Pets are often the targets for people's anger. Newspapers print stories of how dogs are given fur coats and $1000 shampoos. People are shocked when old ladies leave $2000 to their parrot instead of giving to charity.
It is a usual complaint to hear of why government needs so much money to clean the streets after the dogs have fouled them. Or why people will pay any amount to give their pets every luxury. This money is argued that it should be used for such greater goals like saving a child from starvation.
But why single out pets in this moral argument? Why not says money spent on buying a bigger house than you need or a designer dress or a meal that costs $5000 in an expensive restaurant. Are these also wrong?
After all pets give something back to society. They are friends to the lonely and old people, they can be trained to help. They sometimes give pleasure, happiness and protection to people.
In a perfect world, all money wasted on luxuries should go to the starving. But this is not a perfect world? It is no more wrong to spend money on pets. Nowadays many people will not just spend money on basic essentials in life. It is also foolish for people who are not having the expense of pets must be sent to Oxfam.
So instead of morally judging, more effort should be put into organizing events that will encourage people to give money to the starving world, like concerts. If somebody organizes a concert for charity, many people will be eager to spend money on it!
It is unfair to blame and criticize pet owners
for the way they waste money on pets when almost everyone in the developed
world is guilty of the same attitude!