General: White House abuzz as first dog finally arrives

[sophistacavy]

Obamas' new puppy makes a big splash - Washington Post- msnbc.com

There ya go! Go read all about it now.

I do have to say that I am disapointed that they didn't get one of the 13 portugese water dogs available on Petfinder: Petfinder.com

Oh well. They are supposedly going to make a donation to the D.C. Humane Society, but.......I don't think that makes up for not adopting. Although, Bo (their new puppy) did come from a family who the Kennedy's (Bo's original, first home. Also his birthplace, I guess) felt wasn't a right fit (after selling [or whatever]) him to them originally.

But, that brings up the debate over whether responsible breeders really do exist or not. And once again, I have to say that no, they do not. A responsible breeder cannot exist, because the simple, single act of breeding while dogs die in shelters is irresponsible in itself. It doesn't matter if it's the Kennedy's, or someone else. All breeders of whatever quality are doing something truly abhorrent and irresponsible.

Enough said! Go read the article and watch the video. Bo is soooo cute!

[blackarrow]

Does there being orphaned and underprivileged human children mean it's automatically irresponsible to give birth to any of your own, no matter how well-prepared you are to take care of him or her?

[sophistacavy]

Originally Posted by blackarrow

Does there being orphaned and underprivileged human children mean it's automatically irresponsible to give birth to any of your own, no matter how well-prepared you are to take care of him or her?

I have no clue what you are talking about. You simply cannot compare children to animals, and I didn't mention anything about human kids, so.....I don't know what you're saying. No clue.
Sorry!

[blackarrow]

Oh, I don't see why we can't. There are many parentless children in the world. Should we blame the people giving birth to their own children instead of adopting for the problems of the parentless?

Was that clearer?

[lmarieaa]

We as human beings make the conscious desicion to bring children into the world.
Animals are different in the fact that when the copulate, they did not go through the thought process of what it would mean to have babies. Animals are driven by instinct, not sentiment.
Humans are putting/forcing animals into controlled situations in which they are breeding, thus contributing to the millions of healthy adoptable animals being killed in shelters. The dogs won't stop and say to each other "wait, we better not do this...".
We make the decisions for the animals. Our guinea pigs do not tell us when they want to go to the vet or when they would like to have floortime or what veggies they want that day.
It is our responsibility to look after our animals, we are the ones breeding and killing innocent animals. It is not the fault of the animals being bred, but the fault of the people responsible for breeding them. It is impossible for the animals to know any better.

[sophistacavy]

Originally Posted by lmarieaa

We as human beings make the conscious desicion to bring children into the world.
Animals are different in the fact that when the copulate, they did not go through the thought process of what it would mean to have babies. Animals are driven by instinct, not sentiment.
Humans are putting/forcing animals into controlled situations in which they are breeding, thus contributing to the millions of healthy adoptable animals being killed in shelters. The dogs won't stop and say to each other "wait, we better not do this...".
We make the decisions for the animals. Our guinea pigs do not tell us when they want to go to the vet or when they would like to have floortime or what veggies they want that day.
It is our responsibility to look after our animals, we are the ones breeding and killing innocent animals. It is not the fault of the animals being bred, but the fault of the people responsible for breeding them. It is impossible for the animals to know any better.

Exactly. Its not like animals can decide to use a you know what or not. Animal condos (if you get what I meant by "condos" missing one letter) would be spaying/neutering.

At least they didn't have an extra one created.

[blackarrow]

We as human beings make the conscious desicion to bring children into the world.

Well, sometimes.

Animals are different in the fact that when the copulate, they did not go through the thought process of what it would mean to have babies.

Sure. It's also for sure that many humans copulate without going through the thought process of what it would mean to have babies!

Animals are driven by instinct, not sentiment.

I'm certainly not seeing "sentiment" as being a better reason for bringing additional lives into the world when there are many who go without - do you see that as a better reason? And again, many children were conceived without "sentiment" being a factor.

Humans are putting/forcing animals into controlled situations in which they are breeding, thus contributing to the millions of healthy adoptable animals being killed in shelters.

Mmm, partly. Many, many animals are reproducing precisely because they are in uncontrolled situations in which they are breeding, thus contributing to the millions of healthy adoptable animals being killed in shelters. Why should people who deliberately breed dogs be considered responsible for shelter animals, if they make sure the pups they breed go to responsible homes with "return" contracts and strict spay/neuter requirements? The argument presumes that everyone who would get a dog from a breeder would go to a shelter for a dog if the breeder didn't exist, when many people would just not get any dog at all.

It is our responsibility to look after our animals, we are the ones breeding and killing innocent animals. It is not the fault of the animals being bred, but the fault of the people responsible for breeding them. It is impossible for the animals to know any better.

Agreed that it's our responsibility, but I don't see how lack of "fault" of animals has anything to do with it. If you say that there's no possibility of responsible breeding for animals as long as there are animals which die due to lack of care, I don't see how you can say humans should reproduce as long as there are human children who die due to lack of care.

[Paula]

Originally Posted by blackarrow

Does there being orphaned and underprivileged human children mean it's automatically irresponsible to give birth to any of your own, no matter how well-prepared you are to take care of him or her?

No, it doesn't. On the other hand, it would be nice if there could be more focus on adopting many of the parentless children that exist today, particularly when you consider the massive overpopulation problem (amongst humans) that exists.

Originally Posted by lmarieaa

We as human beings make the conscious desicion to bring children into the world. Animals are different in the fact that when the copulate, they did not go through the thought process of what it would mean to have babies. Animals are driven by instinct, not sentiment.

Humans don't always make a "conscious decision" to have children. In many cases it's an accident, and entirely unintentional. And it's a bit absurd to assume or imply that all humans go through a "thought process" of any kind before reproducing.

Originally Posted by sophistacavy

Exactly. Its not like animals can decide to use a you know what or not. Animal condos (if you get what I meant by "condos" missing one letter) would be spaying/neutering.

You know, sometimes things are best left unsaid. Or left to the imagination. Statements like this are unnecessary. And many times obnoxious.

Originally Posted by blackarrow

If you say that there's no possibility of responsible breeding for animals as long as there are animals which die due to lack of care, I don't see how you can say humans should reproduce as long as there are human children who die due to lack of care.

Exactly. Well said.

[lmarieaa]

Humans don't always make a "conscious decision" to have children. In many cases it's an accident, and entirely unintentional. And it's a bit absurd to assume or imply that all humans go through a "thought process" of any kind before reproducing.

I am aware of that, but animals have zero comprehension of what is happening to them. At least a person knows exactly what is going on and can make decisions accordingly. The mother dog is not the one who drops the litter of puppies in a park somewhere because she dosent want them, it is the owner that does that.
So, its okay that we as a human race have created such a massive animal overpopulation problem? No big deal? Are you trying to say that this is the problem for the dogs on the euth list to worry about and not ours? It drives me crazy how animals are being treated like products that you use and throw out when finished with them.

I am not going to choose to go down the endless long dark road discussing whether responsible breeders really exist or not. Been there, done that.
Breeding animals for profit and personal gain is wrong. It is driven by greed. No one will ever change my opinions on that subject. Animals do not exist on this earth so we can exploit them.

[Paula]

Originally Posted by lmarieaa

At least a person knows exactly what is going on and can make decisions accordingly.

I wouldn't actually go that far.

Originally Posted by lmarieaa

So, its okay that we as a human race have created such a massive animal overpopulation problem? No big deal? Are you trying to say that this is the problem for the dogs on the euth list to worry about and not ours?

Who said that? Really, who?

Originally Posted by lmarieaa

Breeding animals for profit and personal gain is wrong.

Agreed.

[lmarieaa]

Also, another argument for breeding is to ensure that a diversity of breeds exist and to continue the population of rare breeds. That is an argument that I find completely absurd.
Why? Why MUST we have a certain rare breed? How does this benefit us? How is this rare breed of dog any better than the mutt that was put down 5 minutes ago? I do not why we have such value for these types of things...I think we have just gotten bored with our lives and these are the types of things that stimulate our minds nowadays? Dogs are dogs. We are way to fixated on physical appearance, whether it with animals or other people. It is so petty.

[blackarrow]

I am aware of that, but animals have zero comprehension of what is happening to them. At least a person knows exactly what is going on and can make decisions accordingly.

I would think that would be a very good reason for humans to choose not to reproduce, yet you seem to be carving out an exception for humans, for reasons you haven't made clear.

So, its okay that we as a human race have created such a massive animal overpopulation problem? No big deal?

Of course not.

Are you trying to say that this is the problem for the dogs on the euth list to worry about and not ours?

Definitely not. I personally spend about thirty hours a week getting dogs on euth lists off them. What I am trying to say is that it's too simplistic to tar every breeder with the same brush for that problem, especially when many dogs aren't from a "breeder" at all.

It drives me crazy how animals are being treated like products that you use and throw out when finished with them.

Me too. That's why I applaud those who work to prevent that. There are people who have bred dogs I include in that category. (I have never done so, in case you're wondering.)

[lmarieaa]

I am not giving an exception for humans. If you want to go there, well, my opinion on that is, I really do not think humans need to be reproducing either. There are plenty of wonderful children that would love to have a nice home to live in and a family that cares for them...which is one of the many reasons I have that if I ever want children, I will adopt. But, I haven't planned my future that far yet. I am only 20.

[blackarrow]

Why? Why MUST we have a certain rare breed? How does this benefit us?

It doesn't rise to the level of a "must," but it certainly benefits humans to have particular breeds of dogs. Mine are border collies, which breed has a long and distinguished history of being a tireless sheepherder. Bloodhounds benefit us by being able to track down everything from escaped criminals to lost children. German shepherds benefit us by working as drug detection dogs and police dogs. The list goes on and on.

How is this rare breed of dog any better than the mutt that was put down 5 minutes ago?

It isn't, necessarily, but of course that also ignores the fact that rare breeds of dogs are put down in shelters right along with mixes.

Dogs are dogs. We are way to fixated on physical appearance, whether it with animals or other people. It is so petty.

You don't seem to be aware that many of the differences between dog breeds aren't based on looks but on working ability.

[lmarieaa]

You don't seem to be aware that many of the differences between dog breeds aren't based on looks but on working ability.

Most people have no need for a "working" dog anymore. I know that there are many exceptions, but people in living in apartments and in the suburbs have no use for a specific type of working dog bred to do a particular thing. In the 21st century people buy dogs based on what they look like, not based on what they were bred to do.
Do people want their little pugs or their staffordshires or other bully breeds for jobs to be accomplished? Of course not, its mere fashion.
My neighbor in my apartment building has a newfoundland....and he sure dosent work on any docks.
The golden retriever is one of the most popular dogs....is everybody duck hunting now or what?
In NYC, everyone lives in apartments, they have jobs that have no need for the use of any kind of dog. That does not stop them from buying their retrievers, and staffordshires, standard poodles, french bulldogs....

[blackarrow]

Most people have no need for a "working" dog anymore. I know that there are many exceptions, but people in living in apartments and in the suburbs have no use for a specific type of working dog bred to do a particular thing.

Oh, I know. Part of the reason I spend so much time doing what I do is because people have brought their border collies to live with them in city apartments, which is a very difficult situation for them. I myself live in the 'burbs and make it work for my dogs because I do agility with them about four days a week - they need that kind of "work." That not all people do their homework sufficiently doesn't strike me as a reason a shepherd (or other person who does have a suitable home) shouldn't get a border collie. The average mutt is simply not going to have the instinct or the drive to do that kind of a job.

Do people want their little pugs or their staffordshires or other bully breeds for jobs to be accomplished? Of course not, its mere fashion.
My neighbor in my apartment building has a newfoundland....and he sure dosent work on any docks.

Mmm, sometimes yes, sometimes no. I would wager tolerance of handling and temperament is important to your neighbor with the Newf. Along with being fantastic at water work, they are known for being phenomenally gentle dogs. Pugs were specifically meant to be companions, to enjoy sitting with their person and being petted, etc. It may not seem like "work" to you, but for the dog and his or her human it may be. I suspect a fair percentage of the staffies and bully breeds are doing some sort of work for their humans, too.
You edited your post while I was typing mine - actually, I do know a large number of people who duck hunt with their retrievers - but most people who have them have sought them out because, like Newfs, they are a good choice for a tolerant family dog. And many people who have chosen their poodles because they are allergic to other breeds of dogs. Etc. etc. It isn't all just vanity - breed characteristics really should be considered when making the decision to add a dog to one's life, whether it be a purebred or a mutt.

[lmarieaa]

I guess I just have a different perspective. There are plenty of mutts in shelters with wonderfully gentle dispositions. You don't have to go pure bred to get a great dog. I know, as I have fostered many awesome street and shelter dogs. Many people have an elitist attitude, and think that the only dogs worth having are those with pedigrees.
I just do not think it is fair to count out all the great dogs in shelters.
And, living in Manhattan I have learned that vanity has a whole lot to do with it.

[lmarieaa]

I suspect a fair percentage of the staffies and bully breeds are doing some sort of work for their humans, too.

I have to disagree with this. Most of the dogs being euthanized where I live are staffordshires. People breed them like crazy over here. It is because that in this culture, they are glorfied in hip-hop and rap videos, they make you look "cool" when you walk them, they make you look tough, etc, etc. It is way beyond having them for protection or something.
Also, these people are breeding these dogs here because they are low on cash and they KNOW they will sell quick. Especially certain colors.

[sophistacavy]

Originally Posted by paula.m.moore

You know, sometimes things are best left unsaid. Or left to the imagination. Statements like this are unnecessary. And many times obnoxious.

How is that obnoxious? I was simply furthering Imarriea's point, because I am on her side, and see zero sense in what anyone else has said on here besides her.

Before I start acting like a mod again, can I please ask a mod, any mod, to give me some tips on how to get this thread back on track? I know that I may have baited people into arguing by posting my personal viewpoint in the OP, but I put this thread in the news section for a reason. I truly feel that I did not start this shindig. Shindigs go in the kitchen

[blackarrow]

Originally Posted by lmarieaa

I just do not think it is fair to count out all the great dogs in shelters.

Oh, I know. Far be it from me to count out dogs in shelters. Both of mine were shelter dogs. Don't assume that purebred dogs were obtained from breeders!