SQ
Senior Member - Vegan for the animals
The way I see it, any person who breeds rats when there are so many in rescues and shelters is an unethical person. Same goes for dogs.
and cats (especially), and rabbits, and guinea pigs, and ...
The way I see it, any person who breeds rats when there are so many in rescues and shelters is an unethical person. Same goes for dogs.
Is it more ethical to give a homeless rat a chance at life, or take in a rat who comes with a higher potential for a greater quality of life? Rats live such short lives, that this question makes a difference.
For me, I will always choose the latter. However, I don't think the first option is necessarily the wrong one. I think it depends on the person, the "rat market", and the availability of homes.
I'm confused - honestly, please don't think I'm trolling here, I'd really like some insight -
If it's completely unethical to breed AT ALL... then are you* happy with the continued decline of pet rat genetics as a whole? Because it seems like that's what would happen, in real life or in a hypothetical scenario where breeders stopped existing. In real life, if you discourage any thoughtful breeding whatsoever, it'll be the truly crappy breeders who keep churning them out, and it'll be people like those on this forum eternally paying for their sins, in a twisted circle of life sort of thing. If everyone actually stopped breeding altogether, the only source of new baby rats would be "oops" litters, which as we all know are most frequently brother-sister or other close relation matings. Will THAT help solve the problems facing rats? Facing rescuers? Facing average pet owners?
I mean, sure, if there are no rats, there aren't any that need rescuing. Huzzah...? But that seems like it shouldn't be the goal, to me.
(*collective you, not aimed at anyone specific, as many seem to agree with this premise)
I don't view keeping companion animals as "using" them for personal gain. There is a mutual, symbiotic relationship there that is entirely natural and normal.The real question is why do humans like to play god? What gives us the right to keep and use animals for personal gain? Why do we think we have the ability to better a population? It takes years of schooling to understand genetics and we still don't know everything. So unless a breeder has years of schooling they can't be sure that they are actually bettering a species.
I'm confused - honestly, please don't think I'm trolling here, I'd really like some insight -
If it's completely unethical to breed AT ALL... then are you* happy with the continued decline of pet rat genetics as a whole? Because it seems like that's what would happen, in real life or in a hypothetical scenario where breeders stopped existing. In real life, if you discourage any thoughtful breeding whatsoever, it'll be the truly crappy breeders who keep churning them out, and it'll be people like those on this forum eternally paying for their sins, in a twisted circle of life sort of thing. If everyone actually stopped breeding altogether, the only source of new baby rats would be "oops" litters, which as we all know are most frequently brother-sister or other close relation matings. Will THAT help solve the problems facing rats? Facing rescuers? Facing average pet owners?
I mean, sure, if there are no rats, there aren't any that need rescuing. Huzzah...? But that seems like it shouldn't be the goal, to me.
(*collective you, not aimed at anyone specific, as many seem to agree with this premise)
Enter your email address to join: