Is it wrong to want another purebred? [Archive]

Ashley

March 27th 05, 04:23 AM

"Brian Link" > wrote in message
...
> Going through old photos today, and came across a directory filled
> with pics from when we were thinking about buying a Bengal (which we
> did, and he's wonderful). Most are from this site:
> http://www.tibcs.com/petcorner/photos.php
>
> After having been through an ordeal with a stray, and knowing the
> incredible number of discarded cats available for adoption, is it
> morally wrong to think of adopting another purebred?
>

No. You'll be adopting a cat that's alive, whether it's purebred or moggie.
It will need a home, you'll give it one, simple, really.

> We've adopted six strays over the last ten years. We bought our Bengal
> primarily because we wanted a cat whose personality could be
> determined before hand, so it would keep our playful, energetic Tiger
> company. This was a specific case that's worked out fantastically..
> http://www.discant.com/Cat/Henry%20001.jpg
>
> But I really love this breed - and if we can get ahold of a kitten,
> there's a better chance that Louis won't go nuts.
>
> Just a thought. Breeders will continue to breed no matter what we do,
> and poor strays will get euthanized no matter what we do. But is this
> just rationalizing?
>

No. Do what you want - it's your life, not the life of those who rant
against purebreds. When I next get a cat it will be an oriental shorthair,
and I have not even the slightest feeling there is anything wrong in my
wanting that and acting upon that want.

Cathy Friedmann

March 27th 05, 04:25 AM

"Brian Link" > wrote in message
...
> Going through old photos today, and came across a directory filled
> with pics from when we were thinking about buying a Bengal (which we
> did, and he's wonderful). Most are from this site:
> http://www.tibcs.com/petcorner/photos.php
>
> After having been through an ordeal with a stray, and knowing the
> incredible number of discarded cats available for adoption, is it
> morally wrong to think of adopting another purebred?
>
> We've adopted six strays over the last ten years. We bought our Bengal
> primarily because we wanted a cat whose personality could be
> determined before hand, so it would keep our playful, energetic Tiger
> company. This was a specific case that's worked out fantastically..
> http://www.discant.com/Cat/Henry%20001.jpg
>
> But I really love this breed - and if we can get ahold of a kitten,
> there's a better chance that Louis won't go nuts.
>
> Just a thought. Breeders will continue to breed no matter what we do,
> and poor strays will get euthanized no matter what we do. But is this
> just rationalizing?
>
> Eh.. I'm not totally driven to take in another cat, but I keep
> wondering what Louis will do when Tiger finally dies.. it would be so
> nice for him to have another friend around. Also I'd be happy to hear
> others' thoughts about adopting from a shelter vs adopting a purebred.
>
> BLink

Considering the number of strays you've adopted, I wouldn't (personally)
over-worry about also wanting a particular breed. But that's just my
opinion - a moderate/middle-of-the-road one.

Cathy

Monique Y. Mudama

March 27th 05, 04:39 AM

On 2005-03-27, Brian Link penned:
> Going through old photos today, and came across a directory filled with pics
> from when we were thinking about buying a Bengal (which we did, and he's
> wonderful). Most are from this site:
> http://www.tibcs.com/petcorner/photos.php
>
> After having been through an ordeal with a stray, and knowing the incredible
> number of discarded cats available for adoption, is it morally wrong to
> think of adopting another purebred?
>
> We've adopted six strays over the last ten years. We bought our Bengal
> primarily because we wanted a cat whose personality could be determined
> before hand, so it would keep our playful, energetic Tiger company. This was
> a specific case that's worked out fantastically..
> http://www.discant.com/Cat/Henry%20001.jpg
>
> But I really love this breed - and if we can get ahold of a kitten, there's
> a better chance that Louis won't go nuts.
>
> Just a thought. Breeders will continue to breed no matter what we do, and
> poor strays will get euthanized no matter what we do. But is this just
> rationalizing?
>
> Eh.. I'm not totally driven to take in another cat, but I keep wondering
> what Louis will do when Tiger finally dies.. it would be so nice for him to
> have another friend around. Also I'd be happy to hear others' thoughts about
> adopting from a shelter vs adopting a purebred.
>
> BLink

You're asking a tough question here. For me, cats are cats regardless of
breed, so I have to put the question to myself in terms of dogs, where
variations are more significant to me. There are most certainly breeds of
dogs that I like much better than others.

I believe in the principle of generalization (kind of like the golden rule):
this is one way that Kant proposed to evaluate whether or not something is
moral. You simply pose yourself the question, if everyone were to do what I
am considering, would I find the world to be a better or a worse place?

It's a toughie. If no one bought cats and dogs from breeders, then breeders
would go out of business, and there would just be moggies. But is this
ultimately my better world? I mean, right now, it's easy enough to find a
black lab mix at the shelter, but if no one were breeding them, would they
still be around? Then again, with all the hip problems to which retrievers
are prone, might it not be better to give up the breed entirely rather than
allow these diseases to continue?

My decision is to avoid buying an animal from a breeder. If I really wanted a
purebred (I personally don't, though, because in my experience mutts and
moggies tend to be healthier), I would go through a rescue organization.

--
monique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully

pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca

-L.

March 27th 05, 06:24 AM

Brian Link wrote:
> Going through old photos today, and came across a directory filled
> with pics from when we were thinking about buying a Bengal (which we
> did, and he's wonderful). Most are from this site:
> http://www.tibcs.com/petcorner/photos.php
>
> After having been through an ordeal with a stray, and knowing the
> incredible number of discarded cats available for adoption, is it
> morally wrong to think of adopting another purebred?

Did you adopt your Bengal or buy him? There's a big difference, you
know. If you want a purebred, get one from a shelter or from a breed
rescue group.

>
> We've adopted six strays over the last ten years. We bought our
Bengal
> primarily because we wanted a cat whose personality could be
> determined before hand, so it would keep our playful, energetic Tiger
> company. This was a specific case that's worked out fantastically..
> http://www.discant.com/Cat/Henry%20001.jpg
>
> But I really love this breed - and if we can get ahold of a kitten,
> there's a better chance that Louis won't go nuts.
>
> Just a thought. Breeders will continue to breed no matter what we do,
> and poor strays will get euthanized no matter what we do. But is this
> just rationalizing?

Yes. if you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem.

>
> Eh.. I'm not totally driven to take in another cat, but I keep
> wondering what Louis will do when Tiger finally dies.. it would be so
> nice for him to have another friend around. Also I'd be happy to hear
> others' thoughts about adopting from a shelter vs adopting a
purebred.

I think what you are asking is about *buying* a purebred. Why support
the breeding of more cats when thousands die daily for lack of homes?

-L.

Karen

March 27th 05, 06:31 AM

I just don't think you have any guarantee about getting along just because
it's a purebred.

[email protected]

March 27th 05, 06:51 AM

Ashley wrote:
> "Brian Link" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Going through old photos today, and came across a directory filled
> > with pics from when we were thinking about buying a Bengal (which
we
> > did, and he's wonderful). Most are from this site:
> > http://www.tibcs.com/petcorner/photos.php
> >
> > After having been through an ordeal with a stray, and knowing the
> > incredible number of discarded cats available for adoption, is it
> > morally wrong to think of adopting another purebred?
> >
>
> No. You'll be adopting a cat that's alive, whether it's purebred or
moggie.
> It will need a home, you'll give it one, simple, really.

Not exactly. He will be *buying* a purebred kitten who doesn't exactly
"need a a home"--Bengal breeders probably have waiting lists, and the
kitten will get a home irregardless. A shelter cat doesn't have that
guarantee.

MaryL

March 27th 05, 06:57 AM

"Brian Link" > wrote in message
...
> Going through old photos today, and came across a directory filled
> with pics from when we were thinking about buying a Bengal (which we
> did, and he's wonderful). Most are from this site:
> http://www.tibcs.com/petcorner/photos.php
>
> After having been through an ordeal with a stray, and knowing the
> incredible number of discarded cats available for adoption, is it
> morally wrong to think of adopting another purebred?
>
>
> BLink

Please don't even consider this. First, don't buy from a breeder because
there are untold numbers of cats already available from shelters and rescue
groups -- and an unbelievably large number are destined to be euthanized.
If you do decide on a purebred, please look at a shelter (where there often
are both purebreds and "look-alikes" available) or contact one of the rescue
groups that rehome abandoned and abused purebreds. Second, I hope you won't
adopt *any* cat at this time. You have just gone through a difficult time
with Henry, and it would be simply asking for trouble to bring another cat
into your home at this early date.

MaryL

[email protected]

March 27th 05, 07:03 AM

Ashley

March 27th 05, 07:42 AM

> wrote in message
oups.com...

> Not exactly. He will be *buying* a purebred kitten who doesn't exactly
> "need a a home"--Bengal breeders probably have waiting lists, and the
> kitten will get a home irregardless.

Kitten still needs a home. If Brian takes it, someone else who might have
taken it might take a shelter cat. But then again, we could go "if" forever.

Brian should do what Brian wants to do. I have no problem at all with people
deciding they would like a certain breed of cat, and getting it. That's
their right.

-L.

March 27th 05, 08:12 AM

Ashley wrote:
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>
>
> > Not exactly. He will be *buying* a purebred kitten who doesn't
exactly
> > "need a a home"--Bengal breeders probably have waiting lists, and
the
> > kitten will get a home irregardless.
>
> Kitten still needs a home. If Brian takes it, someone else who might
have
> taken it might take a shelter cat. But then again, we could go "if"
forever.
>
> Brian should do what Brian wants to do. I have no problem at all with
people
> deciding they would like a certain breed of cat, and getting it.
That's
> their right.

Sure it's their "right". It's also their right not to spay or neuter;
to dump animals at a shelter; to declaw, dock or crop; to leave dogs in
the back yard chained to a tree all day, every day; and a myriad of
other behaviors not in the best interest of animals, as a whole.
Having the "right" doesn't make it "right" to do so.

-L.

Mary

March 27th 05, 08:20 AM

Mary

March 27th 05, 08:27 AM

"Monique Y. Mudama" > wrote :
>
> You're asking a tough question here. For me, cats are cats regardless of
> breed, so I have to put the question to myself in terms of dogs, where
> variations are more significant to me. There are most certainly breeds of
> dogs that I like much better than others.
>
> I believe in the principle of generalization (kind of like the golden
rule):
> this is one way that Kant proposed to evaluate whether or not something is
> moral. You simply pose yourself the question, if everyone were to do what
I
> am considering, would I find the world to be a better or a worse place?
>

Mo, surely you know that Kant's ethical proofs are entirely full of ****.
His metaphysics are more defensible IMO. But most people think they
are too. The principle of generalization is along the line of Aristotle's
Doctrine of the Mean. Okay in a survey course but entirely indefensible
in terms of proofs. Did you have these things as part of logic courses
or Intro philosophy?

Mary

March 27th 05, 08:39 AM

"MaryL" -OUT-THE-LITTER> wrote in message
news:qXr1e.49571$3z.44417@okepread03...
>
> "Brian Link" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Going through old photos today, and came across a directory filled
> > with pics from when we were thinking about buying a Bengal (which we
> > did, and he's wonderful). Most are from this site:
> > http://www.tibcs.com/petcorner/photos.php
> >
> > After having been through an ordeal with a stray, and knowing the
> > incredible number of discarded cats available for adoption, is it
> > morally wrong to think of adopting another purebred?
> >
> >
> > BLink
>
> Please don't even consider this. First, don't buy from a breeder because
> there are untold numbers of cats already available from shelters and
rescue
> groups -- and an unbelievably large number are destined to be euthanized.
> If you do decide on a purebred, please look at a shelter (where there
often
> are both purebreds and "look-alikes" available) or contact one of the
rescue
> groups that rehome abandoned and abused purebreds. Second, I hope you
won't
> adopt *any* cat at this time. You have just gone through a difficult time
> with Henry, and it would be simply asking for trouble to bring another cat
> into your home at this early date.
>
> MaryL
>
>

Oh, nonsense, MaryL! You must have some sort of personal problem
to even suggest this. You have a problem with Megan, right? You
must have. It simply cannot be that Brian is a ****ing idiot for even
considering this after he "had to" give Henry up for the peace of his
other cats. Please, try to get hold of yourself. Brian will do what
Brian wants to do, after all.

Ashley

March 27th 05, 10:00 AM

"-L." > wrote in message
oups.com...

> Sure it's their "right". It's also their right not to spay or neuter;
> to dump animals at a shelter; to declaw, dock or crop; to leave dogs in
> the back yard chained to a tree all day, every day; and a myriad of
> other behaviors not in the best interest of animals, as a whole.
> Having the "right" doesn't make it "right" to do so.

He's talking about caring for a cat, not harming one. Get a grip.

MaryL

March 27th 05, 10:13 AM

"Mary" > wrote in message
...
>
> "MaryL" -OUT-THE-LITTER> wrote in message
> news:qXr1e.49571$3z.44417@okepread03...
>>
>> "Brian Link" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > Going through old photos today, and came across a directory filled
>> > with pics from when we were thinking about buying a Bengal (which we
>> > did, and he's wonderful). Most are from this site:
>> > http://www.tibcs.com/petcorner/photos.php
>> >
>> > After having been through an ordeal with a stray, and knowing the
>> > incredible number of discarded cats available for adoption, is it
>> > morally wrong to think of adopting another purebred?
>> >
>> >
>> > BLink
>>
>> Please don't even consider this. First, don't buy from a breeder because
>> there are untold numbers of cats already available from shelters and
> rescue
>> groups -- and an unbelievably large number are destined to be euthanized.
>> If you do decide on a purebred, please look at a shelter (where there
> often
>> are both purebreds and "look-alikes" available) or contact one of the
> rescue
>> groups that rehome abandoned and abused purebreds. Second, I hope you
> won't
>> adopt *any* cat at this time. You have just gone through a difficult
>> time
>> with Henry, and it would be simply asking for trouble to bring another
>> cat
>> into your home at this early date.
>>
>> MaryL
>>
>>
>
> Oh, nonsense, MaryL! You must have some sort of personal problem
> to even suggest this. You have a problem with Megan, right? You
> must have. It simply cannot be that Brian is a ****ing idiot for even
> considering this after he "had to" give Henry up for the peace of his
> other cats. Please, try to get hold of yourself. Brian will do what
> Brian wants to do, after all.
>
>

LOL!

-L.

March 27th 05, 10:58 AM

Ashley wrote:
> "-L." > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>
> > Sure it's their "right". It's also their right not to spay or
neuter;
> > to dump animals at a shelter; to declaw, dock or crop; to leave
dogs in
> > the back yard chained to a tree all day, every day; and a myriad of
> > other behaviors not in the best interest of animals, as a whole.
> > Having the "right" doesn't make it "right" to do so.
>
>
> He's talking about caring for a cat, not harming one. Get a grip.

Every cat bread means another dies. If you think that's not
"harming" cats, I don't really have anything else to say.

-L.

Phil P.

March 27th 05, 01:21 PM

"Brian Link" > wrote in message
...

Also I'd be happy to hear
> others' thoughts about adopting from a shelter vs adopting a purebred.

As long as you adopt the cat from a kill shelter - it doesn't matter because
you'll be saving a life and providing a companion for Tiger. If you plan to
buy a 'purebred', first, you might want to take a stroll down death row of
your local kill shelter and then see how those forsaken faces make you feel
about buying a cat from a breeder who probably has a waiting list of buyers
and can't churn out cats fast enough.

Why do you ask? Does something not seem right about buying a cat from a
breeder while millions of cats are killed every year because of the lack of
homes?

Phil P.

March 27th 05, 01:24 PM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "-L." > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>
> > Sure it's their "right". It's also their right not to spay or neuter;
> > to dump animals at a shelter; to declaw, dock or crop; to leave dogs in
> > the back yard chained to a tree all day, every day; and a myriad of
> > other behaviors not in the best interest of animals, as a whole.
> > Having the "right" doesn't make it "right" to do so.
>
>
> He's talking about caring for a cat, not harming one. Get a grip.

He's harming the cat he could have adopted. Get a conscience and some
compassion.

>
>

Phil P.

March 27th 05, 01:29 PM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
When I next get a cat it will be an oriental shorthair,
> and I have not even the slightest feeling there is anything wrong in my
> wanting that and acting upon that want.

That's because self-gratification is more important to you than the welfare
of the feline *species*.

Joe Canuck

March 27th 05, 05:00 PM

Phil P. wrote:

> "Brian Link" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> Also I'd be happy to hear
>
>>others' thoughts about adopting from a shelter vs adopting a purebred.
>
>
>
> As long as you adopt the cat from a kill shelter - it doesn't matter because
> you'll be saving a life and providing a companion for Tiger. If you plan to
> buy a 'purebred', first, you might want to take a stroll down death row of
> your local kill shelter and then see how those forsaken faces make you feel
> about buying a cat from a breeder who probably has a waiting list of buyers
> and can't churn out cats fast enough.
>
> Why do you ask? Does something not seem right about buying a cat from a
> breeder while millions of cats are killed every year because of the lack of
> homes?
>
>

Perhaps we should apply this same line of thought with human beings...

There are thousands if not millions of kids around the world without
parents. Perhaps one should adopt a kid first rather than see other kids
go through the early years without the support and benefit of parents.

Once *all* the parentless kids have been adopted, only then should
couples consider having their own kids.

KellyH

March 27th 05, 05:08 PM

"Joe Canuck" > wrote
> Perhaps we should apply this same line of thought with human beings...
>
> There are thousands if not millions of kids around the world without
> parents. Perhaps one should adopt a kid first rather than see other kids
> go through the early years without the support and benefit of parents.
>
> Once *all* the parentless kids have been adopted, only then should couples
> consider having their own kids.

BTDT with this argument. Not the same.

--
-Kelly
kelly at farringtons dot net
"Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG

Joe Canuck

March 27th 05, 05:35 PM

KellyH wrote:

> "Joe Canuck" > wrote
>
>>Perhaps we should apply this same line of thought with human beings...
>>
>>There are thousands if not millions of kids around the world without
>>parents. Perhaps one should adopt a kid first rather than see other kids
>>go through the early years without the support and benefit of parents.
>>
>>Once *all* the parentless kids have been adopted, only then should couples
>>consider having their own kids.
>
>
> BTDT with this argument. Not the same.
>

Well, I think it is the same thing... just difference species. ;)

Why bring more kids into the world when there are already plenty who may
be wondering where there next meal is coming from?

Anyways, this is getting way off-topic.

-L.

March 27th 05, 05:43 PM

Joe Canuck wrote:
>
> Perhaps we should apply this same line of thought with human
beings...
>
> There are thousands if not millions of kids around the world without
> parents. Perhaps one should adopt a kid first rather than see other
kids
> go through the early years without the support and benefit of
parents.

I agree whole-heartedly. Especially since non-renewable resources and
our ability to deal with output are dwindling.

>
> Once *all* the parentless kids have been adopted, only then should
> couples consider having their own kids.

I don't have any problem what-so-ever with that sentiment.

-L.

-L.

March 27th 05, 05:48 PM

Joe Canuck wrote:
>
> Well, I think it is the same thing... just difference species. ;)
>
> Why bring more kids into the world when there are already plenty who
may
> be wondering where there next meal is coming from?

I have asked myself that question for years. For some people, genetics
is important. For others, it's not. I don't really understand the
former. But I also think most people mindlessly breed without even
considering why - not to mention not ever considering adoption. That's
sad because adoption is one of the most beautiful, life-enriching
things one can do as a human being.

-L.

Monique Y. Mudama

March 27th 05, 05:58 PM

On 2005-03-27, Mary penned:
>
> "Monique Y. Mudama" > wrote :
>>
>> You're asking a tough question here. For me, cats are cats regardless of
>> breed, so I have to put the question to myself in terms of dogs, where
>> variations are more significant to me. There are most certainly breeds of
>> dogs that I like much better than others.
>>
>> I believe in the principle of generalization (kind of like the golden
>> rule): this is one way that Kant proposed to evaluate whether or not
>> something is moral. You simply pose yourself the question, if everyone
>> were to do what
> I
>> am considering, would I find the world to be a better or a worse place?
>>
>
> Mo, surely you know that Kant's ethical proofs are entirely full of ****.
> His metaphysics are more defensible IMO. But most people think they are too.
> The principle of generalization is along the line of Aristotle's Doctrine of
> the Mean. Okay in a survey course but entirely indefensible in terms of
> proofs. Did you have these things as part of logic courses or Intro
> philosophy?

Doesn't matter. Of all of the attempts to philosophize moral arguments,
this is the only one that's actually been useful to me in daily life.
And I actually have a minor in Philosophy, so while it's been a while, I
certainly have studied more than just a survey course. It has its
limitations, but asking yourself "What would happen if everyone acted as
I did?" is a very good start in figuring out whether what you're
thinking about doing is a good idea. I don't really care if it can be
logically proven. Logic proofs are fun and neat, but in the end they
always start from some assumption that can be argued, so even if there's
no flaw in the logic, the proof itself won't convince someone who
doesn't want to be convinced.

If you have a better rule of thumb, let me know. In the meantime, it
seems to me that this is exactly the reason that most of us choose
shelter animals over breeding; in the realization that if everyone did
this, breeders would go out of business and there would be fewer cats
euthanized. Otherwise, buying vs. adopting a single cat wouldn't matter one
whit in the grand scheme of things.

--
monique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully

pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca

KellyH

March 27th 05, 05:59 PM

"-L." > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Joe Canuck wrote:
>>
>> Perhaps we should apply this same line of thought with human
> beings...
>>
>> There are thousands if not millions of kids around the world without
>> parents. Perhaps one should adopt a kid first rather than see other
> kids
>> go through the early years without the support and benefit of
> parents.
>
> I agree whole-heartedly. Especially since non-renewable resources and
> our ability to deal with output are dwindling.
>
>>
>> Once *all* the parentless kids have been adopted, only then should
>> couples consider having their own kids.
>
> I don't have any problem what-so-ever with that sentiment.
>
> -L.

Thanks. Guess I'm just a mindless breeder.
You know I considered adoption vs. IVF very carefully. Adoption is not as
easy as people seem to think it is, like you just fill out a form and
someone hands you a child. It also costs thousands of dollars and the
process can be emotionally taxing. I admit, I freaked going over the
application. They want to know *everything* about you, and I do have some
things from my past that are not exactly flattering and I would rather that
no one knew about.
Whatever, I don't have to defend my choice.

--
-Kelly
kelly at farringtons dot net
"Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG

-L.

March 27th 05, 06:24 PM

KellyH wrote:
>
> Thanks. Guess I'm just a mindless breeder.

No, you're not, based on your second sentence, below. I'm referring to
people who don't give a second-thought about having unprotected sex and
then say "ooops! I'm pregnant!" as if it is a surprise, despite the
fact that they don't have the means or maturity to raise a child.

> You know I considered adoption vs. IVF very carefully. Adoption is
not as
> easy as people seem to think it is, like you just fill out a form and

> someone hands you a child. It also costs thousands of dollars and
the
> process can be emotionally taxing.

As I well know. :) State adoption is inexpensive. In some states it's
free. Infant adoption is extremely expensive, mainly because it is
privatized.

> I admit, I freaked going over the
> application. They want to know *everything* about you, and I do have
some
> things from my past that are not exactly flattering and I would
rather that
> no one knew about.
> Whatever, I don't have to defend my choice.

I don't know why you saw yourself in what I wrote, or thought I was
referring to you. You definitely do not fit the menatality of
"mindless breeder."

-L.

kitkat

March 27th 05, 06:33 PM

Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
> In the meantime, it
> seems to me that this is exactly the reason that most of us choose
> shelter animals over breeding; in the realization that if everyone did
> this, breeders would go out of business and there would be fewer cats
> euthanized.

I never even considered a breeder. I simply can not imagine paying that
much money for an animal, when there are so many that need homes and are
given away practically for free. The thought process for me wasn't much
deeper than that. It was basically "Spend 50 bucks, save a life, have a
new fuzzy pal!"

Now, I have a purebred, but I still rescued him. Jasper, being purebred
siamese, probably cost someone a few bucks when he was a kitten, as
someone pointed out here. But when he was 1.5 years old, he ended up at
a shelter cuz the first of his old lady mommies died. Suddenly, Jasper
was just another shelter cat.

I agree with the sentiment that if you really want a purebreed, find one
thru a rescue organization. Don't support a breeder directly. I think at
the end of the day, you'll feel better about you. :)

just my humble 2 pesos,
pam

KellyH

March 27th 05, 07:03 PM

"-L." > wrote
> As I well know. :) State adoption is inexpensive. In some states it's
> free. Infant adoption is extremely expensive, mainly because it is
> privatized.
>

True, but it's not for everyone. It's pretty rare to get an infant through
the state, and correct me if I'm wrong, but you have to be certified foster
parents first.

> I don't know why you saw yourself in what I wrote, or thought I was
> referring to you. You definitely do not fit the menatality of
> "mindless breeder."
>

Because you said (to paraphrase) "everyone should adopt and not
biologically create their own children". What if your IF treatments had
worked?
You know in the adoption groups the arguments go on and on. Like, if you
want to adopt an infant, that's wrong, you should be adopting an older
child. Why aren't you adopting a special needs child? Etc, etc.

If this round of IVF hadn't worked, we probably would be adopting. I felt
like, we had the opportunity to try it, so I should at least give it a shot.
I didn't want to wonder "what if?"
--
-Kelly
kelly at farringtons dot net
"Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG

[email protected]

March 27th 05, 07:29 PM

Ashley wrote:
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>
>
> > Not exactly. He will be *buying* a purebred kitten who doesn't
exactly
> > "need a a home"--Bengal breeders probably have waiting lists, and
the
> > kitten will get a home irregardless.
>
> Kitten still needs a home. If Brian takes it, someone else who might
have
> taken it might take a shelter cat. But then again, we could go "if"
forever.
>
> Brian should do what Brian wants to do. I have no problem at all with
people
> deciding they would like a certain breed of cat, and getting it.
That's
> their right.

Bull****. The kitten does NOT "need a home." You're advocating buying
a specific breed because you *want* it. Don't use such a lame
justification. Just simply say you don't give a **** about how many
homeless cats there are already, as long as you get the look you want.
THAT is your "right".

Sherry

-L.

March 27th 05, 08:14 PM

KellyH wrote:
> "-L." > wrote
> > As I well know. :) State adoption is inexpensive. In some states
it's
> > free. Infant adoption is extremely expensive, mainly because it is
> > privatized.
> >
>
> True, but it's not for everyone. It's pretty rare to get an infant
through
> the state, and correct me if I'm wrong, but you have to be certified
foster
> parents first.

In most states you have to be approved to adopt which differes from
being certified as foster parents. But it depends on the state.

> > I don't know why you saw yourself in what I wrote, or thought I was
> > referring to you. You definitely do not fit the menatality of
> > "mindless breeder."
> >
>
> Because you said (to paraphrase) "everyone should adopt and not
> biologically create their own children".

Um, don't put words in my mouth.

Joe said :

"Once *all* the parentless kids have been adopted, only then should
couples consider having their own kids."

I said:

"I don't have any problem what-so-ever with that sentiment."

I don't have a problem with that sentiment. That doesn't mean I think
it should be instituted. If it was instituted, I still wouldn't have a
problem with it, personally. You can't blame me for wishing every
child was wanted and loved. You can't blame me for being pro-adoption.
I am completely in support of reproductive rights - even the right of
the mindless breeder to pop them out every 10 months, while being on
welfare. But that doesn't mean I don't think adoption is a better
choice for a number of reasons, primarily for the welfare of children
in general, and for the environment. I'm an adoptive parent - how can
I feel differently?

> What if your IF treatments had
> worked?

If they had I might feel differently. But we had planned to adopt in
either case, so the point really is moot.

> You know in the adoption groups the arguments go on and on. Like, if
you
> want to adopt an infant, that's wrong, you should be adopting an
older
> child. Why aren't you adopting a special needs child? Etc, etc.

I know. But adoption of any child differs on a number of issues, from
creating more children.

>
> If this round of IVF hadn't worked, we probably would be adopting. I
felt
> like, we had the opportunity to try it, so I should at least give it
a shot.
> I didn't want to wonder "what if?"

I totally agree that you made the right choice for you. That's great.
I am truly happy for you. Seriously. I don't deny you the right to
make the choice you did. Obviously I didn't make the same choice
mainly because I thought the choice I made was the "better" one under
the circumstances, for a number of reasons. That doesn't make you evil
or wrong for making a different choice. In a perfect world all
children would be as wanted and loved as mine is and as yours will be.
I just wish *all* children had that opportunity. Thus, I agree with
Joe's sentiment.

-L.

Ashley

March 27th 05, 08:22 PM

"-L." > wrote in message
oups.com...

> Every cat bread means another dies. If you think that's not
> "harming" cats, I don't really have anything else to say.

Excellent.

Ashley

March 27th 05, 08:26 PM

"Phil P." > wrote in message
...

>
> He's harming the cat he could have adopted.

But by adopting that cat, he'd be harming all the other cats he could have,
but didn't adopt ... I mean we could go down this silly "what if" road for
ever. It still wouldn't take us anywhere sensible.

Get a conscience and some
> compassion.

I have both in plentiful supply, thank you. I also have a sense of
proportion and reality. There are more than a few people on this group who
would be wise to do the same.

-L.

March 27th 05, 08:26 PM

wrote:
> Bull****. The kitten does NOT "need a home." You're advocating
buying
> a specific breed because you *want* it. Don't use such a lame
> justification. Just simply say you don't give a **** about how many
> homeless cats there are already, as long as you get the look you
want.
> THAT is your "right".
>
> Sherry

But that would require too much honesty, Sherry. Really, you're
expecting too much.

-L.

Ashley

March 27th 05, 08:26 PM

"Phil P." > wrote in message
...
>
> "Ashley" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
> When I next get a cat it will be an oriental shorthair,
>> and I have not even the slightest feeling there is anything wrong in my
>> wanting that and acting upon that want.
>
> That's because self-gratification is more important to you than the
> welfare
> of the feline *species*.

Of course. That must be it.

KellyH

March 27th 05, 08:59 PM

"-L." > wrote
> Um, don't put words in my mouth.
>
> Joe said :
>
> "Once *all* the parentless kids have been adopted, only then should
> couples consider having their own kids."
>
> I said:
>
> "I don't have any problem what-so-ever with that sentiment."

Sorry, didn't mean to. That was my take on what you said. I'm going to
email you, this is way OT for the cat ng.

--
-Kelly
kelly at farringtons dot net
"Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG

Mary

March 27th 05, 09:48 PM

"Joe Canuck" > wrote in message
...
> Phil P. wrote:
>
> > "Brian Link" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > Also I'd be happy to hear
> >
> >>others' thoughts about adopting from a shelter vs adopting a purebred.
> >
> >
> >
> > As long as you adopt the cat from a kill shelter - it doesn't matter
because
> > you'll be saving a life and providing a companion for Tiger. If you
plan to
> > buy a 'purebred', first, you might want to take a stroll down death row
of
> > your local kill shelter and then see how those forsaken faces make you
feel
> > about buying a cat from a breeder who probably has a waiting list of
buyers
> > and can't churn out cats fast enough.
> >
> > Why do you ask? Does something not seem right about buying a cat from a
> > breeder while millions of cats are killed every year because of the lack
of
> > homes?
> >
> >
>
> Perhaps we should apply this same line of thought with human beings...
>
> There are thousands if not millions of kids around the world without
> parents. Perhaps one should adopt a kid first rather than see other kids
> go through the early years without the support and benefit of parents.
>
> Once *all* the parentless kids have been adopted, only then should
> couples consider having their own kids.

This is an old hackneyed chestnut, Joe. And the answer is, YES,
we really should. But where the analogy fails is that buying the product
of a commercial breeding is not the same thing as giving in to the
deep-seated urge to replicate our own DNA. (No, I do not and
will not have children, for reasons of my own.)

Mary

March 27th 05, 09:51 PM

Mary

March 27th 05, 10:12 PM

"Monique Y. Mudama" > wrote in message
...
> On 2005-03-27, Mary penned:
> >
> > "Monique Y. Mudama" > wrote :
> >>
> >> You're asking a tough question here. For me, cats are cats regardless
of
> >> breed, so I have to put the question to myself in terms of dogs, where
> >> variations are more significant to me. There are most certainly breeds
of
> >> dogs that I like much better than others.
> >>
> >> I believe in the principle of generalization (kind of like the golden
> >> rule): this is one way that Kant proposed to evaluate whether or not
> >> something is moral. You simply pose yourself the question, if everyone
> >> were to do what
> > I
> >> am considering, would I find the world to be a better or a worse place?
> >>
> >
> > Mo, surely you know that Kant's ethical proofs are entirely full of
****.
> > His metaphysics are more defensible IMO. But most people think they are
too.
> > The principle of generalization is along the line of Aristotle's
Doctrine of
> > the Mean. Okay in a survey course but entirely indefensible in terms of
> > proofs. Did you have these things as part of logic courses or Intro
> > philosophy?
>
> Doesn't matter. Of all of the attempts to philosophize moral arguments,
> this is the only one that's actually been useful to me in daily life.

Here is where it falls down--as a basis for moral behavior, forget the
predicate logic. It is not only completely unlikely but utterly impossible
that "everyone" would do whatever thing you are considering doing.
Therefore you are measuring the worth (or potential harm) of an event
or deed by a false measure. It would be more effective were you to ask
yourself something like, "would this be a good thing if 100 out of every
10,000 people did it." But still it would fall down, because I can give you
example after example of beneficial or "good" deeds/events/choices that,
were say, even half the population to do them, would NOT be good. The
first that comes to mind: you are in a large city on a large, busy city
highway
or beltline or freeway. You see an accident. You stop to see if you can
help.
As it turns out, you are able to pull a child to safety before the care
blows
up. Now then, what if half the people on the same busy beltline did the same
thing? Meaning, stopped to help? It would most certainly not be a good
thing,
and in fact the resulting gridlock would keep the emergency vehicles needed
to contain the fire in the car and administer medical help to the child
could
not reach the child due to all the stopped vehicles on the road.

> And I actually have a minor in Philosophy, so while it's been a while, I
> certainly have studied more than just a survey course.

Very cool. That's a lot more than most people get.

It has its
> limitations, but asking yourself "What would happen if everyone acted as
> I did?" is a very good start in figuring out whether what you're
> thinking about doing is a good idea.

It's not bad, but the fact is there are things one should do that would
not be good things if everyone or even half of everyone did them.

I don't really care if it can be
> logically proven. Logic proofs are fun and neat, but in the end they
> always start from some assumption that can be argued, so even if there's
> no flaw in the logic, the proof itself won't convince someone who
> doesn't want to be convinced.

No, they do not always begin with an assumption that can be argued.
But that is neither here nor there in terms of the present application.
The practice of predicate logic can be thought of as no more than
mental masturbation--or it can be much more, as it can transfer off
of paper and into actual life.

>
> If you have a better rule of thumb, let me know.

I do not have a better rule of thumb but I have a better idea:
ditch "rules of thumb." Examine every situation as the unique
combination of causes and effects that itis, and each potential
deed, too.

Mary

March 27th 05, 10:18 PM

"KellyH" > wrote in message
...
>
> "-L." > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >
> > Joe Canuck wrote:
> >>
> >> Perhaps we should apply this same line of thought with human
> > beings...
> >>
> >> There are thousands if not millions of kids around the world without
> >> parents. Perhaps one should adopt a kid first rather than see other
> > kids
> >> go through the early years without the support and benefit of
> > parents.
> >
> > I agree whole-heartedly. Especially since non-renewable resources and
> > our ability to deal with output are dwindling.
> >
> >>
> >> Once *all* the parentless kids have been adopted, only then should
> >> couples consider having their own kids.
> >
> > I don't have any problem what-so-ever with that sentiment.
> >
> > -L.
>
> Thanks. Guess I'm just a mindless breeder.
> You know I considered adoption vs. IVF very carefully. Adoption is not as
> easy as people seem to think it is, like you just fill out a form and
> someone hands you a child. It also costs thousands of dollars and the
> process can be emotionally taxing. I admit, I freaked going over the
> application. They want to know *everything* about you, and I do have some
> things from my past that are not exactly flattering and I would rather
that
> no one knew about.
> Whatever, I don't have to defend my choice.
>

Kelly. The two situations are not even comparable. It is a false
analogy. We all have a deep-seated drive to reproduce, and
in some cases a need to parent. In addition humans, while we
are animals, are the only animals who ____ and _____ and
do any number of things including conceive of a time beyond
our own deaths. Whether or not we breed is personal and
very complicated--and not the same thing as whether we
choose to support the breeding of domesticated animals
who are currently overbreeding. From a Randian point
of view (not my own, or not all the way, anyway) when
the other animals outstrip our own abilities and grow
bigger cerebral cortexes and opposable thumbs then
THEY will have the dilemma about whether or not
they allow US to breed. Until then it is every human for
his or her self. :)

Mary

March 27th 05, 10:20 PM

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Ashley wrote:
> > > wrote in message
> > oups.com...
> >
> >
> > > Not exactly. He will be *buying* a purebred kitten who doesn't
> exactly
> > > "need a a home"--Bengal breeders probably have waiting lists, and
> the
> > > kitten will get a home irregardless.
> >
> > Kitten still needs a home. If Brian takes it, someone else who might
> have
> > taken it might take a shelter cat. But then again, we could go "if"
> forever.
> >
> > Brian should do what Brian wants to do. I have no problem at all with
> people
> > deciding they would like a certain breed of cat, and getting it.
> That's
> > their right.
>
> Bull****. The kitten does NOT "need a home." You're advocating buying
> a specific breed because you *want* it. Don't use such a lame
> justification. Just simply say you don't give a **** about how many
> homeless cats there are already, as long as you get the look you want.
> THAT is your "right".
>

Ashley is of the 500-lb gorilla school of ethics. "Should I do it"
becomes "Can I do it and do I want to?"

Mary

March 27th 05, 10:22 PM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Phil P." > wrote in message
> ...
>
>
> >
> > He's harming the cat he could have adopted.
>
>
> But by adopting that cat, he'd be harming all the other cats he could
have,
> but didn't adopt ... I mean we could go down this silly "what if" road for
> ever. It still wouldn't take us anywhere sensible.
>
>
> Get a conscience and some
> > compassion.
>
> I have both in plentiful supply, thank you. I also have a sense of
> proportion and reality. There are more than a few people on this group who
> would be wise to do the same.
>
>

Breeders suck and people who support breeders suck.
It's in the Bible, the Koran, the Talmud and tatooed
on my own sweet ass.

Mary

March 27th 05, 10:23 PM

"-L." > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> wrote:
> > Bull****. The kitten does NOT "need a home." You're advocating
> buying
> > a specific breed because you *want* it. Don't use such a lame
> > justification. Just simply say you don't give a **** about how many
> > homeless cats there are already, as long as you get the look you
> want.
> > THAT is your "right".
> >
> > Sherry
>
> But that would require too much honesty, Sherry. Really, you're
> expecting too much.
>

Oh, right, like you, Lynnie, the mealy-mouthed social-engineering
fan with the major victim mentality knows the first gd thing about
honesty. You are such a ****ing hypocrite.

Mary

March 27th 05, 10:24 PM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Phil P." > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Ashley" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>
> > When I next get a cat it will be an oriental shorthair,
> >> and I have not even the slightest feeling there is anything wrong in my
> >> wanting that and acting upon that want.
> >
> > That's because self-gratification is more important to you than the
> > welfare
> > of the feline *species*.
>
> Of course. That must be it.
>
>

It is. Phil is spot on and has you and your kind pegged.

Mary

March 27th 05, 10:25 PM

"KellyH" > wrote in message
...
> "-L." > wrote
> > Um, don't put words in my mouth.
> >
> > Joe said :
> >
> > "Once *all* the parentless kids have been adopted, only then should
> > couples consider having their own kids."
> >
> > I said:
> >
> > "I don't have any problem what-so-ever with that sentiment."
>
> Sorry, didn't mean to. That was my take on what you said. I'm going to
> email you, this is way OT for the cat ng.
>

To late. I am reporting you and Hanoi Lynnie to your
respective ISPs because you offend me and I believe your ISPs owe me
proctection from being offended. Nya nya nya.

Phil P.

March 27th 05, 10:26 PM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Phil P." > wrote in message
> ...
>
>
> >
> > He's harming the cat he could have adopted.
>
>
> But by adopting that cat, he'd be harming all the other cats he could
have,

Absurd. He'd be *saving* the life of a cat - which would free up space and
resources for another cat that might be otherwise killed. Ergo, he'd
actually be saving two lives for the 'price' of one whereas buying a cat
from a breeder would indirectly cause the death of those two cats.

Mary

March 27th 05, 10:27 PM

"MaryL" -OUT-THE-LITTER> wrote in message
news:gPu1e.49575$3z.15531@okepread03...
>
> "Mary" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "MaryL" -OUT-THE-LITTER> wrote in message
> > news:qXr1e.49571$3z.44417@okepread03...
> >>
> >> "Brian Link" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > Going through old photos today, and came across a directory filled
> >> > with pics from when we were thinking about buying a Bengal (which we
> >> > did, and he's wonderful). Most are from this site:
> >> > http://www.tibcs.com/petcorner/photos.php
> >> >
> >> > After having been through an ordeal with a stray, and knowing the
> >> > incredible number of discarded cats available for adoption, is it
> >> > morally wrong to think of adopting another purebred?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > BLink
> >>
> >> Please don't even consider this. First, don't buy from a breeder
because
> >> there are untold numbers of cats already available from shelters and
> > rescue
> >> groups -- and an unbelievably large number are destined to be
euthanized.
> >> If you do decide on a purebred, please look at a shelter (where there
> > often
> >> are both purebreds and "look-alikes" available) or contact one of the
> > rescue
> >> groups that rehome abandoned and abused purebreds. Second, I hope you
> > won't
> >> adopt *any* cat at this time. You have just gone through a difficult
> >> time
> >> with Henry, and it would be simply asking for trouble to bring another
> >> cat
> >> into your home at this early date.
> >>
> >> MaryL
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Oh, nonsense, MaryL! You must have some sort of personal problem
> > to even suggest this. You have a problem with Megan, right? You
> > must have. It simply cannot be that Brian is a ****ing idiot for even
> > considering this after he "had to" give Henry up for the peace of his
> > other cats. Please, try to get hold of yourself. Brian will do what
> > Brian wants to do, after all.
> >
> >
>
> LOL!
>
>

low five, lowwwwww five! And Happy Easter. :)

Phil P.

March 27th 05, 10:31 PM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Phil P." > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Ashley" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>
> > When I next get a cat it will be an oriental shorthair,
> >> and I have not even the slightest feeling there is anything wrong in my
> >> wanting that and acting upon that want.
> >
> > That's because self-gratification is more important to you than the
> > welfare
> > of the feline *species*.
>
> Of course. That must be it.

I *know* it is - otherwise you wouldn't even think about buying a cat from a
breeder while million of cats are languishing and dying in shelters.

Mary

March 27th 05, 10:36 PM

"Phil P." > wrote in message
...
>
> "Ashley" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Phil P." > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > "Ashley" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > >>
> > > When I next get a cat it will be an oriental shorthair,
> > >> and I have not even the slightest feeling there is anything wrong in
my
> > >> wanting that and acting upon that want.
> > >
> > > That's because self-gratification is more important to you than the
> > > welfare
> > > of the feline *species*.
> >
> > Of course. That must be it.
>
> I *know* it is - otherwise you wouldn't even think about buying a cat from
a
> breeder while million of cats are languishing and dying in shelters.
>

And you are right. If my girls cannot live forever (my first choice) then
maybe one day I want a Siamese-type cat. The short hair and the
coloring, esp. the blue eyes. I will go to a shelter and try to find one--
but how much you want to bet that some little scrawny dime-a-dozen
looking gray tabby like Cheeks steals my heart with the tilt of her
head before I even SEE a Siamese type? :)

CatNipped

March 27th 05, 10:45 PM

"Phil P." > wrote in message
...

> Absurd. He'd be *saving* the life of a cat - which would free up space
and
> resources for another cat that might be otherwise killed. Ergo, he'd
> actually be saving two lives for the 'price' of one whereas buying a cat
> from a breeder would indirectly cause the death of those two cats.

Gotta say, I don't understand how people can keep breeders in business - I
wish they would all just *STOP* (sorry those of you who may be breeders, but
I *really* don't like what you're doing to those cats who need a home but
aren't fortunate enough to be born with a pedigree). What a cat looks like
is not what I fall in love with (DH is *SO* glad appearances aren't what I'm
interested in <ducking> - just joking sweetie!!!!).

Hugs,

CatNipped

Mary

March 27th 05, 11:17 PM

"PawsForThought" > wrote in message
...
> Mary wrote:
> >>We all have a deep-seated drive to reproduce
>
> Speak for yourself! LOL
>
> --

Haven't you ever felt it, on a basic biological level? Like you
can feel your blood simmering in your veins at certaintimes?
Or experienced changes in the way you look at babies or feel
when you hear a baby crying? In my 20s I referred to such
events as Mother Nature thumbing her nose at me. :) It
is not a desire so much as a drive. Even sexual desire is
part of it--and the entire reason we are programed to find
that desire so strong and powerful and compelling. Happily,
I have rarely allowed what I am sitting on to dictate my
actions. :)

Joe Canuck

March 27th 05, 11:41 PM

Mary wrote:

> "-L." > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>
>>Joe Canuck wrote:
>>
>>>Perhaps we should apply this same line of thought with human
>>
>>beings...
>>
>>>There are thousands if not millions of kids around the world without
>>>parents. Perhaps one should adopt a kid first rather than see other
>>
>>kids
>>
>>>go through the early years without the support and benefit of
>>
>>parents.
>>
>>I agree whole-heartedly. Especially since non-renewable resources and
>>our ability to deal with output are dwindling.
>
>
>
> Right. So this means that you would NOT have had your own
> child if you had not been infertile?
>
>

I don't have kids, well except for my cat. ;)

Mary

March 28th 05, 12:54 AM

"Joe Canuck" > wrote in message
...
> Mary wrote:
>
> > "-L." > wrote in message
> > oups.com...
> >
> >>Joe Canuck wrote:
> >>
> >>>Perhaps we should apply this same line of thought with human
> >>
> >>beings...
> >>
> >>>There are thousands if not millions of kids around the world without
> >>>parents. Perhaps one should adopt a kid first rather than see other
> >>
> >>kids
> >>
> >>>go through the early years without the support and benefit of
> >>
> >>parents.
> >>
> >>I agree whole-heartedly. Especially since non-renewable resources and
> >>our ability to deal with output are dwindling.
> >
> >
> >
> > Right. So this means that you would NOT have had your own
> > child if you had not been infertile?
> >
> >
>
> I don't have kids, well except for my cat. ;)
>

I was talking to Lynnie, but that is good to know, anyway. :)

Mary

March 28th 05, 01:02 AM

"PawsForThought" > wrote

> Mary, honestly, I never have. Maybe there's something wrong with me
> but I can tell you I've never felt that desire. I mean I like kids, so
> long as they're not mine. Funny, when they show a baby on tv for
> instance, my husband and I will look at each other and say "too bad
> it's not a kitten. Now THAT would be cute!" :')
>
> --

I have had the impulse, but as soon as I thought about how
it would change my life I vetoed it. Even with my sisters and
many of my friends and colleagues doing the little mysterious
smile and comments such as "it's the most wonderful thing
in the world" and all that other stuff the childful do around
us child-less, I have never bought into the idea that I am
missing anything I don't want to miss. For me, doing anything
and everything I want to do with my life without having the
distraction of dependants who might or might not even like
me or appreciate what I have done for them just does not
quite suck. :) I have watched my oldest nieces and nephews
grow up, too. Let's just say that their parents' experiences
with them have done nothing to make me think my first
take on the situation was wrong.

Joe.Canuck(at)gmail.com

March 28th 05, 01:07 AM

Mary wrote:

> "Joe Canuck" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Mary wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"-L." > wrote in message
oups.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Joe Canuck wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Perhaps we should apply this same line of thought with human
>>>>
>>>>beings...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>There are thousands if not millions of kids around the world without
>>>>>parents. Perhaps one should adopt a kid first rather than see other
>>>>
>>>>kids
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>go through the early years without the support and benefit of
>>>>
>>>>parents.
>>>>
>>>>I agree whole-heartedly. Especially since non-renewable resources and
>>>>our ability to deal with output are dwindling.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Right. So this means that you would NOT have had your own
>>>child if you had not been infertile?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>I don't have kids, well except for my cat. ;)
>>
>
>
> I was talking to Lynnie, but that is good to know, anyway. :)
>
>

In the newsgroups when one posts, they "speak" to everyone. ;)

Candace

March 28th 05, 02:20 AM

Mary wrote:

> (No, I do not and
>will not have children, for reasons of my own.)

Thank God. But it might cut down on your incessant usenet postings so
I guess there would be an upside (for us).

Candace

Mary

March 28th 05, 02:40 AM

"Candace" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Mary wrote:
>
> > (No, I do not and
> >will not have children, for reasons of my own.)
>
> Thank God. But it might cut down on your incessant usenet postings so
> I guess there would be an upside (for us).
>
> Candace
>

Wow. That was so witty, and not at all predictable. You
radical, you. <G>

Candace

March 28th 05, 03:00 AM

Mary wrote:
> "Candace" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> > Mary wrote:
> >
> > > (No, I do not and
> > >will not have children, for reasons of my own.)
> >
> > Thank God. But it might cut down on your incessant usenet postings
so
> > I guess there would be an upside (for us).
> >
> > Candace
> >
>
> Wow. That was so witty, and not at all predictable. You
> radical, you. <G>

Oh, is that why you posted it--so someone could predictably respond and
fall, once more, into your trap? I feel sooooo foolish...and
simple...and mainstream by doing so. If only I could take it back,
darn, bested by "Mary" yet again...

Monique Y. Mudama

March 28th 05, 03:02 AM

On 2005-03-27, Mary penned:
>
> Kelly. The two situations are not even comparable. It is a false analogy. We
> all have a deep-seated drive to reproduce, and in some cases a need to
> parent. In addition humans, while we are animals, are the only animals who
> ____ and _____ and do any number of things including conceive of a time
> beyond our own deaths. Whether or not we breed is personal and very
> complicated--and not the same thing as whether we choose to support the
> breeding of domesticated animals who are currently overbreeding. From a
> Randian point of view (not my own, or not all the way, anyway) when the
> other animals outstrip our own abilities and grow bigger cerebral cortexes
> and opposable thumbs then THEY will have the dilemma about whether or not
> they allow US to breed. Until then it is every human for his or her self. :)

There is absolutely no way to prove that no animal can conceive of a time
beyond its own death. Every time I've ever heard a characteristic described
as uniquely human, like self-sacrifice for strangers or the use of tools, it's
turned out to be disproven, so I tend to be skeptical of any claim about how
special we are.

Anyway, I really don't think that, for most people, the question of
reproduction is any more complicated than "How many?" The idea that producing
more children could be morally wrong just doesn't have much place in most
people's worldview. You're giving humans more credit than I would.

--
monique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully

pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca

Monique Y. Mudama

March 28th 05, 03:07 AM

On 2005-03-28, Mary penned:
>
> I have had the impulse, but as soon as I thought about how it would change
> my life I vetoed it. Even with my sisters and many of my friends and
> colleagues doing the little mysterious smile and comments such as "it's the
> most wonderful thing in the world" and all that other stuff the childful do
> around us child-less, I have never bought into the idea that I am missing
> anything I don't want to miss. For me, doing anything and everything I want
> to do with my life without having the distraction of dependants who might or
> might not even like me or appreciate what I have done for them just does not
> quite suck. :) I have watched my oldest nieces and nephews grow up, too.
> Let's just say that their parents' experiences with them have done nothing
> to make me think my first take on the situation was wrong.

My coworker's wife just had a baby. He was back in the office just
about instantly. Of course he wanted to tell me about how it's the best
thing you can ever do. Well, I'm not going to **** him off by
contradicting him -- what's the point? -- but I'm just sitting here
thinking, you think it changed your life? That thing wasn't in your
body. You're here at work two days later; gee, I wonder what your
wife's doing right now. (To be fair, he'd been asking about paternity
leave earlier and I'm sure it would be tough for them to do without the
pay). It's the old joke about pregnancy being like breakfast -- the
chicken's involved, but the pig is committed. Yeah, nice, he donated
some sperm and I bet he'll have some sleepless nights. Still, I don't
want a male telling me how great it would be to have my body invaded and
permanently altered. I could get that with cancer, too.

--
monique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully

pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca

Meghan Noecker

March 28th 05, 04:30 AM

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 18:21:21 -0500, "PawsForThought"
> wrote:

>Mary, honestly, I never have. Maybe there's something wrong with me
>but I can tell you I've never felt that desire. I mean I like kids, so
>long as they're not mine.

Same here.

I babysat some infants when I was younger, and I was very glad to give
them back to their mothers.

I love taking care of my cats and dogs, and I want to adopt most of
the ones I see. But I don't feel the same way when i look at human
children.

--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com

Bolo

March 28th 05, 04:33 AM

I think buying a purebred is the smart thing to do,for starters you know
what kind of cat you are getting unlike adopted cats some of them have been
in half a dozen homes.I have heard some real horror stories about adopted
cats but have never heard a bad thing about buying a purebred.And like
someone already said you are giving a cat a good home ,but by buying
purebred you know what you are getting into.I have 2 cats, a maine coon and
a ragdoll,and would never trade them for anything.

"Brian Link" > wrote in message
...
> Going through old photos today, and came across a directory filled
> with pics from when we were thinking about buying a Bengal (which we
> did, and he's wonderful). Most are from this site:
> http://www.tibcs.com/petcorner/photos.php
>
> After having been through an ordeal with a stray, and knowing the
> incredible number of discarded cats available for adoption, is it
> morally wrong to think of adopting another purebred?
>
> We've adopted six strays over the last ten years. We bought our Bengal
> primarily because we wanted a cat whose personality could be
> determined before hand, so it would keep our playful, energetic Tiger
> company. This was a specific case that's worked out fantastically..
> http://www.discant.com/Cat/Henry%20001.jpg
>
> But I really love this breed - and if we can get ahold of a kitten,
> there's a better chance that Louis won't go nuts.
>
> Just a thought. Breeders will continue to breed no matter what we do,
> and poor strays will get euthanized no matter what we do. But is this
> just rationalizing?
>
> Eh.. I'm not totally driven to take in another cat, but I keep
> wondering what Louis will do when Tiger finally dies.. it would be so
> nice for him to have another friend around. Also I'd be happy to hear
> others' thoughts about adopting from a shelter vs adopting a purebred.
>
> BLink

Meghan Noecker

March 28th 05, 04:45 AM

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 07:21:57 -0500, "Phil P." >
wrote:

>As long as you adopt the cat from a kill shelter - it doesn't matter because
>you'll be saving a life and providing a companion for Tiger. If you plan to
>buy a 'purebred', first, you might want to take a stroll down death row of
>your local kill shelter and then see how those forsaken faces make you feel
>about buying a cat from a breeder who probably has a waiting list of buyers
>and can't churn out cats fast enough.

This is a very good idea.

While back, there was a discussion about Maine Coons, and I was very
interested, because the breed appeals to me. I have seen them at
shows, and I figured that somebody I might want one. I don't care
about pedigree, so a shelter cat would be fine. It doesn't need to be
a purebred. The temperment is more important, so if I find a cat that
looks good and has the temperement I want, then I should be happy.

So, basically, I was hopeful of getting a Maine Coon in the future,
but not interested in going to a breeder.

Well, about 6 weeks ago, I was at a cat show as a vendor, and I found
myself looking a special cat. I don't know why. I went over to talk to
the shelter lady, not look at adopting a cat. But I gazed into his
eyes, and he sucked me in. He was all curled up in his litter box, so
I didn't even get a good look until the next day. And I didn't realize
how heavy he was until I carried him out to the car.

So, what did I get? Well, he might be part Maine Coon. He is large
(though only 12-13 lbs), and he is fluffy. But he looks pretty much
like an oversized Balinese. The shelter described him as a Himilayan
mix. Frankly, I don't care what he is. He is beautiful, and the
sweetest, non agressive cat I ever met. He is so mild and sweet.
Exactly what I expected when I gazed into his eyes.

My only disappointment is that he won't stay on my bed and does not
appear to want to cuddle. But I am hopeful that he will warm up to it
later. He comes for petting now more than before, he lets me pet his
belly now. So, he may eventually get mory cuddly. He has been
following me around like a puppy dog since I got him, so he is
definitely friendly. And he talks a lot. Sometimes meowing, and
sometimes a cute chortle.

Anyway, he wasn't exactly what I had visualized, and he came along a
lot sooner than planned, but he is perfect. And I think anybody
looking for a cat could check oout the shelters and find the cat for
them, even if the cat doesn't match their preconceived ideal.

--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com

Ashley

March 28th 05, 05:11 AM

"Meghan Noecker" > wrote in message
...

> Anyway, he wasn't exactly what I had visualized, and he came along a
> lot sooner than planned, but he is perfect. And I think anybody
> looking for a cat could check oout the shelters and find the cat for
> them, even if the cat doesn't match their preconceived ideal.

I think anyone looking for a cat should get the cat they want, then take
care of it responsibly.

Mary

March 28th 05, 05:14 AM

"Candace" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Mary wrote:
> > "Candace" > wrote in message
> > oups.com...
> > > Mary wrote:
> > >
> > > > (No, I do not and
> > > >will not have children, for reasons of my own.)
> > >
> > > Thank God. But it might cut down on your incessant usenet postings
> so
> > > I guess there would be an upside (for us).
> > >
> > > Candace
> > >
> >
> > Wow. That was so witty, and not at all predictable. You
> > radical, you. <G>
>
> Oh, is that why you posted it--so someone could predictably respond and
> fall, once more, into your trap? I feel sooooo foolish...and
> simple...and mainstream by doing so. If only I could take it back,
> darn, bested by "Mary" yet again...
>

I just post what I feel like posting, you hip and radical chick.
You do the same. Live and let live. :)

Mary

March 28th 05, 05:17 AM

"Bolo" > wrote in message
news:3WK1e.817220$Xk.34378@pd7tw3no...
> I think buying a purebred is the smart thing to do,for starters you know
> what kind of cat you are getting unlike adopted cats some of them have
been
> in half a dozen homes.I have heard some real horror stories about adopted
> cats but have never heard a bad thing about buying a purebred.

hahahaha!

Dave

March 28th 05, 06:26 AM

In message > "Mary"
> wrote:

>
>"PawsForThought" > wrote in message
...
>> Mary wrote:
>> >>We all have a deep-seated drive to reproduce
>>
>> Speak for yourself! LOL
>>
>> --
>
>Haven't you ever felt it, on a basic biological level? Like you
>can feel your blood simmering in your veins at certaintimes?
>Or experienced changes in the way you look at babies or feel
>when you hear a baby crying? In my 20s I referred to such
>events as Mother Nature thumbing her nose at me. :) It
>is not a desire so much as a drive. Even sexual desire is
>part of it--and the entire reason we are programed to find
>that desire so strong and powerful and compelling. Happily,
>I have rarely allowed what I am sitting on to dictate my
>actions. :)
>

Maybe it's a male/female thing, but I've never had any real urge to
breed.

Meghan Noecker

March 28th 05, 07:19 AM

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 16:11:56 +1200, "Ashley"
> wrote:

>
>"Meghan Noecker" > wrote in message
...
>
>> Anyway, he wasn't exactly what I had visualized, and he came along a
>> lot sooner than planned, but he is perfect. And I think anybody
>> looking for a cat could check oout the shelters and find the cat for
>> them, even if the cat doesn't match their preconceived ideal.
>
>I think anyone looking for a cat should get the cat they want, then take
>care of it responsibly.
>
>
How do you know that thecat you want isn't at the shelter, waiting for
you?

Mine was, and I didn't even know I wanted another cat yet - I already
had 3.

Also, sometimes, what you want isn't necessary what you need, or what
needs you.

Back when I got my sheltie, I wanted an adult, already trained, large
sheltie. I ended up with an adult, never socialized or trained, badly
abused, tiny sheltie.

She was not at all what I wanted, and I would never have chosen her.
My mom gave her to me, not knowing how messed up this dog was.

She may not have been what I wanted, but she is a wonderful dog, the
happiest, sweetest dog on earth. She is exactly what I needed, and I
learned a lot from her.

All I am saying is that we shouldn't lock ourselves into a strict
definition of what we want. We could be passing up a ton of great
animals because we are ded set on how the cat will look. And that
really is how we pick most breeds. Temperment is more predictable, but
there are many breeds who posess the same basic temperment. The
difference is their look.

--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com

Ashley

March 28th 05, 07:53 AM

"Meghan Noecker" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 16:11:56 +1200, "Ashley"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>"Meghan Noecker" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>> Anyway, he wasn't exactly what I had visualized, and he came along a
>>> lot sooner than planned, but he is perfect. And I think anybody
>>> looking for a cat could check oout the shelters and find the cat for
>>> them, even if the cat doesn't match their preconceived ideal.
>>
>>I think anyone looking for a cat should get the cat they want, then take
>>care of it responsibly.
>>
>>
> How do you know that thecat you want isn't at the shelter, waiting for
> you?
>

Easy. Every cat I've ever had has been either from the SPCA or from a home
that advertised kittens, or a pet shop. They've been moggies. I've loved
(and still love them). However, I know that for my next cats I will be
getting an Aby and an oriental shorthair, because I *really* like what I've
seen of those cats and they really appeal to me. Could I love another moggie
or two? Yes. Will I get one? Who knows. But I *will* be getting those
pedigrees, because I want them. Believe it or not, I do know what I want.

There's nothing to say a cute domestic shorthair from the SPCA won't also
take my fancy - and if it does, I'll get it. Won't stop me getting the
pedigrees, tho.

> All I am saying is that we shouldn't lock ourselves into a strict
> definition of what we want. We could be passing up a ton of great
> animals because we are ded set on how the cat will look.

Or maybe just because we've set our heart on it, and there's nothing wrong
with that. As long as those cats are then lovingly and responsibly cared
for, it's fine by me.

-L.

March 28th 05, 08:17 AM

Meghan Noecker wrote:
>
> Mine was, and I didn't even know I wanted another cat yet - I already
> had 3.
>

Just wanted to say, the cat sounds gorgeous. Have you posted any pics?

-L.

Brian Link

March 28th 05, 08:33 AM

On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 20:39:50 -0700, "Monique Y. Mudama"
> wrote:

>On 2005-03-27, Brian Link penned:
>> Going through old photos today, and came across a directory filled with pics
>> from when we were thinking about buying a Bengal (which we did, and he's
>> wonderful). Most are from this site:
>> http://www.tibcs.com/petcorner/photos.php
>>
>> After having been through an ordeal with a stray, and knowing the incredible
>> number of discarded cats available for adoption, is it morally wrong to
>> think of adopting another purebred?
>>
>> We've adopted six strays over the last ten years. We bought our Bengal
>> primarily because we wanted a cat whose personality could be determined
>> before hand, so it would keep our playful, energetic Tiger company. This was
>> a specific case that's worked out fantastically..
>> http://www.discant.com/Cat/Henry%20001.jpg
>>
>> But I really love this breed - and if we can get ahold of a kitten, there's
>> a better chance that Louis won't go nuts.
>>
>> Just a thought. Breeders will continue to breed no matter what we do, and
>> poor strays will get euthanized no matter what we do. But is this just
>> rationalizing?
>>
>> Eh.. I'm not totally driven to take in another cat, but I keep wondering
>> what Louis will do when Tiger finally dies.. it would be so nice for him to
>> have another friend around. Also I'd be happy to hear others' thoughts about
>> adopting from a shelter vs adopting a purebred.
>>
>> BLink
>
>You're asking a tough question here. For me, cats are cats regardless of
>breed, so I have to put the question to myself in terms of dogs, where
>variations are more significant to me. There are most certainly breeds of
>dogs that I like much better than others.
>
>I believe in the principle of generalization (kind of like the golden rule):
>this is one way that Kant proposed to evaluate whether or not something is
>moral. You simply pose yourself the question, if everyone were to do what I
>am considering, would I find the world to be a better or a worse place?

This is a somewhat rarified philosophical question, which has limited
use in real-world situations. At least this one.

If everyone bought purebreds, who were spayed/neutered unless the
buyer was a certified breeder themselves, then there would be no
strays.

However, in the real world, some buy purebreds, others let their pets
breed willy-nilly. Worse yet, others let their unfixed cats go wild.
Result = more strays than purebreds.

>It's a toughie. If no one bought cats and dogs from breeders, then breeders
>would go out of business, and there would just be moggies.

This is also a tough issue which brings into focus one's worldview. If
you feel cats are basically vermin (gak - that's too strong a word, at
least you feel that cats are short-lived animals which can also be
companion animals), then the fate of coyote-culled feral colonies can
be chalked up to the cruelty of the wilderness.. the same way
beautiful animals such as deer are piled up by the dozen along rural
highways. Or bunnies. Or squirrels (which my mother despises, but I
personally love seeing loping in our front yard).

Just playing devil's advocate here.. you all know I love all cats...

Personally, I think purebreeds play a useful role for a number of
reasons. An owner unfamiliar with cats adopts a purebred on
well-advertised temperament, appearance and behavior - if they form a
relationship they have a new respect for the animal and may choose to
adopt a stray the next time. An owner (like myself) who needs a
particular personality which inbreeding can assure buys a purebred
with such a personality. That owner may also take in strays or adopt
as well.

My own issues have stemmed from the fact that all my cats have been
adoptees who would otherwise have died or been shelter-bound (seven
over the last ten years), and the one exception was chosen based on
the suitability of the breed's advertised personality as a companion
for our one remaining mutt, a playful, energetic and social beast.
Louis the Bengal and Tiger the Maine-Coonish mutt are an utter success
story.

Megan has helped me see that there exist such things as foster-rescue
homes, where people live with their cats and are reliable to judge
their personalities. Tiger is 9 years senior to Louis, and when he
dies, I know Louis will be lonely. The bond they've formed is a unique
thing for me in my years of living with a houseful of cats. I have a
hint now that although a well-established breed may have
characteristics tailor-made to Louis (i.e., another bengal or a Maine
Coon), that it's possible to pick an fostercat with those same
personality traits.

>But is this
>ultimately my better world? I mean, right now, it's easy enough to find a
>black lab mix at the shelter, but if no one were breeding them, would they
>still be around? Then again, with all the hip problems to which retrievers
>are prone, might it not be better to give up the breed entirely rather than
>allow these diseases to continue?

A very good point. The same might be said for any large-breed dog.
There are two absolutely gorgeous Great Danes which I see being walked
around our neighborhood. Yes they're beautiful animals, but they're
also walking time-bombs for their owners.

>My decision is to avoid buying an animal from a breeder. If I really wanted a
>purebred (I personally don't, though, because in my experience mutts and
>moggies tend to be healthier), I would go through a rescue organization.

Again, I agree that mutts seem to be hardier beasts. Kinda QED unless
you're a Creationist...

There's a strain of DSH (if one can talk of a strain of mutts) which
seems quite similar to Maine Coons, which I'd heard at one time were
the original mousers brought to the New World. These cats so
infiltrated themselves into the gene pool that their qualities are
constantly expressed even through seemingly unrelated parents. Tiger
is Maine-Coonish in his markings, ear-tufts, mane and high-pitched
voice, as well as his predilection for hanging out near you, but never
"on" you. However, he's small, and his parents were a DSH white-cat
and DSH orange tabby. Except for his recent bout of conjunctivitis,
he's thriving, healthy and ornery as an 11 yr old.

I haven't formed an opinion on this yet. Megan talked my ear off about
the plight of the stray, and I have a lot of sympathy with her
position. On the other hand, a purebreed is a known quantity. And they
will indeed continue to be produced.

It's a difficult question, and I'm grateful for all you folks who've
weighed in.

BLink
Brian Link, Minnesota Countertenor
----------------------------------
"The chimpanzee wore a little blue blazer with brass buttons, and with
the seal of the President of the United States sewed to the breast
pocket....Everywhere he went, bands would play 'Hail to the Chief.'
The chimpanzee loved it. He would bounce up and down." - Kurt Vonnegut

[email protected]

March 28th 05, 08:40 AM

> Breeders suck and people who support breeders suck.
> It's in the Bible, the Koran, the Talmud and tatooed
> on my own sweet ass.

Then wouldn't buying a cat from a breeder means rescuing that cat from
the evil breeder?

MaryL

March 28th 05, 11:31 AM

"Bolo" > wrote in message
news:3WK1e.817220$Xk.34378@pd7tw3no...
>I think buying a purebred is the smart thing to do,for starters you know
> what kind of cat you are getting unlike adopted cats some of them have
> been
> in half a dozen homes.I have heard some real horror stories about adopted
> cats but have never heard a bad thing about buying a purebred.
>
>

Have you never heard about some of the physical problems that are common
with certain breeds? If not, you haven't done much reading.

MaryL

Joe.Canuck(at)gmail.com

March 28th 05, 04:40 PM

MaryL wrote:

> "Bolo" > wrote in message
> news:3WK1e.817220$Xk.34378@pd7tw3no...
>
>>I think buying a purebred is the smart thing to do,for starters you know
>>what kind of cat you are getting unlike adopted cats some of them have
>>been
>>in half a dozen homes.I have heard some real horror stories about adopted
>>cats but have never heard a bad thing about buying a purebred.
>>
>>
>
>
> Have you never heard about some of the physical problems that are common
> with certain breeds? If not, you haven't done much reading.
>
> MaryL
>
>

Every cat can have physical problems. With purebred, it is easier to
track within the breed therefore we hear about it. With moggies, it
cannot be tracked within lines because there are no records... so we
don't hear about it. That doesn't mean there are no problems.

I have a Ragdoll. There have been instances of HCM in the Ragdoll, but
it is not widespread.

Hemmaholic

March 28th 05, 04:56 PM

Brian,

Don't let people put a guilt trip on you! If you want to get another
Bengal, do so! If it really isn't important for it to be a kitten,
then do ask your breeder about retired adults and any possible rescues.
Things happen and people who do buy kittens are not always able to
keep them and most often return them to the breeder. If your breeder
doesn't have one, they may know of another breeder who does. It might
be worthwhile to check it out.

I, on the other hand, will be buying a kitten, the first purebred I
have bought in nearly 40 years. All of my other feline friends have
been strays or someone else's unwanted kittens. I have an 12-14 year
old shelter cat now that my daughter adopted and after two years had to
give up due to pet restrictions where she was moving to. I was
supposed to keep 'Baby' for a year; that was a good 10 years ago. (And
I already had two older felines at the time).

A couple of years ago I rescued a kitten and developed a very close
bond with it. He mysteriously disappeared last summer. Although I
looked for him, I never found my companion. I did come across one that
looked a lot like him, unfortunately it had been hit and killed. I
brought it home and buried it, cursed it's owners, etc.

I also care for a small colony of feral cats; ones that I started to
feed back when they were kittens. I didn't have the resources or
connections when they were young enough to be able to tame them and be
able to adopt them out as pets, so I have done what I could for them by
providing a somewhat crude shelter and food and have recently gone
through with the first T/N/R session. Four of the five were caught,
neutered and released. In another month or so, my coordinator and I
will attempt to trap the remaining 'kitten' plus two adults that have
been seen coming around for food. So far all of my colony have been
males, although the gender of the remaining kitten isn't known - it
sure won't let me touch it!

I have done and will continue to do what I can for the unloved,
unwanted felines I come in contact with and feel zero amount of "guilt"
about getting a purebred.

Hemma

Monique Y. Mudama

March 28th 05, 04:56 PM

On 2005-03-28, Bolo penned:
> I think buying a purebred is the smart thing to do,for starters you know
> what kind of cat you are getting unlike adopted cats some of them have been
> in half a dozen homes.I have heard some real horror stories about adopted
> cats but have never heard a bad thing about buying a purebred.And like
> someone already said you are giving a cat a good home ,but by buying
> purebred you know what you are getting into.I have 2 cats, a maine coon and
> a ragdoll,and would never trade them for anything.

I've heard plenty of horror stories about buying a purebred (did you happen to
read the thread a few months ago where a lady bought a purebred kitten who
turned out to be very, very ill?). I don't think your assumption that a
purebred will automatically have had a better history than a moggie holds any
water, either. You're assuming a conscientious breeder, and many breeders
aren't.

As for knowing what you're getting into ... you might know statistics, but you
don't know about their individual traits just by reading the breed
description. I'm thinking this is especially true when you buy a "pet
quality" as opposed to "show quality" pet.

I have one cat, born to a feral mom, and would never trade her for anything.
It was great fun watching her grow up and seeing her personality develop.

--
monique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully

pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca

-L.

March 28th 05, 05:02 PM

Joe.Canuck(at)gmail.com wrote:
> Every cat can have physical problems. With purebred, it is easier to
> track within the breed therefore we hear about it. With moggies, it
> cannot be tracked within lines because there are no records... so we
> don't hear about it. That doesn't mean there are no problems.
>
> I have a Ragdoll. There have been instances of HCM in the Ragdoll,
but
> it is not widespread.

Moggies don't have the problems associated with inbreeding that
purbreds do. Moggies in general are more healthy due to hybrid vigor.

-L.

Phil P.

March 28th 05, 05:13 PM

"Bolo" > wrote in message
news:3WK1e.817220$Xk.34378@pd7tw3no...
> I think buying a purebred is the smart thing to do,for starters you know
> what kind of cat you are getting

Yeah, you can always look up the list of all the genetic defects of each
breed caused by selective breeding to "improve the breed" and pick the
defects you like the best.

unlike adopted cats some of them have been
> in half a dozen homes.I have heard some real horror stories about adopted
> cats but have never heard a bad thing about buying a purebred.

You need to get out more. Purebreds are more susceptible to genetic defects
and certainly disease due to reduced disease resistance. As the gene pool
decreases, so does *immunity*.

Phil P.

March 28th 05, 05:28 PM

"Joe.Canuck(at)gmail.com" <"Joe.Canuck(at)gmail.com"> wrote in message
...
> MaryL wrote:
>
> > "Bolo" > wrote in message
> > news:3WK1e.817220$Xk.34378@pd7tw3no...
> >
> >>I think buying a purebred is the smart thing to do,for starters you know
> >>what kind of cat you are getting unlike adopted cats some of them have
> >>been
> >>in half a dozen homes.I have heard some real horror stories about
adopted
> >>cats but have never heard a bad thing about buying a purebred.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > Have you never heard about some of the physical problems that are common
> > with certain breeds? If not, you haven't done much reading.
> >
> > MaryL
> >
> >
>
> Every cat can have physical problems. With purebred, it is easier to
> track within the breed therefore we hear about it. With moggies, it
> cannot be tracked within lines because there are no records...

Not so Joe. The most widely used list of genetic defects in cats by Johnny
Hoskins of LA State *includes* moggies. The list was compiled from all the
26 veterinary university hospitals in North America over >20 years.

'Purebreds' unequivocally have more genetic defects than moggies. In fact,
the Siamese in particular, has more documented genetic defects than all the
purebred breeds and moggies combined! The Persian breeds are a close
second. Even the natural breeds such as the beautiful Turkish Angora -
aren't natural anymore unless you go to Anatolia to get one.

As the gene pool decreases, so does immunity and the ability to fight off
disease. Think of 'selective breeding' like playing poker with the same
five cards over and over - but moggies are dealt fresh cards every hand.
After a few hands, the moggie was exposed to many more cards than the
'purebred'. Sure, the purebred might be able to fight off a very limited
number diseases much better than the moggie - but the moggie can fight off
many, many more.

Moggies have hybrid vigor - 'purebreds' have inbreeding depression.

Phil

Phil P.

March 28th 05, 05:34 PM

Mary

March 28th 05, 07:40 PM

"Brian Link" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 20:39:50 -0700, "Monique Y. Mudama"
> > wrote:
>
> >On 2005-03-27, Brian Link penned:
> >> Going through old photos today, and came across a directory filled with
pics
> >> from when we were thinking about buying a Bengal (which we did, and
he's
> >> wonderful). Most are from this site:
> >> http://www.tibcs.com/petcorner/photos.php
> >>
> >> After having been through an ordeal with a stray, and knowing the
incredible
> >> number of discarded cats available for adoption, is it morally wrong to
> >> think of adopting another purebred?
> >>
> >> We've adopted six strays over the last ten years. We bought our Bengal
> >> primarily because we wanted a cat whose personality could be determined
> >> before hand, so it would keep our playful, energetic Tiger company.
This was
> >> a specific case that's worked out fantastically..
> >> http://www.discant.com/Cat/Henry%20001.jpg
> >>
> >> But I really love this breed - and if we can get ahold of a kitten,
there's
> >> a better chance that Louis won't go nuts.
> >>
> >> Just a thought. Breeders will continue to breed no matter what we do,
and
> >> poor strays will get euthanized no matter what we do. But is this just
> >> rationalizing?
> >>
> >> Eh.. I'm not totally driven to take in another cat, but I keep
wondering
> >> what Louis will do when Tiger finally dies.. it would be so nice for
him to
> >> have another friend around. Also I'd be happy to hear others' thoughts
about
> >> adopting from a shelter vs adopting a purebred.
> >>
> >> BLink
> >
> >You're asking a tough question here. For me, cats are cats regardless of
> >breed, so I have to put the question to myself in terms of dogs, where
> >variations are more significant to me. There are most certainly breeds
of
> >dogs that I like much better than others.
> >
> >I believe in the principle of generalization (kind of like the golden
rule):
> >this is one way that Kant proposed to evaluate whether or not something
is
> >moral. You simply pose yourself the question, if everyone were to do
what I
> >am considering, would I find the world to be a better or a worse place?
>
> This is a somewhat rarified philosophical question, which has limited
> use in real-world situations. At least this one.
>
> If everyone bought purebreds, who were spayed/neutered unless the
> buyer was a certified breeder themselves, then there would be no
> strays.
>
> However, in the real world, some buy purebreds, others let their pets
> breed willy-nilly. Worse yet, others let their unfixed cats go wild.
> Result = more strays than purebreds.
>
> >It's a toughie. If no one bought cats and dogs from breeders, then
breeders
> >would go out of business, and there would just be moggies.
>
> This is also a tough issue which brings into focus one's worldview. If
> you feel cats are basically vermin (gak - that's too strong a word, at
> least you feel that cats are short-lived animals which can also be
> companion animals), then the fate of coyote-culled feral colonies can
> be chalked up to the cruelty of the wilderness.. the same way
> beautiful animals such as deer are piled up by the dozen along rural
> highways. Or bunnies. Or squirrels (which my mother despises, but I
> personally love seeing loping in our front yard).
>
> Just playing devil's advocate here.. you all know I love all cats...
>

Oh, yes, we do. I have an acquaintance who is always going on about how
much she loves cats. She must. She has probably had 20 in the last five
years.
For some reason she can never keep them.

Mary

March 28th 05, 07:41 PM

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> > Breeders suck and people who support breeders suck.
> > It's in the Bible, the Koran, the Talmud and tatooed
> > on my own sweet ass.
>
> Then wouldn't buying a cat from a breeder means rescuing that cat from
> the evil breeder?
>
No, it is encouraging the breeder to breed by rewarding him with
cash.

Adam Helberg

March 28th 05, 07:56 PM

"Brian Link" > wrote in message
...

It's not "wrong" for you to buy a bred cat, you will be doing neither harm nor good;
just satisifying your desire, like when you buy anything else. The breeder, knowing
he sold the cat, will breed more.

When you adopt a shelter cat you are doing a good deed by saving an animal's life.

Adam

Mary

March 28th 05, 09:05 PM

"Hemmaholic" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Brian,
>
> Don't let people put a guilt trip on you! If you want to get another
> Bengal, do so!

Oh, don't worry, he will!

Mary

March 28th 05, 09:06 PM

"PawsForThought" > wrote in message
...
> MaryL wrote on 3/27/2005 :
> > "Brian Link" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> Going through old photos today, and came across a directory filled
> >> with pics from when we were thinking about buying a Bengal (which we
> >> did, and he's wonderful). Most are from this site:
> >> http://www.tibcs.com/petcorner/photos.php
> >>
> >> After having been through an ordeal with a stray, and knowing the
> >> incredible number of discarded cats available for adoption, is it
> >> morally wrong to think of adopting another purebred?
> >>
> >>
> >> BLink
> >
> > Please don't even consider this. First, don't buy from a breeder
because
> > there are untold numbers of cats already available from shelters and
rescue
> > groups -- and an unbelievably large number are destined to be
euthanized. If
> > you do decide on a purebred, please look at a shelter (where there often
are
> > both purebreds and "look-alikes" available) or contact one of the rescue
> > groups that rehome abandoned and abused purebreds.
>
> Totally agree. I can't see supporting the breeding of cats. It just
> makes no sense when there are cats in shelters just as wonderful as any
> purebred.
>
> Second, I hope you won't
> > adopt *any* cat at this time. You have just gone through a difficult
time
> > with Henry, and it would be simply asking for trouble to bring another
cat
> > into your home at this early date.
> >
> > MaryL
>
> I must have missed all this. Did this person try to adopt another cat?
>

Google for Brian "asshole" Link and "Henry."

Mary

March 28th 05, 09:08 PM

"Phil P." > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Joe.Canuck(at)gmail.com" <"Joe.Canuck(at)gmail.com"> wrote in message
> ...
> > MaryL wrote:
> >
> > > "Bolo" > wrote in message
> > > news:3WK1e.817220$Xk.34378@pd7tw3no...
> > >
> > >>I think buying a purebred is the smart thing to do,for starters you
know
> > >>what kind of cat you are getting unlike adopted cats some of them have
> > >>been
> > >>in half a dozen homes.I have heard some real horror stories about
> adopted
> > >>cats but have never heard a bad thing about buying a purebred.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > Have you never heard about some of the physical problems that are
common
> > > with certain breeds? If not, you haven't done much reading.
> > >
> > > MaryL
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Every cat can have physical problems. With purebred, it is easier to
> > track within the breed therefore we hear about it. With moggies, it
> > cannot be tracked within lines because there are no records...
>
> Not so Joe. The most widely used list of genetic defects in cats by
Johnny
> Hoskins of LA State *includes* moggies. The list was compiled from all
the
> 26 veterinary university hospitals in North America over >20 years.
>
> 'Purebreds' unequivocally have more genetic defects than moggies. In
fact,
> the Siamese in particular, has more documented genetic defects than all
the
> purebred breeds and moggies combined! The Persian breeds are a close
> second. Even the natural breeds such as the beautiful Turkish Angora -
> aren't natural anymore unless you go to Anatolia to get one.
>
> As the gene pool decreases, so does immunity and the ability to fight off
> disease. Think of 'selective breeding' like playing poker with the same
> five cards over and over - but moggies are dealt fresh cards every hand.
> After a few hands, the moggie was exposed to many more cards than the
> 'purebred'. Sure, the purebred might be able to fight off a very limited
> number diseases much better than the moggie - but the moggie can fight off
> many, many more.
>
> Moggies have hybrid vigor - 'purebreds' have inbreeding depression.
>

I knew if I stayed out of this one you would have a better reply than I
would have. Thanks, Phil.

PawsForThought

March 28th 05, 09:30 PM

>>Yeah, you can always look up the list of all the genetic defects of
each
breed caused by selective breeding to "improve the breed" and pick the
defects you like the best.

Personally I'm partial to that bulge-eyed, squished in almost
non-existent nose look. Argh.....why do people do that to cats?!!

Mary

March 28th 05, 09:32 PM

"Adam Helberg" > wrote in message
k.net...
>
> "Brian Link" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> It's not "wrong" for you to buy a bred cat, you will be doing neither harm
nor good;
> just satisifying your desire, like when you buy anything else. The
breeder, knowing
> he sold the cat, will breed more.
>
> When you adopt a shelter cat you are doing a good deed by saving an
animal's life.
>

Very nicely put. However, Brian does not care.

Mary

March 28th 05, 09:38 PM

"PawsForThought" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> >>Yeah, you can always look up the list of all the genetic defects of
> each
> breed caused by selective breeding to "improve the breed" and pick the
> defects you like the best.
>
> Personally I'm partial to that bulge-eyed, squished in almost
> non-existent nose look. Argh.....why do people do that to cats?!!
>

It is amazing, isn't it? To take a perfectly beautiful creature
and do that. Ugh.

Ray

March 29th 05, 02:09 AM

Just curious after all this discussion, have you an answer to your
question?

Monique Y. Mudama

March 29th 05, 04:52 AM

On 2005-03-27, Mary penned:
>
> "Monique Y. Mudama" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> Doesn't matter. Of all of the attempts to philosophize moral arguments,
>> this is the only one that's actually been useful to me in daily life.
>
> Here is where it falls down--as a basis for moral behavior, forget the
> predicate logic. It is not only completely unlikely but utterly impossible
> that "everyone" would do whatever thing you are considering doing.
> Therefore you are measuring the worth (or potential harm) of an event or
> deed by a false measure. It would be more effective were you to ask yourself
> something like, "would this be a good thing if 100 out of every 10,000
> people did it." But still it would fall down, because I can give you example
> after example of beneficial or "good" deeds/events/choices that, were say,
> even half the population to do them, would NOT be good. The first that comes
> to mind: you are in a large city on a large, busy city highway or beltline
> or freeway. You see an accident. You stop to see if you can help. As it
> turns out, you are able to pull a child to safety before the care blows up.
> Now then, what if half the people on the same busy beltline did the same
> thing? Meaning, stopped to help? It would most certainly not be a good
> thing, and in fact the resulting gridlock would keep the emergency vehicles
> needed to contain the fire in the car and administer medical help to the
> child could not reach the child due to all the stopped vehicles on the road.

All interesting points. You're absolutely right; I don't think morality can
ever be decided as simply as a single question. Well, maybe "does this harm
anyone," but it's almost always the case that an action harms *someone*, at
least by inaction, so ... it's never simple.

>> I don't really care if it can be logically proven. Logic proofs are
>> fun and neat, but in the end they always start from some assumption
>> that can be argued, so even if there's no flaw in the logic, the
>> proof itself won't convince someone who doesn't want to be convinced.
>
> No, they do not always begin with an assumption that can be argued.
> But that is neither here nor there in terms of the present
> application. The practice of predicate logic can be thought of as no
> more than mental masturbation--or it can be much more, as it can
> transfer off of paper and into actual life.

Gah, I just had something typed up, and my editor ate it!

Well, anyway. I do think that logic is incredibly useful in day to day life.
It helps me separate good, solid ideas from bull****. But I don't think it
can take us all the way when we're talking about the really interesting stuff:
right and wrong, why we're here, etc. It's a step in the right direction, but
it's not the solution.

>> If you have a better rule of thumb, let me know.
>
> I do not have a better rule of thumb but I have a better idea: ditch
> "rules of thumb." Examine every situation as the unique combination of
> causes and effects that itis, and each potential deed, too.

Of course, but a rule of thumb isn't meant to be exact. It's meant to be an
approximation that works in many situations. There are, of course, many ways
to approach a question, and it's a good idea to think about anything important
from several angles.

--
monique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully

pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca

Mary

March 29th 05, 05:35 AM

"Monique Y. Mudama" > wrote in message
...
> On 2005-03-27, Mary penned:
> >
> > "Monique Y. Mudama" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>
> >> Doesn't matter. Of all of the attempts to philosophize moral
arguments,
> >> this is the only one that's actually been useful to me in daily life.
> >
> > Here is where it falls down--as a basis for moral behavior, forget the
> > predicate logic. It is not only completely unlikely but utterly
impossible
> > that "everyone" would do whatever thing you are considering doing.
> > Therefore you are measuring the worth (or potential harm) of an event or
> > deed by a false measure. It would be more effective were you to ask
yourself
> > something like, "would this be a good thing if 100 out of every 10,000
> > people did it." But still it would fall down, because I can give you
example
> > after example of beneficial or "good" deeds/events/choices that, were
say,
> > even half the population to do them, would NOT be good. The first that
comes
> > to mind: you are in a large city on a large, busy city highway or
beltline
> > or freeway. You see an accident. You stop to see if you can help. As it
> > turns out, you are able to pull a child to safety before the care blows
up.
> > Now then, what if half the people on the same busy beltline did the same
> > thing? Meaning, stopped to help? It would most certainly not be a good
> > thing, and in fact the resulting gridlock would keep the emergency
vehicles
> > needed to contain the fire in the car and administer medical help to the
> > child could not reach the child due to all the stopped vehicles on the
road.
>
> All interesting points. You're absolutely right; I don't think morality
can
> ever be decided as simply as a single question. Well, maybe "does this
harm
> anyone," but it's almost always the case that an action harms *someone*,
at
> least by inaction, so ... it's never simple.

No but you are a natural at it hee hee! As am I. Makes for some entertaining
thoughts and some thorny dilemmas.

>
> >> I don't really care if it can be logically proven. Logic proofs are
> >> fun and neat, but in the end they always start from some assumption
> >> that can be argued, so even if there's no flaw in the logic, the
> >> proof itself won't convince someone who doesn't want to be convinced.
> >
> > No, they do not always begin with an assumption that can be argued.
> > But that is neither here nor there in terms of the present
> > application. The practice of predicate logic can be thought of as no
> > more than mental masturbation--or it can be much more, as it can
> > transfer off of paper and into actual life.
>
> Gah, I just had something typed up, and my editor ate it!

Hate that. You really should feed your editor more. <G>

>
> Well, anyway. I do think that logic is incredibly useful in day to day
life.
> It helps me separate good, solid ideas from bull****. But I don't think
it
> can take us all the way when we're talking about the really interesting
stuff:
> right and wrong, why we're here, etc. It's a step in the right direction,
but
> it's not the solution.
>

Actually, I meant the formal operaton of applying predicate
logic to texts or verbal arguments. It's all mental masturbation.
However--that said, the whole purpose of the exercise is to
train the mind to think logically. As you know, having had a
good deal of philosophy.

> >> If you have a better rule of thumb, let me know.
> >
> > I do not have a better rule of thumb but I have a better idea: ditch
> > "rules of thumb." Examine every situation as the unique combination of
> > causes and effects that itis, and each potential deed, too.
>
> Of course, but a rule of thumb isn't meant to be exact. It's meant to be
an
> approximation that works in many situations.

Yes, but generalization can be death of a good argument!!

There are, of course, many ways
> to approach a question, and it's a good idea to think about anything
important
> from several angles.
>

I'm with you there. I love seeing all sides, and often do this to the
point that I lose my original position. It's great fun.

Anyway, you did bring up Kant so you had it coming! Plllllbbbbt!

Meghan Noecker

March 29th 05, 08:41 AM

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 10:40:58 -0500, "Joe.Canuck(at)gmail.com"
<"Joe.Canuck(at)gmail.com"> wrote:

>
>Every cat can have physical problems. With purebred, it is easier to
>track within the breed therefore we hear about it. With moggies, it
>cannot be tracked within lines because there are no records... so we
>don't hear about it. That doesn't mean there are no problems.

Actually, the problems are more likely in the purebreds, and while
some are specific to the breed, some are simply because of
irresponsible breeders who don't bother to do testing before breeding.

If you are going to choose a cat whose parents were not tested, then
you will have better odds with a moggie.

In my own experience, I have seen a siamese that was extremely
neurotic. Medications did not help.

We got a kitten that was supposed to be siamese - came from two
purebred siamese. She kept getting fluffier, and i finally learned
that she is a balinese. This is a recessive gene that obviously both
parents carried, but nobody knew.

With dogs, we have had 3 shelties from shelters. The first went blind
at age 9. A very common eye problem with no cure, that could have been
prevented if the breeder had simply tested the dogs before breeding.

The second sheltie arrived with minor vision problems, and that is now
getting worse. More notably, she has an enlarged heart.The vet said
she should never exercise more than 10 minutes at a time. Her heart
pushes on her windpipe, so she can stop breathing. So much for taking
her with me on long walks and rollerblading.

The 3rd sheltie had recurrent bladder infections and eventually died
of bladder cancer.

There are some nice benefitss to choosing a purebred, but health ain't
one of them.

--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com

Hemmaholic

March 30th 05, 01:40 AM

I've wanted a Bengal since I first started reading about the breed -
about ten years ago. Needless to say, the breed was much too new then
and not "fixed" in it's traits. The breed has developed slowly and
quite well over the past decade and this year I finally had the money
to be able to get one.

I am getting a Silver Spotted male in about a month. The /silvers were
only recently accepted for Championship status and they remind me very
much of the last cat I had. He was a rescue at 5 weeks of age and was
one of the most loving, intelligent felines I've ever been blessed with
knowing. Anyway, to make a long story short some one took him last
summer and I've been aching to have that special bond back. Pippin was
sliver with black tabby markings, but instead of solid stripe they were
small spots set close together, he had the whited tummy and spots
similar to the Bengal breed and may well have had Bengal in his
bloodline..

So you see it hasn't been a sudden decision, and it's only been
serendipity that I was able to connect with a breeder not far from me
and that has the Silver Spotted Bengals This breeder has also been
most helpful in helping me get the right connections to be able to
properly care for my little feral colony.

Rebecca.

Cheryl

March 30th 05, 02:06 AM

On Tue 29 Mar 2005 07:40:16p, Hemmaholic wrote in
rec.pets.cats.health+behav
oups.com):

> I've wanted a Bengal since I first started reading about the
> breed - about ten years ago. Needless to say, the breed was
> much too new then and not "fixed" in it's traits. The breed has
> developed slowly and quite well over the past decade and this
> year I finally had the money to be able to get one.

I have a pair that were rescued at the age of about 8 weeks. No,
there are no papers that they are Bengals, but they have all of the
traits, especially the male, and when I had an any idea that they
might be Bengal mixes, I was scared. ;) They're now about 6 months
old.

Pics :)
This album is just Rhett, the boy baby
http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/shambondow/album?.dir=8768&.src=ph

Here is both of them from the time they were first spotted (early
pics are with their two other littermates)
http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/shambondow/album?.dir=1f98&.src=ph

--
Cheryl

"The clever cat eats cheese and breathes down rat holes with baited
breath."
- W.C. Fields

Phil P.

March 30th 05, 03:12 AM

"Hemmaholic" > wrote in message
oups.com...

>
> Don't let people put a guilt trip on you!

Guilt is a matter of conscience. The mere fact he has doubts means
something about buying a 'purebred' just doesn't seem right to him.

>
> I have done and will continue to do what I can for the unloved,
> unwanted felines I come in contact with and feel zero amount of "guilt"
> about getting a purebred.

Yeah, I've met a lot people like you who feel helping strays and ferals or
even volunteering in a shelter somehow justifies buying a 'purebred' -- as
if they're rewarding themselves for the good they do.

[email protected]

March 30th 05, 08:54 AM

It's all been said, but yes, I think it's wrong to buy another
purebred. It just encourages more breeding, perpetuates the myths that
purebreds are safer, more predictable or less risky than shelter cats,
and deprives an abandoned cat of a home, when there are not nearly
enough.

That said, I'm not an advocate of kitten adoption period. Even adopting
shelter kittens does little or nothing to address cat overpopulation.
Those of us who give a crap about these creatures really need to
dedicate ourselves to adopting homeless adult cats.

And yeah, my first cat was a 6 month old shelter kitten. But I'd never
do that again. The second one was a frightened semi-feral and when the
time comes, I'll take on another of the lost ones who needs me. I'd go
as far up the scale as your own temperament, availability and cat
handling skills will take you.

There are limited opportunities to do good in this world, but this is
one of the things we can do. Maybe we'll get to a day when all this
isn't necessary and we can all select the designer kitten of our
choice. But we aren't there yet and we will never be unless we start
taking responsibility for the situation we have....

Hemmaholic

March 30th 05, 02:25 PM

"Phil said. . . Yeah, I've met a lot people like you who feel helping
strays and ferals or
even volunteering in a shelter somehow justifies buying a 'purebred'
-- as
if they're rewarding themselves for the good they do. "

I resent the implication that because I have chosen to purchase a
purebred I am somehow "rewarding" myself for the "good I do".

I will not, however, justify my decision to you or any other narrow
minded people who think anything other than a "short/long haired
domestic, aka: alley cat" is the only breed anyone should ever share
their lives with.

How many animals do you have, how many feral colonies have you helped
to set up and how many do you, personally, care for? Or do you just
pontificate and try to force your views on others?

Hemma

Phil P.

March 30th 05, 03:40 PM

"Hemmaholic" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> "Phil said. . . Yeah, I've met a lot people like you who feel helping
> strays and ferals or
> even volunteering in a shelter somehow justifies buying a 'purebred'
> -- as
> if they're rewarding themselves for the good they do. "
>
> I resent the implication that because I have chosen to purchase a
> purebred I am somehow "rewarding" myself for the "good I do".

Really? Well, I sure as hell didn't mean it as a compliment or praise!

>
> I will not, however, justify my decision to you or any other narrow
> minded people who think anything other than a "short/long haired
> domestic, aka: alley cat" is the only breed anyone should ever share
> their lives with.

That's not what I said. Don't manipulate my statements. I never said a
DS/LH "is the only breed anyone should ever share their lives with." I
said its unconscionable to *buy* a 'purebred' from a *breeder* while
millions of cats are languishing and dying in shelters every year. There's
nothing wrong with adopting a 'purebred' from a shelter... Or are the
'papers' too important to you?

>
> How many animals do you have, how many feral colonies have you helped
> to set up and how many do you, personally, care for?

How many does it take to win a prize? See? I was right about you!

Or do you just
> pontificate and try to force your views on others?

I talk it like I walk it.

Mary

March 30th 05, 06:18 PM

-L.

March 31st 05, 12:30 AM

wrote:
> It's all been said, but yes, I think it's wrong to buy another
> purebred. It just encourages more breeding, perpetuates the myths
that
> purebreds are safer, more predictable or less risky than shelter
cats,
> and deprives an abandoned cat of a home, when there are not nearly
> enough.
>
> That said, I'm not an advocate of kitten adoption period. Even
adopting
> shelter kittens does little or nothing to address cat overpopulation.
> Those of us who give a crap about these creatures really need to
> dedicate ourselves to adopting homeless adult cats.

Oh please. Kittens that are not adopted end up on the kill-pile as
well. have you not ever worked in a kill shelter? The puppies and
kittens are killed just as the adults. Don't deny any animal destined
for the kill-pile a home. A kitten is a better fit for some families -
not every family is a good fit for an adult cat.

-L.

Bolo

March 31st 05, 12:32 AM

If you are to cheap to buy a purebred,then fine go get a free one from a
shelter or from the free kittens ad from the news paper.But if you want a
good cat stop smoking or drinking and use the money to buy a purebred.

"Brian Link" > wrote in message
...
> Going through old photos today, and came across a directory filled
> with pics from when we were thinking about buying a Bengal (which we
> did, and he's wonderful). Most are from this site:
> http://www.tibcs.com/petcorner/photos.php
>
> After having been through an ordeal with a stray, and knowing the
> incredible number of discarded cats available for adoption, is it
> morally wrong to think of adopting another purebred?
>
> We've adopted six strays over the last ten years. We bought our Bengal
> primarily because we wanted a cat whose personality could be
> determined before hand, so it would keep our playful, energetic Tiger
> company. This was a specific case that's worked out fantastically..
> http://www.discant.com/Cat/Henry%20001.jpg
>
> But I really love this breed - and if we can get ahold of a kitten,
> there's a better chance that Louis won't go nuts.
>
> Just a thought. Breeders will continue to breed no matter what we do,
> and poor strays will get euthanized no matter what we do. But is this
> just rationalizing?
>
> Eh.. I'm not totally driven to take in another cat, but I keep
> wondering what Louis will do when Tiger finally dies.. it would be so
> nice for him to have another friend around. Also I'd be happy to hear
> others' thoughts about adopting from a shelter vs adopting a purebred.
>
> BLink

[email protected]

March 31st 05, 02:25 AM

"Oh please. Kittens that are not adopted end up on the kill-pile as
well. have you not ever worked in a kill shelter? The puppies and
kittens are killed just as the adults. Don't deny any animal destined
for the kill-pile a home.

Around here, the kittens fly out of the shelter (both the no-kill and
the municipal) and the adult cats who aren't blessed with people
outreach skills languish indefinitely if they aren't euthanized. Those
are the facts. 8/10 potential adopters want kittens. Probably 50% of
the remaining ones won't look at at a cat older than 2 or 3 years old.
It's a problem. Some of those people have to be redirected to the
enormous stock of 5 year old cats whose owners have dumped them. And
it's hard.

"A kitten is a better fit for some families -not every family is a good
fit for an adult cat"

Yeah, it's too bad the kittens grow up into adult cats then, isn't it?
I can't count the number of people who sweep in during kitten season,
pick a cutie, and then send him on back a year or two later when he's
not a baby anymore. I'm getting progressively more leery of
kittens-only folks everyday.

Ashley

March 31st 05, 03:10 AM

> wrote in message
ups.com...

> Yeah, it's too bad the kittens grow up into adult cats then, isn't it?
> I can't count the number of people who sweep in during kitten season,
> pick a cutie, and then send him on back a year or two later when he's
> not a baby anymore. I'm getting progressively more leery of
> kittens-only folks everyday.

That would be because, working in a shelter, you don't get to see much of
those who get a kitten and keep it for the next 15 years ...

I'm beginning to get more than mildly leary of the shelter folk who assume
every cat owner must be like the irresponsible ones they see the results of.
There are far too many of them on usenet.

[email protected]

March 31st 05, 03:49 AM

"That would be because, working in a shelter, you don't get to see much
of
those who get a kitten and keep it for the next 15 years ..."

I don't work in a shelter. Just volunteer on Saturday afternoons to do
some adoption counseling for cats.

"I'm beginning to get more than mildly leary of the shelter folk who
assume
every cat owner must be like the irresponsible ones they see the
results of. There are far too many of them on usenet. "

Some are, some aren't. I see some pretty scary people on a regular
basis. Not bad people, but ignorant and careless about how to take care
of a pet. My neighbor used to leave her little puppy chained up to a
soaking wet plastic doghouse in the pouring rain (until I harassed her
about it). Not a bad person, but doing a bad thing. It happens all the
time. And as I said, the "I want a little kitten, not a cat" people
have a particularly high ratio.

Ashley

March 31st 05, 04:14 AM

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> "That would be because, working in a shelter, you don't get to see much
> of
> those who get a kitten and keep it for the next 15 years ..."
>
> I don't work in a shelter. Just volunteer on Saturday afternoons to do
> some adoption counseling for cats.
>

Same diff.

> "I'm beginning to get more than mildly leary of the shelter folk who
> assume
> every cat owner must be like the irresponsible ones they see the
> results of. There are far too many of them on usenet. "
>
> Some are, some aren't. I see some pretty scary people on a regular
> basis. Not bad people, but ignorant and careless about how to take care
> of a pet. My neighbor used to leave her little puppy chained up to a
> soaking wet plastic doghouse in the pouring rain (until I harassed her
> about it). Not a bad person, but doing a bad thing.

And no doubt would have responded well to a caring "Do you realise" instead
of harassment. Education is much more effective than badgering.

It happens all the
> time. And as I said, the "I want a little kitten, not a cat" people
> have a particularly high ratio.

Well, you know what, when I get new cats, I get kittens. I love the kitten
stage and I wouldn't miss it for the world. Last two I got are still here,
10.5 years later. Ones before that, sadly I had to find homes for when I
left Britain. But, you know what, I *found* a home for them, together. With
a family who adored them. People working, or volunteering as you do, see the
bad stories. Those of us who aren't like that simply don't get noticed. For
the same reason that good news doesn't sell papers.

I am, however, really sick of the lecturing "If you saw what I saw" bunch
around here, who seem to think that anyone who has slightly different views
about cats than they do must be evil, or close to it. Having said that, such
posters are progressively filling up my killfile, so their words are, in my
case, falling on deaf ears. Really advancing their cause, aren't they?

[email protected]

March 31st 05, 06:10 AM

"And no doubt would have responded well to a caring "Do you realise"
instead of harassment. Education is much more effective than badgering"

If you're talking about my neighbor, the answer is no. They received
several caring overtures which were totally ignored. They responded to
what was basically a public shaming. And again, if you're talking about
people returning kittens to shelters after they've grown up - I have
tried talking to these people - to no avail. It's always allergies,
spouses, babies, moving, it's not as cute as it used to be and that's
that..

"Well, you know what, when I get new cats, I get kittens. I love the
kitten
stage and I wouldn't miss it for the world. Last two I got are still
here,
10.5 years later. Ones before that, sadly I had to find homes for when
I
left Britain. But, you know what, I *found* a home for them, together.
With
a family who adored them. People working, or volunteering as you do,
see the bad stories. Those of us who aren't like that simply don't get
noticed. For the same reason that good news doesn't sell papers"

I get that your defensive reaction came from your predilection for
adopting kittens. You're right, being a responsible adopter of kittens
is better than being an irresponsible adopter of kittens. But I do
reserve my warmest thoughts and a higher level of admiration for people
who adopt troubled adult cats. It's more work, it's less common, and
they are deserving of high praise.

Ashley

March 31st 05, 06:16 AM

> wrote in message
ups.com...

> I get that your defensive reaction came from your predilection for
> adopting kittens.

No, actually, it's not a defensive reaction. It's an aggressive reaction.
I'm sick to death of the holier-than-thou attitude some posters on this ng
display. In all honesty, I'm not sick-to-death of it enough for it to keep
me awake at night, nor am I sick-to-death of it enough for it to concern me
when I'm not posting, but I am sick-to-death enough of it to point it out
here a few times.

You're right, being a responsible adopter of kittens
> is better than being an irresponsible adopter of kittens. But I do
> reserve my warmest thoughts and a higher level of admiration for people
> who adopt troubled adult cats. It's more work, it's less common, and
> they are deserving of high praise.

You are assuming, tracyrose, that anyone really cares about your praise.
Some of us just care about enjoying our cats.

[email protected]

March 31st 05, 06:53 AM

>
> I am, however, really sick of the lecturing "If you saw what I saw"
bunch
> around here, who seem to think that anyone who has slightly different
views
> about cats than they do must be evil, or close to it.

As a member of the "If you saw what I saw" camp, and I can probably
speak for Phil in that camp also, you're not nearly as sick of us as we
are of you.

Sherry

[email protected]

March 31st 05, 06:58 AM

Bolo wrote:
> If you are to cheap to buy a purebred,then fine go get a free one
from a
> shelter or from the free kittens ad from the news paper.But if you
want a
> good cat stop smoking or drinking and use the money to buy a
purebred.
>
>
You're trolling, right?

Or are you suggesting people adopt from shelters, or adopt rescued
strays because it's *cheaper*?
Let me clue you in. I "adopted" Biskit from my windowsill in rain/sleet
storm last February. After vaccinations, spaying, hernia surgery and
surgery to remove a BB from under the skin on her side, the grand total
for my "free cat" was over $400. I daresay that's about what most
purebreds fetch around here.

Sherry

-L.

March 31st 05, 08:00 AM

wrote:
> >
> > I am, however, really sick of the lecturing "If you saw what I saw"
> bunch
> > around here, who seem to think that anyone who has slightly
different
> views
> > about cats than they do must be evil, or close to it.
>
> As a member of the "If you saw what I saw" camp, and I can probably
> speak for Phil in that camp also, you're not nearly as sick of us as
we
> are of you.
>
>
> Sherry

Common as pinworms. Unfortunately.

-L.

Brian Link

March 31st 05, 08:39 AM

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 13:40:38 -0500, "Mary" > wrote:

>
>"Brian Link" > wrote in message
...

>> Just playing devil's advocate here.. you all know I love all cats...
>>
>Oh, yes, we do. I have an acquaintance who is always going on about how
>much she loves cats. She must. She has probably had 20 in the last five
>years.
>For some reason she can never keep them.

Does she take your advice?

BLink

[email protected]

March 31st 05, 08:40 AM

Ashley wrote:
> > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>
> > I get that your defensive reaction came from your predilection for
> > adopting kittens.
>
> No, actually, it's not a defensive reaction. It's an aggressive
reaction.
> I'm sick to death of the holier-than-thou attitude some posters on
this ng
> display. In all honesty, I'm not sick-to-death of it enough for it to
keep
> me awake at night, nor am I sick-to-death of it enough for it to
concern me
> when I'm not posting, but I am sick-to-death enough of it to point it
out
> here a few times.
>
> You're right, being a responsible adopter of kittens
> > is better than being an irresponsible adopter of kittens. But I do
> > reserve my warmest thoughts and a higher level of admiration for
people
> > who adopt troubled adult cats. It's more work, it's less common,
and
> > they are deserving of high praise.
>
> You are assuming, tracyrose, that anyone really cares about your
praise.
> Some of us just care about enjoying our cats.

Brian Link

March 31st 05, 08:40 AM

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 15:32:48 -0500, "Mary" > wrote:

>
>"Adam Helberg" > wrote in message
k.net...
>>
>> "Brian Link" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>> It's not "wrong" for you to buy a bred cat, you will be doing neither harm
>nor good;
>> just satisifying your desire, like when you buy anything else. The
>breeder, knowing
>> he sold the cat, will breed more.
>>
>> When you adopt a shelter cat you are doing a good deed by saving an
>animal's life.
>>
>
>Very nicely put. However, Brian does not care.
>

And your evidence is... ?

Oh wait... you're insane. I forgot.

BLink

Brian Link

March 31st 05, 08:42 AM

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 19:02:10 -0500, "Mary" > wrote:

>
>"PawsForThought" > wrote
>
>> Mary, honestly, I never have. Maybe there's something wrong with me
>> but I can tell you I've never felt that desire. I mean I like kids, so
>> long as they're not mine. Funny, when they show a baby on tv for
>> instance, my husband and I will look at each other and say "too bad
>> it's not a kitten. Now THAT would be cute!" :')
>>
>> --
>
>
>I have had the impulse, but as soon as I thought about how
>it would change my life I vetoed it. Even with my sisters and
>many of my friends and colleagues doing the little mysterious
>smile and comments such as "it's the most wonderful thing
>in the world" and all that other stuff the childful do around
>us child-less, I have never bought into the idea that I am
>missing anything I don't want to miss. For me, doing anything
>and everything I want to do with my life without having the
>distraction of dependants who might or might not even like
>me or appreciate what I have done for them just does not
>quite suck. :) I have watched my oldest nieces and nephews
>grow up, too. Let's just say that their parents' experiences
>with them have done nothing to make me think my first
>take on the situation was wrong.
>

Let me just mention, on behalf of responsible parents everywhere, that
your decision was entirely proper.

BLink

[email protected]

March 31st 05, 08:52 AM

-L. wrote:
> wrote:
> > >
> > > I am, however, really sick of the lecturing "If you saw what I
saw"
> > bunch
> > > around here, who seem to think that anyone who has slightly
> different
> > views
> > > about cats than they do must be evil, or close to it.
> >
> > As a member of the "If you saw what I saw" camp, and I can probably
> > speak for Phil in that camp also, you're not nearly as sick of us
as
> we
> > are of you.
> >
> >
> > Sherry
>
> Common as pinworms. Unfortunately.
>
> -L.

Sorry, I'm not following you. :-)
What is as common as pinworms? You mean, self-serving people who have a
couple of pampered house cats, and don't give a damn about alleviating
suffering, and curbing overpopulation, or cats as a species in general?
The ones who brag about their "rights" to "own" whatever strikes their
fancy, and the homeless are someone else's problem? Like that selfish
bitch Ashley?

Sherry

-L.

March 31st 05, 09:03 AM

wrote:
> >
> > Common as pinworms. Unfortunately.
> >
> > -L.
>
> Sorry, I'm not following you. :-)
> What is as common as pinworms? You mean, self-serving people who have
a
> couple of pampered house cats, and don't give a damn about
alleviating
> suffering, and curbing overpopulation, or cats as a species in
general?
> The ones who brag about their "rights" to "own" whatever strikes
their
> fancy, and the homeless are someone else's problem? Like that selfish
> bitch Ashley?
>
> Sherry

Yes. :)

-L.

Mary

March 31st 05, 09:35 AM

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> >
> > I am, however, really sick of the lecturing "If you saw what I saw"
> bunch
> > around here, who seem to think that anyone who has slightly different
> views
> > about cats than they do must be evil, or close to it.
>
> As a member of the "If you saw what I saw" camp, and I can probably
> speak for Phil in that camp also, you're not nearly as sick of us as we
> are of you.
>
>
> Sherry
>

Well now, nice to see you again Sherry!

Mary

March 31st 05, 09:44 AM

"Brian Link" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 13:40:38 -0500, "Mary" > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Brian Link" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> >> Just playing devil's advocate here.. you all know I love all cats...
> >>
> >Oh, yes, we do. I have an acquaintance who is always going on about how
> >much she loves cats. She must. She has probably had 20 in the last five
> >years.
> >For some reason she can never keep them.
>
> Does she take your advice?
>
> BLink
>

I rarely offer idiots advice, Brian. In your case I made a rare
exception.

Mary

March 31st 05, 09:44 AM

"Brian Link" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 15:32:48 -0500, "Mary" > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Adam Helberg" > wrote in message
> k.net...
> >>
> >> "Brian Link" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >>
> >> It's not "wrong" for you to buy a bred cat, you will be doing neither
harm
> >nor good;
> >> just satisifying your desire, like when you buy anything else. The
> >breeder, knowing
> >> he sold the cat, will breed more.
> >>
> >> When you adopt a shelter cat you are doing a good deed by saving an
> >animal's life.
> >>
> >
> >Very nicely put. However, Brian does not care.
> >
>
> And your evidence is... ?
>
> Oh wait... you're insane. I forgot.
>
> BLink

My evidence is poor Henry.

Mary

March 31st 05, 09:45 AM

"Brian Link" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 19:02:10 -0500, "Mary" > wrote:
>
> >
> >"PawsForThought" > wrote
> >
> >> Mary, honestly, I never have. Maybe there's something wrong with me
> >> but I can tell you I've never felt that desire. I mean I like kids, so
> >> long as they're not mine. Funny, when they show a baby on tv for
> >> instance, my husband and I will look at each other and say "too bad
> >> it's not a kitten. Now THAT would be cute!" :')
> >>
> >> --
> >
> >
> >I have had the impulse, but as soon as I thought about how
> >it would change my life I vetoed it. Even with my sisters and
> >many of my friends and colleagues doing the little mysterious
> >smile and comments such as "it's the most wonderful thing
> >in the world" and all that other stuff the childful do around
> >us child-less, I have never bought into the idea that I am
> >missing anything I don't want to miss. For me, doing anything
> >and everything I want to do with my life without having the
> >distraction of dependants who might or might not even like
> >me or appreciate what I have done for them just does not
> >quite suck. :) I have watched my oldest nieces and nephews
> >grow up, too. Let's just say that their parents' experiences
> >with them have done nothing to make me think my first
> >take on the situation was wrong.
> >
>
> Let me just mention, on behalf of responsible parents everywhere, that
> your decision was entirely proper.
>
> BLink

Thank you. I agree.

Meghan Noecker

March 31st 05, 10:08 AM

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:40:44 -0500, "Phil P." >
wrote:

>That's not what I said. Don't manipulate my statements. I never said a
>DS/LH "is the only breed anyone should ever share their lives with." I
>said its unconscionable to *buy* a 'purebred' from a *breeder* while
>millions of cats are languishing and dying in shelters every year. There's
>nothing wrong with adopting a 'purebred' from a shelter... Or are the
>'papers' too important to you?
>
>

Papers are a big deal in many breeds, but a statement I like in the
horse world is, "you don't ride the papers."

In the same way, you don't snuggle with the papers and the papers
don't love you back. So, unless you are showing, the papers are really
not important. They just inflate the value of the animal as an object
or breeding stock, but not as a pet.

Only one of my animals has had papers, and she is hardly a good
example of the breed. She's an undersized sheltie with prick ears,
poor conformation, totally wrong coat; and she has an enlarged heart
and poor vision. Her papers are meaningless. On the other hand, she is
the cutest sweetest most wonderful dog. But the papers don't say that.

As you said, Phil, there are plenty of purebreds in the shelters. The
only difference is that they don't have papers. It seems like the best
place to look for a pet quality purebred. And with the websites like
petfinder, it is even easier since you don't have to go to each
shelter physically. You can sit at home and look online.

--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com

Meghan Noecker

March 31st 05, 10:22 AM

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 17:16:58 +1200, "Ashley"
> wrote:

>No, actually, it's not a defensive reaction. It's an aggressive reaction.
>I'm sick to death of the holier-than-thou attitude some posters on this ng
>display. In all honesty, I'm not sick-to-death of it enough for it to keep
>me awake at night, nor am I sick-to-death of it enough for it to concern me
>when I'm not posting, but I am sick-to-death enough of it to point it out
>here a few times.
>

It's very similar to the older person explaining something to the
younger person. I hated it when older people did it to me, but now I
am totally frustrated with my know-it-all nephew who can't see the
whole picture, and totally resists what I try to tell him from actual
experience.

Those of us who do know, really do know. And it's hard to convince
people until they have seen as well.

I understand where you are coming from. Honestly. I grew up in a home
where breeding was intentional and considered a good thing. My mom was
a backyard breeder and proud of it. A lot of what she told me was
from ignorance or bias. But it was wrong. It wasn't until I joined
this group that I began to learn how wrong it was. And it took me
awhile to change my opinions. But I did, and now I know better.

Once you have actually been on both sides, it's easier to look at both
sides and judge which one is better. My first 3 cats came from my mom
as a bakyard breeder. I have been lucky with their health. But I have
also seen how that luck could have been a horrible mistake. You see,
Kira got a double dose of a recessive gene that my mom was completely
unaware of, even though she had been breeding the same two lines
together for about 8 years and probably 6 litters. We realized later
that a couple other kittens demonstrated the gene as well, but we
never kept in contact with the buyers, so we never knew. Thankfully,
that gene was simply a mutant long hair gene, but it just as easily
could have been a gene for a health defect.

I am ashamed of the history, and I feel horrible knowing how much we
contributed to the overpopulation problem. I have to wonder how many
of our kittens died young or ended up in shelters. There is nothing I
can do to take it back, but I will do my best to encourage others to
take a better path.

--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com

Meghan Noecker

March 31st 05, 10:30 AM

On 30 Mar 2005 21:58:22 -0800, wrote:

>Or are you suggesting people adopt from shelters, or adopt rescued
>strays because it's *cheaper*?
>Let me clue you in. I "adopted" Biskit from my windowsill in rain/sleet
>storm last February. After vaccinations, spaying, hernia surgery and
>surgery to remove a BB from under the skin on her side, the grand total
>for my "free cat" was over $400. I daresay that's about what most
>purebreds fetch around here.

My mom and I spent over $750 on a stray cat she found at the side of
the road. Head injury, etc. And he died after 2 1/2 weeks. The
cheapest to pick up and the most expensive in terms of emergency vet
care. You could also say he cost more to enjoy per day than the
others, too. But I don't regret it. He taught me several things in
those two weeks, and those were well the cost, even the emotional
cost, which was much worse than the money. I'd have paid a lot more if
it would have meant he would live.

My shelter cat was $75 for the adoption. Admittedly a good value since
he was already neutered, had vaccinations, and a microchip. But he
didn't adjust to the food change, so I spent $76 at the vet about a
week after I got him. It did the trick, so he is doing well now and
settled in. Now he's enjoying the food a bit too much :)

I suppose adopting will save money with the initial purchase, so
that's an added bonus, but certainly not the reason to adopt. After
all, anything can happen with *any* animal. So, vet bills can be
around the corner at any time.

--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com

Phil P.

March 31st 05, 11:19 AM

"Ashley" > wrote in message

>
> That would be because, working in a shelter, you don't get to see much of
> those who get a kitten and keep it for the next 15 years ...

From where do you conjure up your ridiculous notions? You don't work or
volunteer in shelters. So, how could you possibly know what we see? You
need to get out more... a lot more.

From my experience, I think I can say with reasonable certainty, that the
overwhelming vast majority of shelter adoptives keep their cats for *life*.

> I'm beginning to get more than mildly leary of the shelter folk

I'm sure the shelter folk are more than mildly leery of armchair critics who
shooti off their big mouths about things they know nothing about.

Phil P.

March 31st 05, 11:28 AM

"Ashley" > wrote in message

> I am, however, really sick of the lecturing "If you saw what I saw" bunch
> around here, who seem to think that anyone who has slightly different
views

As one of the "if you saw what I saw" bunch" I can say with reasonable
certainty that "if you saw what I saw" you'd probably have a different view,
too. On second thought, after reading some of your posts, maybe not -
you're too self-centered.

Having said that, such
> posters are progressively filling up my killfile,

Maybe that's why your views are so distorted and your information is so
erroneous.

Phil P.

March 31st 05, 11:34 AM

"Meghan Noecker" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:40:44 -0500, "Phil P." >
> wrote:
>
>
> >That's not what I said. Don't manipulate my statements. I never said a
> >DS/LH "is the only breed anyone should ever share their lives with." I
> >said its unconscionable to *buy* a 'purebred' from a *breeder* while
> >millions of cats are languishing and dying in shelters every year.
There's
> >nothing wrong with adopting a 'purebred' from a shelter... Or are the
> >'papers' too important to you?
> >
> >
>
> Papers are a big deal in many breeds, but a statement I like in the
> horse world is, "you don't ride the papers."

Also, unless you actually *see* the mating and *birthing* you can't be
absolutely sure the kitten came from the pedigree on the papers. In
breeders' lingo, falsifying papers is called 'paper hanging'. They even have
a name for it!

>
> As you said, Phil, there are plenty of purebreds in the shelters. The
> only difference is that they don't have papers.

Absolutely.

Phil

[email protected]

March 31st 05, 04:22 PM

Meghan Noecker wrote:
> On 30 Mar 2005 21:58:22 -0800, wrote:
>
>
> >Or are you suggesting people adopt from shelters, or adopt rescued
> >strays because it's *cheaper*?
> >Let me clue you in. I "adopted" Biskit from my windowsill in
rain/sleet
> >storm last February. After vaccinations, spaying, hernia surgery and
> >surgery to remove a BB from under the skin on her side, the grand
total
> >for my "free cat" was over $400. I daresay that's about what most
> >purebreds fetch around here.
>
>
> My mom and I spent over $750 on a stray cat she found at the side of
> the road. Head injury, etc. And he died after 2 1/2 weeks. The
> cheapest to pick up and the most expensive in terms of emergency vet
> care. You could also say he cost more to enjoy per day than the
> others, too. But I don't regret it. He taught me several things in
> those two weeks, and those were well the cost, even the emotional
> cost, which was much worse than the money. I'd have paid a lot more
if
> it would have meant he would live.
>
Have you seen my Biskit? For my $400, I got the most beautiful and
unusual cat in the whole world. She is, for lack of a better word, the
most "polite" cat I have ever owned. She is a "lady" and so dainty. Her
litterbox habits are impeccable, and so are her "housecat manner." She
*never* scratches on the furniture or jumps up on the counter...she
gets at my feet and "asks" to jump in my lap with a cute little mew.
She is totally devoted to me and faithfully stays in the same room with
me.
I dare anybody to go to a breeder, and ask for all that, and expect to
get it by forking over $400.
She is beautiful because she is a moggie. She has a sweet nature
because she has known hunger, and neglect, and abuse, and cats like
that are "grateful." I am sure of it.
Here's Bikkie:
http://members.aol.com/jjrich0523/biskitwindow.jpg
http://members.aol.com/jjrich0523/bikkie.jpg

Sherry

[email protected]

March 31st 05, 04:34 PM

> > As a member of the "If you saw what I saw" camp, and I can probably
> > speak for Phil in that camp also, you're not nearly as sick of us
as we
> > are of you.
> >
> >
> > Sherry
> >
>
> Well now, nice to see you again Sherry!

Yeah, I thought it was time to leave lurker-land. I'm finally getting
used to the google interface. OE was just so unstable I gave up
trying.
Sherry

Mary

March 31st 05, 06:53 PM

"Meghan Noecker" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 17:16:58 +1200, "Ashley"
> > wrote:
>
> >No, actually, it's not a defensive reaction. It's an aggressive reaction.
> >I'm sick to death of the holier-than-thou attitude some posters on this
ng
> >display. In all honesty, I'm not sick-to-death of it enough for it to
keep
> >me awake at night, nor am I sick-to-death of it enough for it to concern
me
> >when I'm not posting, but I am sick-to-death enough of it to point it out
> >here a few times.
> >
>
>
> It's very similar to the older person explaining something to the
> younger person. I hated it when older people did it to me, but now I
> am totally frustrated with my know-it-all nephew who can't see the
> whole picture, and totally resists what I try to tell him from actual
> experience.
>
> Those of us who do know, really do know. And it's hard to convince
> people until they have seen as well.
>
> I understand where you are coming from. Honestly. I grew up in a home
> where breeding was intentional and considered a good thing. My mom was
> a backyard breeder and proud of it. A lot of what she told me was
> from ignorance or bias. But it was wrong. It wasn't until I joined
> this group that I began to learn how wrong it was. And it took me
> awhile to change my opinions. But I did, and now I know better.
>
> Once you have actually been on both sides, it's easier to look at both
> sides and judge which one is better. My first 3 cats came from my mom
> as a bakyard breeder. I have been lucky with their health. But I have
> also seen how that luck could have been a horrible mistake. You see,
> Kira got a double dose of a recessive gene that my mom was completely
> unaware of, even though she had been breeding the same two lines
> together for about 8 years and probably 6 litters. We realized later
> that a couple other kittens demonstrated the gene as well, but we
> never kept in contact with the buyers, so we never knew. Thankfully,
> that gene was simply a mutant long hair gene, but it just as easily
> could have been a gene for a health defect.
>
> I am ashamed of the history, and I feel horrible knowing how much we
> contributed to the overpopulation problem. I have to wonder how many
> of our kittens died young or ended up in shelters. There is nothing I
> can do to take it back, but I will do my best to encourage others to
> take a better path.
>
>

Beautifully put, Meghan. You really have a great way of articulating
complicated situations.

Mary

March 31st 05, 06:57 PM

Mary

March 31st 05, 07:07 PM

> wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Meghan Noecker wrote:
> > On 30 Mar 2005 21:58:22 -0800, wrote:
> >
> >
> > >Or are you suggesting people adopt from shelters, or adopt rescued
> > >strays because it's *cheaper*?
> > >Let me clue you in. I "adopted" Biskit from my windowsill in
> rain/sleet
> > >storm last February. After vaccinations, spaying, hernia surgery and
> > >surgery to remove a BB from under the skin on her side, the grand
> total
> > >for my "free cat" was over $400. I daresay that's about what most
> > >purebreds fetch around here.
> >
> >
> > My mom and I spent over $750 on a stray cat she found at the side of
> > the road. Head injury, etc. And he died after 2 1/2 weeks. The
> > cheapest to pick up and the most expensive in terms of emergency vet
> > care. You could also say he cost more to enjoy per day than the
> > others, too. But I don't regret it. He taught me several things in
> > those two weeks, and those were well the cost, even the emotional
> > cost, which was much worse than the money. I'd have paid a lot more
> if
> > it would have meant he would live.
> >
> Have you seen my Biskit? For my $400, I got the most beautiful and
> unusual cat in the whole world. She is, for lack of a better word, the
> most "polite" cat I have ever owned. She is a "lady" and so dainty. Her
> litterbox habits are impeccable, and so are her "housecat manner." She
> *never* scratches on the furniture or jumps up on the counter...she
> gets at my feet and "asks" to jump in my lap with a cute little mew.
> She is totally devoted to me and faithfully stays in the same room with
> me.
> I dare anybody to go to a breeder, and ask for all that, and expect to
> get it by forking over $400.
> She is beautiful because she is a moggie. She has a sweet nature
> because she has known hunger, and neglect, and abuse, and cats like
> that are "grateful." I am sure of it.
> Here's Bikkie:
> http://members.aol.com/jjrich0523/biskitwindow.jpg
> http://members.aol.com/jjrich0523/bikkie.jpg
>

God, Sherry, you could be talking about Cheeky. The way she acts is
similar--so polite, so grateful, and so deeply appreciative of affection,
food, everything she gets. She currently has the sniffles and has not been
eating her canned food as she should. She is so polite that when I take
her from the bed, where she is clearly in a grumpy mood, and set her
by the food dish, she begins to eat without pause. No breeder cat
could ever compare, I just know it.

Mary

March 31st 05, 07:08 PM

> wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> > > As a member of the "If you saw what I saw" camp, and I can probably
> > > speak for Phil in that camp also, you're not nearly as sick of us
> as we
> > > are of you.
> > >
> > >
> > > Sherry
> > >
> >
> > Well now, nice to see you again Sherry!
>
> Yeah, I thought it was time to leave lurker-land. I'm finally getting
> used to the google interface. OE was just so unstable I gave up
> trying.

You sure haven't missed much. Just the same old ****. :)
There have been some great funny moments, though, come
to think of it.

Ashley

March 31st 05, 08:23 PM

"Phil P." > wrote in message
...
>
> "Ashley" > wrote in message
>
>> I am, however, really sick of the lecturing "If you saw what I saw" bunch
>> around here, who seem to think that anyone who has slightly different
> views
>
>
> As one of the "if you saw what I saw" bunch" I can say with reasonable
> certainty that "if you saw what I saw" you'd probably have a different
> view,
> too. On second thought, after reading some of your posts, maybe not -
> you're too self-centered.
>
>
> Having said that, such
>> posters are progressively filling up my killfile,
>
> Maybe that's why your views are so distorted and your information is so
> erroneous.

You know what, you actually stay out of my killfile because, despite your
"I'm right, you're wrong" view of the world, you make some interesting and
informative posts and while you voice your disdain for those who disagree
with you, you don't resort to the juvenile name-calling that others do. And
as long as it remains that way, you'll stay out and I'll get to benefit from
your superior wisdom and change my personality all because of you.

Won't that be just marvellous?

Steve G

March 31st 05, 09:56 PM

wrote:
(...)
> The ones who brag about their "rights" to "own" whatever strikes
their
> fancy, and the homeless are someone else's problem?

The human homeless? Or do they not count?

We all choose what good we fail to do. Your failing just happens to be
different to Ashley's, it would seem.

Steve.

Steve G

March 31st 05, 10:25 PM

wrote:
(...)
>
> Or are you suggesting people adopt from shelters, or adopt rescued
> strays because it's *cheaper*?

You're suggesting it's generally not??

Of the moggies I've either had, grew up with, or have otherwise been in
my immediate family, exactly none had exceptional costs that would not
also apply to a purebred.

Undoubtably the low cost of a moggie does weigh into some (many?)
decisions to adopt.

Plus it's a ait of irony to see an anti-purebred person like yerself
arguing that moggies can be as expensive as a purebred - seems like
you're trying to up their share price...

> Let me clue you in. I "adopted" Biskit from my windowsill in
rain/sleet
> storm last February. After vaccinations, spaying, hernia surgery and
> surgery to remove a BB from under the skin on her side, the grand
total
> for my "free cat" was over $400. I daresay that's about what most
> purebreds fetch around here.

Over a cat's lifetime, the purchase price of mog or bred is almost
insignificant when measured against other costs. Let's say 15 years of
vaccinations, checkups, food, toys, occasional significant medical
interventions. Food alone can easily weigh in at $3000 over a cat's
lifetime. Vet costs, a similar amount. I figure c.$10,000 is a
reasonable figure for a lifetime of care, and that's before any initial
purchase cost.

Steve.

Mary

March 31st 05, 10:35 PM

"Steve G" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> wrote:
> (...)
> > The ones who brag about their "rights" to "own" whatever strikes
> their
> > fancy, and the homeless are someone else's problem?
>
> The human homeless? Or do they not count?
>
> We all choose what good we fail to do. Your failing just happens to be
> different to Ashley's, it would seem.
>

You and Ashley are the same kind of asshole, Steve. Both for
breeders, and both proponents of allowing cats to roam
unsupervised. Your substance is clearly snot. However,
no matter how much you sneer and wheedle and split
hairs, the "failing" is yours, not Sherry's. For you the cat
is an object. A pure-bred animal is some sort of status
symbol. I believe Phil characterized your complex as the
"tiny dick" syndrome. Although you can be amusing,
I am afraid I must agree with Phil.

Steve G

March 31st 05, 10:51 PM

wrote:
(...)
> me.
> I dare anybody to go to a breeder, and ask for all that, and expect
to
> get it by forking over $400.

Hm, I happened to, but maybe I was just lucky. Prior to buying a
purebred cat, I had only interacted with mogs to any great degree. In
the light of this experience I have to say that I was - and continue to
be - amazed by the personality of my aby.

Better than a mog? No.

Different - IME, absolutely.

> She is beautiful because she is a moggie. She has a sweet nature
> because she has known hunger, and neglect, and abuse, and cats like
> that are "grateful." I am sure of it.

What anthropomorphic rot! When an animal has been abused they are far
*less* likely to be amenable to human interaction. If your pre-abused
cat has the remarkable pesonality you describe, then it is despite this
abuse, not because. Like humans, indeed.

Besides, a 'sweet nature' ain't the only personality trait of value. My
mog - who happened to have a rough start in life - is mildly
cantankerous, and nowhere near as amenable to handling of any sort as
my purebred cat. Try clipping his claws, for instance, and he'll rip
you a new arsehole. However, he is himself and I value him for his
quirks and 'faults' as much as I value my aby. (On the other hand,
people who interact with Big Cat don't seem to favour him as much as I
do - especially vets, heh heh heh).

Few - perhaps no - personality traits in cats are inherently good or
bad, and it does a disservice to attach strong value judgements to
anthropomorphisms such as 'polite' and 'grateful'.

Steve.

Steve G

March 31st 05, 11:27 PM

Mary wrote:
(...)
>
> You and Ashley are the same kind of asshole, Steve.

Actually, we have the same arsehole. It's a timeshare.

> Both for breeders,

As is your want, you misrepresent views of others so that they fit into
the very few pigeonholes in your loft. For breeders? FWIW, my views:

- I am against breeding cats that have *inherent* faults in a Darwinian
sense, e.g., extremely flat-faced cats, some types of tailless cats,
hairless cats. I would allow for exceptions, such as to preserve
naturally-occuring breeds at risk of becoming extinct.

- I am for the (strict) regulation of breeding practices such that the
genetic health of bred cats is maintained / improved. If it were found
that some breeds could not exist without defects of any sort, then I
would disallow the breeding of such animals.

- I am for breeding of cats that meet these criteria. I am for the
hybridisation of domestic and wild cats, e.g., Bengals et al.

My views on breeding apply to all pets, such as the rats that are my
other pets.

I consider breeders and shelters to both be useful potential pet
sources. I weight the latter a little more highly, but do not feel an
obligation to adopt from shelters under all circumstances.

That I do not attack all breeders is certainly an act of selfishness to
a large extent; I do not want some cat breeds to die out, and I
obviously do not 'need' a purebred animal. However, owning a pet at all
is a basically selfish act, and I don't feel the need to assuage any
guilt by only adopting shelter cats.

In other areas of my life guilt (or belief) does strongly alter my
behaviour. Saving cats is not one such area.

> and both proponents of allowing cats to roam unsupervised.

Ideally, I believe that cats should have free access to the outdoors -
including the hunting of live prey in a natural setting. This would not
apply if the access area is especially dangerous (e.g., inner city
environment). The 'acceptable' level of danger is debatable, and
ultimately up to the owner to decide any cost-benefit tradeoffs.

I consider an excellent general outdoor-access solution to be a
freely-accessible enclosed area. They are virtually no problems with
this approach. I have reservations about indoor cats, but as long as
they are provided with sufficient space, and environmental enrichment,
then my reservations are relatively mild.

> Your substance is clearly snot. However,
> no matter how much you sneer and wheedle and split
> hairs, the "failing" is yours, not Sherry's.

Me, I have lots of failings. You?

> For you the cat is an object.

Yes. Usually a lamp. Taxidermy. Bulb up the rectum. Bob's yer uncle.
Saves on food costs.

> A pure-bred animal is some sort of status symbol.

Who's supposed to be impressed?

> I believe Phil characterized your complex as the
> "tiny dick" syndrome.

Yah - this happens on the (few) occasions when I disagree with him and
argue my points using independent info to justify my position. Well
known sign of micropenis.

> Although you can be amusing,
> I am afraid I must agree with Phil.

Don't be afraid.

Actually, I typed this message using my wang. Then again, this is a
very small keyboard.

Steve.

[email protected]

March 31st 05, 11:53 PM

"What anthropomorphic rot! When an animal has been abused they are far
*less* likely to be amenable to human interaction. If your pre-abused
cat has the remarkable pesonality you describe, then it is despite this
abuse, not because. Like humans, indeed"

You compare abused (actually the right terms is neglected) cats to
abused humans and say *we're* engaging in anthromorphic rot. (?)
The reality is, and you would know this if you'd ever formed a
long-term relationship with a seriously neglected cat is that they are,
after a long interval marked by lack of trust, incredibly happy and
grateful and ecstatic to finally be in a safe place with a kind human
of their own. But you have to do the work to get there.

And I did. Because I didn't rescue Flower as a selfish act. I already
had a perfectly wonderful cat. I did it because she needed me and I had
enough space in my home and my heart to care for one more that nobody
else wanted. It's just gravy that she's turned out to be a great cat :>

Steve G

April 1st 05, 12:08 AM

wrote:
(...)
>
> You compare abused (actually the right terms is neglected)

I see. So, if a cat was kicked around and generally ****ed with by a
previous owner, the cat was just 'neglected'? Enter political
correctness, exit brain.

> cats to
> abused humans and say *we're* engaging in anthromorphic rot. (?)

In general, if any species is abused by another, it will show a lack of
trust (hm, possible anthropomorphism) toward the abuser's species (or
gender. Or whatever). As you say, this trust can take considerable
effort to recapture.

> The reality is, and you would know this if you'd ever formed a
> long-term relationship with a seriously neglected cat is that they
are,

I have a long-term relationship with a seriously neglected cat (hm,
sounds a bit rude). I have never had any interactions with 'abused'
cats.

(...)
>
> And I did. Because I didn't rescue Flower as a selfish act.

No such thing as altruism. You did good, but also got your rewards.

S.

Mary

April 1st 05, 01:03 AM

> wrote in message
ups.com...
> "What anthropomorphic rot! When an animal has been abused they are far
> *less* likely to be amenable to human interaction. If your pre-abused
> cat has the remarkable pesonality you describe, then it is despite this
> abuse, not because. Like humans, indeed"
>
> You compare abused (actually the right terms is neglected) cats to
> abused humans and say *we're* engaging in anthromorphic rot. (?)
> The reality is, and you would know this if you'd ever formed a
> long-term relationship with a seriously neglected cat is that they are,
> after a long interval marked by lack of trust, incredibly happy and
> grateful and ecstatic to finally be in a safe place with a kind human
> of their own. But you have to do the work to get there.
>
> And I did. Because I didn't rescue Flower as a selfish act. I already
> had a perfectly wonderful cat. I did it because she needed me and I had
> enough space in my home and my heart to care for one more that nobody
> else wanted. It's just gravy that she's turned out to be a great cat :>
>

Who are you talking to?

[email protected]

April 1st 05, 03:39 AM

wrote:
> "What anthropomorphic rot! When an animal has been abused they are
far
> *less* likely to be amenable to human interaction. If your pre-abused
> cat has the remarkable pesonality you describe, then it is despite
this
> abuse, not because. Like humans, indeed"
>
> You compare abused (actually the right terms is neglected)

No, dear. They are two different terms. Abuse differs from neglect.
Obviously this is part of your problem WRT lack of understanding.

-L.

[email protected]

April 1st 05, 05:20 AM

Whoopie. We just got a silver chinchilla CFA-papered flat-faced Persian
guy into the shelter today. He's a sweetie, but he can barely breathe,
he's got mange, an infected eye, and his owners dumped him because they
"moved". You gotta love breeders.

kitkat

April 1st 05, 05:31 AM

wrote:
> and his owners dumped him because they
> "moved". You gotta love breeders.

I know this has been said a million times on here and I am just
preaching to the choir...but how does one just decide the will get rid
of a cat because they "moved" or because "they don't have time" or they
simply "do not want" them any longer. I stopped at PetSmart today for
some food and of course I am always drawn to the kitties for adoption
room. Most of the cages simply said "not wanted" and i thought...what
MOTHER F*CKER just decides "MEH! I no longer want this cat."

O.M.G. I wanted to pound my damn fists on the windows and then I wanted
to steal them all and take them all home. Lily and Daisy and the little
black one and the two calico looking ones and the orange
tabby...and...and...

UGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mary

April 1st 05, 05:35 AM

"kitkat" > wrote in message
. com...
> wrote:
> > and his owners dumped him because they
> > "moved". You gotta love breeders.
>
>
> I know this has been said a million times on here and I am just
> preaching to the choir...but how does one just decide the will get rid
> of a cat because they "moved" or because "they don't have time" or they
> simply "do not want" them any longer. I stopped at PetSmart today for
> some food and of course I am always drawn to the kitties for adoption
> room. Most of the cages simply said "not wanted" and i thought...what
> MOTHER F*CKER just decides "MEH! I no longer want this cat."
>
> O.M.G. I wanted to pound my damn fists on the windows and then I wanted
> to steal them all and take them all home. Lily and Daisy and the little
> black one and the two calico looking ones and the orange
> tabby...and...and...
>
>
> UGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah. I have to go to Petsmart to get a couple more
Alpine scratchers. I had better dive in there and run back
out. When my Ship Come In I will found a wonderful
cat sanctuary where unwanted kitties may live happy,
fun and safe lives attended by animal lovers who may
also benefit from a nice place to live. I mean it, too.

kitkat

April 1st 05, 05:53 AM

Mary wrote:
> "kitkat" > wrote in message
> . com...
>
wrote:
>>
>>>and his owners dumped him because they
>>>"moved". You gotta love breeders.
>>
>>
>>I know this has been said a million times on here and I am just
>>preaching to the choir...but how does one just decide the will get rid
>>of a cat because they "moved" or because "they don't have time" or they
>>simply "do not want" them any longer. I stopped at PetSmart today for
>>some food and of course I am always drawn to the kitties for adoption
>>room. Most of the cages simply said "not wanted" and i thought...what
>>MOTHER F*CKER just decides "MEH! I no longer want this cat."
>>
>>O.M.G. I wanted to pound my damn fists on the windows and then I wanted
>>to steal them all and take them all home. Lily and Daisy and the little
>>black one and the two calico looking ones and the orange
>>tabby...and...and...
>>
>>
>>UGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>
> Yeah. I have to go to Petsmart to get a couple more
> Alpine scratchers. I had better dive in there and run back
> out.

I just cant ever manage to do that. But when I do see those poor
kitties, it makes me want to hurry home and hug my own furballs.

> When my Ship Come In I will found a wonderful
> cat sanctuary where unwanted kitties may live happy,
> fun and safe lives attended by animal lovers who may
> also benefit from a nice place to live. I mean it, too.

Yeah, the register after he asked me if I needed anything else (which i
obviously didn't or else I'd have it with me at the check-out...but
anyway) and I replied "Just a big van to take all those kitties outta
here and nice huge house with a hundred rooms for all of them."

He actually looked at me funny. I'm not so sure this guy was really all
that into animals. A job is a job is a job.

[email protected]

April 1st 05, 05:56 AM

Steve G wrote:
> wrote:
> (...)
> >
> > Or are you suggesting people adopt from shelters, or adopt rescued
> > strays because it's *cheaper*?
>
> You're suggesting it's generally not??

Eckshully, you are right. My thought process at the time was strictly
re: strays. A shelter moggie is generally an extremely good buy,
compared to a purebred. They are generally already vaccinated and
neutered, and due to vet discounts, our price is cheaper than if one
took a "free kitten" and paid full price to a vet for those necessary
services. The shelter cats are vet-checked, but overall long-term
health is a crap shoot, exactly what you get with a purebred. Probably
less of a crap shoot, since genetically, moggies are a hardier lot.
>
> Of the moggies I've either had, grew up with, or have otherwise been
in
> my immediate family, exactly none had exceptional costs that would
not
> also apply to a purebred.
> >
> Plus it's a ait of irony to see an anti-purebred person like yerself
> arguing that moggies can be as expensive as a purebred - seems like
> you're trying to up their share price...

Again, generally they are not, unless you're willing to take on a
special needs cat or a rescue in bad shape. Which isn't even a
consideration to the original issue, since the Ashleys of the world,
who are insistant on a particular "look" and "type" (purebred)
certainly wouldn't lower their standards for a special needs cat. I was
simply illustrating that cost isn't even a consideration to the reasons
most of us prefer moggies.

Sherry

Mary

April 1st 05, 06:10 AM

"kitkat" > wrote in message
m...
> Mary wrote:
> > "kitkat" > wrote in message
> > . com...
> >
> wrote:
> >>
> >>>and his owners dumped him because they
> >>>"moved". You gotta love breeders.
> >>
> >>
> >>I know this has been said a million times on here and I am just
> >>preaching to the choir...but how does one just decide the will get rid
> >>of a cat because they "moved" or because "they don't have time" or they
> >>simply "do not want" them any longer. I stopped at PetSmart today for
> >>some food and of course I am always drawn to the kitties for adoption
> >>room. Most of the cages simply said "not wanted" and i thought...what
> >>MOTHER F*CKER just decides "MEH! I no longer want this cat."
> >>
> >>O.M.G. I wanted to pound my damn fists on the windows and then I wanted
> >>to steal them all and take them all home. Lily and Daisy and the little
> >>black one and the two calico looking ones and the orange
> >>tabby...and...and...
> >>
> >>
> >>UGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
> >
> > Yeah. I have to go to Petsmart to get a couple more
> > Alpine scratchers. I had better dive in there and run back
> > out.
>
> I just cant ever manage to do that. But when I do see those poor
> kitties, it makes me want to hurry home and hug my own furballs.
>
> > When my Ship Come In I will found a wonderful
> > cat sanctuary where unwanted kitties may live happy,
> > fun and safe lives attended by animal lovers who may
> > also benefit from a nice place to live. I mean it, too.
>
> Yeah, the register after he asked me if I needed anything else (which i
> obviously didn't or else I'd have it with me at the check-out...but
> anyway) and I replied "Just a big van to take all those kitties outta
> here and nice huge house with a hundred rooms for all of them."
>
> He actually looked at me funny. I'm not so sure this guy was really all
> that into animals. A job is a job is a job.
>
>

You would have the same reaction as I did at the Snowflake
shelter where I found Cheeks. It was excruciating. They were
all sweet, all beautiful, and all quietly looking at me, whether
lying down or approaching, like "take me, take me!" It did not
break my heart it just beat the **** out of it. I can't go back
until I can take another cat so I just send them money.

-L.

April 1st 05, 07:40 AM

kitkat wrote:
> wrote:
> > and his owners dumped him because they
> > "moved". You gotta love breeders.
>
>
> I know this has been said a million times on here and I am just
> preaching to the choir...but how does one just decide the will get
rid
> of a cat because they "moved" or because "they don't have time" or
they
> simply "do not want" them any longer.

Often this is code for "the cat pees all over the house but I don't
want to tell the shelter this because then they will kill the cat."
You have to take reasons for surrender with a grain of salt.

>I stopped at PetSmart today for
> some food and of course I am always drawn to the kitties for adoption

> room. Most of the cages simply said "not wanted" and i thought...what

> MOTHER F*CKER just decides "MEH! I no longer want this cat."
>
> O.M.G. I wanted to pound my damn fists on the windows and then I
wanted
> to steal them all and take them all home. Lily and Daisy and the
little
> black one and the two calico looking ones and the orange
> tabby...and...and...
>
>
> UGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

After awhile, you just get numb. You just resign yourself to doing
anything and everything you can to help them, because you realize you
can't adopt them all. The worst for me is the adult dog section of the
shelter. Cats are placed more frequently than dogs in most places, and
adult dogs are harder to place than most other animals. Nothing tears
my heart out more than seeing a sweet adult dog on death row.

-L.

Ashley

April 1st 05, 07:43 AM

"Steve G" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Mary wrote:
> (...)
>>
>> You and Ashley are the same kind of asshole, Steve.
>
> Actually, we have the same arsehole. It's a timeshare.

<snip>

> Actually, I typed this message using my wang. Then again, this is a
> very small keyboard.

LOL!

Steve, I am enjoying your posts. On my screen, they follow one after the
other, uninterrupted, but they are most enjoyable (and remarkably mild!)

Ashley

April 1st 05, 07:44 AM

> wrote in message
ups.com...

> And I did. Because I didn't rescue Flower as a selfish act. I already
> had a perfectly wonderful cat. I did it because she needed me and I had
> enough space in my home and my heart to care for one more that nobody
> else wanted.

If you hurry, there might still be time for the Pope to begin the
beatification process.

Mary

April 1st 05, 07:51 AM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Steve G" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >
> > Mary wrote:
> > (...)
> >>
> >> You and Ashley are the same kind of asshole, Steve.
> >
> > Actually, we have the same arsehole. It's a timeshare.
>
> <snip>
>
> > Actually, I typed this message using my wang. Then again, this is a
> > very small keyboard.
>
> LOL!
>
> Steve, I am enjoying your posts. On my screen, they follow one after the
> other, uninterrupted, but they are most enjoyable (and remarkably mild!)
>

Now this is a mutual appreciation society made in heaven.

Mary

April 1st 05, 07:52 AM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
> > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>
>
> > And I did. Because I didn't rescue Flower as a selfish act. I already
> > had a perfectly wonderful cat. I did it because she needed me and I had
> > enough space in my home and my heart to care for one more that nobody
> > else wanted.
>
> If you hurry, there might still be time for the Pope to begin the
> beatification process.
>
>
This is the exact type of snide comment that Steve G. makes
that makes him seem like an unhappy old woman in a girdle
that pinches her nasty bits. You two are soul mates.

Phil P.

April 1st 05, 08:32 AM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Phil P." > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Ashley" > wrote in message
> >
> >> I am, however, really sick of the lecturing "If you saw what I saw"
bunch
> >> around here, who seem to think that anyone who has slightly different
> > views
> >
> >
> > As one of the "if you saw what I saw" bunch" I can say with reasonable
> > certainty that "if you saw what I saw" you'd probably have a different
> > view,
> > too. On second thought, after reading some of your posts, maybe not -
> > you're too self-centered.
> >
> >
> > Having said that, such
> >> posters are progressively filling up my killfile,
> >
> > Maybe that's why your views are so distorted and your information is so
> > erroneous.
>
> You know what, you actually stay out of my killfile

Given the substance of your posts, do you really think I give a **** if you
killfile me? I really hate to dissapoint you, but I don't.

because, despite your
> "I'm right, you're wrong" view of the world, you make some interesting and
> informative posts and while you voice your disdain for those who disagree
> with you, you don't resort to the juvenile name-calling that others do.

Sure I do! I've called several people assholes!

And
> as long as it remains that way, you'll stay out and I'll get to benefit
from
> your superior wisdom

You haven't seemed to earn anything so far.

and change my personality all because of you.
>
> Won't that be just marvellous?

Any change in your personality would be an improvement.

Phil P.

April 1st 05, 08:34 AM

[email protected]

April 1st 05, 08:34 AM

"Often this is code for "the cat pees all over the house but I don't
want to tell the shelter this because then they will kill the cat."
You have to take reasons for surrender with a grain of salt."

Well, it can be, but it's a no-kill shelter and we really do try to get
the truth of the matter. The poor little flat-face hasn't shown any
signs of litterbox problems as of yet.

"If you hurry, there might still be time for the Pope to begin the
beatification process"

No can do. Jewish by birth. The best I can aspire to is limbo :>

[email protected]

April 1st 05, 08:45 AM

Steve G wrote:
> wrote:
> (...)
> > The ones who brag about their "rights" to "own" whatever strikes
> their
> > fancy, and the homeless are someone else's problem?
>
> The human homeless? Or do they not count?
>
> We all choose what good we fail to do. Your failing just happens to
be
> different to Ashley's, it would seem.
>
> Steve.

Ummm....where did I say the human homeless don't count? I apologize. I
failed to mention that I had a homeless couple living under my roof for
most of January and part of February this year.
Are there any other of my failings you'd like to discuss?

Sherry

Ashley

April 1st 05, 08:51 AM

"Phil P." > wrote in message
...

> Given the substance of your posts, do you really think I give a **** if
> you
> killfile me?

No, not at all. I thought it might remotely interest you to know that I, and
others, find some of your information interesting, though.

I

>
> Any change in your personality would be an improvement.

Phil, you are really quite amazing. You can't tell anything from my
personality from what I post. All you can tell is my posting style. Which
may, or may not, reflect my everyday personality.

Hey, you, Mary and Sherry could be sweet, lovely people in everyday life. It
wouldn't surprise me at all. I've been around usenet long enough to
understand that some people undergo complete personality changes once you
put them in front of keyboard and grant them anonymity.

But, quite frankly, I don't care what any of you are like in everyday life,
cos it has no relevance to my life. When it comes to usenet, however, I will
listen to those who have something to say, and say it without degenerating
into juvenile abuse.

Ashley

April 1st 05, 08:52 AM

"Phil P." > wrote in message
...
>
> "Ashley" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> > wrote in message
>> ups.com...
>>
>>
>> > And I did. Because I didn't rescue Flower as a selfish act. I already
>> > had a perfectly wonderful cat. I did it because she needed me and I had
>> > enough space in my home and my heart to care for one more that nobody
>> > else wanted.
>>
>> If you hurry, there might still be time for the Pope to begin the
>> beatification process.
>
>
> If would more than the pope to beatify you!

Don't trip over yourself in that attempt to get that brilliant thought of
yours out, Phil

Ashley

April 1st 05, 08:52 AM

> wrote in message
oups.com...

> "If you hurry, there might still be time for the Pope to begin the
> beatification process"
>
> No can do. Jewish by birth. The best I can aspire to is limbo :>
>

LOL! Good comeback :-)

Mary

April 1st 05, 09:31 AM

"Phil P." > wrote in message
...
>
> "Ashley" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Phil P." > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > "Ashley" > wrote in message
> > >
> > >> I am, however, really sick of the lecturing "If you saw what I saw"
> bunch
> > >> around here, who seem to think that anyone who has slightly different
> > > views
> > >
> > >
> > > As one of the "if you saw what I saw" bunch" I can say with reasonable
> > > certainty that "if you saw what I saw" you'd probably have a different
> > > view,
> > > too. On second thought, after reading some of your posts, maybe not -
> > > you're too self-centered.
> > >
> > >
> > > Having said that, such
> > >> posters are progressively filling up my killfile,
> > >
> > > Maybe that's why your views are so distorted and your information is
so
> > > erroneous.
> >
> > You know what, you actually stay out of my killfile
>
>
> Given the substance of your posts, do you really think I give a **** if
you
> killfile me? I really hate to dissapoint you, but I don't.
>
>
>
> because, despite your
> > "I'm right, you're wrong" view of the world, you make some interesting
and
> > informative posts and while you voice your disdain for those who
disagree
> > with you, you don't resort to the juvenile name-calling that others do.
>
>
> Sure I do! I've called several people assholes!
>
>
> And
> > as long as it remains that way, you'll stay out and I'll get to benefit
> from
> > your superior wisdom
>
>
> You haven't seemed to earn anything so far.
>
>
>
> and change my personality all because of you.
> >
> > Won't that be just marvellous?
>
>
> Any change in your personality would be an improvement.
>
>
>
Well damn, Phil. You're still winning the popularity contest
but just by a hair. 8)

Mary

April 1st 05, 09:35 AM

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> "Often this is code for "the cat pees all over the house but I don't
> want to tell the shelter this because then they will kill the cat."
> You have to take reasons for surrender with a grain of salt."
>
> Well, it can be, but it's a no-kill shelter and we really do try to get
> the truth of the matter. The poor little flat-face hasn't shown any
> signs of litterbox problems as of yet.
>
> "If you hurry, there might still be time for the Pope to begin the
> beatification process"
>
> No can do. Jewish by birth. The best I can aspire to is limbo :>
>

Tracy--honestly, you have to work on your attributions. I have
no clue who you are replying to more than half the time. Here
you reply to our resident Moron, Lyn AND our resident
self-centered jackass Ashley in the same post. I have an inkling
that you have great things to say--but they cannot come through
as you are posting now.

If you want others to fully comprehend what you are saying,
please consider replying to one post at a time and including
a snippet of the post to which you are replying in your post--
either in quotes or with the >>things.

Mary

April 1st 05, 09:38 AM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Phil P." > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > Given the substance of your posts, do you really think I give a **** if
> > you
> > killfile me?
>
> No, not at all. I thought it might remotely interest you to know that I,
and
> others, find some of your information interesting, though.

Phil's information has saved cats' lives.

>
> I
>
> >
> > Any change in your personality would be an improvement.
>
> Phil, you are really quite amazing. You can't tell anything from my
> personality from what I post. All you can tell is my posting style. Which
> may, or may not, reflect my everyday personality.
>
> Hey, you, Mary and Sherry could be sweet, lovely people in everyday life.
It
> wouldn't surprise me at all. I've been around usenet long enough to
> understand that some people undergo complete personality changes once you
> put them in front of keyboard and grant them anonymity.

Eeeyuuu. You have the unmistakable stench of the stupid about you. Where is
that
sweet-smelling tuxedo cat of mine?

Ashley

April 1st 05, 12:15 PM

"Diane L. Schirf" > wrote in message
hlink.net...

> That means that they're not such sweet, lovely people deep down, because
> sweet, lovely people are what they are all the time, not sweet and
> lovely just for show when others are watching.

You may very well think that, I couldn't possibly comment.

But anyway, I've realised that this is not a newsgroup I come to to indulge
in anger venting. Now that I've made it clear what I think of the
holier-than-thou pontificating that goes on, I'm gonna try my best to ignore
it. I come here to learn things from other cat owners that I didn't know
before. As long as I keep learning, and as long as the signal-to-noise ratio
is low enough, I'll keep reading.

Should it get too high, I'll just add to my killfile :-)

Ashley

April 1st 05, 12:28 PM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...

> But anyway, I've realised that this is not a newsgroup I come to to
> indulge in anger venting. Now that I've made it clear what I think of the
> holier-than-thou pontificating that goes on, I'm gonna try my best to
> ignore it. I come here to learn things from other cat owners that I didn't
> know before. As long as I keep learning, and as long as the
> signal-to-noise ratio is low enough, I'll keep reading.
>
> Should it get too high, I'll just add to my killfile :-)

Whoops. Low/high. You know what I mean!

Orchid

April 1st 05, 01:20 PM

On 31 Mar 2005 20:56:42 -0800, wrote:

>A shelter moggie is generally an extremely good buy,
>compared to a purebred. They are generally already vaccinated and
>neutered, and due to vet discounts, our price is cheaper than if one
>took a "free kitten" and paid full price to a vet for those necessary
>services.

Something like 80% of the breeders I know do ESN and kittens
go home altered. Granted, I don't know any BYBers.

>The shelter cats are vet-checked, but overall long-term
>health is a crap shoot, exactly what you get with a purebred. Probably
>less of a crap shoot, since genetically, moggies are a hardier lot.

Tell that to my lovely sweet Hakaisha. He's less than a year
old. He has Grade 4 luxated patellas in *both* hind legs (surgery in
July), food allergies (IVD rabbit and green pea until he's 18 months),
a heart murmur (thank the gods, the cardiologist said it appeared to
be benign at this time), and flea allergies (and he reacts badly to
Frontline).
Hakkai is the malnourished kitten that DH and I found
wandering our neighborhood. We love him to death, but at this point
he's not only more expensive than both of our Bengals put together,
but his costs have outpaced all of the money (including show
registrations, travel to shows, and medical fees) that we spent on the
Bengals in their first year of active showing.
We'd never give him up but I can see where people who don't
have the resources that DH and I have (we're highly paid DINKS) would
have euthanised him or dropped him at a shelter.

Orchid
See Orchid's Kitties! -- http://nik.ascendancy.net/bengalpage
Want a Purebred Cat? Read This! -- http://nik.ascendancy.net/orchid

kaeli

April 1st 05, 04:58 PM

In article >,
enlightened us with...
>
> O.M.G. I wanted to pound my damn fists on the windows and then I wanted
> to steal them all and take them all home.

Am I the only one who sometimes cries after visiting Petsmart and seeing one
or more cats in the adoption area who look so depressed, you just KNOW they
loved their people and can't understand why they no longer see them?

I feel bad for all of them, but the ones who seem to really miss their family
- the family that just dumped them off like old clothes they no longer want -
really gets me.

--
--
~kaeli~
Never say, "Oops!"; always say, "Ah, interesting!"
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace

kaeli

April 1st 05, 05:05 PM

In article om>,
enlightened us with...
>
> Besides, a 'sweet nature' ain't the only personality trait of value. My
> mog - who happened to have a rough start in life - is mildly
> cantankerous, and nowhere near as amenable to handling of any sort as
> my purebred cat. Try clipping his claws, for instance, and he'll rip
> you a new arsehole. However, he is himself and I value him for his
> quirks and 'faults' as much as I value my aby. (On the other hand,
> people who interact with Big Cat don't seem to favour him as much as I
> do - especially vets, heh heh heh).
>

You know, out of my 3 cats, my favorite (tho' I love them all dearly, of
course) is the one who is MOST bitchy and troublesome (as in getting into
things all the time).
Go figure.

--
--
~kaeli~
Found God? If nobody claims Him in 30 days, He's yours to
keep.
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace

kitkat

April 1st 05, 05:12 PM

kaeli wrote:
> In article >,
> enlightened us with...
>
>>O.M.G. I wanted to pound my damn fists on the windows and then I wanted
>>to steal them all and take them all home.
>
>
> Am I the only one who sometimes cries after visiting Petsmart and seeing one
> or more cats in the adoption area who look so depressed, you just KNOW they
> loved their people and can't understand why they no longer see them?

I don't cry but I easily could. Instead I just get what I came to buy
and RACE home so I can see my fuzzers and hug them and kiss them and
tell them I'd never get rid of them. :)

Mary

April 1st 05, 05:34 PM

"Diane L. Schirf" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
> In article >,
> "Ashley" > wrote:
>
> > Hey, you, Mary and Sherry could be sweet, lovely people in everyday
life. It
> > wouldn't surprise me at all. I've been around usenet long enough to
> > understand that some people undergo complete personality changes once
you
> > put them in front of keyboard and grant them anonymity.
>
> That means that they're not such sweet, lovely people deep down, because
> sweet, lovely people are what they are all the time, not sweet and
> lovely just for show when others are watching.
>
> --

Not to mention the fact that "sweet and lovely" are highly
overrated. I mean, it's great for the folks these "sweet
and lovely" people know, but it must suck to be them.
I am just as straightforward in RL as I am here. We
are all entitled to our individual values, and in case
mine are not clear, it just ain't about popularity.
Heh.

Mary

April 1st 05, 05:35 PM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Diane L. Schirf" > wrote in message
> hlink.net...
>
> > That means that they're not such sweet, lovely people deep down, because
> > sweet, lovely people are what they are all the time, not sweet and
> > lovely just for show when others are watching.
>
> You may very well think that, I couldn't possibly comment.
>
> But anyway, I've realised that this is not a newsgroup I come to to
indulge
> in anger venting. Now that I've made it clear what I think of the
> holier-than-thou pontificating that goes on, I'm gonna try my best to
ignore
> it. I come here to learn things from other cat owners that I didn't know
> before. As long as I keep learning, and as long as the signal-to-noise
ratio
> is low enough, I'll keep reading.
>
> Should it get too high, I'll just add to my killfile :-)
>
>

Oh man. How holier-than-thou of you. lol

Mary

April 1st 05, 05:53 PM

"kaeli" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> enlightened us with...
> >
> > O.M.G. I wanted to pound my damn fists on the windows and then I wanted
> > to steal them all and take them all home.
>
> Am I the only one who sometimes cries after visiting Petsmart and seeing
one
> or more cats in the adoption area who look so depressed, you just KNOW
they
> loved their people and can't understand why they no longer see them?
>
> I feel bad for all of them, but the ones who seem to really miss their
family
> - the family that just dumped them off like old clothes they no longer
want -
> really gets me.
>

****, man, maybe I should just order my Alpine Scratcher online.

Mary

April 1st 05, 06:03 PM

"kaeli" > wrote in message
...
> In article om>,
> enlightened us with...
> >
> > Besides, a 'sweet nature' ain't the only personality trait of value. My
> > mog - who happened to have a rough start in life - is mildly
> > cantankerous, and nowhere near as amenable to handling of any sort as
> > my purebred cat. Try clipping his claws, for instance, and he'll rip
> > you a new arsehole. However, he is himself and I value him for his
> > quirks and 'faults' as much as I value my aby. (On the other hand,
> > people who interact with Big Cat don't seem to favour him as much as I
> > do - especially vets, heh heh heh).
> >
>
> You know, out of my 3 cats, my favorite (tho' I love them all dearly, of
> course) is the one who is MOST bitchy and troublesome (as in getting into
> things all the time).
> Go figure.
>

Talk like this reminds me of my Gnarly. One time I picked her
up and apparently surprised her. I thought I was going to need
a transfusion. *sniff* I miss my Debbil Cat.

Steve G

April 1st 05, 11:04 PM

Mary wrote:
(...)
> This is the exact type of snide comment that Steve G. makes
> that makes him seem like an unhappy old woman in a girdle
> that pinches her nasty bits. You two are soul mates.

This being the interweb, I could in fact be an unhappy old woman in a
girdle rather than the virulent, lantern-jawed hero I obviously given
an appearance of being.

Anyway, things could be worse; I could endlessly stalk the people on
this ng I don't like, starting non-cat related threads with the express
purpose of satifying my own need for internecine flamewars, and
crossposting to irrelevant groups in the hope of spreading the joy
still further. Viva free speech, eh...

Steve.

Steve G

April 1st 05, 11:06 PM

Mary wrote:
(...)
>
> Now this is a mutual appreciation society made in heaven.

Think of it as a counterpoint to your occasional mutual-masturbation
postings.

Steve.

Steve G

April 1st 05, 11:16 PM

Orchid wrote:
(...)
>
> Tell that to my lovely sweet Hakaisha. He's less than a year
> old. He has Grade 4 luxated patellas in *both* hind legs (surgery in
> July), food allergies (...)

The exception proves the rule, but the rule remains intact.

Steve.

Steve G

April 1st 05, 11:20 PM

wrote:
(...)
>
> Ummm....where did I say the human homeless don't count? I apologize.
I
> failed to mention that I had a homeless couple living under my roof
for
> most of January and part of February this year.

Really? Touche, then.

> Are there any other of my failings you'd like to discuss?

Yeah, well I bet I can, like, do more pullups than you.

Steve.

Phil P.

April 1st 05, 11:46 PM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Phil P." > wrote in message
> ...

> >
> > If would more than the pope to beatify you!
>
> Don't trip over yourself in that attempt to get that brilliant thought of
> yours out, Phil

Naa, I just pay very little attention to my replies to you.

Phil P.

April 1st 05, 11:51 PM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Phil P." > wrote in message
> ...

>
> Phil, you are really quite amazing. You can't tell anything from my
> personality from what I post. All you can tell is my posting style. Which
> may, or may not, reflect my everyday personality.

Hey - you brought up changing your personality - not me. Apparently you
feel it needs changing.

[email protected]

April 1st 05, 11:58 PM

Steve G wrote:
> wrote:
> (...)
> >
> > Ummm....where did I say the human homeless don't count? I
apologize.
> I
> > failed to mention that I had a homeless couple living under my roof
> for
> > most of January and part of February this year.
>
> Really? Touche, then.

Really. No joke. In retrospect, it was a mistake I won't make again,
but I won't fail to try to help someone. Next time I'll provide
transportation to the Jesus House (shelter) and make a donation.
Becuase they are professionals and know how to hook up the homeless
with far more resources than I can on my own.
>
>
> > Are there any other of my failings you'd like to discuss?
>
> Yeah, well I bet I can, like, do more pullups than you.

Ha! If you can do one pullup, yeah, you've got me there.

Sherry
>
> Steve.

[email protected]

April 2nd 05, 12:04 AM

Diane L. Schirf wrote:
> In article >,
> "Ashley" > wrote:
>
> > Hey, you, Mary and Sherry could be sweet, lovely people in everyday
life. It
> > wouldn't surprise me at all. I've been around usenet long enough to

> > understand that some people undergo complete personality changes
once you
> > put them in front of keyboard and grant them anonymity.
>
> That means that they're not such sweet, lovely people deep down,
because
> sweet, lovely people are what they are all the time, not sweet and
> lovely just for show when others are watching.

I don't really aspire to be sweet and lovely. I'd rather be ethical,
compassionate and honest. Besides, I'd rather be blunt and honest than
be one of those "sweet and lovely" people from the "sweet and lovely"
newsgroups, who are "sweet and lovely" when posting for all the group
to see, then send crappy e-mails warning new posters to "be nice or
else, and don't talk about declaw."

Don't you think?

Sherry
>
> --
> http://www.slywy.com/

Steve G

April 2nd 05, 12:12 AM

wrote:
(...)
>
> Eckshully, you are right. My thought process at the time was strictly
> re: strays. A shelter moggie is generally an extremely good buy,
> compared to a purebred. They are generally already vaccinated and
> neutered, and due to vet discounts, our price is cheaper than if one
> took a "free kitten" and paid full price to a vet for those necessary
> services. The shelter cats are vet-checked, but overall long-term
> health is a crap shoot, exactly what you get with a purebred.
Probably
> less of a crap shoot, since genetically, moggies are a hardier lot.

Well, decent breeders will also supply the cat with vaccinitions and
neutering. Regarding the health thing: Choose between a random mog and
a random purebred, and the mog would have a better change of having
sound genes / good health. When choosing a breeder, IMO you do need to
- as far as possible - check the genetic health in their lines, because
bad lines do exist. Breeding - even inbreeding - per se is not the
problem, but breeding from defective genetic stock is.

Exceptions to all rules, of course.

(...)
> certainly wouldn't lower their standards for a special needs cat. I
was
> simply illustrating that cost isn't even a consideration to the
reasons
> most of us prefer moggies.

I wonder to what extent this is true? If purebreds cost the same as
mogs, what would happen to (relative) ownership rates of the two?
Purely a bit of mental wanking, I guess, given that this will never
happen.

Steve.

-L.

April 2nd 05, 12:12 AM

wrote:
> I don't really aspire to be sweet and lovely. I'd rather be ethical,
> compassionate and honest. Besides, I'd rather be blunt and honest
than
> be one of those "sweet and lovely" people from the "sweet and lovely"
> newsgroups, who are "sweet and lovely" when posting for all the group
> to see, then send crappy e-mails warning new posters to "be nice or
> else, and don't talk about declaw."
>
> Don't you think?
>
> Sherry

But Sherry, you *are* sweet and lovely...and compassionate, ethical,
honest and blunt. No reason to compromise any for the rest.

-L.

[email protected]

April 2nd 05, 12:23 AM

Steve G wrote:
> wrote:
> (...)
> >
> > Eckshully, you are right. My thought process at the time was
strictly
> > re: strays. A shelter moggie is generally an extremely good buy,
> > compared to a purebred. They are generally already vaccinated and
> > neutered, and due to vet discounts, our price is cheaper than if
one
> > took a "free kitten" and paid full price to a vet for those
necessary
> > services. The shelter cats are vet-checked, but overall long-term
> > health is a crap shoot, exactly what you get with a purebred.
> Probably
> > less of a crap shoot, since genetically, moggies are a hardier lot.
>
> Well, decent breeders will also supply the cat with vaccinitions and
> neutering. Regarding the health thing: Choose between a random mog
and
> a random purebred, and the mog would have a better change of having
> sound genes / good health. When choosing a breeder, IMO you do need
to
> - as far as possible - check the genetic health in their lines,
because
> bad lines do exist. Breeding - even inbreeding - per se is not the
> problem, but breeding from defective genetic stock is.

Again, you're making a valid point becuase my thought process is
stricly the BYB/kitten mill breeders. In the shelter business, you
don't get much contact with decent breeders.

> > certainly wouldn't lower their standards for a special needs cat. I
> was
> > simply illustrating that cost isn't even a consideration to the
> reasons
> > most of us prefer moggies.
>
> I wonder to what extent this is true? If purebreds cost the same as
> mogs, what would happen to (relative) ownership rates of the two?
> Purely a bit of mental wanking, I guess, given that this will never
> happen.

I think purebred ownership would probably rise, if I had to tell the
honest truth. There are people out there who simply like to say "I have
a Cornish Rex".... "I have an American Curl"...or whatever. It's a
status symbol for them. BTW, I have a purebred. I got him from a kitten
mill bust. A filthy houseful of Applehead Siamese. Except this one
kitten, who looks Siamese, but was long-haired. When I"m feeling
particularly pretentious, I say "I have a Balinese." :-)

Sherry

Mary

April 2nd 05, 12:32 AM

"Steve G" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Mary wrote:
> (...)
> > This is the exact type of snide comment that Steve G. makes
> > that makes him seem like an unhappy old woman in a girdle
> > that pinches her nasty bits. You two are soul mates.
>
> This being the interweb, I could in fact be an unhappy old woman in a
> girdle rather than the virulent, lantern-jawed hero I obviously given
> an appearance of being.

That would actually explain a lot. Your tiny-dick syndrome might
then actually be a no-dick syndrome.

>
> Anyway, things could be worse; I could endlessly stalk the people on
> this ng I don't like, starting non-cat related threads with the express
> purpose of satifying my own need for internecine flamewars, and
> crossposting to irrelevant groups in the hope of spreading the joy
> still further. Viva free speech, eh...
>

Um. Genius? Posting to unmoderated news groups does not
amount to stalking. I'm posting to a cat group about cats. Get
over it. You can jump on the bandwagon and blather on about
stalking and Evil and all the other hilarious terms the other old
girls toss around, but that does not change the truth. Viva free
speech indeed. Why don't you just get over the fact that some
people simply have a lot more courage than you do. I merely have
the courage of my own convictions but it must seem
excessive to a nasty, snide little man like you.

Mary

April 2nd 05, 12:32 AM

"Steve G" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Mary wrote:
> (...)
> >
> > Now this is a mutual appreciation society made in heaven.
>
> Think of it as a counterpoint to your occasional mutual-masturbation
> postings.
>
> Steve.
>

Eyuuu. That's a lot more than I need to know about your love life.

Mary

April 2nd 05, 12:34 AM

"Steve G" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Orchid wrote:
> (...)
> >
> > Tell that to my lovely sweet Hakaisha. He's less than a year
> > old. He has Grade 4 luxated patellas in *both* hind legs (surgery in
> > July), food allergies (...)
>
> The exception proves the rule, but the rule remains intact.
>
> Steve.
>

Bull****. There is no such rule. It's a crap shoot for both mixed breeds
and pure breds, unless the pure bred are overly inbred or stupidly
bred.

I cannot imagine why you ever even appeared marginally intelligent to me.
Must have been a virus. Dickhead.

Mary

April 2nd 05, 12:35 AM

"Steve G" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> wrote:
> (...)
> >
> > Ummm....where did I say the human homeless don't count? I apologize.
> I
> > failed to mention that I had a homeless couple living under my roof
> for
> > most of January and part of February this year.
>
> Really? Touche, then.
>
>
> > Are there any other of my failings you'd like to discuss?
>
> Yeah, well I bet I can, like, do more pullups than you.
>

What kind of two-faced backpedaling is this?

lol

Mary

April 2nd 05, 12:37 AM

"Phil P." > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Ashley" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Phil P." > wrote in message
> > ...
>
> > >
> > > If would more than the pope to beatify you!
> >
> > Don't trip over yourself in that attempt to get that brilliant thought
of
> > yours out, Phil
>
> Naa, I just pay very little attention to my replies to you.
>
>

Pssst ... Stevie has his panties in a knot. He's fun to **** with
when he is in his Grumpy Old Woman mood.

Mary

April 2nd 05, 12:37 AM

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Steve G wrote:
> > wrote:
> > (...)
> > >
> > > Ummm....where did I say the human homeless don't count? I
> apologize.
> > I
> > > failed to mention that I had a homeless couple living under my roof
> > for
> > > most of January and part of February this year.
> >
> > Really? Touche, then.
>
> Really. No joke. In retrospect, it was a mistake I won't make again,
> but I won't fail to try to help someone. Next time I'll provide
> transportation to the Jesus House (shelter) and make a donation.
> Becuase they are professionals and know how to hook up the homeless
> with far more resources than I can on my own.
> >
> >
> > > Are there any other of my failings you'd like to discuss?
> >
> > Yeah, well I bet I can, like, do more pullups than you.
>
> Ha! If you can do one pullup, yeah, you've got me there.
>

Trust me, you don't even have what Steve pulls on a regular basis.

FD701

April 2nd 05, 12:00 PM

Why is it wrong to want a pure-breed ? Yes, there are shelter cats who need
a home. But I wouldnt want all those lovely breeds to die out, just because
we are all supposed to get poor old shelter moggies. If I could afford it, I
would love to have a bengal, maine coon or chartreuse. But I cant. So I got
a moggie (actually the moggie got me, but thats a different story). I am
glad though, I didnt have to go to a shelter to get it. After my frined's
cat died (she had it for 15 years), she tried to get a cat from the animal
shelter. What a hassle ! They wouldnt allow her to have one, as she was a
working mum and didnt have enough time for it and had no answer to the
question what to do with it, when she went on holiday (she hasnt been on
holiday for 10 years!). She ended up buying 2 kittens from a pet shop,
instead of getting a cat from the shelter.

[email protected]

April 2nd 05, 05:02 PM

Brandy Alexandre wrote:
>
> If a cat is in a shleter, I think there should be a little more
> flexibility. Someone who loves cats, especially to the point of
> adopting a moggie over a precisely beautiful Abby or Siamese, or
> Coon, is definitely going to spend quality time with it.

Not really. Shelter cats are much more likely to be impulse buys,
particularly if the shelter does offsite adoption fairs. If you want a
purebred, generally, (if you're talking about a decent breeder), you'r
on a waiting list for a litter. It's up the the shelter personnel to
try to sort out who is prepared for a lifetime commitment, and who will
toss the kitten away as soon as they realize kittens poop, shed,
scratch, and have to be fed, and the kids bore of it.

> I find nothing wrong with wanting a purebred, and the pickiness
> should be left to them, not moggies.

Maybe I am not interpreting this sentence correctly, or else it is the
singularly most offensive thought I've ever read. Is it correct to
interpret this as meaning that breeders of purebreds should somehow
have stricter criteria for adopting than shelters? Every kitten, no
matter what, deserves to have its potential home carefully screened. No
kitten deserves to go into a home that is not suitable.

For the record, I don't do adoptions anymore. It's too much
responsibility and I lose sleep over it. For one thing, people will
stand there and tell you they need a kitten for the kids, becuase their
rottweiler killed the last two. And they get mighty ****ed when you
tell them they can't have one. Or they come in for a puppy, and you
remember they're the same people who brought you a half-grown lab, IN
THE TRUNK OF THEIR CAR, last year. Some people just suck. And it's your
responsibility to weed those people out.

Sherry

There are many reasons for
> desiring a specific breed and wanting to be sure that it's pure,
> like wanting a Russian Blue because of allergies and the like.
>
> Denting on the basis of time. What a crock.
>
> --
> Brandy Alexandre=AE
> http://www.swydm.com/?refer=3DBrandyAlx
> Well, would you?

Phil P.

April 2nd 05, 08:37 PM

> wrote in message
oups.com...
Brandy Alexandre wrote:
>

>> I find nothing wrong with wanting a purebred, and the pickiness
>> should be left to them, not moggies.

>Maybe I am not interpreting this sentence correctly, or else it is the
singularly most offensive thought I've ever read.

Consider the source and and don't let it bother you, Sherry. Since the
bimbo puts a price tag on her ass (literally) and sells it to the highest
bidder, its easy to understand how the turd places a higher value on
'purebreds'.

>Is it correct to
>interpret this as meaning that breeders of purebreds should somehow
>have stricter criteria for adopting than shelters?

That about sums up the bimbo's mentality.

Every kitten, no
>matter what, deserves to have its potential home carefully screened. No
>kitten deserves to go into a home that is not suitable.

She's lucky that person who placed a cat with her didn't feel that way. I
suspect her cat's behavioral and neurological problems are the result of
trauma -- as in *abuse*.

>For the record, I don't do adoptions anymore. It's too much
>responsibility and I lose sleep over it.

My placement average dropped to about 10% - so I only handle adoptions in
special situations - and I even second guess those. Reading posts from
low-lifes like her in cat newsgroups had a lot to do with my extreme caution
and reluctance to place cats. OTOH, I'd feel safer taking a chance on a
complete stranger than on something like her.

>Some people just suck. And it's your responsibility to weed those people
>out.

I don't think I could ever feel completely confident placing a cat again
without making the adoptives take a polygraph!

Phil

KellyH

April 2nd 05, 09:23 PM

"kaeli" > wrote
> Am I the only one who sometimes cries after visiting Petsmart and seeing
> one
> or more cats in the adoption area who look so depressed, you just KNOW
> they
> loved their people and can't understand why they no longer see them?
>
> I feel bad for all of them, but the ones who seem to really miss their
> family
> - the family that just dumped them off like old clothes they no longer
> want -
> really gets me.

I do the intakes at our shelter, and I can't stand it sometimes. You do
have to go numb on occasion or you might hit someone.
I even tell people when they contact us about turning in the cat, about how
stressed the cat is going to be in the shelter, sometimes they get sick from
the stress, etc. But they don't care.
I get larger surrender donations from people who bring in a stray they found
then from owner turn-ins. The stray people call, come visit the cat, cry,
not the owner turn-ins. Occasionally you get an owner turn-in who is realyl
heartbroken about surrendering, but it's not that often.

--
-Kelly
kelly at farringtons dot net
"Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG

[email protected]

April 2nd 05, 11:14 PM

Phil P. wrote:
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> Brandy Alexandre wrote:
> >
>
> >> I find nothing wrong with wanting a purebred, and the pickiness
> >> should be left to them, not moggies.
>
> >Maybe I am not interpreting this sentence correctly, or else it is
the
> singularly most offensive thought I've ever read.
>
>
> Consider the source and and don't let it bother you, Sherry. Since
the
> bimbo puts a price tag on her ass (literally) and sells it to the
highest
> bidder, its easy to understand how the turd places a higher value on
> 'purebreds'.
>
>
>
> >Is it correct to
> >interpret this as meaning that breeders of purebreds should somehow
> >have stricter criteria for adopting than shelters?
>
>
> That about sums up the bimbo's mentality.
>
>
> Every kitten, no
> >matter what, deserves to have its potential home carefully screened.
No
> >kitten deserves to go into a home that is not suitable.
>
> She's lucky that person who placed a cat with her didn't feel that
way. I
> suspect her cat's behavioral and neurological problems are the result
of
> trauma -- as in *abuse*.

I have to tell you this story about behavioral problems. Bear with me,
it's long. My son got a kitten last year. Bosley was 1 last Nov. He was
aggressive and mean. When he got agitated, like if he smelled another
cat, he would attack the *people* around him, or if he got too wound up
playing, he'd do the same. So my son gets an OTR truck driving job. I
take the cat and bring him here. This was about 2 months ago. At first
it was a nightmare. We had to keep him locked in a bedroom for over a
month--he was just plain viscious with us, and and with the other cats.

Long story short, he is a different cat now. He doesn't growl and hiss,
not even at the other cats.
This tells me my son was abusing this cat. I don't mean abuse in the
most literal sense of the word, but he was playing too rough with him,
and Bosley doesn't respond well to that kind of treatment.
He needs to be petted with a gentle hand, and he doesn't like it when
anyone raises their voice. He gets over-stimulated and sometimes just
needs to be left alone.
He's not getting the cat back, ever. Anyhoo. The moral of the story is,
some cats aren't really crazy-mean. They just aren't being treated
right and that's the only way they know to protest.

Sherry

KellyH

April 2nd 05, 11:27 PM

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote
> You know, I can relate to your story about a shelter not allowing a
> cat a good home. My sister--the epitome of cat lovers--was actually
> refused an adoption because the cat would be indoor/outdoor!!! They
> didn't want their cats to be allowed outdoors, therefore, she was
> denied the cat.

I turn down people all the time because of indoor/outdoor. Where do you
think all the friendly strays came from? Were they beamed down by aliens?
No, someone let their cat out, it wandered away, and is now living in the
shelter. Why should I let someone repeat the same story?

--
-Kelly
kelly at farringtons dot net
"Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG

Priscilla Ballou

April 2nd 05, 11:35 PM

In article >,
"KellyH" > wrote:

> "Brandy Alexandre" > wrote
> > You know, I can relate to your story about a shelter not allowing a
> > cat a good home. My sister--the epitome of cat lovers--was actually
> > refused an adoption because the cat would be indoor/outdoor!!! They
> > didn't want their cats to be allowed outdoors, therefore, she was
> > denied the cat.
>
> I turn down people all the time because of indoor/outdoor. Where do you
> think all the friendly strays came from? Were they beamed down by aliens?
> No, someone let their cat out, it wandered away, and is now living in the
> shelter. Why should I let someone repeat the same story?

I had to sign an agreement when I adopting the first two of my current
brood that I would keep them indoors and not declaw them. They were
spay/neutered before I took them home. That's pretty standard in my
experience.

Priscilla
--
"You can't welcome someone into a body of Christ and then say only
certain rooms are open." -- dancertm in alt.religion.christian.episcopal

Phil P.

April 3rd 05, 12:11 AM

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Phil P. wrote:
> > > wrote in message

> > She's lucky that person who placed a cat with her didn't feel that
> way. I
> > suspect her cat's behavioral and neurological problems are the result
> of
> > trauma -- as in *abuse*.
>
> I have to tell you this story about behavioral problems. Bear with me,
> it's long. My son got a kitten last year. Bosley was 1 last Nov. He was
> aggressive and mean. When he got agitated, like if he smelled another
> cat, he would attack the *people* around him, or if he got too wound up
> playing, he'd do the same. So my son gets an OTR truck driving job. I
> take the cat and bring him here. This was about 2 months ago. At first
> it was a nightmare. We had to keep him locked in a bedroom for over a
> month--he was just plain viscious with us, and and with the other cats.
>
> Long story short, he is a different cat now. He doesn't growl and hiss,
> not even at the other cats.
> This tells me my son was abusing this cat. I don't mean abuse in the
> most literal sense of the word, but he was playing too rough with him,
> and Bosley doesn't respond well to that kind of treatment.
> He needs to be petted with a gentle hand, and he doesn't like it when
> anyone raises their voice. He gets over-stimulated and sometimes just
> needs to be left alone.
> He's not getting the cat back, ever. Anyhoo. The moral of the story is,
> some cats aren't really crazy-mean. They just aren't being treated
> right and that's the only way they know to protest.

You're right. But in the case of Branded, I think the bimbo probably
whacked her cat around if she scratched her on day she was filming.

I can't tell you how many aggressive, 'vicious' "unadoptables' we've turned
around with just patience and gentle treatment. I think many people play
rough and wild with cats when they're young which makes the cat grow up
aggressive. Many people also use their hands when they play with the cat -
which makes the cat think hands are toys. Then they punish or dump the cat
when she bites. Sometimes you can tell what a cat has been through when
they swat your hand when you try to pet them. Why else would a cat be
afraid of hands?

Phil

KellyH

April 3rd 05, 02:21 AM

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote
> Well, if it's in the shelter because it wandered away from home, you're
> right that it probably shouldn't go to another outdoor home. But you
> honestly can't be trying to say that people who allowed their cats
> outside in suburbia make bad owners. The cat she was replacing was
> with her for 18 years, indoors and out.
>

Yes I can. That cat was lucky it lived to be 18, but not everyone is that
lucky. Right here in suburbia, we have coyotes. They were even hanging
around the shelter, probably attracted by the dumpster and the dog poop.
We get cats that are injured from being outside, half frozen, covered with
fleas and ticks, etc.
Now tell me why I should adopt a cat to an indoor/outdoor home?

--
-Kelly
kelly at farringtons dot net
"Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG

Phil P.

April 3rd 05, 02:56 AM

"Priscilla Ballou" > wrote in message
...

> I had to sign an agreement when I adopting the first two of my current
> brood that I would keep them indoors and not declaw them. They were
> spay/neutered before I took them home. That's pretty standard in my
> experience.

We have similar conditions in our adoption agreement but unfortunately,
they're very hard if not impossible to enforce. Many adoptives don't know
that. So their willingness to sign the agreement is a sign of good
intentions but not necessarily a guarantee. However, if an adoptive is
unwilling to agree to the conditions, that's a good enough reason for
denying the application.

I try to engage adoptives in casual conversation - I find out more
information that way than if I actually question them. You'd be surprised
how many adoptives actually talk themselves out of a cat or dog.

Phil

KellyH

April 3rd 05, 03:19 AM

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote
> Because someone has a loving home to offer it? She ended up adopting
> two cats elsewhere from a more reasonable shelter 5 years ago. They
> come in, they go out. I said suburban, not rural. She has no coyotes,
> badgers, raccoons, giant squirrels or vicious bunnies in her ranch-
> style tract home planned neighborhood.
>

There's someone else out there who will give this cat a loving, indoor-only
home. Just because the cat is in a shelter doesn't mean I have to give it
to the first person that comes along. It's our shelter policy to adopt to
indoor-only homes.
BTW, I *am* talking about the suburbs. Our shelter is located right off a
busy commerical strip in Southern NH. There have been coyote sightings in
people's backyards, in their neat little planned suburb neighborhoods. I
live in a condo development and have raccoons trying to get in my trash cans
all the time.

I'm all for letting your cat out if you can do it in a safe manner, i.e. an
enclosure or walking on a leash.
--
-Kelly
kelly at farringtons dot net
"Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG

Mary

April 3rd 05, 03:41 AM

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
news:1112494095.f2aa1c3b3c0a55ded076445d16bae384@t eranews...
> KellyH > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> > "Brandy Alexandre" > wrote
> >> Well, if it's in the shelter because it wandered away from home,
> >> you're right that it probably shouldn't go to another outdoor
> >> home. But you honestly can't be trying to say that people who
> >> allowed their cats outside in suburbia make bad owners. The cat
> >> she was replacing was with her for 18 years, indoors and out.
> >>
> >
> > Yes I can. That cat was lucky it lived to be 18, but not everyone
> > is that lucky. Right here in suburbia, we have coyotes. They
> > were even hanging around the shelter, probably attracted by the
> > dumpster and the dog poop. We get cats that are injured from being
> > outside, half frozen, covered with fleas and ticks, etc.
> > Now tell me why I should adopt a cat to an indoor/outdoor home?
> >
>
> Because someone has a loving home to offer it? She ended up adopting
> two cats elsewhere from a more reasonable shelter 5 years ago. They
> come in, they go out. I said suburban, not rural. She has no coyotes,
> badgers, raccoons, giant squirrels or vicious bunnies in her ranch-
> style tract home planned neighborhood.
>

And I'm sure there are no cars. Asshole.

Mary

April 3rd 05, 03:42 AM

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
news:1112494658.fb22477e861645f8150dc1a5b45986c8@t eranews...
> Diane L. Schirf > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> > In article <1112494240.bccaf9860ad3633de7c7e839f323a6f2@terane ws>,
> > "Brandy Alexandre" > wrote:
> >
> >> I don't think people with in/out cats are evil or bad "parents."
> >
> > Would you think that people who let their two-year-olds out to
> > wander whereever they chose were bad parents? I would.
> >
>
> Now you're being ridiculous. It's a CAT, not a child.
>
And there we have it. Your cat is more of a "thing" to you.

CatNipped

April 3rd 05, 03:42 AM

"KellyH" > wrote in message
...
> "Brandy Alexandre" > wrote
> > Because someone has a loving home to offer it? She ended up adopting
> > two cats elsewhere from a more reasonable shelter 5 years ago. They
> > come in, they go out. I said suburban, not rural. She has no coyotes,
> > badgers, raccoons, giant squirrels or vicious bunnies in her ranch-
> > style tract home planned neighborhood.
> >
>
> There's someone else out there who will give this cat a loving,
indoor-only
> home. Just because the cat is in a shelter doesn't mean I have to give it
> to the first person that comes along. It's our shelter policy to adopt to
> indoor-only homes.
> BTW, I *am* talking about the suburbs. Our shelter is located right off a
> busy commerical strip in Southern NH. There have been coyote sightings in
> people's backyards, in their neat little planned suburb neighborhoods. I
> live in a condo development and have raccoons trying to get in my trash
cans
> all the time.
>
> I'm all for letting your cat out if you can do it in a safe manner, i.e.
an
> enclosure or walking on a leash.
> --
> -Kelly
> kelly at farringtons dot net
> "Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG

I can vouch for that too. I live in a suburb just north of Houston - the
largest city in Texas, in a neighborhood with *lots* of houses. When I
tried to TNR a cat my humane trap caught 4 raccoons, 2 possums, and a skunk
(among other animals). We've also spotted coyotes not far from my home.
But even more dangerous than that is that about a mile from my house is a
busy highway. In just the last week I've seen *FOUR* dead cats in the road
less than 2 miles from my home. Indoor/outdoor cats routinely roam up to 2
miles away from their home. I challenge anyone in a suburb to say that they
live more than 2 miles away from a busy highway!

Hugs,

CatNipped

Mary

April 3rd 05, 03:43 AM

Mary

April 3rd 05, 04:06 AM

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
news:1112497058.65478a3720e023687cd6110a9302b3a9@t eranews...
> Mary > wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> >
> > "Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in
> > message
> > news:1112494658.fb22477e861645f8150dc1a5b45986c8@t eranews...
> >> Diane L. Schirf > wrote in
> >> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
> >>
> >> > In article
> >> > <1112494240.bccaf9860ad3633de7c7e839f323a6f2@terane ws>,
> >> > "Brandy Alexandre" > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I don't think people with in/out cats are evil or bad
> >> >> "parents."
> >> >
> >> > Would you think that people who let their two-year-olds out to
> >> > wander whereever they chose were bad parents? I would.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Now you're being ridiculous. It's a CAT, not a child.
> >>
> > And there we have it. Your cat is more of a "thing" to you.
> >
> >
> >
>
> A thing with teeth, claws, keen eyesight and hearing, masterfully
> agile with thousands and thousands of years evolution teaching it
> how to be outdoors, not to mention in a grassy backyard. A two-
> year-old on the other hand... do you now see how incredibly stupid
> the comment was? Cruelty is in the eye of the beholder. There are
> some places where it's illegal to have a cat confined only to the
> indoors. I forget where it was, but I'm sure you know how to use
> Google.
>

Why do you keep your cat inside?

Mary

April 3rd 05, 04:09 AM

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
news:1112497342.652be174c3cc3022c856ad6529fe84f7@t eranews...
> Mary > wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> >
> > "Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in
> > message
> > news:1112494095.f2aa1c3b3c0a55ded076445d16bae384@t eranews...
> >> KellyH > wrote in
> >> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
> >>
> >> > "Brandy Alexandre" > wrote
> >> >> Well, if it's in the shelter because it wandered away from
> >> >> home, you're right that it probably shouldn't go to another
> >> >> outdoor home. But you honestly can't be trying to say that
> >> >> people who allowed their cats outside in suburbia make bad
> >> >> owners. The cat she was replacing was with her for 18 years,
> >> >> indoors and out.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Yes I can. That cat was lucky it lived to be 18, but not
> >> > everyone is that lucky. Right here in suburbia, we have
> >> > coyotes. They were even hanging around the shelter, probably
> >> > attracted by the dumpster and the dog poop. We get cats that
> >> > are injured from being outside, half frozen, covered with fleas
> >> > and ticks, etc. Now tell me why I should adopt a cat to an
> >> > indoor/outdoor home?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Because someone has a loving home to offer it? She ended up
> >> adopting two cats elsewhere from a more reasonable shelter 5
> >> years ago. They come in, they go out. I said suburban, not
> >> rural. She has no coyotes, badgers, raccoons, giant squirrels or
> >> vicious bunnies in her ranch- style tract home planned
> >> neighborhood.
> >>
> >
> > And I'm sure there are no cars. Asshole.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Just because my opinion is different from yours doesn't make it
> wrong.

When you allow a cat to roam unsupervised you endanger that cat
and that is wrong.

And the name-calling actually harms your credibility, just
> so you know.

Oh please. Credibility with whom? Pffft.

>Like I said, I don't want an outdoor cat, but I'm not
> going to villify someone who does. My parent's cat Cocoa lived
> outsode ONLY for 13-years. He knew his home and his boundaries, and
> it WAS rural. He died of bladder cancer. Their other cat, B2,
> started indoor/outdoor and then became strictly outdoor. He died at
> the tender age of 22.
>
> Sorry, but your presumptions don't top my experience.
>

"Topping" is not the point. When you allow cats to roam
unsupervise, you flaming ****ing idiot, you endanger them
by exposing them to anything that might be out there. It is
a fact. And since you keep your cat inside, you appear
to be a hypocrite on top of everything else. But you make
a nice punching bag, or so I hear.

Mary

April 3rd 05, 04:53 AM

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
news:1112498543.ff4928fa39a22b506d03e23374e39e7f@t eranews...
> Mary > wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> > "Topping" is not the point. When you allow cats to roam
> > unsupervise, you flaming ****ing idiot, you endanger them
> > by exposing them to anything that might be out there. It is
> > a fact. And since you keep your cat inside, you appear
> > to be a hypocrite on top of everything else. But you make
> > a nice punching bag, or so I hear.
> >
>
> Whatever. You've proven you're no one who is interested in intelligent
> exchange of ideas and opinions. A little ironic calling me the flamer.
>

I called you a " flaming ****ing idiot." As in, a blatant, gaudy,
impossible to miss Idiot with a capital "I" You are old enough
to recall when "flaming" had nothing to do with Usenet since
Usenet did not exist, after all.

Mary

April 3rd 05, 04:54 AM

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
news:1112500375.89a03968e95a18b61a0c051a28f10649@t eranews...
> Diane L. Schirf > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> > In article <1112497342.652be174c3cc3022c856ad6529fe84f7@terane ws>,
> > "Brandy Alexandre" > wrote:
> >
> >> My parent's cat Cocoa lived
> >> outsode ONLY for 13-years.
> >
> > Oh, yes, the experience of one cat certainly is typical.
> >
> > Well, I could tell you about the ones I know of killed by cars,
> > raccoons, dogs, etc. But hey -- your one story trumps thousands of
> > others.
> >
> > ;)
> >
>
> Why did you snip the other story? There were two in that post and
> you're trying to bolster your argument through editing my words? I
> think you've lost. I doubt you've had thousands of cats, frankly, so I
> don't think you have any real or personal experiences to participate in
> this discussion. Especially when you have to lie in your replies,
>

WHY DO YOU KEEP YOUR CAT INDOORS?

Phil P.

April 3rd 05, 05:10 AM

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message

A thing with teeth, claws, keen eyesight and hearing, masterfully
> agile with thousands and thousands of years evolution teaching it
> how to be outdoors,

Antifreeze, poisoned mice/rats, toxic chemicals, cars, trucks, buses,
sadistic psychopaths with BB guns/22s and lighter fluid were not included in
their "thousands and thousands of years evolution teaching"... You didn't
think of that, now did you, bimbo?

KellyH

April 3rd 05, 05:13 AM

"Diane L. Schirf" > wrote> Because I get bored
with this type of argument. "It didn't happen to me,
> so therefore it must not happen."
>

Here are some examples of cats that are in our shelter right now, who did
not fare so well in the great outdoors:

Special Delivery is a 5 month old kitten who was found half-frozen by a UPS
driver. She is doing well now, but needed intense care when she first came
in.

Felix and Smokey Jane are both in foster care on six-month bite holds. They
came in with bite wounds of unknown origin.

Terra is at the animal hospital right now, fighting off some sort of
infection. He was found scraped up, dirty, and only weighed 6 lbs.

Willa was found stray with 3 kittens. She and one of the kittens tested
positive for FeLV. The one kitten cleared the virus, and Willa just did a
couple weeks ago.

Omar was found stray and estimated to be 15 years old. He was skin and
bones, and is now in a hospice foster care. He was also hyperthyroid and
has started gaining weight.

--
-Kelly
kelly at farringtons dot net
"Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG

kitkat

April 3rd 05, 05:59 AM

Diane L. Schirf wrote:
> In article >,
> "KellyH" > wrote:
>
>
>>That cat was lucky it lived to be 18, but not everyone is that
>>lucky. Right here in suburbia, we have coyotes.
>
>
> All it takes is a raccoon, and raccoons are everywhere.
>
> BTW, as I type this, Hodge is lying comfortably across my feet.

Yep. The indoor cat's life is really...rough!
;)

Ashley

April 3rd 05, 06:20 AM

"Phil P." > wrote in message
link.net...

> Antifreeze, poisoned mice/rats, toxic chemicals, cars, trucks, buses,
> sadistic psychopaths with BB guns/22s and lighter fluid were not included
> in
> their "thousands and thousands of years evolution teaching"... You didn't
> think of that, now did you, bimbo?

God the States sounds like a horrible place.

kitkat

April 3rd 05, 06:26 AM

Ashley wrote:
> "Phil P." > wrote in message
> link.net...
>
>
>
>>Antifreeze, poisoned mice/rats, toxic chemicals, cars, trucks, buses,
>>sadistic psychopaths with BB guns/22s and lighter fluid were not included
>>in
>>their "thousands and thousands of years evolution teaching"... You didn't
>>think of that, now did you, bimbo?
>
>
> God the States sounds like a horrible place.

Not quite. However, I am saddened by the alarming number of sadistic
psychopaths. I'm quite sure you have cars, trucks, buses, and chemicals
in NZ.

Phil P.

April 3rd 05, 06:30 AM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Phil P." > wrote in message
> link.net...
>
>
> > Antifreeze, poisoned mice/rats, toxic chemicals, cars, trucks, buses,
> > sadistic psychopaths with BB guns/22s and lighter fluid were not
included
> > in
> > their "thousands and thousands of years evolution teaching"... You
didn't
> > think of that, now did you, bimbo?
>
> God the States sounds like a horrible place.

You don't have antifreeze, poisoned mice/rats, toxic chemicals, cars,
trucks, buses, sadistic psychopaths with BB guns/22s and lighter fluid in
NZ?

And don't call me god...

Ashley

April 3rd 05, 06:42 AM

"kitkat" > wrote in message
m...
> Ashley wrote:
>> "Phil P." > wrote in message
>> link.net...
>>
>>
>>
>>>Antifreeze, poisoned mice/rats, toxic chemicals, cars, trucks, buses,
>>>sadistic psychopaths with BB guns/22s and lighter fluid were not included
>>>in
>>>their "thousands and thousands of years evolution teaching"... You
>>>didn't
>>>think of that, now did you, bimbo?
>>
>>
>> God the States sounds like a horrible place.
>
> Not quite. However, I am saddened by the alarming number of sadistic
> psychopaths. I'm quite sure you have cars, trucks, buses

Yup. However, your perception of that risk is much higher than mine.
Probably because you think our roads must be as busy as yours.

, and chemicals
> in NZ.

Never, ever, ever heard of cats being deliberated fed antifreeze or poisoned
anything. Whenever there is a case of deliberate cruelty it is *all over*
the news. Kiwis hate thugs who pick on creatures weaker than themselves.

Ashley

April 3rd 05, 06:45 AM

"Phil P." > wrote in message
...
>
> "Ashley" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Phil P." > wrote in message
>> link.net...
>>
>>
>> > Antifreeze, poisoned mice/rats, toxic chemicals, cars, trucks, buses,
>> > sadistic psychopaths with BB guns/22s and lighter fluid were not
> included
>> > in
>> > their "thousands and thousands of years evolution teaching"... You
> didn't
>> > think of that, now did you, bimbo?
>>
>> God the States sounds like a horrible place.
>
>
> You don't have antifreeze, poisoned mice/rats, toxic chemicals, cars,
> trucks, buses, sadistic psychopaths with BB guns/22s and lighter fluid in
> NZ?
>

Seriously, I have *never* heard of any such instances in New Zealand. The
one instance I have heard of recently was a cat who was thrown off a wharf
by a group of kids. Thankfully the cat survived. It was all over the local
newspaper.

When there are cases of cruelty to animals, believe it or not, they make the
national news because Kiwis are so disgusted by it. The two that spring to
mind in the past couple of years are a thug who dragged his dog behind his
car as punishment for a perceived misdeed (dog has now recovered and has
been rehomed, thug has just begun a 9-month jail sentence for the offence);
and a turkey that was kicked around by a group of kids. These items were
treated as national news.

> And don't call me god...
>
>

Ashley

April 3rd 05, 06:46 AM

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
news:1112506475.cda894c001dfa8b9612a9a783535c414@t eranews...

>
> LOL! Heya, kiwi. I have a great friend in Methven. Moved there a few
> years ago from Rakaia.

Boy, your friends live in the world's hot spots, don't they? ;-)

He not only had cats and dogs outside, but
> lambs! Can you imagine how dangerous and cruel that must have been?
> Lambs? OUTSIDE??? ;)

Not only that, but we eat them!

Mary

April 3rd 05, 06:49 AM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Phil P." > wrote in message
> link.net...
>
>
> > Antifreeze, poisoned mice/rats, toxic chemicals, cars, trucks, buses,
> > sadistic psychopaths with BB guns/22s and lighter fluid were not
included
> > in
> > their "thousands and thousands of years evolution teaching"... You
didn't
> > think of that, now did you, bimbo?
>
> God the States sounds like a horrible place.
>
>

It is! That's why everyone is clamoring to get into New Zealand.

Wahahahahahahahaha!!!

Mary

April 3rd 05, 06:50 AM

"kitkat" > wrote in message
m...
> Ashley wrote:
> > "Phil P." > wrote in message
> > link.net...
> >
> >
> >
> >>Antifreeze, poisoned mice/rats, toxic chemicals, cars, trucks, buses,
> >>sadistic psychopaths with BB guns/22s and lighter fluid were not
included
> >>in
> >>their "thousands and thousands of years evolution teaching"... You
didn't
> >>think of that, now did you, bimbo?
> >
> >
> > God the States sounds like a horrible place.
>
> Not quite. However, I am saddened by the alarming number of sadistic
> psychopaths. I'm quite sure you have cars, trucks, buses, and chemicals
> in NZ.
>
>

But there are no sadistic psychopaths. Also, the dogs do not eat cats.
It's practically heaven. Especially if you are a lizard.

Phil P.

April 3rd 05, 07:03 AM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Phil P." > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Ashley" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>
> >> "Phil P." > wrote in message
> >> link.net...
> >>
> >>
> >> > Antifreeze, poisoned mice/rats, toxic chemicals, cars, trucks, buses,
> >> > sadistic psychopaths with BB guns/22s and lighter fluid were not
> > included
> >> > in
> >> > their "thousands and thousands of years evolution teaching"... You
> > didn't
> >> > think of that, now did you, bimbo?
> >>
> >> God the States sounds like a horrible place.
> >
> >
> > You don't have antifreeze, poisoned mice/rats, toxic chemicals, cars,
> > trucks, buses, sadistic psychopaths with BB guns/22s and lighter fluid
in
> > NZ?
> >
>
> Seriously, I have *never* heard of any such instances in New Zealand.

Perhaps you need to get out more... or are all accidents and poisonings
reported to you directly? New Zealand doesn't have rats or mice that some
people don't want around? The mice eat the poison; the cat eats the mice...
the cat gets poisoned.

Antifreeze is also used as coolant - helps prevent cars from overheating.
Cats are attracted to antifreeze.

Not all cat killings are reported - many times the bodies are buried or
thrown in dumpsters in paper bags or eaten by other animals. So I seriously
doubt you're aware of all the killings.

Ashley

April 3rd 05, 07:20 AM

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
news:1112507444.4e54afbeb1b1f38fd7c7e1e876fc6f92@t eranews...

> Hehehe! We do, too. Not many, but count me in the numbers. They're
> quite tasty.

Roasted with garlic and rosemary. Nothing beats it ;-)

kitkat

April 3rd 05, 07:20 AM

Ashley wrote:
> "kitkat" > wrote in message
> m...
>
>>Ashley wrote:
>>
>>>"Phil P." > wrote in message
link.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Antifreeze, poisoned mice/rats, toxic chemicals, cars, trucks, buses,
>>>>sadistic psychopaths with BB guns/22s and lighter fluid were not included
>>>>in
>>>>their "thousands and thousands of years evolution teaching"... You
>>>>didn't
>>>>think of that, now did you, bimbo?
>>>
>>>
>>>God the States sounds like a horrible place.
>>
>>Not quite. However, I am saddened by the alarming number of sadistic
>>psychopaths. I'm quite sure you have cars, trucks, buses
>
>
> Yup. However, your perception of that risk is much higher than mine.
> Probably because you think our roads must be as busy as yours.
>
> , and chemicals
>
>>in NZ.
>
>
> Never, ever, ever heard of cats being deliberated fed antifreeze or poisoned
> anything. Whenever there is a case of deliberate cruelty it is *all over*
> the news. Kiwis hate thugs who pick on creatures weaker than themselves.

No one is saying that the antifreeze is being fed deliberately. Cars
leak stuff. Or cars don't leak in NZ?

And just because your roads arent as busy does not make them "not
dangerous".

All I'm saying is that the snide comment about the States sounding like
a horrible place in turn makes it sound like I can expect NZ to be some
sort of paradise with rainbows, unicorns, a 100% sane AND animal loving
population, that clearly only uses chemicals safe for cats and other
animals. etcetera.

kitkat

April 3rd 05, 07:22 AM

Mary wrote:
> "kitkat" > wrote in message
> m...
>
>>Ashley wrote:
>>
>>>"Phil P." > wrote in message
link.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Antifreeze, poisoned mice/rats, toxic chemicals, cars, trucks, buses,
>>>>sadistic psychopaths with BB guns/22s and lighter fluid were not
>
> included
>
>>>>in
>>>>their "thousands and thousands of years evolution teaching"... You
>
> didn't
>
>>>>think of that, now did you, bimbo?
>>>
>>>
>>>God the States sounds like a horrible place.
>>
>>Not quite. However, I am saddened by the alarming number of sadistic
>>psychopaths. I'm quite sure you have cars, trucks, buses, and chemicals
>>in NZ.
>>
>>
>
>
> But there are no sadistic psychopaths. Also, the dogs do not eat cats.
> It's practically heaven. Especially if you are a lizard.
>
>
heh. like i just got done saying...NZ...the land of rainbows and unicorns!

Ashley

April 3rd 05, 07:24 AM

"Phil P." > wrote in message
...
>

> Perhaps you need to get out more...

No thanks. I get out quite enough :-)

or are all accidents and poisonings
> reported to you directly?

Nope. But you'd think that if it were a common problem, I might have heard
of it. Just possibly.

New Zealand doesn't have rats or mice that some
> people don't want around? The mice eat the poison; the cat eats the
> mice...
> the cat gets poisoned.

Mostly, if people have mice they don't want, they get a cat ... That would
be why 52% of our households have at least one cat.

>
> Antifreeze is also used as coolant - helps prevent cars from overheating.

You don't say! I would never have guessed! Gosh, you are so clever.

> Cats are attracted to antifreeze.
>

And yet, if it were a common problem, you'd think that vets here would
commonly warn against it, that the SPCA would occasionally warn against it
....

> Not all cat killings are reported - many times the bodies are buried

You don't say. I would never have guessed. Gosh, you're so clever.

or
> thrown in dumpsters in paper bags or eaten by other animals.

Not that last bit. Not here. It's the cats that eat other animals.

So I seriously
> doubt you're aware of all the killings.

Funny thing is, I'm not aware of *any* killing of the kind you mention. Not
one.

kitkat

April 3rd 05, 07:27 AM

Ashley wrote:
> "Phil P." > wrote in message
> ...
>
>
>>Perhaps you need to get out more...
>
>
> No thanks. I get out quite enough :-)
>
> or are all accidents and poisonings
>
>>reported to you directly?
>
>
>
> Nope. But you'd think that if it were a common problem, I might have heard
> of it. Just possibly.
>
> New Zealand doesn't have rats or mice that some
>
>>people don't want around? The mice eat the poison; the cat eats the
>>mice...
>>the cat gets poisoned.
>
>
> Mostly, if people have mice they don't want, they get a cat ... That would
> be why 52% of our households have at least one cat.
>
>
>>Antifreeze is also used as coolant - helps prevent cars from overheating.
>
>
> You don't say! I would never have guessed! Gosh, you are so clever.
>
>
>>Cats are attracted to antifreeze.
>>
>
>
> And yet, if it were a common problem, you'd think that vets here would
> commonly warn against it, that the SPCA would occasionally warn against it
> ...
>
>
>
>>Not all cat killings are reported - many times the bodies are buried
>
>
> You don't say. I would never have guessed. Gosh, you're so clever.
>
> or
>
>>thrown in dumpsters in paper bags or eaten by other animals.
>
>
>
> Not that last bit. Not here. It's the cats that eat other animals.
>
>
> So I seriously
>
>>doubt you're aware of all the killings.
>
>
> Funny thing is, I'm not aware of *any* killing of the kind you mention. Not
> one.
>
>
Well, I guess you are right then. It sure does suck living here. Now I
must get back to my horrible life with my imprisoned kitties. ;)

p.s. for you march madness freaks...GO ILLINI!!!!!

Mary

April 3rd 05, 07:37 AM

"Ashley" > wrote :
> So I seriously
> > doubt you're aware of all the killings.
>
> Funny thing is, I'm not aware of *any* killing of the kind you mention.
Not
> one.
>
>

Let me just raise your awareness then:

http://www.rspcanz.org.nz/

See the 2004 List of Shame.

""This list provides chilling evidence of the warped and sadistic cruelty of
some New Zealanders, and of the callous and thoughtless selfishness of
others," said acting national chief executive of the NZ RSPCA Jenny
Prattley.

Mary

April 3rd 05, 07:43 AM

"Ashley" > wrote :
>
> or are all accidents and poisonings
> > reported to you directly?
>
>
> Nope. But you'd think that if it were a common problem, I might have heard
> of it. Just possibly.
>

Actually, the NZ RSPCA indicates that New Zealand animal abusers
tend to use microwave ovens, freezers, hammers, knives, guns and
dragging via trucks to abuse cats and dogs. I did not see anti-freeze
mentioned.

Ashley

April 3rd 05, 07:46 AM

"kitkat" > wrote in message
. com...

> No one is saying that the antifreeze is being fed deliberately. Cars leak
> stuff. Or cars don't leak in NZ?
>

Yup. However, antifreeze ain't all that common, quite frankly. Most of the
country is temperate and the really cold areas are very sparsely populated.
Certainly, in Auckland, where I live, there would be no danger of any cat
ever ingesting any antifreeze. No one here uses it.

> And just because your roads arent as busy does not make them "not
> dangerous".
>

As I said - perceptions. For instance, when I was house hunting, I
specifically said to agents I will not even consider any house on a main
road. One agent ignored this comment and took me to a house on the main
road - I refused to get out of the car and look at it, even though she said
"But it's you". I could tell from the outside it was indeed my kind of
house, but that risk was too great.

Off a main road, down a long driveway, with extremely cat-attractive bush to
run around in is an entirely different matter.

I would never live anywhere where it was not relatively safe for my cats to
be outside. I value my freedom to roam and will put myself at what some
others perceive to be "risk" in order to do so because the benefits outweigh
the risks and I have a much more interesting, rewarding life that way. I
choose the same for my cats. I wouldn't live anywhere where I thought the
risks outweighed the benefits.

> All I'm saying is that the snide comment about the States sounding like a
> horrible place

Hey, I was just reacting to what was written. Go back and read it - that
paragraph *does* make the States sound like a bloody horrible place. I know
it's not - I've visited and I have a sister who lives there.

And maybe that's my point - I don't know where you live and what your area
is like, but what's posted here sounds glum, glum, glum. If the States ain't
that glum, then is it ever-so-slightly possible that's what's posted here
is, shall we say, slightly over-egged.

in turn makes it sound like I can expect NZ to be some
> sort of paradise with rainbows, unicorns, a 100% sane AND animal loving
> population, that clearly only uses chemicals safe for cats and other
> animals. etcetera.

Nope, we have our problems. We don't blow them out of proportion,
though............................................ .................................................. .....................

Ashley

April 3rd 05, 07:48 AM

"kitkat" > wrote in message
. com...

> Well, I guess you are right then. It sure does suck living here.

It would appear Phil thinks so. He sure painted it that way!

Now I
> must get back to my horrible life with my imprisoned kitties. ;)

I suspect your cats have a life they are more than contented with. And I
have no problem with the life you have chosen for your cats. I wouldn't
choose it for mine, though.

Ashley

April 3rd 05, 07:49 AM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...

> Nope, we have our problems. We don't blow them out of proportion,
> though............................................ .................................................. .....................

Sorry but all those dots. Computer threw a bit of a tizz!

kitkat

April 3rd 05, 07:54 AM

Ashley wrote:

>
> And maybe that's my point - I don't know where you live and what your area
> is like, but what's posted here sounds glum, glum, glum. If the States ain't
> that glum, then is it ever-so-slightly possible that's what's posted here
> is, shall we say, slightly over-egged.

Well, I won't argue that the sad stories about what happens to our pets
that roam freely ARE indeed glum, glum, glum. But that doesn't make it a
glum place to live. Things that happen are just that...things that
happen. I would also imagine that the people posting here who seem to be
"blowing things out of proportion" are probably reacting to the
experiences they have had with their own pets or animals they work with
at their respective shelters and/or rescue organizations.

I also wont argue that life in the US will be different than life in NZ.
Perhaps cats are somewhat safer roaming unsupervised where you live.
Lucky for you! However, still...not so lucky for that list of animals on
the NZ's list of shame!

Mary

April 3rd 05, 07:58 AM

"kitkat" > wrote in message
om...
> Ashley wrote:
>
> >
> > And maybe that's my point - I don't know where you live and what your
area
> > is like, but what's posted here sounds glum, glum, glum. If the States
ain't
> > that glum, then is it ever-so-slightly possible that's what's posted
here
> > is, shall we say, slightly over-egged.
>
> Well, I won't argue that the sad stories about what happens to our pets
> that roam freely ARE indeed glum, glum, glum. But that doesn't make it a
> glum place to live. Things that happen are just that...things that
> happen. I would also imagine that the people posting here who seem to be
> "blowing things out of proportion" are probably reacting to the
> experiences they have had with their own pets or animals they work with
> at their respective shelters and/or rescue organizations.
>
> I also wont argue that life in the US will be different than life in NZ.
> Perhaps cats are somewhat safer roaming unsupervised where you live.
> Lucky for you! However, still...not so lucky for that list of animals on
> the NZ's list of shame!

Wasn't it Ashley who posted that cats are routinely shot in
NZ because they are imported--not indigenous--and kill off all
the native creatures?? They are routinely shot.

Phil P.

April 3rd 05, 08:06 AM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Phil P." > wrote in message
> ...
> >
>
> > Perhaps you need to get out more...
>
> No thanks. I get out quite enough :-)

I mean out of your house...not closet.

>
> or are all accidents and poisonings
> > reported to you directly?
>
>
> Nope. But you'd think that if it were a common problem, I might have heard
> of it. Just possibly.

I don't think so. You seem too uninformed

>
> New Zealand doesn't have rats or mice that some
> > people don't want around? The mice eat the poison; the cat eats the
> > mice...
> > the cat gets poisoned.
>
> Mostly, if people have mice they don't want, they get a cat ... That would
> be why 52% of our households have at least one cat.

What about the other 48% that don't have cats? What do they use to keep
mice away, your picture?

>
> >
> > Antifreeze is also used as coolant - helps prevent cars from
overheating.
>
> You don't say! I would never have guessed! Gosh, you are so clever.

Naa, it just seems that way to you because you aren't.

>
> > Cats are attracted to antifreeze.
> >
>
> And yet, if it were a common problem, you'd think that vets here would
> commonly warn against it, that the SPCA would occasionally warn against it

So New Zealanders weren't told antifreeze is toxic to cats? Maybe you
should spread the word.

> ...
>
>
> > Not all cat killings are reported - many times the bodies are buried
>
> You don't say. I would never have guessed. Gosh, you're so clever.

Naa, it just seems that way to you because you aren't.

>
> or
> > thrown in dumpsters in paper bags or eaten by other animals.
>
>
> Not that last bit. Not here. It's the cats that eat other animals.

So cats are the largest carnivores in NZ, eh?

>
>
> So I seriously
> > doubt you're aware of all the killings.
>
> Funny thing is, I'm not aware of *any* killing of the kind you mention.
Not
> one.

As I said, perhaps you need to get out of your house more....

Phil P.

April 3rd 05, 08:08 AM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "kitkat" > wrote in message
> . com...
>
> > No one is saying that the antifreeze is being fed deliberately. Cars
leak
> > stuff. Or cars don't leak in NZ?
> >
>
> Yup. However, antifreeze ain't all that common, quite frankly. Most of the
> country is temperate and the really cold areas are very sparsely
populated.

Antifreeze also prevents auto cooling systems from rusting.... Most cars
come from the factory with antifreeze already in the radiators...

Your really are quite uninformed.

Phil P.

April 3rd 05, 08:11 AM

"Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
news:1112511741.1497b9784df675af0247668fa0396f6c@t eranews...
> Ashley > wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
>
> >
> > "kitkat" > wrote in message
> > . com...
> >
> >
> >> Well, I guess you are right then. It sure does suck living here.
> >
> > It would appear Phil thinks so. He sure painted it that way!
> >
> > Now I
> >> must get back to my horrible life with my imprisoned kitties. ;)
> >
> > I suspect your cats have a life they are more than contented with.
> > And I have no problem with the life you have chosen for your cats.
> > I wouldn't choose it for mine, though.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Egads, he's pouncing on you, too? That man needs a life. Glad to know
> the killfile's working.

I just love it when assholes have to keep reminding people that they're
killfiled!

Mary

April 3rd 05, 08:12 AM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
> news:1112506475.cda894c001dfa8b9612a9a783535c414@t eranews...
>
>
> >
> > LOL! Heya, kiwi. I have a great friend in Methven. Moved there a few
> > years ago from Rakaia.
>
>
> Boy, your friends live in the world's hot spots, don't they? ;-)
>
> He not only had cats and dogs outside, but
> > lambs! Can you imagine how dangerous and cruel that must have been?
> > Lambs? OUTSIDE??? ;)
>
> Not only that, but we eat them!
>
>

You do lots of things to sheep and other animals. Go here
and select New Zealand. You will know you are there when
you see "Goat Sexually Assaulted" and "Neighbor's Cat
Microwaved."

http://www.pet-abuse.com/database/index.php

Mary

April 3rd 05, 08:13 AM

"Phil P." > wrote in message
...
>
> "Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
> news:1112511741.1497b9784df675af0247668fa0396f6c@t eranews...
> > Ashley > wrote in
> > rec.pets.cats.health+behav:
> >
> > >
> > > "kitkat" > wrote in message
> > > . com...
> > >
> > >
> > >> Well, I guess you are right then. It sure does suck living here.
> > >
> > > It would appear Phil thinks so. He sure painted it that way!
> > >
> > > Now I
> > >> must get back to my horrible life with my imprisoned kitties. ;)
> > >
> > > I suspect your cats have a life they are more than contented with.
> > > And I have no problem with the life you have chosen for your cats.
> > > I wouldn't choose it for mine, though.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Egads, he's pouncing on you, too? That man needs a life. Glad to know
> > the killfile's working.
>
>
> I just love it when assholes have to keep reminding people that they're
> killfiled!
>

Being killfiled means you won. I have many notches on my mouse. 8)

Phil P.

April 3rd 05, 08:15 AM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "kitkat" > wrote in message
> . com...
>
>
> > Well, I guess you are right then. It sure does suck living here.
>
> It would appear Phil thinks so. He sure painted it that way!

I just don't live in fantasyland like you. I live in the real 2005 world.
Free roaming may have been safer 50 years ago, but not in today's world.

Phil P.

April 3rd 05, 08:22 AM

"Mary" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Ashley" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Brandy Alexandre" > wrote in message
> > news:1112506475.cda894c001dfa8b9612a9a783535c414@t eranews...
> >
> >
> > >
> > > LOL! Heya, kiwi. I have a great friend in Methven. Moved there a
few
> > > years ago from Rakaia.
> >
> >
> > Boy, your friends live in the world's hot spots, don't they? ;-)
> >
> > He not only had cats and dogs outside, but
> > > lambs! Can you imagine how dangerous and cruel that must have been?
> > > Lambs? OUTSIDE??? ;)
> >
> > Not only that, but we eat them!
> >
> >
>
> You do lots of things to sheep and other animals. Go here
> and select New Zealand. You will know you are there when
> you see "Goat Sexually Assaulted"

A goat was sexually assaulted? Naaa-aaaa-aaa!

and "Neighbor's Cat
> Microwaved."
>
> http://www.pet-abuse.com/database/index.php

But Ashley never heard of things like that.....

Ashley

April 3rd 05, 08:46 AM

"kitkat" > wrote in message
om...

> I also wont argue that life in the US will be different than life in NZ.
> Perhaps cats are somewhat safer roaming unsupervised where you live. Lucky
> for you! However, still...not so lucky for that list of animals on the
> NZ's list of shame!

Yup. It's tough being a lamb.

Mary

April 3rd 05, 08:50 AM

Mary

April 3rd 05, 08:57 AM

"Ashley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "kitkat" > wrote in message
> om...
>
>
> > I also wont argue that life in the US will be different than life in NZ.
> > Perhaps cats are somewhat safer roaming unsupervised where you live.
Lucky
> > for you! However, still...not so lucky for that list of animals on the
> > NZ's list of shame!
>
> Yup. It's tough being a lamb.
>
>

From http://www.rspcanz.org.nz/listofshame04.html

New Zealand's 2004 LIST OF SHAME--Intstances of Animal Cruelty

30 cases of animal abuse
The SPCA has released its second annual "List of Shame", detailing 30 cases
of deliberate cruelty or callous neglect perpetrated on New Zealand's
animals during the past 12 months.
"This list provides chilling evidence of the warped and sadistic cruelty of
some New Zealanders, and of the callous and thoughtless selfishness of
others," said acting national chief executive Jenny Prattley.
"This isn't a comprehensive record of all the cases of which we have
knowledge. Moreover, there will obviously be cases which never see the light
of day. But the list does give an overview of the abuse of animals in our
country and provides clear cause for concern."
Cases on the List of Shame include that of a Northland dog dragged behind a
car at speeds of up to 80 kph over a mixture of gravel and sealed roads, and
a Nelson dog beaten on the head with a hammer. In addition, the list gives
details of several animals discovered in severely emaciated and neglected
condition.
"Perhaps most disturbing of all are the cases involving children and
youths," said Mrs Prattley. "For example, at Brighton (near Dunedin)
children were seen enticing ducks with bread and then throwing stones and
rocks at them. And in nearby Sawyers Bay a group of nine-year-old boys
deliberately killed 12 hens.
If we can't educate our children out of these calculated acts of heartless
cruelty, we are certainly heading for trouble as a society. There is a
considerable body of research linking violence to animals with cruel and
violent behaviour towards our fellow human beings. We ignore this research
at our peril.
The List of Shame makes grim reading. However, the good news - as compared
to last year - is that many of the cases included on our 2004 list have
resulted in court prosecutions, and the courts are gradually taking a
tougher stance on sentencing after years of absurdly light sentences. We
applaud this firmer approach and hope that it becomes the norm in the years
ahead."
Mrs Prattley added that 2004 has seen the first custodial sentences imposed
under the Animal Welfare Act, as well as higher financial penalties for
offenders and the first lifetime ban on dog ownership.
"The signs are that these tougher penalties have the support of the majority
of New Zealanders, many of whom love and care for their own animal friends
and are sickened by the cruelties perpetrated on innocent creatures. We ask
them to continue supporting our work, both by alerting us to cases of animal
abuse and by providing the funds needed for investigating and prosecuting
these cases."

-L.

April 3rd 05, 09:02 AM

Ashley wrote:
> "Phil P." > wrote in message
> link.net...
>
>
> > Antifreeze, poisoned mice/rats, toxic chemicals, cars, trucks,
buses,
> > sadistic psychopaths with BB guns/22s and lighter fluid were not
included
> > in
> > their "thousands and thousands of years evolution teaching"... You
didn't
> > think of that, now did you, bimbo?
>
> God the States sounds like a horrible place.

It is. And it's also a very lovely place. Just depends upon where you
are.
Overall, though, life outdoors is not safe for cats in the US. There
are areas where it is safe, but increasingly, those types of properites
are hard to come by.

I grew up in a wonderful place to have indoor-outdoor cats, and despite
that, we still lost a couple to cars over the 32 years we had cats
there. The rest lived long and happy lives. I think Americans forget
that there are many places in the world where cats can live well as
indoor-outdoor cats. Most of my Brit friends, for example, are
horrified that my cats are indoor-only. They have kept cats for years
as indoor-outdoor and never had an incident.

-L.

Phil P.

April 3rd 05, 09:06 AM

"Mary" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Ashley" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "kitkat" > wrote in message
> > om...
> >
> >
> > > I also wont argue that life in the US will be different than life in
NZ.
> > > Perhaps cats are somewhat safer roaming unsupervised where you live.
> Lucky
> > > for you! However, still...not so lucky for that list of animals on the
> > > NZ's list of shame!
> >
> > Yup. It's tough being a lamb.
> >
> >
> So you missed the cat that was microwaved and the puppies
> that were stabbed and shot, the cat that was placed alive in
> a freezer, and the dog that was so severely beaten his eye fell out?
> Sleazebag.

If those incidents really happened, surely Ashley would have heard of
them... Terrible things like that don't happen in Ashley's fantasy world...

Ashley

April 3rd 05, 09:06 AM

"Phil P." > wrote in message
nk.net...
>
> "Ashley" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Phil P." > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>>
>> > Perhaps you need to get out more...
>>
>> No thanks. I get out quite enough :-)
>
>
> I mean out of your house...not closet.
>

Oh goodness gracious, look at that, someone who thinks implying that someone
is gay is an insult - and a clever one at that. OK, got the measure of you
now Phil. Ta.

>
> I don't think so. You seem too uninformed

Of life in New Zealand? Tell me what you know about it Phil, and we'll see
who's ill-informed.

> What about the other 48% that don't have cats? What do they use to keep
> mice away, your picture?

Their neighbours' cats.

>
>>
>> >
>> > Antifreeze is also used as coolant - helps prevent cars from
> overheating.
>>
>> You don't say! I would never have guessed! Gosh, you are so clever.
>
>
> Naa, it just seems that way to you because you aren't.
>

Woo-hoo. What's your Mensa membership number?

>
> So New Zealanders weren't told antifreeze is toxic to cats? Maybe you
> should spread the word.
>

Why? So few of us use it. It's hardly a threat.

>
> So cats are the largest carnivores in NZ, eh?
>

Yes. See, you're so well informed.

..
>
> As I said, perhaps you need to get out of your house more....
>

Here's the list of countries I've travelled to, Phil.

United States, Britain, Ireland, Holland, Portugal, Spain, Greece, France,
Andorra, Turkey, Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, Niger, Nigeria, Cameroon,
Central African Republic, Zaire (now Congo), Rwanda, Uganda, Kenya,
Australia.

I don't think so.