Is advocating laws regulating the breeding of animals a good idea?

I don't believe in advocating speciesist legislation that reinforces Welfarism and the property status of animals and legitimizes animal slavery and exploitation.

When an animal advocate advocates for a law related to the animal prisoners that are imprisoned in this breeding system, they perpetuate and reinforce the property status that these animals have in our society. They legitimize the exploitation of animals. The law that will be enforced is a law to protect 'commodities', not a law to safeguard persons.
In the population’s eyes now the problem becomes the treatment, or rather the societal view that the treatment is the problem becomes reinforced, of the exploited animals and not the exploitation of breeding and killing animals at any whim. As long as they are treated good and as long as their are laws regulating their "welfare", they can be killed when their owner think that they no longer need to take care of the animal. The focus becomes on the treatment of animals, instead of putting the focus on all use of animals. And nonvegan animal lovers think that they are helping the animals while they are consuming their dinner of animal foods, wearing their leather shoes and their wool sweater, and bringing their healthy pet to the animal shelter because of that they don't have time to take care of her. And since animals are property under the law, the animal welfare reforms don't offer any real protection – not in reality and seldom in court. You can't regulate what property owners should do with their property unless you can argue a speciesist interest of humans that necessitates property owners to treat their property in a certain way - e.g. not beating him/her in public.

More related articles:
http://law.bepress.com/rutgersnewarklwps/art21/
 http://bloganders.blogspot.no/2014/05/abolitionist-veganism-articles.html

------
A person wrote:
" We should just try to convince the back yard breeder of pit bulls that breeding is wrong and wait for him/her to be convinced that breedign is wrong while he contributes to dog fighting and dogs ending up in the shelters to be euthanized?" ??

We try to convince him and all of the rest of the speciesist nonvegan population that are equally responsible to these atrocities.
What else can you do other than education and resucing animals from animal shelters?
We don't have any legal power to arrest him or the nonvegan population for their atrocities.

--------------------------

 "and adopting "property" from shelters does not legitimize the exploitation. "


No, it doesn't. You are showing that this isn't just "property" that can be disregarded on the "trash pile" by his/her property owner. You are showing that this is a sentient being with an inherent value.

PeTA on the other hand are showing by their murder of thousands animals, that these animals are just brrcks in some utilitarian game. They are promoting the classic Welfarist position that it is the "treatment" that is the problem, not animal use and killing.
--


Making a moral action may have potential side effects e.g. of what some people will perceive. When we meet people we should of course explain to them about veganism and about that it is wrong to domesticate animals.

So what should we do with all animals at the kill shelters? Just ignore them while they are being exploited? I claim that it is a moral obligation to rescue them.

Of course we should work for a non-speciesist vegan world where no animals are bred in parallel.
---------
-------------------------------------


"Banning breeding" of all pets is good. That is the same as prohibiting more animals to become slaves in animal slavery.


"Breed specific legislation" as you were talking about above is reinforcing the property status of animals. It legislates how we should treat "property". I refer to my post above (that I inserted to a blog post now): http://bloganders.blogspot.no/2014/05/is-advocating-laws-regulating-breeding.html

-----
It is a total difference between rescuing slaves from being exploited and killed compared to enabling, legitimizing and legislating for a system that allows for slaves to be exploited and killed.

-----

As long as animals are property, you can't make any effective laws that prohibit their owners from killing them. It didn't work with the human slaves a couple of hundred of years ago. It will not work with the animal slaves either. Secondly, you are only legitimizing animal slavery by making reforms regulating it.
More to read (please read it): http://law.bepress.com/rutgersnewarklwps/art21/

You are not going to help the animals if you don't understand the theory, because all your efforts of doing legislation will be contra-productive to what you are aiming for.

You need to shift the paradigm by education. When people are educated and a majority are non-speciesist vegans you can make legislation abolishing all animal use. Before people are educated, any legislation will only reinforce the property status of animals and will be contra-productive to what you are aiming for.