4 ms·

Quite so. It's fascinating how we take a compassionate, rational approach when it comes to not letting our pets spend the remainder of their lives in misery yet

• mensetmanusman 3y ago
  We can, we have just learned from history we haven't been able to not abuse such power.
• Qem 3y ago
  I wouldn't call it compassionate. The pets can't have a word on it. I think it's egotistical. Pets make us fun. When they stop being a fun source, we kill them and replace with "puppy-mill" sourced younger ones, while congratulating ourselves for our "piety". We force-sterilize them, for our own convenience. Just like slavery was once considered normal by slave-owners, but now we all see it as a barbaric practice, I think future generations will look down upon us, for the way we used to treat animals.
  • JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > pets can't have a word on it. I think it's egotistical. "End-of-life care accounts for about 10-12% of all healthcare spending" [1], though "spending in the last three calendar years of life reached 24.5 percent in Taiwan," suggesting "high aggregate medical spending is due not to last-ditch efforts to save lives but to spending on people with chronic conditions" [2]. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1282187/#:~:text=According%20to%20one%20estimate%2C%20end,%24%2029%20billion%2C%20respectively2 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1282187/#:~:tex.... [2] https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2017.0174 https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2017.0174