The Instigator
LatinaGirl8894
Pro (for)
Winning
30 Points
The Contender
TheSymbiote
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Animals should not be kept in cages

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 5 votes the winner is...
LatinaGirl8894
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/22/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,445 times Debate No: 63718
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (5)

 

LatinaGirl8894

Pro

The question is not, "Can they reason?" nor, "Can they talk?" but rather, "Can they suffer?" ~Jeremy Bentham

1. Cages are Harmful

"Wire cages are the standard in commercial breeding. Sadly, though, there is no limit to the damage wire cages can do to dogs' health. They experience joint and limb discomfort and irregular growth from standing on the wires. Their paw pads can be badly bruised or cut from the hard metal. Because wire cages aren't comfortable, dogs remain standing for longer periods of time, resulting in poor posture and stress on muscles."http://www.quotegarden.com...

I think that this quote speaks for itself. It clearly says that keeping animals in cages can cause harm to them. Some can have long tem effects that can make life diffucult for them.

2. Cages are Restrictive

Often times people put animals that are too big for a cage in them and they will stay there for long periods of time. Puppy mills stuff so many pups into one cage and just leave them there until they are needed. You would not want to be squished into a small cage so why shold they?

3. Cages are used as a form of Punishment

"Never use the crate as a punishment. Your dog will come to fear it and refuse to enter it."
http://www.humanesociety.org...

I could not agree more with this statement. Using a cage as punishment is not the right way to train your animal to do things the right way. If they only associate the cage with something bad they will not want to go into a cage at all. They might even become violent when presented with on in the future.

Some people would argue that using a cage is a necessary part of owning an animal, but i would disagree with that. If animals were meant to be in cages they would have been created that way.
TheSymbiote

Con

Wow, dude. You do realize that people put dogs in cages to protect them. Take it like this. You have a pet bird. You don't use a cage, the bird flies out of the house, the bird starves and dies out because it is not made for the outside. You can basically use this with any animal. A poor hamster isn't caged. You have a little sister, she likes running around the house, she steps on and kills the hamster. You realize that right? You logic is that it is in-humane, but who cares? You say animals shouldn't be caged yet you eat the animals raised on farms. Unless you are vegan you should be Debating this topic. Unless you care about animals you shouldn't debate this topic
Debate Round No. 1
LatinaGirl8894

Pro

My opponent says that people put dogs in cages to protect them. Protect them from what? That is not protecting them it is confining them.

Plenty of birds have made out just fine without having to be trapped in a cage; my opponent saying that birds are not made for the outside is just silly. If they were not made for outside they would not have wings, they don"t need them to sit in a cage all day.

The argument of hamsters being squished. Hamsters were not born in cages so my opponent is saying that if there are not kept in a cage that they would go extinct? I don't think so.

My opponent says "who cares" if it's inhumane to keep animals in cages. So basically my opponent is saying that he doesn't care about the misery or suffering of animals being in cages? Hmmmm.

You make a big assumption saying that I eat animals raised on farms, but how does that prove your point? What does a farm have to do with animals being in a cage?

Just pointing out that none of my initial arguments have been refuted; therefore the resolution stands.
TheSymbiote

Con

Wow, dude I can see your totally butt hurt but what ever

Alright m8 lets duke this out one more time.

Ok search up in google "Ran over dogs"

With a hamster search up "crushed my hamster"

Put the pieces together, people make mistakes, people do things. Plus, you ban cages. Now what? I can see the headlines now, "Baby Gets Mauled by Dog" "Kids Eyes Are At Stake" "Snakes kill dozens" "Lion kills family" "Salmonella Disease Strikes"
And theoretically saying, you want all animals to be free? So that whole herd of sheep gets eaten by wolves. That whole herd of cow gets slaughtered. Whats the difference? The problem with you is that you don't understand what I am trying to say. Animals, need to be kept in cages. Humans are animals, we kill, we fight, we rape. So what? Animals are food. If you think about it, animals are our products, we made animals, we bred, and bred, and bred, until we got that cute little puppy. So who says that we can't do what we want with them? We paid, we signed papers, we paid some more. Yet, people hurt animals and that is against the law. You most likely don't adopt pets and give them homes if you do then why are you wasting your time on here when you can be saving animals? Wanna know who is a pheg u
Debate Round No. 2
LatinaGirl8894

Pro

First of all I never said that all animals are to be free. Never did those words appear in this debate. I simply said that animals don't need to be in cages.

Sheep are not kept in cages, they are in a field where they are free to run around and are not confined to a small space like a cage.
Who would be the one slaughtering the cows? Once again this has nothing to do with the topic.
If you are going to get a pet/animal and keep them in a cage then what is the point of having an animal in the first place?
By your logic, if humans are animals and you say animals need to be kept in cages then you are basically saying we all need to be in cages and that is beyond the point of this debate.

As I stated in the beginning cages are bad for these reasons: they are harmful, restrictive and are used for punishment.
The resolution still stands.
TheSymbiote

Con

What ever, if you care so much then help the animals
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by FreedomBeforeEquality 2 years ago
FreedomBeforeEquality
I would say on points 2 and 3 that they are self evident things. Yes you use a cage for punishment ... if that is your intent then the effect of them associating it as a form of punishment is not a bad thing at all. It's part of the punishment process ... to train and discipline. They are "restricting"? You dont say? Im would not be suprised to see "restriction"in the very definition of the word cage, because thats the intent of its use. To restrict the animal from going places it should not.

Your nest rounds should definitely work on the why of it. Why do you think animals should be able to roam unrestricted at all times. Why you think punishment and discipline is a thing no animal should have to go through. Why you think wild ought to stay wild.

I wonder if you would even have the same love for them if you had not been brought up in a world where many where tamed and you were afforded the opportunity to be close with them and learn about them.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Zanomi3 2 years ago
Zanomi3
LatinaGirl8894TheSymbioteTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Full points to Pro. Spelling and Grammar (Several mistakes by Con) is self explanatory. Conduct (why bring up being "butt hurt"?) is also due to lack of respect from Con. Arguments is clear; Con continuously brought up things that Pro never stated. Sources easily to Pro because Con failed to use any sources whatsoever.
Vote Placed by jynxx 2 years ago
jynxx
LatinaGirl8894TheSymbioteTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Con A) was "Totally butthurt" himself, B) had terrible grammar, and C) overall really rude. He accepted this challenge and had terrible arguments.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
LatinaGirl8894TheSymbioteTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: con pretty much gives up at the end.
Vote Placed by VelCrow 2 years ago
VelCrow
LatinaGirl8894TheSymbioteTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: "Wow, dude I can see your totally butt hurt but what ever" minus conduct points for that statement. "m8" minus conduct for spelling and grammar Pro had better arguments with better material for support. Con used ad hominem attacks and did not even address Pro's points. For any further explanation feel free to pm me.
Vote Placed by kasmic 2 years ago
kasmic
LatinaGirl8894TheSymbioteTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Cons conduct was poor at best so conduct to pro. Con did not refute pros case, as it is Unrefuted arguments to pro. Pro was the only one to use sources.