Quote:
Originally Posted by BamaFan121s  Regarding the comparison of why it's acceptable for an owner/vet to make assessments on pain and suffering in the case of having an animal put down, but the same principle doesn't apply to docking tails.
That was the "point" I was referring to, in case you truly are interested. However, like I said in my previous post, it is clear that our lines of logic are on opposite ends of the spectrum, and I doubt anything would be achieved from any further discussion on this matter...so don't feel obligated. |
Oh it's absolutely no trouble at all. I have plenty of time, so again if you'd like to point out where I stated "All breeders" I'll be more than happy to correct that.
Let's see.
why it's acceptable for an owner/vet to make assessments on pain and suffering in the case of having an animal put down, but the same principle doesn't apply to docking tails. When an animal is suffering to the point of having no quality of life and no chance of getting any better. In other words they're basically going to vegitate and maybe even starve to death and the vet through his experience, training and the ability to do all the necessary tests, advises , then it's for the good of the animal itself, not the owner but the animal.
IF and I repeat IF a vet were to advise docking, why?
Would it be for the good of the animal? Is it because the animal needs it's tail chopped to be able to balance correctly? maybe it needs it's tail chopped to be able to run faster? I think not. There are no benefits to docking for the animal itself. The only benefits are for the breeder. That's the difference, there is no comparisson if you are looking at the benefits of the animal itself.