Resolved: Animal Abuse is Acceptable

Con may use any definition he wants, provided he explains it. For the purposes of my argument, animal abuse is "abuse to an animal that one owns that does not interfere with productivity," so no maiming an animal then having it do work for you but at a reduced capacity, due to aforementioned maiming. Buying a kitten and taking it home, on the other hand... To begin with, animal abuse is acceptable because the animals are not human. Were a human abusing another human, it would be terrible, because a human is being harmed. The viewpoint presented here is very long-run zero-sum, in this case stretching into the thousands of years, and in that we will need a non-vacuum environment, food on our tables, water to drink, air to breathe, and sunlight, as does almost everything else above a single-cellular stage now. Because I'm human, I want humanity to succeed, so everything becomes a resource. This ties into my argument because animals are infinitely more expendable than humans. If there are dedicated animals to abuse, people can vent into them and not face stigma, because it counts as a human using his resources to his own end. It would be horrible to be the animal, but who cares? Animal abuse is acceptable, because as long as productivity doesn't suffer, people are getting their jollies in on abusing something that isn't their fellow man. An example would not be amiss here. Take Bob. Everyone say "Hi, Bob." He is trapped in the lowest rungs of power, and has nobody to take his frustrations out on. He goes and gets an animal to abuse. Now that he has something below him to take things out on, he's a lot happier. I'm not saying it's good or bad, merely that it is in human nature. For example, in George Orwell's "Shooting an Elephant" (Where my Brit Lit kids at?), the narrator states that "With one part of my mind I thought of the British Raj as an unbreakable tyranny, as something clamped down, in saecula saeculorum, upon the will of prostrate peoples; with another part I thought that the greatest joy in the world would be to drive a bayonet into a Buddhist priest's guts." In all fairness, the natives were actively hostile to him in the story, but it's the exercise of power over those who are weaker that counts here. The animals, unless they are being used for testing, consumption, or assistance for the disabled, and therefore exempt from abuse (hopefully, I mean they're being productive here), are draining resources that could have gone to a human. The gratification from the abuse makes up for that drain. They could also make up for the drain with love and companionship, as well, and probably more than any amount of gratification from abuse, but that takes time, unlike the immediate "Oh yeah, power feels good" one gets as they exercise the more immediate power over the unfortunate beast. Factor in the fact that most animals have a faster lifecycle than humans, and you have an endless source of amusement/gratification with a large enough population. You take them one at a time, and... Look at it squirm! Now the proviso: If you are abusing animals, perhaps you need help. It is gratifying in the short term, but you are ultimately hurting yourself. It is far better to form a friendship, because the release granted by the abuse in the short run is far outweighed by the fact that, as you get used to it, it starts to get boring, and you start look to your fellow man, putting you back to square one... It is far better to search for challenges and achieve, but hey, each to their own. I don't judge. And before you ask, no, I have not been diagnosed with Antisocial Personality Disorder. On the animal abuse front, my family has a cat that was returned to the shelter twice before we got her. It took a month for her to be comfortable with us being within ten feet of her or her food dish. We love her all the same. The moral of the story is if you're going to abuse an animal, don't palm it off on other people when you're done. Have the guts to kill it, or at least keep it locked up until it dies. It's not fair to anyone to get their animal pre-abused, especially if they're going to take it in and shower it with affection, and it reacts with hostility, possibly hurting one or more of them.