On 03/03/2021 12:39, T i m wrote:
On Wed, 3 Mar 2021 11:50:24 +0000, Max Demian
wrote:

snip troll ****

The facts are so painful you feel obliged to label them as troll ****.
Yet I'm not the troll who started this thread.

"I'm so sorry for people with no pets; they have to make such a fuss of
their children."

Or not.

There are plenty of people out there who aren't demonstrative and so
the chances are they wouldn't be likely to 'make a fuss' of their
children or any animals that they happened to share their houses with
(not sure you would call them 'pet's in those instances).

I've seen that myself ... people who wouldn't welcome your dogs in
their house or that have a dog themselves but don't acknowledge it
when they come home (the dog desperate to say 'hello' but is
completely ignored).

Perhaps they don't like pets to be obliged to **** and pee at their
owners command and expectations.

Perhaps they think you are cruelly exploiting animals by keeping then as
adornments? Especially when you cruelly refrain from giving them meat
and meat products, something they would eat naturally.

And of course we shouldn't 'keep' any pets but it becomes a grey area
when an animal latches onto you (and not because of imprinting from
birth, that should be avoided) but it's therefore possible to share
your life / home with another animal (human or other species) as long
as it's provided / allowed all it's natural behaviours (or as many as
possible), plus any enrichment etc. What you don't typically do with a
pet is kill and eat it (although people do of course but then I
question the idea of it ever being 'a companion animal').

Keepiog pets is hardly natural for the pet. Have you considered joining
any pressure groups trying to close down zoos, for keeping animals/pets
in unnatural conditions?

So a 'rescued' animal, (say in response to human interference /
poaching) that has the freedom / protection of a wildlife park till
it's able to support / defend itself that *chooses* to maintain
contact with it's human rescuers etc.

There should have been no need to rescue an animal. It is a
contradiction for a fanatical vegan to keep pets for their personal
pleasure and then complain farm animals are kept for my pleasure, and of
course a natural source of B12.

Ideally there would be no need for any animal 'rescues' because there
wouldn't be poaching of parent animals and there wouldn't be live
stock 'farmers' who can no longer deal with their moral conflict,
giving up their animals to a rescue, rather than selling them as the
objects, the commodity that they would typically be.

In an ideal fanatical vegan world we wouldn't have zoos and pets.

I would hope that having a tactile pet in the family would mean people
would make the link between the sentience of other creatures and their
right / desire to live and the (non) consumption of the flesh of the
same ... but the normalisation, indoctrination, marketing and peer
pressure is so strong that I don't believe it is often the case, or at
lest till the person grows up and makes their own choices.


I would hope that eating meat will ensure my B12 levels are kept at
normal levels without having to resort to artificial and unnatural sources.