Let’s say the CDC discovers that for whatever reason that cats and dogs have the ability to contract the ebola virus via airborne delivery and pass it along to humans via fluids transmission. And when the animals contract it they are just carriers and show no symptoms. As a precaution, the CDC is requesting that all pets be euthanized to significantly reduce the transmission of ebola to other humans.
Would you bring your cats and/or dogs in to be killed?
A tough one. I lean towards “I would not”, but then you know there’s those days when the dog has an accident on the bed, or the cats just won’t shut up…
Seriously, I think I’d try to keep my animals. The kids might have to go live somewhere else.
First, it would have to be an epidemic, not the current circumstances. Then, not without evidence that a) the animal in question can be infected with Ebola, b) my animal had been exposed, and c) that quarantining the animals was not effective in preventing transmission.
I would really, really want to know that my pet was infected as opposed to exposed, but I understand that in an epidemic, we temporarily give up rights in order to preserve lives. I would surrender my cats to be euthanized, and it would break my heart, though. I would suffer because of it.
No. If it were shown that my dog was actually a carrier of the virus then yes, of course I’d have him put down to stop the spread. But some pet somewhere might spread a virus so let’s put them all down - absolutely no. Ask me again when there are more than a handful of cases.
Since our cats never leave the house, hell no. No way for them to have caught it, nobody for them to give it to but us.
You’re talking about trying to exterminate two whole species, here.
This is where the hypothetical breaks down. There would have to be some really strong evidence that there is a reasonable and realistic chance that silenus’s indoor housecats could contract ebola.
If it was conclusively demonstrated that this would be necessary to prevent or seriously impede an true ebola epidemic, then yes, I would go ahead and do it.
Yes, of course, given the scenario laid out.
Yes, although it would break my heart. 
But I’d have to be really, really convinced that my three dogs and two cats were carriers. I certainly wouldn’t march them off to be killed on the first directive.
All pets? As a precaution? Oh, hell no. The hypothetical CDC is nuts. The human race derives enormous benefit from having dogs and cats around.
Unless the human race is threatened with something like extinction. But then, I hate these Sadistic Choice hypotheticals where we’re forced to choose between two horrible alternatives.
Sure, if I was absolutely convinced they could carry Ebola. Fluffy would have to be put down. It would break my heart but what alternative would there be?
Britain killed many of their pets at the beginning of WWII. They were concerned they’d be aggressive and dangerous in the Air Raid shelters.
You win the thread.
I’m gonna say no way on this one. (Though as the owner of a snake and some fish, I’m not directly affected).
There are far too many wild and feral animals to make killing the household ones a reasonable precaution, and its the wild and feral populations that would represent the biggest reservoir of the disease, given their wide travel range, opportunistic diets and lack of medical care. Seriously, it’s like throwing out the baby and *keeping *the bathwater.
Furthermore, a disease that spreads that easily is not going to be stopped by any order like this. If it gets that point, we’re toast. Sorry, guys. Go buy a copy of the The Stand and count down the hours.
This.
I can’t have pets euthanized unless there’s reasonable cause.
Read the OP real quick. Just came back from taking care of the cat. The dogs I’ll have to think about.
No way. We live out in the country and it’s easy for me to keep my dogs and cats from having any contact with other pets. I would be diligent in that quarantine, but they’re not getting killed unless they have been shown to be actual carriers.
No. My two cats are indoors only; my partner’s two dogs are never allowed to go out without leashes. So who are they going to infect? We can take precautions to protect ourselves, and that’s the extent of our responsibility. And if we become infected, and it’s fatal, the six of us will all go together . . . humanely.
Our animals play a big part in what makes life worth living. We will give them up - along with our own lives - when we are convinced that they are endangering other humans. And not a moment sooner.
Yes.
If they can catch it from breathing, then absolutely yes.
No. If they came to take my kitty away, I’d try to hide her. If that failed, I’d try to set her free. If *that *failed and they took her and killed her, then they’re the guilty ones and my conscience is clean (if very sad).
Sure. But only after all the free range mammals were killed. I mean, if inside only cats could transmit it…what about the mice and rats running around? And what about the feral cats? (black death anyone?) Rats, mice and cats are common test subjects for testing things designed for humans.
What about all those horses running around? Oh, and cows and pigs. Forget about bacon cheeseburgers after the kill off.
So, yeah…you can have my cats and dogs after you kill everything else.
Yep. Then again I lived in China during SARS.