I don’t think the OP is coming back.
Well, I’ve just read this whole thing through. If the OP had mentioned sled dogs or work horses, mules, oxen, etc., he may have had an argument, I know my grandfather treated his work horses as pets when they weren’t working.
Personally, I don’t think the OP, well, never mind.
At the risk of invalidating the entirety of the SDMB (and really the internet), I have to ask, “and your point is?”
Is this directed at me?
I must say this has been a most entertaining thread.
You say that now, but wait until Tarantino comes out with an action packed moving about a down trodden rottweiler, rescued from a shelter by a red headed left handed Anabaptist bounty hunter…
“So, I get to kill humans AND get all the dog chow and bitches I want? What’s not to like??”…
I’ve read the first few pages but not the remaining so forgive me if I’ve repeated something but the OP doesn’t seem to have an accurate understanding of how “pet-hood” developed. From what I have read in the past (no cites, sorry) proto pet dogs (I recently saw a documentary that suggests that something wolf-like but more docile was the culprit) initially and voluntarily approached people. Substantially more recently something similar happened with cats, though the two different animals had different functions and relationships with us. I believe, for the most part, the relationships have been mutually beneficial.
My wife and I have had four cats, two of which we adopted from shelters and two of which were strays and, believe it or not came to us. And pocho, despite the reputation cats have for independence and aloofness, they are very affectionate.
People don’t own a pet cat, the pet cat owns the family,lol, also my parents corgi likes to herd family members along, she is definately no slave…
Nitpick:
Definition of SPECIE
: money in coin
— in specie
: in the same or like form or kind <ready to return insult in specie>; also : in coin
(Didn’t read the whole thread - apologies if someone has already mentioned this…)
I had similar thought’s to the OP’s initial query, which is what led me here. I read the entire thread and found that, overall, there was stronger arguments from the opposing view point. That being said, I feel that my queries and concerns were not well represented, and this is an attempt to attain some clarity on the matter.
I found an article that summarized most of my thought’s, see link below.
http://speciesism.wordpress.com/2007/05/04/domestication/
I have also copy/pasted the article on here for convenience. I look forward to hearing any comments or feedback on the post below. Thanks for your time.
I live in the Dominican Republic and there are a lot of free dogs in the streets. none of them live as well as their cousins who are owned by humans. I see these poor dogs with oozing sores that no one takes care of. They have no way of doing it themselves. Yes they need to be owned to improve their lives. They are incapable of thriving without being owned.
Not being speciesist would be unnatural. No other species on this planet considers all other species to be their equal.
I have a deal with my cat - I get to treat her like a “slave”, to quite literally own her as property, and she gets to not notice or care, as cats know nothing whatsoever about property rights or the inherent dignity of self-reliant freedom. Indeed, in spite of her status as a thing, as living property, she treats me as her “slave”. 
The notion that domestic pets could simply be released into the wild for their own good lacks an air of reality. There are 80 million dogs in the US and 90 million cats. Any attempt to repatriate them into the wild en mass would lead to disaster for both them and the environment, which really cannot support so many predators.
This is both totally irrelevant (whether something is “natural” or not has nothing to do with whether it is morally correct or not) and false. Dogs were domesticated tens of thousands of years ago, long before humans had advanced out of the stone age. It is absolutely natural for dogs to live with, hunt with, and be ‘owned’ by humans.
As for the rest of the argument, I strongly disagree. Animals should not be treated cruelly in any situation. But I see the moral question of keeping animals for companionship as similar to the moral question of raising children. Companion animals are like children that don’t grow up. They are mostly incapable of living on their own, and for those few that are capable of living in the wild, would live longer, happier, and healthier lives as companions to humans who loved them and treated them with love. As to a question of ‘rights’, I believe companion animals should have the same rights as young children – a right to be free from cruelty, to have one’s physical needs met, etc.
And who’s going to aid them in this return? The same ones who domesticated them.
And how the hell do you teach a dog to hunt?
I’m not sure making wild millions of animals that have no fear of humans and/or civilization is the smartest move in the world. In what areas will they be released?
Welcome to the SDMB!
FYI: You should note that copying and pasting whole articles violates copyright and Board rules. In the future copy snippets and link to the full article.
It is not unnatural at all. Or at least it does not have to be. As it happens cats domesticated themselves.
Think about this from Mother Nature’s standpoint. Different animals evolve to fill different niches and each has a strategy that helps guarantee the perpetuation of their species. In Mother Nature’s terms that is the whole game right there…continuation of the species. Animals that are poor at that (for one reason or another) go extinct.
From a domestic dog or cat’s point of view they have merely adopted a particular survival strategy have been hugely successful doing it. They traded “freedom” for consistent meals, health care, shelter and squeaky toys. I am pretty sure they are quite content with the bargain they made. There are many dogs and cats that roam free outside and could run away if they chose. For the most part they return home of their own volition.
I think this is the first time I’ve seen animal rights twaddle interbred with libertarian twaddle.
Let’s hope the hybrid doesn’t breed true.
I get what you mean when you say you are your cat’s slave, I see it first hand with friends and family. What troubled me though is that most people spray or neuter their pets, and I know the practical reasons for it, but something just doesn’t sit right with me about it, it could be me projecting human values onto a non-human, but i will try to express it best i can;
Humans breed these pets, we are somewhat in control of their population, we are indirectly affecting whether or not they are created, and after their creation we say they need us and we need them, and it’s a symbiotic relationship…but why not just stop creating them for our purpose? and having to neuter or spray them? if we didn’t create them, they wouldn’t need us…
Regarding your second paragraph; I see what you are saying, it’s not very realistic to release them into the wild, they are not fit for it, but what about preventing future breeding and creation of domesticated pet’s. Hypothetically speaking, if all owners continued to care and love their pets as they have, but the creation of new pets be controlled… assuming that’s what people agreed on, couldn’t this be a way of reducing that large number?
While some people treat their higher order pets as objects, some people treat children and spouses as objects. Society should reject this.
Interaction with humans is deep in the genes of dogs. I have a retired guide dog breeder, and she is different from other dogs in many ways as the result of a 60 year breeding program. There are other traits even deeper. She is a golden retriever, and during training she was not allowed to fetch. When she went into the breeder program, and so did not have to maintain behaviors she’d need as a guide, she knew immediately about fetching and retrieving with no training on our part.
It would take dozens of generations, if not more, to prepare dogs for the wild. And what wild would they go into? How disruptive would they be of the current ecosystem? How many existing species would you be willing to see go extinct because you introduced dogs? It would be better to just stop breeding them.
And saying you should not dominate your dog is just naive. Dominance behaviors are built into dogs, as one can see when seeing dogs interact. If you don’t dominate a dog the dog will dominate you (it happens all the time) and you wind up with an unhappy and badly behaving dog.