Debate trial run. "Pet ownership should be made illegal"
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-12-2012, 09:18 PM (This post was last modified: 27-12-2012 10:03 PM by PoolBoyG.)
Lightbulb Debate trial run. "Pet ownership should be made illegal"
I'd like have threads that put out a proposition, and users will debate it, but make an effort to give the best possible argument they can that conflicts with their real world views. Why?
1. It allows users to explore all the potential arguments that they may come up against.
2. It may allows users to sympathize with others they disagree with.
3. It may hone their own debating skills.
4. It may give an excuse for people with particularly despicable beliefs to debate for things that they may not necessarily have had an opportunity to explore. They can explore fully what they think and why.



The topic for this trial run is "Should owning a pet be made illegal?". Users should take a side and give their best possible answer for why or why not.

I was inspired by a caller on the Howard Stern show, who would kill neighbourhood pets to console the children of those pets, in their time of grief. His argument was that he was envious of those pets, and that those children should be loving him instead of their pets. He was definitely giving off a pedo vibe. He also threw something in about god and religion. But ugh.. try to come up with something better.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-12-2012, 09:24 PM
RE: Debate trail run. "Pet ownership should be made illegal"
(27-12-2012 09:18 PM)poolboyg88 Wrote:  I'd like have threads that put out a proposition, and users will debate it, but make an effort to give the best possible argument they can that conflicts with their real world views. Why?
1. It allows users to explore all the potential arguments that they may come up against.
2. It may allows users to sympathize with others they disagree with.
3. It may hone their own debating skills.
4. It may give an excuse for people with particularly despicable beliefs to debate for things that they may not necessarily have had an opportunity to. They can explore fully what they think and why.



The topic for this trail run is "Should owning a pet be made illegal?". Users should take a side and give their best possible answer for why or why not.

I was inspired by a caller on the Howard Stern show, who would kill neighbourhood pets to console the children of those pets, in their time of grief. His argument was that he was envious of those pets, and that those children should be loving him instead of their pets. He also threw something in about god and religion. But ugh.. try to come up with something better.

No, it cannot be made illegal if we are to be humane.

There currently are millions of pets - what would happen to them were it made illegal? Most of these animals are incapable of surviving without human care.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-12-2012, 09:24 PM
RE: Debate trail run. "Pet ownership should be made illegal"
Pets are essentially mindless sacks of meat, that people waste time, money, and affection on.
1. These animals are being forced to exist (breeding), and forced into artificial environments to serve their masters needs (mostly emotional). Their entire existing, and lives are just as playthings and emotional outlets for people. They're living dolls.
2. The time, money, and affection should be spent on real people - people who need it, and people who are able to appreciate it, and reciprocate. The pet owner and society at large would be better off if they didn't have pets and were forced to interact with real people.

*Note. I'm going to feel real awkward if this debate template takes off, and we graduate to something like racial debates >_>
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes PoolBoyG's post
27-12-2012, 09:26 PM
RE: Debate trail run. "Pet ownership should be made illegal"
(27-12-2012 09:24 PM)poolboyg88 Wrote:  Pets are essentially mindless sacks of meat, that people waste time, money, and affection on.
1. These animals are being forced to exist (breeding), and forced into artificial environments to serve their masters needs (mostly emotional). Their entire existing, and lives are just as playthings and emotional outlets for people. They're living dolls.
2. The time, money, and affection should be spent on real people - people who need it, and people who are able to appreciate it, and reciprocate. The pet owner and society at large would be better off if they didn't have pets and were forced to interact with real people.

*Note. I'm going to feel real awkward if this debate template takes off, and we graduate to something like racial debates >_>



You are or are not including working dogs?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-12-2012, 09:29 PM
RE: Debate trail run. "Pet ownership should be made illegal"
(27-12-2012 09:24 PM)Chas Wrote:  There currently are millions of pets - what would happen to them were it made illegal? Most of these animals are incapable of surviving without human care.
Mass euthanasia. As stated, they shouldn't have been forced to exists, as living toys, in the first place. Let the owners pay out of pocket for it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-12-2012, 09:31 PM
RE: Debate trail run. "Pet ownership should be made illegal"
(27-12-2012 09:26 PM)Chas Wrote:  You are or are not including working dogs?
Beasts of burden are not pets. They're essentially living machinery. They don't fall into this debate.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-12-2012, 09:32 PM
RE: Debate trail run. "Pet ownership should be made illegal"
(27-12-2012 09:29 PM)poolboyg88 Wrote:  
(27-12-2012 09:24 PM)Chas Wrote:  There currently are millions of pets - what would happen to them were it made illegal? Most of these animals are incapable of surviving without human care.
Mass euthanasia. As stated, they shouldn't have been forced to exists, as living toys, in the first place. Let the owners pay out of pocket, for it.
You just lost.

There is no way that could ever come about honestly.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-12-2012, 09:33 PM
RE: Debate trail run. "Pet ownership should be made illegal"
Did you, by chance, mean "trial run"?

No, it shouldn't be illegal.

I give my three pets a good home. They likely would not have existed, ever, if we had never domesticated dogs and cats. If they did exist, in a slightly less domesticated version, their life in the wild would be one of constant discomfort, hunger, and fear.

My pets are sheltered, well-fed, and they are loved and they love my family back. Is it love? I think so; they sure are affectionate.

I would never support any laws that get in the way of living and loving. We already have too many of those laws, and this suggestion is unnecessarily ludicrous.

They are not dolls and it's certainly my choice how and on what I spend my money.

"Whores perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly." - Robert A. Heinlein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Aseptic Skeptic's post
27-12-2012, 09:34 PM
RE: Debate trail run. "Pet ownership should be made illegal"
(27-12-2012 09:29 PM)poolboyg88 Wrote:  
(27-12-2012 09:24 PM)Chas Wrote:  There currently are millions of pets - what would happen to them were it made illegal? Most of these animals are incapable of surviving without human care.
Mass euthanasia. As stated, they shouldn't have been forced to exists, as living toys, in the first place. Let the owners pay out of pocket for it.
Now I figure you're either joking or just playing devil's advodate - either way, that's just nonsense.

"Whores perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly." - Robert A. Heinlein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-12-2012, 09:35 PM
RE: Debate trail run. "Pet ownership should be made illegal"
(27-12-2012 09:32 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(27-12-2012 09:29 PM)poolboyg88 Wrote:  Mass euthanasia. As stated, they shouldn't have been forced to exists, as living toys, in the first place. Let the owners pay out of pocket, for it.
You just lost.

There is no way that could ever come about honestly.
I wouldn't expect drug addicts to give up their drugs either. It'll be messy, but beneficial. For people (and animal, not forced to exist and live as toys for others). People can spend their time, money, and emotion on real people.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: