Susan Kennedy wrote:

<snip>
> This is exactly the problem. Cat, dogs, domestic animals, have the
> intelligence of a small child. So do wild animals.

Animals vary tremendously in intelligence. Some, like some parrots,
really do have the intelligence of small human children on human-style
intelligence tests, but from my experience with animals, their
ways of interacting with the world are so different from humans', it's
hard to compare one-to-one with any particular stage of human
development.

> They don't know to look
> both ways before crossing the street until they are hit by a car - and by
> that time, it's too late for most of them, even if they are intelligent
> enough to learn. Are you also advocating that we give up cars, tractors,
> and other vehicles, or lower the speed limit to about 10 miles an hour so
> ignorant animals have time to get out of the way?

No. I wouldn't suggest ignoring animals in your headlights, but
part of owning one's own life is to take one's own risks.

>>(and breeding or neutering ) cats and other pets is that we have
>>made them permanent dependents -- whether as slaves or food or
>>pseudo-"children". Obviously, the well-cared-for (not pampered )
>>pet, or even better, companion animal, will have a much better life
>>and welfare than a battery-cage hen, a calf in a veal crate, or
>>a fighting dog. That is good for that pet. But he/she has a better
>>life _at the whim of his/her owner_. The owner could as easily have

> Now this part I agree with. Ask any farmer what happens when an owner
> decides he or she doesn't want a pet anymore. Many of them have had to
> shoot those feral dogs you talked about in our converstation because they
> were killing livestock and would not hesitate to go after small children
> either. Farmers often find dogs, cats, pet rabbits, etc., who have been
> dumped near their farmhouses on the (false) theory that the farmer has the
> time and money to find them and will take care of them. I just do not think
> your solution is one.

>>abused or neglected him/her -- any episode of _Animal Precinct_ or
>>_Animal Cops_ ( or a stint in rescue ) will show how bad it can get.

>>What ARAs believe is that the basic master/pet relationship is
>>morally wrong. The life of the animal should not belong to the
>>master -- even the kind master. The animal should own his own life.

> Animals do no own their lives in the wild, and if you think they do, you
> need to watch some nature shows about predators.

I do think animals own their own lives in the wild. That does not mean
they don't face dangers of predation, starvation, dominance fights,
and so on. But think about it -- humans do, too, both within our own
society, and interacting with non-humans. A human getting shot or
arrested for trespassing is like an animal being driven out of another
animal's territory; a low-status animal being picked on by a
higher-status animal or driven out of the group is like a human being
fired or mugged; a human being eaten by a tiger or crocodile is like
a rabbit being eaten by a predator. But those situations are a lot
different from a human held as a slave, or a little child controlled
by parents -- when a human really doesn't own his own life.

>>That does not mean the human cannot have a relationship with the
>>animal -- something like Jane Goodall's friendship with her
>>chimpanzees or the relationships in _Never Cry Wolf_. Those people
>>didn't just observe at a distance; they touched and interacted with
>>the animals -- but they did not control them. Humans who go to places
>>(like the Galapagos Islands when they were first discovered) where
>>the animals have not had contact with humans before, are often amazed
>>that the animals do not fear them and run from them. Fear of humans
>>is a learned behavior in wild animals. Not that we will live in a
>>Disney world or a Dr. Doolittle world. But we can have a much more
>>friend-like relationship with animals who are neither our prey nor
>>our possessions.

> What you choose to ignore is that 1: the human animal is by nature a
> predator itself.

Yes, to a degree. But we don't have to live as predators. We are not
(under good conditions) predators over our pets, or many wild animals.
Humans can live in other ways; we are not obligate carnivores.

and 2: there are plenty of other predators in the world
> who would not hesitate to eat us as well as their other prey.

Certainly.

> In the animal world, you're predator, or you're prey. Everything that
> lives, eats something, and some animals just naturally eat other animals.
> It's the way of the world.

But many animals do not eat other animals. Humans are unusual in the
animal kingdom in that they can control their own behavior and
environment in such ways that they can live as herbivores, not
omnivores. That does not mean animals will not die as a result
of human actions. But we can do much more to respect animals and
treat them as beings with certain very basic rights than we do.

Rat