feeding house mice

[patientz3ro]

I have much to respond to!

- Peta does agree to the keeping of pets, just against the ways they are kept! We also don't like & are against breeders & exploiting animals! We believe if you need to have a pet, to save / rescue it instead of buying them from a breeder or pet stores. These places have been more focused on the financial profit rather than the care of the animal & their ethical treatment! Though we wish in a perfect world all animals can be free & roam like all creatures, humans as well, but that is something that we know is fairly impossible & know might never happen. So in knowing this we are trying to better the lives & rights of the animals! I would copy & paste a quote or two but my experience from other forums, I think that is against regulations & is a cause for banning.

There is SO much wrong with this, it's almost difficult to know where to start. First of all, at what point did the animals get together and decide that Peta was the ultimate authority on what the "correct" way to keep a pet was?

You don't like, and are against breeders and exploiting animals... Without those evil breeders, animals like our beloved Ball Pythons are collected from the wild, depleting natural populations. The Hog Island Boa is a perfect example. There's a very good possibility they're extinct in the wild. Their numbers were already low, and since they weren't widely recognized as a separate species, or even a distinct subspecies, there were no checks in place to reduce the capture of wild specimens for the pet trade. NOW, it's the evil breeders keeping those animals from vanishing. I'd hardly accuse those breeders of "exploiting" their animals. You know what I DO consider exploitation? Filming and photographing the mistreatment of animals so that those images can be used to generate more income for an organization who uses that money to buy magazine ads, billboards, and television commercials while operating animal shelters that routinely uses euthanasia to deal with,

"animals who are unwanted for one reason or another: because they are aggressive, sick, hurt, elderly, or at death's door and because no good homes exist for them."

I have no problem with Peta humanely euthanizing an animal in order to end the suffering of a dying or incurable animal, but killing aggressive, elderly, hurt, and sick animals because no "good" homes exist for them is simply disgusting to me. If there are no "good" homes, take some of the money used to fund those ad campaigns, and use it to provide care for those animals that Peta has taken responsibility for. For now, Peta would rather spend those dollars putting naked supermodels on billboards.

For the record, Peta most definitely IS against the keeping of pets, and they're more than happy to say so on their website. They openly say that it would be in the best interest of the animals if "pet keeping" never existed, and that it's a "selfish desire to possess animals and receive love from them". But let's get back to what you said. You say you're not against the keeping of pets, and then you go on to say that "...we wish in a perfect world all animals can be free & roam like all creatures, humans as well, but that is something that we know is fairly impossible & know might never happen." Maybe you're missing the contradiction in those statements, but let me point it out to you. You can either agree with the keeping of pets, or you can want all animals to be free and roam. If your idea of a "perfect world" is all animals being free to roam, that's the exact opposite of keeping pets. While I'm on the subject, I'm not a big fan of the term "pets". I prefer "companion animals," and for the record, mankind and his companion animals have had a mutually beneficial relationship since the beginning of recorded history. While I can't back my theory up with science at the moment, I believe that relationship can probably be traced back to the point when the first canids discovered they could make an easy meal of the scraps early hominids threw outside of their caves. That's why your "perfect world" is never going to happen. I, for one, am very glad it won't. If she could communicate, I feel confident my baby Ajja would tell you the same. She'll never have to face a predator, go without food and fresh water, warmth, shelter, or protection, and she will have the absolute best medical care available. What do you think the chances are that she'd have those same certainties in the wild? If you're going to share your life with a companion animal, it's time to disavow that stated goal of a perfect world where all animals roam free. To do otherwise is nothing less than hypocrisy.

For what it's worth, I applaud you for doing some research on caring for your new animal, and I hope you have a long and rewarding relationship with Fluffy.