November 19, 2004

Opponent Arguments

The hardest argument to refute that my opponents make, is that the operation is beneficial to single animals that are always indoors, as well as pets that are allowed to roam freely. Many of them are unaware of the medical benefits that result from having their pet spayed or neutered, so you have to inform them of the risks, and then make them realize that their pets life could be lengthened and improved from having the operation.
Another argument made by opponents that is somewhat difficult to refute is that the operation is ‘too expensive’. This is hard to argue against because every individual has a different income and thus different idea of what ‘expensive’ denotes. The best way I have come up with to argue that the operation will still be beneficial despite its cost, is that no matter how much money you make, the cost of a spay or neuter operation will still be less than the treatment of ailments eliminated by the operation will cost. From that one may conclude that in the long run, he or she will be saving money.
One more argument my opponents like to make is one based on luxury. Many owners feel that it is a waste to spay or neuter their ‘pure-bread’ cat or dog. They think that they may even be able to make money off their pet’s offspring. Data shows that this is an assumption that should be looked at differently. Nearly half of animals euthenized in animal shelters are indeed pure-bread. Therefore pure-bread animals are just as major part of the problem of overpopulation as mixed breed animals are. Other statistics show that people often do not make much money off their pure-bread pups or kittens. Usually only breeders that already have a reputation and business set up benefit from selling pups and kittens.

Posted by knol0041 at November 19, 2004 11:21 AM