The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

Should Pets be Allowed in Apartments

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
dpro905 has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 10/4/2017 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 1,495 times Debate No: 104288
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)




I think that animals should be allowed in apartments because they can help people with loneliness and they can have more people want to live in apartments because its cheaper and they can bring their beloved pets with them. Although animals can be messy or disruptive to the building, I believe that they will clean it up, its their living space, why would they want it to reek of pee and be disgusting and dirty. I feel these are just a few reasons why animals should be allowed, but I'd love to hear what others have to say.


This appears to me to be a confusion of the concept of property ownership. The landlord owns the property and the value it possesses: he or she rents out this property in exchange for what is deemed as its value in capital finance. As such, the person who lives in the apartment only owns it insofar as they use it and rent it out: they do not own the value of the apartment for this belongs to the landlord. As such anything that could potentially damage the value of that property, such as owning a pet, though whilst may be beneficial for the person living in the apartment is detrimental for the landlord. Animals can physically damage an apartment through scratching it or making a mess very hard to clean in it (which the renter is not always obliged to do under law, depending of course on the extent of damage). Or, they can do reputational damage, in that people will not want to rent out the house consequent to a pet-enabled living space based on allergy or the conception that it makes an apartment somehow dirtier. Thus, damaging the value of the property.

Now, if I was to rent a car, should I be allowed to do certain things in it (like eat hot food, smoke, drink...) in it that could potentially damage that rented car's value? The same argument applies to housing.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by TheUnexaminedLife 2 years ago
@Arganger Still excludes certain types of accommodation
Posted by Arganger 2 years ago
If someone really needs it (for instance for depression or anxiety, under the fair housing act, just get a note from a doctor and make your pet an esa.
Posted by KostasT.1526 2 years ago
I believe this is more of a topic to be discussed in the forums.
This debate has 6 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.