Humane Society says Petland stores tied to puppy mills

[Giselle]

You know, I've said it before and I'll say it again. The reason education about BYBs and puppy mills is so difficult to disseminate is because the discussion is essentially based on ethics.

Physically, there's really nothing wrong with breeding dogs. Financially, there's really nothing wrong with breeding dogs for money. But ethically, there is something corrupt about the ways people breed dogs for the sole purpose of money in today's society.

I'm glad the education is getting out there, but I hope it doesn't degenerate to: "Oh, we should avoid pet store puppies because they'll end up costing a lot at the vet". Yeahhhh...maybe...but that's just a side issue. And it's placing the emphasis on money again. It's working on Kohlberg's preconventional stage. You avoid a behavior that solicits punishment (avoiding pet store puppies to avoid big vet bills), when, ideally, one should avoid pet store puppies because the place of their origin is inherently unethical. The big issue is ethics! Alright. My rant is over.

[Medusa]

Well, to be clear, I mentioned the large vet bills only to demonstrate just how many health issues Charmin had. Whether or not she truly was a puppy mill dog, I don't know. But I see your point.

[Giselle]

Oh, I'm not accusing anybody of anything. I've just seen comments regarding the monetary disadvantage of buying pet store puppies and it has always irked me, so I just thought I'd clear that up now vs. later In the end, education is education. Hopefully, eventually, everybody will understand the issues at large =)

[Cataholic]

Giselle,
I think I see your point, somewhat. But, will you elaborate? I think it is an interesting distinction that you make.

I do think I disagree somewhat that this is just about money/ethics. I think it is morally reprehensible/inhumane/irresponsible to breed animals in the BYB or puppy mill situation, money aside. I think it is inhumane to lock an animal in a cage, and essentially breed the life out of it. I think at the heart of it all, I DO think it is wrong (general word) to 'make money' off of another living creature. I think this is different than making money off of an employee, in the employment context, as that human has rights/responsiblities/choices.

But, maybe I just don't see your point as clearly as I should.
Johanna

[Giselle]

I do think I disagree somewhat that this is just about money/ethics.

I never said it was as simple as money. But it definitely is about ethics. Btw, I'm using the word "ethics" in the same manner that you're using "moral", but I figure "ethics" is a less polarizing word to use

The point about caging breeding animals in puppy mills is part of breeding ethics. But the larger point I'm making is this: We have millions and millions and millions of companion quality animals being tossed around the rescue system. A large majority of those animals will never get adopted out. They will get killed. To add insult to injury, BYBs and puppy millers create puppies for the sole purpose of companionship. Thus, in today's vastly overpopulated society, one should only breed an animal to create more exemplary examples of that animal. In other words, if one were breeding a Doberman Pinscher, that Doberman Pinscher should fit the correct type, health, temperament, and possess adequate (preferably, strong) working ability. In other words, a breeder should only breed to "better" the breed. In essence, it'd be unethical to produce puppies for the sole purpose of companionship when there are millions of companion-quality puppies languishing in shelters. But BYB's and PM's totally disregard this, and this is the ethical dilemma I'm talking about.

So when people try to convince others not to buy pet store animals simply because those animals may harbor health issues/they may cost more with vet bills, it's sidestepping the larger issue. And it also opens up the door for a lot of anecdotal "Well, I bought my dog from a pet store and he's perfectly healthy" arguments. So THAT is my gripe.

[Cataholic]

And, now I see your distinction clearly. And, I could not agree more. Thanks for the extra information.

[Twisterdog]

You avoid a behavior that solicits punishment (avoiding pet store puppies to avoid big vet bills), when, ideally, one should avoid pet store puppies because the place of their origin is inherently unethical. The big issue is ethics! Alright. My rant is over.

Of course. In theory, we should ALL avoid all unethical things simply because they are such. However, in practice, Joe Public is often sadly lacking in ethical standards.

And it matters not to the dogs who are suffering and dying in cages whether Mr. Public decided to stop buying BYB puppies due to an ethical revolution, or simply a fear of getting hit in the pocketbook. In the end, the result for the dogs is the same.

If the drunk at the bar decides to call a cab instead of attempting to drive himself home because he fears getting an expensive DUI ticket, instead of the obviously ethical higher ground, does it matter to the family whos lives will be spared by his decision? No.

[Giselle]

Twisterdog, I understand your point, but my point was basically saying that we shouldn't let the underlying message deteriorate, as it often does. Fundamentally, our education regarding PM's and BYB's should emphasize the ethical implications of their rampant breeding rather than the financial burden it may or may not impose on the owner. I agree that Joe Public often needs tangible incentives to avoid pet store animals, but I'm just hoping that our education still aims to invoke the higher level reasoning that this issue needs It's that incomplete understanding vs. fuller understanding dilemma. Hopefully, the education that is getting out there is still aiming to instill a deeper, fuller understanding of the issue!

And, now, to quote Alexander Pope

A little learning is a dangerous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring.
There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely sobers us again.

[Twisterdog]

Twisterdog, I understand your point, but my point was basically saying that we shouldn't let the underlying message deteriorate, as it often does. Fundamentally, our education regarding PM's and BYB's should emphasize the ethical implications of their rampant breeding rather than the financial burden it may or may not impose on the owner. I agree that Joe Public often needs tangible incentives to avoid pet store animals, but I'm just hoping that our education still aims to invoke the higher level reasoning that this issue needs It's that incomplete understanding vs. fuller understanding dilemma. Hopefully, the education that is getting out there is still aiming to instill a deeper, fuller understanding of the issue!

Agreed. I think the HSUS article did a good job of exposing the compromised ethics.

And, of course, I think the answer to the PR side of this, and any, problem is a two-pronged approach: Expose the ethical violations in detail, so that those of us who are concerned with such things will know and make the appropriate choice; and also expose the more basic, everyday, Joe Q. Public problems, such as money, for the folks who just aren't into soul searching. Covers all the bases.