat.

Maggie Jean said...

I do the same with worms after it rains.
I'd be ecstatic if trumper took a three and a half year break. 🤗

KC said...

I've had these thoughts about both pets and zoo animals. My cats have access to outside and are living the life, no concerns there. But my kids just got a hamster and it has been harder for me to accept than I expected. I know she wouldn't live long in the wild, but is it a good life for her to spend most of her time in a cage? She gets a lot of attention and time in her ball and play area, but I can tell she wants more freedom. Don't know if I can buy another.

While I often feel worried about the animals' happiness when I go to the zoo, I do agree that they are probably saving a lot of lives. The education is very important, in addition to the preservation of species. Just don't have elephants!

Maggie Jean said...

I thought the same about birds. They need to be outside, not in cages.
Poor allies. 😓

Maggie Jean said...

* ellies.

It's Like a Tweet, Without the Twitter.

Am I the only one who has not seen, The Game of Thrones?