Owning and Caring For a Pet is Unethical

A debate worth reading I would say. Thank you for allowing me to challenge you one this issue. I. Religious Grounds A. Law does not supersede preference. In many countries in many laws, there are stipulations and rights conferred onto one group or another. In the U.S. laws are written to establish greater wages for congressmen, to exclude diplomats from judicial proceedings, to require business to preferentially treat departments of government. So Law is more subjective than Religion. Ethics one of the most subjective philosophical studies. Aesthetics is a study under ethics, because ethics is a system of thought to assign value through rational means. Being of a philosophical nature and one pertaining to value, I would not deem it as a study in universal truths. B. non sequitur. It implies that life has an intrinsic value and animal life has it's place as well as human. I don;t think my opponent has made a case to assume human life is more valuable than animal life. intuitively many of us would agree but if such a value judgement is made with out legal or religious grounds then where is my opponents ethical argument for stating human life is more valuable? It is merely a moral subjective value most would agree with, making my opponent's case an appeal to Argumentum ad populum. C. I have contention with my opponent's statement, "We bear no responsibility to care for animals" I have been making this very case from religious grounds, legally pets are seen as property and being such you do have a responsibility to take care of your property. I can not buy a house and burn it down, justifying my actions as "It's mine I can do anything destructive I want," one would surely be in trouble with the rest of society. Many pets ethically have been through unnatural breeding been forced to lose some of their instinctual drives and are incapable of fending for themselves in a natural environment. Making it our responsibility to care for what we have grown. The false dichotomy is my opponents making. Again in the resolution and the first round where Pro could have made such distinctions, my opponent has not done. Meaning any exception to the caring of pet that can be found to be ethical, as it is our responsibility to do so, would negate the resolution Pro has presented. II. Symbiotic Relationship - Animal pets: In many counties Police Work dogs go home with their "human partners" They work side by side and when work is done the animal agent is a part of the family. My opponent wishes to state that such pets are only around for the jobs they facilitate. These animals do not work 24-7. They are some ones pets, some one cares for them not out of functionality but out of compassion. Which is what makes them different from livestock like chicken. - Moral Claim: My opponent admits that his reasoning for this debate would lead to a logical conclusion that most things are unethical (like watching TV). Simply put caring for pets as my opponent has quoted to be a substantial amount of money each year, is a business that drives economic growth. Many of our luxuries, the variety and choices we have in open market, All these choices allow for more jobs to be created. To ultimately deem all these businesses unethical and outlawed would leave millions more hurting to provide for the basic living needs of themselves and human family. In 2012 Animal care and services had 200,000 plus jobs with a 15% estimated growth (faster than normal economic growth) [http://www.bls.gov...]. This is just the actual animal handling services. It is not inclusive of people who work and run factories to produce pet and animal related products. This is just for the U.S. In conclusion: There are religious responsibilities to care for pets, legal responsibility to maintain property, ethical responsibility to care for what we as a society have made. My opponent has offered no ethical grounds to why humans should be treated better than animals, though I may agree. The industry of supporting pets and pet owners is a growth potential of immense value to better the lives and sustain the well being of millions of humans. Clearly the resolution, "Owning and Caring For a Pet is Unethical" has been found to be lacking substantial credence. Thank you.