- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Like I said I have a shit ass phone and you can't believe everything you see and I'm not the only one that see's the true. Most humans don't want to share there stuff, so they came up with a reason like overpopulation so strays and wildlife don't enter fear with there human life negatively.
What the fuck I spent 7 years in 4H showing dogs and rabbits, and two years in Africa studying wild dogs. I have plenty of experience with animals. 10% is not a lot because like you said the several kittens would most likely would end up dead there first winter. Lots of strays fall back on there wild insects, being a stray wouldn't be as bad if the ASPCA didn't pick them up all the time.
So really spaying and neutering is not getting to a solution that would end, so maybe they should try something else. So what if domestication is unnatural they would still die of starvation.
Well obviously it does because you said vasectomies and plus it would be more realistically logical to believe that there has to be one different operation.
Tell me personally would you choose vasectomies for your pet or are to selfish to deal with there hormone levels.
How would there be a big increase if only the people that can deal with there hormone levels get the vasectomies. Specially when vasectomies would also bring the so called overpopulation down👎.
I didn't say that but that page you showed me said that. Cats can survive in the city because of back alleys, the lots of cats that survive there. There is more than 20 million children suffering in India, so like you said if people to animals as less than there should be much more help to feeding the starving children.
So what if there is a little bit more strays on the street. Should the many suffer for the few?
Also I'm not saying you have to choose the operation but I'm saying if you can deal with the hormone levels then please do, so your argument was not accurate to what I was saying, because it does not involve unwilling owners.
Yes it does, it means you don't have to spay and neuter because there is a different operation.
I'm advocating for people to deal with there hormone levels. I'm not saying spaying and neutering should be illegal but just saying that it is wrong for someone to do it, when they can choose a different operation and it is also wrong if they choose spaying and neutering just because they don't want to deal with there hormone levels.
Fine I will choose the vasectomies operation.
Yes you do for it to be fully accurate and even than somebody still can switch up the data results if they don't find what they like. I do have a reasonable argument but sorry to say but you and many others are corrupt in the mind to realize, what simple and realistic logic I'm giving you. What do you not get?
Yes, because that's a healthy death per birth %. Are you fine with children suffering.
Like you say, there's a slim chance of mating and them surviving the first winter and if what you say is true than how would there be a overpopulation if they can't even survive the first winter.
And like I said I don't give a shit what society thinks because what there doing is horribly wrong. Starvation is part of nature. Living a short dignify life is better than being a pet.
What the fuck, I don't have to give you the god dam name to the operation for there to be another solution. So what if I'm not specific that doesn't mean that there not a different solution.
What the hell do you think I've been advocating for on this topic.
I'm saying hey people stop with your selfishness and choose a different operation and deal with there hormone level.
Cats find shelter in abandoned house tree's and lots of other places and so would dogs, so it wouldn't even a few more pets get kicked out of the house. It would be more morally good if we choose a different operation.
Not all science is off of date but the most realistic out come or answer. You can't just do a little study on the population and except it to be accurate. Thing's like big study's is it cost too much and a full scale study will cost millions. It's hard to find pages and to link them on this phone.
I should do my own website and do more research and stuff that takes lots of time, I have somebody to take care of and a job.
Yes of course, and also 20 million pets die every year too, it doesn't matter if 20 million die because that is a healthy rate of death per birth.
How does it not make sense?
There's lots of activates groups that have different opinions and different date, you can't just you one little page. I'm sorry but you can't always believe what you see on the internet. You got to have experience. In person.
And that's why society is wrong, you do it to others but not your on kind what's wrong with are hearts.
You don't need to control breeding because nature will take care of its self.
Yes I did, its called getting a different operation.
No time has past because we could stop today, like I said and gave good reasons why there is no deer overpopulation its just us overpopulating this world that it became so dense that it seems to be a overpopulation of deer.
No there is a operation that will not effect the sex drive and will prevent pragnacy.
That is one page, plus it says cats live in human areas so it can't really effect bob cats and most other wild life and plus like people say there's to many raccoons, so cats do very little or just no effect to wild. Its nature that allows to species like cat and fox to live even if there is competition for food and if not evolution will take its effect.
I said humans do more damage to wild life than stray cats and dogs, so we should neuter are selves before cats. Plus if true cats do, do massive damage to wild life than that's are fault anyway.
Yes it well, there is no deer overpopulation just humans moving into there area and also if there was a little increases in there population, its most likely because someone said owe no there is a overpopulation of wolves or bob cat so guss what they start being hunted and than there well not be any wolves to take care of the deer. Nature will balance itself out but it can't if we keep moving onto there area.
Like I said there is no overpopulation and the explanation is the reasons I listed before that caused humans to come up with a reason, like overpopulation so they don't have to take responsibility for the selfishness and there cause of a little increase in cats and dogs population.
1000 years ago I bit there was more deer, wolves together than us but not now because there is to many of us.
I can't remember the name but its very close to what humans get to prevent a pragnacy permanently.