And in mine, it's like providing food, shelter, and companionship to someone you love.

It appears to me that the only way to argue against that is by taking the position that people and their pets don't really love each other.

And if you're so emotionally impoverished that you'd actually make that argument, it's just sad.

Well, as CD said - I love my animals and care and protect them. I love dogs, cats, birds, but especially TROLLS!

--Jack

The fact that you refer to animals as "life forms" tells me that the folks responding in this thread care more about the welfare of animals than you ever will.

If my dog runs outside the house without a leash, and I tell her to get back in the house, and she does, then is it okay?

When there is a drought outside, my pets still have fresh water. They don't need to roam the countryside looking for a drink.

If they get sick, they get medical attention. If a parasite infects or infests them, they get that taken care of too.

If they break a leg, they get medical attention. They don't have to spend the rest of their lives limping.

When it's hot outside, they don't need to risk being eaten by a troll by going under a bridge for shade...

"like restraining a life-form and forcing it into unnatural company"

My cat found ME actually, came running up to me out of the blue, started to talk to me, followed me as I walked through my sister's back yard, and has chosen to stay with us ever since. He comes in the house and leaves as he pleases... but wouldn't you know, he's at the door every day at meal time. I guess that makes ME the restrained life form forced into unnatural company.

Are you also opposed to keeping houseplants?

I let my parent's "pet" outside on our half-acre lawn with no fence. He has freedom to roam around, pee on what he wants and even wanders off the property into the woods behind our house. Why does he come back to be let in after awhile?

Because he's connected with us on a pack level. Dogs roam in packs (families), and he has chosen to be a part of our pack, and let us be a part of his pack. If he wanted to, he could easily run away and fend for himself. He's a terrier, and chases/hunts smaller animals. Catching chipmunks, mice, and birds. He's fully capable of fending for himself.

What's really to say different species can't live harmoniously side by side. Even dogs and elephants have chosen to be partners (friends). And seeing stories on the news about dogs trying to care for their "owners" when they are injured, or whimper when their "owners" die, really reinforces that pets and humans can co-exist naturally.

Sure, some people shouldn't have pets. Or should only have one, rather than 6. And I know people who do prevent their pets from doing what they desire. Yes, certain individuals ruin it for the rest. But I think it can be done correctly sometimes.

[edit] You've never seen animals in the wild adopt other species babies because their parents died? So yes, animals do take care of other animals, even if they aren't a related species.

If this is some ploy to get some attention to your sig links, then I think you've succeeded...

Otherwise you're a complete quack IMO.

Kevin

Doe she look restrained or trapped?

Gasen, without quoting your post considering I don't want to flood the thread with those pictures, I will say that to me it doesn't look happy.

These pics were taken while she felt sleepy. She is too quick for me to take pics while she is playing.

Caring for animals may take them out of their "Natural Habitat" but I think most of them would much rather this life, where they have guaranteed food, drink, shelter, unlike the wild where you could go a day without food.

Hmm, why is it showing only 5 posts by Memberhere23094 when he/she has posted almost 20 times in this thread? Anybody else seeing that?

Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 9 Posts

Alan Petersen

*[Traffic increasing through means of engaging on forums debates could be a possible traffic-increasing strategy for Internet Marketers, and one that fellow Internet Marketers can pick up on if they so please.]

"Some life forms just like to argue so they start silly threads to feel alive."

*And I'd hate to say that I can only hope that those puppies' living conditions are of better quality due to the obvious maturity-level of their owner. Just a thought.

"Here are the 3 life forms I'm torturing every day by "enslaving" them. One was rescued from a puppy mill in Oklahoma where she lived in a crammed chicken coop. The second was abandoned by it's OWNERS after 5 years so we took her in. I guess we should have let them set her free. "

What you put out is what you'll face. I'm only sayin'.

Maybe the troll will like this story -

Man run over by truck after dog puts it in gear

This is half-trolling but I don't understand why Americans have problems with Koreans/Chinese eating dogs when they themselves eat Chicken.

I have a Chicken as a pet once, we use them for cock-beauty-pageants.

Well, let's check the score of the debate:

On one side we have the troll...errr...I mean the OP who seems to be on a personal crucade to ruin any bit of credibility he has or ever will have in this forum.....who stands on his comment that...."owning a pet is like restraining a life-form and forcing it into unnatural company"

On the other side we have scores of rational thinking warriors who counter strongly with love & compassion for domesticated "life forms" of all kinds...

Score:
OP - 1
Warriors - 59+

Not much of a debate.....more like someone just looking for a little attention.

OK Folks...there's nothing more to see here....move along

To the OP

I guess that while growing up, your dog was loved more than you.
You are also pissed off because the only time the dog played with you was when a bone was tied around your neck.

It's Ok. It's not your fault. There is still time to prove that you are worthy of attention, but this is not the way.














Oh, and Snowy says

Referring pets to life forms indicates that you don't care them.

Hey Memberhere23094

HeySal here - I'm sure you'll remember my name for awhile.

I don't know what country you come from. I don't care. It just chills me that you can't see the love of a pet as anything more than "artificial affection". If a situation ever came down to between you and my dog - you're dead" Simple as that.

Certain forms of animals were domesticated over 6,000 years ago. There are indications of much longer ago, but not feeling like checking the stats again, I'm leaving it at a safe and very highly accepted time range.

At first, animals were domesticated for working and food purposes - because humans will use anything on the planet to make their lives easier -- kinda like most societies have had slavery of other humans. Of course, even slave owners loved some humans right at the same time that they abused others.

Somewhere along the way - people found out that certain animals can be very good friends of ours.

I am going to agree that certain animals are not meant to be in captivity, and I do not support the ownership of exotic pets. Their cognitive processes and social orientations are not usually situated to enjoy captivity even when well cared for. Some animals, however, are extremely happy with their relationships with their humans.

It is now known that communication is an instinct that all creatures share. We can learn to understand them just as they can learn to understand us. The memory system of animals such as dogs and cats are departmentalized just as ours are. The department of the memory that works the strongest is the emotional department. This fact is logical since it is often our memory of our emotions relative to past episodes that determine how we make decisions about new data. If something proves to cause bad emotions, avoiding that particular thing will become instinctual in the animal (or human - that is why some people can't go near success even when wholy qualified in every way, they have subconsciously recorded success as a "danger"). Now, when something makes a creature happy and gives it good emotions, it will see that object as beneficial and want access to that object.

Now with that said - animals, as well as humans, have emotions. Period.

A dog and a human - both able to communicate - both creatures with emotional dispositions - both with similar natural social instincts. And you find something wrong with our co-existence?

My business/hobby/avocation/vocation - my whole lifestyle revolves around going out into wild areas. My dog and I were together all the time out there. He could have run away at any time. Why didn't he? I could leave my door open when I left the house and when I got home, my dog would still be in the house - all three of them. They could have left. Why didn't they?
When I was grieved, my dogs would come and nuzzle and put their heads in my lap - that is more care than you can get out of half the human population. Did I love my dog(s) in return? I risked my life to save Munchie. That's a lot more than I would have done for you in the same situation. Would I do that for some "artificial affection"? No, I did it because he was the most important person in my life and I loved him dearly. He died about 8 months ago and I still miss him every day of my life. I feel absolutely blessed that there is a little guy who needs me where I am now. We became fast friends when I got here and we have wonderful times together. I show him things he's never seen and he's learning to understand what I am saying to him. I understand a lot of what he tries to tell me, too, now.

We did everything together - if you would have seen his joy when I would ask if he wanted to go "swimming", "hiking", or for a "big go"(which included camping with all the rest), you would not have dared to ask a question as stupid as if he were happy being my dog. If you would have seen him run and retrieve the things we needed to go where I asked if he wanted to - you'd not have asked any questions about if he understood what I had said. and..........
If it were you that he had found when you were lost or dug you out of an avalanche, you'd have no questions about whether humans and dogs can make wonderful companions or not.

What you have indicated in the OP is that you are completely unaware of the fact that there are different sorts of animals and that some are very well paired with humans. You have no understanding of the social structures or cognitive systems of the most popular pet animals, and have no ability to feel a very central emotional system of both humans and pack animals. I have met many people who thought they did not, could not love a pet - but were soon convinced that they were wrong. Those of us who do love our animals as family members do not appreciate the shallow and completely clueless insinuation that our affections are "artificial". I have been able to assume that about some husbands/wives - but I would never assume that about someone I saw out and about with a well cared for, smiling, and responsive dog.

Furthermore - I always listened to my dog about who not to go near. He always was right. Somehow I get the feeling that Munchie, Blitz, and Kayne would have had the same thing to tell me about you had any of them met you. I just hope for your safety you don't feel inclined to see anyone else's pets as good for nothing but a food source. Dogs know that type of thing and you might find out that they might not be the one on the menu if that is what you think about them. They will know - and so will the pet's human. Trust me on that one.

Now -- if all that isn't quite good enough for your stoic interests, then think about this ---
Humans have all but dessicated many natural animal habitats. Many species are now going extinct due to loss of their habitats. What exactly do you presume might happen if everyone just let all of their animals loose into the environment? Many would die of elements they are no longer naturalized to withstand. Many would perish from starvation. Many contained diseases would become rampant -- -and a pack of wild starving dogs isn't pleasant to face when you are out somewhere. Dogs ARE canines - and would develop just as wolves and coyotes, but there would be MILLIONS of them. Perhaps you would get to see what a dog is once it loses it's domestication. You probably would not survive to tell about it. Cats? Same thing. In the wild they carry some pretty nasty diseases and while they don't fair badly in the wild, put millions out there and you have a severe problem on your hands even before their sheer numbers drive them out of natural food sources.

I hope you understand the cyber world much better than you understand the real one and how animals and humans can live together in relationships beneficial for both species. If not........well..........sucks to be you.

If anything after reading this ridiculous thread (which is just a ploy to get people to read his religious propaganda garbage on EZA), I love my dog more. I was just going through all the pictures i've taken of him and thought i'd share my favourite.

This is Wendel back when he was 2 months old...he's 7 months old now:

It's not just domesticated animals who bond with humans either.

YouTube - Christian the lion - Full ending
Regarding your constant referrals to our furred, feathered and finned (for that is what they are) as "life-forms", does that you a no-life form?