Before we start, let me say that none, some or all of the things below may
or not be my opinions. Which are or not is not the question. I find myself
very comfortable arguing all sides of an argument. The point is
>Don't sell fuzzies. You paid out the cash with the intent of taking care of
>them. If you can't take care of them, find someone else that can and hope
>they do as well as you had hoped. They may not be human babies, but they
>are your responsibility, nonetheless...they are not merchandise to be sold.
If I understandf correctly, private owners should not sells ferrets. I
suppose there is a perfectly good reason then why shelters and breeders
should be allowed to sell. I guess you thought that went without saying.
Or, since one of the facts is that a person that buys a pet should not sell,
breeders are not covered since they generally do not pay for the ferts, at
least not in a per head sense.
Why then should people not be allowed to sell their pets if the circumstances
so require, or for any reason. Since previous post showed why not, I will
tackle why they should not be questioned:
- a pet sold for money is more likely to end up with a person that will take
some degere of responsibility: people generally do not like to throw money
away. But if you were to give the pet away, the chances of the pet falling
in the hands of less responsible people are greater since the donee has
certainly nothing to lose in the transaction.
- a person may have made a poor decision in buying a ferret. Recognizing
this error, the person has to let go of the ferret. It is clear that a
ferret has a high value (go to any pet store or shelter, and ask to see the
price tag). So they should then give away for nothing somethiong of value,
for the sole reason that the ferret is a living being anf that living being
are not usually sold. Well, babies put up for adoption do carry a price,
albeit indirect. As far as animals, I guess ferret people are the only ones
I know that seem to think that way for the sale of pets by owners is a very
common practice.
- But lets say that yes, ferrets should be given away, not sold. Then
shouldn't the same should apply to shelters, under the argument that if you
can't take care of the ferret you should give them to good home. Of course,
some shelters will say that they can take care of them all, that they don't
need to sell them.. why sell them then? Why not give them away? Well of
course, shelters have the right to recoup their costs, for the welfare of
all ferrets, present and future.
What about those shelters that are overcrowded and yet still take on the
responsiblity of new and thus really have to sell them just to keep going?
Does that not happen out there? It seems like it does.
So it would appear that the only people benefitting from a no resale of
ferrets would be those that are, under this reationale, allowed to sell
them: shelters and breeders. Again, shelters will often incur much more
expense than income from the sales. So why not allow direct sales between
people, thus relieving shelters of some burdens?
Finally, all these arguments are swept under the rug by simply saying that
it would be unethical to for individuals to sells their pets, and thus they
should give them away. The problem is, ethics are based on personal and
societal beliefs (there is an element of what a person believes, and what a
person believes society wants, and what society as a whole regards as
ethical conduct). As such, they are not carved in stone, and no one can
claim to be right over everyone else. The same hold for many other things,
not just ethics (something many FMLers appear to forget sometimes...). The
point is, flinging the idea that a conduct is ethical or not does not answer
all the controversies and puts them to rest. I shall leave it at that.
Antonio, Fudge, Poulette and George
[Posted in FML issue 2314]
|
