LilacDragon;596578 wrote: Rachel - you are never going to convince her that she is not looking at the big picture or that PETA isn't a good thing. She prefers to believe the propoganda that PETA pumps out.
While I understand your passion for show quality, healthy, well bred Cocker Spaniel (I have owned one and will never own another, personally) I am a bit saddened that you wouldn't ever consider rescuing a cocker. While I would love to have another rottweiler in my home (and I know the breeder that I would want to get a pup from), I spent 8 wonderful years with a magnificent, healthy, beautiful ambassador of the breed that was rescued from the local animal control at the age of 4.
If you check my earlier post, you will see that I have rescued cockers. I have rescued about 9 but so far (some have been here 6 yrs) I have been unlucky at finding good homes for them. I still have 5 rescue cockers here. I had 6 till this spring when one had to be put down for health problems. Rescue cockers don't tend to be the sweet merry dogs I am used to having around though. They are usually the result of backyard breeding and cockers are a breed you MUST be careful of the temperament of.:-4
Vent: Breeding for $$$
-
LilacDragon
- Posts: 1382
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:23 am
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Vent: Breeding for $$$
I've already been around this with LilacDragon,and now I'm going to go around with you Rachel.
YOU DON'T GET IT.
A dog is a dog. It doesn't make a tinker's dam about what people want, or how much money they go for or what papers they have etc.
Too many dogs means we don't need more!
How hard is that to understand?
You would do well to educate yourself on Peta and all the good they have done for the animal world, in the ways of primate abuse, research labs, puppy mills, using animals in drug trafficking, premarin horses, pet food experiments (ie: IAMS) and a myriad of other things. You don't have to agree with everything of course, but to deny that they have been and continue to be pivotal in benefitting animals as a whole is quite ignorant.
And LilacDragon, I will speak for myself, thank you.
YOU DON'T GET IT.
A dog is a dog. It doesn't make a tinker's dam about what people want, or how much money they go for or what papers they have etc.
Too many dogs means we don't need more!
How hard is that to understand?
You would do well to educate yourself on Peta and all the good they have done for the animal world, in the ways of primate abuse, research labs, puppy mills, using animals in drug trafficking, premarin horses, pet food experiments (ie: IAMS) and a myriad of other things. You don't have to agree with everything of course, but to deny that they have been and continue to be pivotal in benefitting animals as a whole is quite ignorant.
And LilacDragon, I will speak for myself, thank you.
Vent: Breeding for $$$
RedGlitter;596743 wrote: I've already been around this with LilacDragon,and now I'm going to go around with you Rachel.
YOU DON'T GET IT.
A dog is a dog. It doesn't make a tinker's dam about what people want, or how much money they go for or what papers they have etc.
Too many dogs means we don't need more!
How hard is that to understand?
You would do well to educate yourself on Peta and all the good they have done for the animal world, in the ways of primate abuse, research labs, puppy mills, using animals in drug trafficking, premarin horses, pet food experiments (ie: IAMS) and a myriad of other things. You don't have to agree with everything of course, but to deny that they have been and continue to be pivotal in benefitting animals as a whole is quite ignorant.
And LilacDragon, I will speak for myself, thank you.
I have no problem understanding what you seem to believe. I just know that you are wrong. In your world then, the ideal situation would be for the end of all purebred animals so there would be the eventual demise of dogs as companions?
It doesn't matter to me what PETA has done that is positive. The negative far out weighs the good. The Humane Society of the United States was already in place to help prevent animal cruelty. PETA has only served to create a negative image of animal rights groups by frequently acting as a terrorist organization.
YOU DON'T GET IT.
A dog is a dog. It doesn't make a tinker's dam about what people want, or how much money they go for or what papers they have etc.
Too many dogs means we don't need more!
How hard is that to understand?
You would do well to educate yourself on Peta and all the good they have done for the animal world, in the ways of primate abuse, research labs, puppy mills, using animals in drug trafficking, premarin horses, pet food experiments (ie: IAMS) and a myriad of other things. You don't have to agree with everything of course, but to deny that they have been and continue to be pivotal in benefitting animals as a whole is quite ignorant.
And LilacDragon, I will speak for myself, thank you.
I have no problem understanding what you seem to believe. I just know that you are wrong. In your world then, the ideal situation would be for the end of all purebred animals so there would be the eventual demise of dogs as companions?
It doesn't matter to me what PETA has done that is positive. The negative far out weighs the good. The Humane Society of the United States was already in place to help prevent animal cruelty. PETA has only served to create a negative image of animal rights groups by frequently acting as a terrorist organization.
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Vent: Breeding for $$$
rachelg;596771 wrote: I have no problem understanding what you seem to believe. I just know that you are wrong. In your world then, the ideal situation would be for the end of all purebred animals so there would be the eventual demise of dogs as companions?
It doesn't matter to me what PETA has done that is positive. The negative far out weighs the good. The Humane Society of the United States was already in place to help prevent animal cruelty. PETA has only served to create a negative image of animal rights groups by frequently acting as a terrorist organization.
Whoa. You are so way out in left field it's comical. Get a clue. If you think the HSUS is all we need to stop animal cruelty, you have no business in the animal field whatsoever.
Peta's negative outweighing the positive is only your opinion and not really worth much. It tells me where you get your information. Terrorist organization?! Saw that coming a mile off. Do you actually buy that? Maybe you should start thinking for yourself instead of paying too much mind to crap you read.
And to prove my point that you don't comprehend this issue too well, NO. I do not want to see the end of having pets. I want to see people -ALL people including holier than thou, self-called "responsible" breeders (which is a total oxymoron) stop producing more animals until we get to stop slaughtering what we already have. This is basic common sense. I don't mind arguing with someone who's wrong, but at least give me something to work with.
It doesn't matter to me what PETA has done that is positive. The negative far out weighs the good. The Humane Society of the United States was already in place to help prevent animal cruelty. PETA has only served to create a negative image of animal rights groups by frequently acting as a terrorist organization.
Whoa. You are so way out in left field it's comical. Get a clue. If you think the HSUS is all we need to stop animal cruelty, you have no business in the animal field whatsoever.
Peta's negative outweighing the positive is only your opinion and not really worth much. It tells me where you get your information. Terrorist organization?! Saw that coming a mile off. Do you actually buy that? Maybe you should start thinking for yourself instead of paying too much mind to crap you read.
And to prove my point that you don't comprehend this issue too well, NO. I do not want to see the end of having pets. I want to see people -ALL people including holier than thou, self-called "responsible" breeders (which is a total oxymoron) stop producing more animals until we get to stop slaughtering what we already have. This is basic common sense. I don't mind arguing with someone who's wrong, but at least give me something to work with.
Vent: Breeding for $$$
I still think you are missing my whole point. Even if everyone in the world stopped breeding, the animals that are now sitting in the shelters would not be adopted just because the breed or puppy they wanted was not available. A dog is NOT a dog to most people. If they can't have the dog or puppy they want, they will not have anything.
And I was one of the people who was at the dog show I was talking about with the PETA activists letting their dogs out. To me, that is an act of terrorism, to take what is most important to a person and put it in harm's way. I am a writer by the way, I don't get my words from things I read. I use them the way I see to be appropriate.
And now, I am headed for the dog shows, to do what my dogs and I enjoy most -
SHOW!:-6 :driving:
And I was one of the people who was at the dog show I was talking about with the PETA activists letting their dogs out. To me, that is an act of terrorism, to take what is most important to a person and put it in harm's way. I am a writer by the way, I don't get my words from things I read. I use them the way I see to be appropriate.
And now, I am headed for the dog shows, to do what my dogs and I enjoy most -
SHOW!:-6 :driving:
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Vent: Breeding for $$$
Even if everyone in the world stopped breeding, the animals that are now sitting in the shelters would not be adopted just because the breed or puppy they wanted was not available.
No, they would die out and then we could license people to breed properly only what was necessary instead of this obnxious mass production we have currently.
And that is the whole point.
If they can't have the dog or puppy they want, they will not have anything
There is no dog at present that cannot be found in a shelter or breed rescue. There is no intelligent reason to demand a freshborn puppy when you can go get what you want from someone who already has it. To do so is pure selfishness and that should not be catered to.
No, they would die out and then we could license people to breed properly only what was necessary instead of this obnxious mass production we have currently.
And that is the whole point.
If they can't have the dog or puppy they want, they will not have anything
There is no dog at present that cannot be found in a shelter or breed rescue. There is no intelligent reason to demand a freshborn puppy when you can go get what you want from someone who already has it. To do so is pure selfishness and that should not be catered to.
-
LilacDragon
- Posts: 1382
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:23 am
Vent: Breeding for $$$
RedGlitter;596827 wrote: Even if everyone in the world stopped breeding, the animals that are now sitting in the shelters would not be adopted just because the breed or puppy they wanted was not available.
No, they would die out and then we could license people to breed properly only what was necessary instead of this obnxious mass production we have currently.
And that is the whole point.
If they can't have the dog or puppy they want, they will not have anything
There is no dog at present that cannot be found in a shelter or breed rescue. There is no intelligent reason to demand a freshborn puppy when you can go get what you want from someone who already has it. To do so is pure selfishness and that should not be catered to.
OMG!!
Who gets to decide what "breeding properly" is? YOU?
The U.S. government already requires that kennels that sell wholesale to retail stores must must have a USDA license. Now - go look and see what good that does! Take a look at some of the violations that USDA licensed breeders have on their records and what happens to them. NOT A DAMN THING.
You might want to go back and read what the goal of PETA is. To end the use of animals for human entertainment, yada, yada, yada. OWNING A DOG IS HUMAN ENTERTAINMENT in the "eyes" of PETA.
As for your last paragraph quoted above - go stand in Petland and surround yourself with people looking to get one of those adoreable puppies. Ask one of them why they aren't looking at the local shelter. I can promise you that most of them will tell you that they don't want someone's reject.
I am done. I am so sick and tired of arguing with someone who is unwilling to even consider that someone else might have a clue besides yourself.
No, they would die out and then we could license people to breed properly only what was necessary instead of this obnxious mass production we have currently.
And that is the whole point.
If they can't have the dog or puppy they want, they will not have anything
There is no dog at present that cannot be found in a shelter or breed rescue. There is no intelligent reason to demand a freshborn puppy when you can go get what you want from someone who already has it. To do so is pure selfishness and that should not be catered to.
OMG!!
Who gets to decide what "breeding properly" is? YOU?
The U.S. government already requires that kennels that sell wholesale to retail stores must must have a USDA license. Now - go look and see what good that does! Take a look at some of the violations that USDA licensed breeders have on their records and what happens to them. NOT A DAMN THING.
You might want to go back and read what the goal of PETA is. To end the use of animals for human entertainment, yada, yada, yada. OWNING A DOG IS HUMAN ENTERTAINMENT in the "eyes" of PETA.
As for your last paragraph quoted above - go stand in Petland and surround yourself with people looking to get one of those adoreable puppies. Ask one of them why they aren't looking at the local shelter. I can promise you that most of them will tell you that they don't want someone's reject.
I am done. I am so sick and tired of arguing with someone who is unwilling to even consider that someone else might have a clue besides yourself.
Sandi
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Vent: Breeding for $$$
LD, I don't give a rat's ass what you have to say about licenses or regulations or idiots in a pet store because it means nothing in the face of common sense. Do you possess any of that? You seem like an otherwise intelligent woman so I'm not sure why you cannot see that it is common sense that decides when breeding is appropriate, not the USDA, the government, not the public supply and demand and sure as hell not the AKC.
Anyone with a lick of sense might could see this.
And if you're so tired of arguing with me, why do you keep coming back? I'm pretty sure when you say you're tired of arguing with me, that you really mean pity I won't come around to your way of thinking since you seem to feel just as sure as I do.
Anyone with a lick of sense might could see this.
And if you're so tired of arguing with me, why do you keep coming back? I'm pretty sure when you say you're tired of arguing with me, that you really mean pity I won't come around to your way of thinking since you seem to feel just as sure as I do.