2006-11-27 23:04:57 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Animals need to eat, wherever they are. If they're at your place you'll feed them, if they're not domesticated and live outside they'll look for food themselves. So whatever you do, animals (and pets) will eat! And I don't think killing them all is a good solution, they're not the reason why some people have nothing to eat ;)
2006-11-27 23:08:05 · answer #1 · answered by El Emigrante 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes it is perfectly fine. Where are people going hungry and why is the proper question. Opressive govts are the reason and beyond your control. We were told as children to eat all of our food because of starving people in China. I have been to China a couple of times and they make jokes about this. There is plenty of food in the world to feed everyone. It is poverty that must be addressed. Mexico has all the natural resources it needs to have a very prosperous country yet 95 percent of the people are poor because of a corupt govt. What do they do with their poor. Shove them on us. You must get to the root of the problem. Corruption. Of course you should have a pet they bring love and companionship to a family. Do not let corupt govts. spoil your fun.
2006-11-28 07:12:53 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
As long as you're not feeding those hungry humans to your household pet.
My pets are family. I worry about my family's needs before I worry about strangers.
2006-11-28 07:31:34 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
If you keep a pet, you have a responsibility to feed it! Would it be right to let a household pet starve to death?
2006-11-28 07:10:15 · answer #4 · answered by F R 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Got something against pets? Hey I'll donate to charity if they feed the hungry, but unless their willing to come in my house and catch mice for kibble, I'll continue to feed my cats as well.
2006-11-28 07:07:50 · answer #5 · answered by nuthnbettr2do0128 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The world being overpopulated as it is, would you not also see it as wrong to feed poor people living in an area of the world that is not conducive to human life only to allow that person to live long enough to reproduce, thus bringing more poverty to the area? Which is worse? Allowing one human to starve or feeding that person so that he may make a family of starving children?
2006-11-28 07:13:55 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
are those people going to be fed if the household pet dies of starvation? We should learn to respect every being, help as we can but without pretending to have all the world on our shoulders.
2006-11-28 07:07:47 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
It's not my job to feed people all over the world. it's the government's responsibility. as far as my pets, that's my personal choice to care for them.
2006-11-28 07:34:34 · answer #8 · answered by renamed 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
thats right, but all we can do is to give enough charity. but that does not mean that we dont feed household pets.they're creatures & have the right to be fed.
2006-11-28 07:09:43 · answer #9 · answered by marz 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't mind giving my pet food and it is the right thing to do.
I'll just give to charity for the poor, but I can't let my pets without food.
2006-11-28 07:10:25 · answer #10 · answered by cass 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋