I'm not trying to be rude, just trying to clarify what you are suggesting. You think people should stop rescuing strays, spay/neuter the pets already owned, and then euthanize shelter animals? If this is the way you think it should be (and excuse me if I messed that up), how can you then say "How is one animal in need of a home any better than another?" What is the problem with rescuing strays? Or giving the shelter dogs a second chance rather than euthanizing them? How can you say in one sentence, why bring another one home, we have plenty...and then in another say no dog's life is greater than another? What makes that shelter dog, or rescue dog, or whatever, any more worthy of saving than Charlie? Because they're already here? That dog has obviously made it into many of the men's hearts, who are we to say they are wrong for wanting to save it? If they can get the funds together, more power to them.
I agree that the CL zealots are idiots though. And I apologize if I misinterpreted any of your post. Just trying to wrap my head around that correctly.