Isn't it interesting that the very people who promote no cruelty to animals are the very people who endorse animal euthanasia? Why is it merciful to kill an animal, but demonic to do so to a human being? From the press than Teri Schiavo got, we understand that people don't think human euthanasia's okay, and from all the anti-death-penalty protests, we understand that people don't think that PEOPLE who are too aggressive should be put to sleep. Why to animals?

Where's the logic?

ok guys i have a question well first i am doing a debate and i need a little help it is on animal euthanasia and i need to know your opinions about it is it right or wrong. please reply asap thanks.

I think that there is no black and white, right or wrong euthanasia. It will always be a shade of gray. In certain circumstances, it is very cruel to put an animal down for unjustified reasons. But in other cases, it is the humane thing to do, because the alternative is much worse. Sometimes euthanasia is the only way to end an animals pain and suffering. I believe euthanasia is right and wrong. It depends on the circumstances.

quote:

but why can't we help both at the same time?

We could, I suppose, but it'd cost a lot of money. Not saying it isn't possible, but it'd be tough. Heck, it's tough even dealing with either one alone.

Well shit, you've convinced me.

RONG RONG RONG IT TERRIBLE AND HORRIBLE

quote:

Originally posted by clpo13:

quote:

Also, do you know how many animals there are just wandering around without a home or in a pound waiting for someone to have it?

Do you know how many kids there are just wandering around without a home or waiting for someone to adopt them?

Let's fix our problems first, and then we can move on to the other animals, all right?

You do have a point, but why can't we help both at the same time? I'm sure there is a way we can do that. Like maybe we could do something like, for every animal adopted, so much money can go to helping children, or vice versa.

Animals sometimes go through pain, and sadly, we can't always do something to stop it. Sometimes, you don't have enough money to cure them, and the only way to keep them from pain is to put them to sleep. Sometimes there just isn't a cure.
I do not beleive an animal should be put down because it's violent. I beleive we should find a way to keep them alive, because sometimes, it's not their fault.

quote:

Also, do you know how many animals there are just wandering around without a home or in a pound waiting for someone to have it?

Do you know how many kids there are just wandering around without a home or waiting for someone to adopt them?

Let's fix our problems first, and then we can move on to the other animals, all right?

RIGHT, and for all you people who say it's wrong and/or bought their pet from a pet store:

WHAT'S YOUR PROBLEM?!
Pet stores get their pets from puppy mills where dogs are kept by the hundreds and bred over and over just to get a couple good looking puppies! Also, do you know how many animals there are just wandering around without a home or in a pound waiting for someone to have it?

This isn't just semantics. While I agree that putting your animal down cause its too aggressive is just as wrong as capital punishment, animal euthanasia is not inherently wrong. Last month I found my very sick cat Nikolai dying on the floor in my bedroom, and to keep him from suffering in that death I took him immediately to an emergency pet hospital and put him down. I stayed with him. It was the only thing I could do for him and I'm glad I was able to.

And furthermore, there wouldn't be so many stray animals all over if people SPAYED/NEUTERED their freaking pets. It's not expensive. Hell, the local Animal Shelters do it free if you're in financial difficulty. JUST DO IT!

quote:

Originally posted by clpo13:
You three are strange...

Congratulations clpo, you've just been awarded understatement of the week award.

I personally have had two animals put down. One was a very old dog who was too sick to live a happy life anymore, I don't have any regrets about putting him down because it was the kind thing to do. The other was a horse who had hurt herself and who, for numerous reasons, couldn't be healed. That hurt more but I still think it was the right thing. As far as animal shelters go I don't have a problem with them using euthanasia. What I have a problem with is the morons who let their cats and dogs breed when they can't take care of the offspring.

I'm also a supporter of people's right to decide to end it. If I ever ended up as a vegetable I sure as heck wouldn't want people to keep me on life support. What's the point?

quote:

Originally posted by clpo13:
It's not just space that's a problem, but also how to keep the animals fed and exercised.

And from getting sick.

quote:

Originally posted by Saturnmoth007:
I have volunteered at a no-kill shelter for 6 yrs. What they mean by no-kill is no killing the animals that have no chance of being adopted, whether because they are scared or not people-friendly. No-kill shelters do not let pathetic animals live... if they have an incurable disease or disorder.

But they turn away dogs once they become full. Where do you think people go if a "no-kill" shelter wont take them? They end up dumping the animal on the side of the road to get hit by a car or poisoned or shot. The animals are lucky to make it into a shelter that's not "no-kill" even if it means they have to be put down. At least euthanasia is more humane.

quote:

I think we should agree with FML that kids in Asia are not animals and it is not wrong for them to exsists.

Thank You for your support.

Jumping from animals to Terry Schiavo back to animals again? That's rather interesting...

The problem with aggressive animals is that often there are no places where they can be safely taken care of. We can't just keep them in shelters indefinitely. Space is limited.

I volunteer at a low-kill animal shelter, where they only use euthanasia if the animal is too sick to live without suffering. I think that this is the only kind of animal euthanasia that is okay. Animals that are too aggressive for adoption should be sent somewhere that they can be cared for without hurting anyone. I think that the whole Terry Schiavo thing was pretty ridiculous. Her husband should have had the choice since she wasn't really "alive" anyway. Animals should only be put to sleep if they have absolutely no chance of survival and it will make them not suffer.

I have volunteered at a no-kill shelter for 6 yrs. What they mean by no-kill is no killing the animals that have no chance of being adopted, whether because they are scared or not people-friendly. No-kill shelters do not let pathetic animals live... if they have an incurable disease or disorder.

No-kill shelters are good ideas, but they pose a logistics nightmare. It's not just space that's a problem, but also how to keep the animals fed and exercised. These shelters would have to have a rather big budget...

I've been around animals practically my whole life and I've worked in an animal shelter for six years. I can honestly say that I've seen it all when it comes to euthanasia.

The one I worked at didn't discriminate when it came time to put an animal down even though the majority of the animals that were euthanized were healthy adoptable dogs and cats whose only reasoning for being put to sleep was because of the pet over-population.

Pet over-populaton can be controlled with spaying and neutering. Here's a link to the thread I created aboutspaying and neutering.

quote:

Animals are generally euthanized because there is no way for shelters to provide for them (and no one to adopt them), they are sick and injured, or simply dangerous. It's often the only humane thing to do, considering the alternatives.

This is true. When people keep breeding their animals (i.e. dogs and cats) and giving them away and not adopting them from shelters, something's gotta give. But some shelters jump too quickly to euthanization if they spot a problem. For example, some animals who aren't used to being in cages may act out in ways that are different then how they act outside the cage. The unfamiliar environment makes them uncomfortable, and the resulting behavior can lead shelter workers to believe the animal is "unadoptable." I know this from experience; my parents turned a cat over to a local shelter, and while the cat acted tame and friendly ordinarily, in the cage the cat acted in such a way that the shelter workers thought that he was feral (wild), so they euthanized him. The truth is that all shelters are not created equal. The worst part is when some shelters just don't care how they euthanize animals or if it's humane; some shelters use gas chambers or even gunshots to "euthanize" animals.
What do you all think of no-kill shelters? Ideally, it'd be a great thing, if the problem of animal overpopulation was brought under control via spaying/neutering. The problem is that a no-kill shelter can only hold so many animals, then they have to turn them away (which may lead to them going to a kill shelter, or; worst case scenario, the caretaker of the animal abandoning them or killing them). Meanwhile, the animals who have been at the no-kill shelter for a longer period of time may start to lose their sanity, depending on the quality of socialization at the shelter.