dag@tellab2.UUCP (Donald Graft) (05/22/84)
It is somewhat surprising to me that in all the discussion of "pets on the loose" and "freedom" that nobody has raised the point that there are several other ways that we circumscribe the freedom of our pets. For example, we often have them neutered and thereby deprive them of complete and satisfying sex lives. In the case of cats, we sometimes remove their claws and thereby deprive them of normal use of their bodies. I believe each of these issues must be considered separately. Let's consider the issue of whether cats should be let out. First, an analogy. A mother does not let her one-year old go outside unsupervised. The reason is simply that the child is not equipped for dealing with the world. Similarly, although cats may be admirably equipped for wild environments, they are not so well equipped for our modern cement jungles. Some may be able to survive in the modern world and others (perhaps less alert or intelligent) may not. Therefore, it becomes the cat owner's responsibility to weigh all relevant factors and come to a decision on behalf of the cat. The owner acts "in loco parentis" as it were. In my particular situation, the factors lead me to restrict my cats to the house and to SUPERVISED outside access. However, this doesn't mean that in a different situation the decision couldn't be different. In other words, I don't think it is always irresponsible to let cats out. On the other hand, in many situations it is irresponsible. As far as neutering and declawing are concerned, I haven't come to any conclusions yet. I'd welcome comments and will post my conclusions when available.
sdm@tellab3.UUCP (Steve Magerkurth) (05/23/84)
****A Biased oppinion follows****** I have a simple rule in my house, NO FURRED or FEATHERED ANIMALS! One has enough ties *worries* about wondering about the moralities of dealing with animals. . .Furred critters shed, shed hair finds its way into food, clothes and noses. . .Feathered critters pooh but I don't get the newspaper nor do I know how change a bird's diapers. . . If animals are a source of joy, fine, but if they replace *normal* human interaction--why not find a CAVE?
features@ihuxf.UUCP (M.A. Zeszutko) (05/24/84)
>If animals are a source of joy, fine, but if they replace >*normal* human interaction--why not find a CAVE? My argument is that having my animals keeps my capacity for having normal human interactions going, until such time as an SO comes along! At least, by having pets, I have to be concerned about something outside myself, and am consequently less self-centered than I might otherwise be. Mary Ann Zeszutko AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville p.s. Kaboodle, Prudence and Kit-Kit are indoor cats. And I'm sure that Kit-Kit is happier to have a home than he was when he was rummaging in our trash bins looking for food. (Unfortunately, before he came to live with me, he picked up a taste for junk food. That is certainly not the "natural cat"! How would you handle it?)