awashinlove said:

I said the idea sounds good, in theory. But then I went on to explain how, in practice, it would actually lead to more homeless cats.
First of all, slim? Have you checked the numbers of cats in homes vs. those killed or abandoned? Peeing and singing is not remotely, almost maybe, somewhat sorta slim.
Sure, many cats will pee in the house sometimes, and some cats will make noise.
On the other hand, peeing on the pillows repeatedly and yowling all night and acting tortured if confined in one room is not the behavior of the average housecat raised indoors since kittenhood, especially not with proper attention and litter training.
I don't consider willing to accept your cat only when he's acting perfect "good." The type of home you describe are exactly the homes that need to stop adopting.
I'm not talking about people who only accept cats who act perfectly. I'm talking about people who don't mind having to clean up the occasional cat vomit from the floor, ignore some loud meowing at 3:00 in the morning, or keep some cleaning solution handy in case the cat pees somewhere aside from the litterbox.
But those same people might not want to deal with coninually finding pillows or blankets or furniture soaked with strong-smelling cat urine. They might not want to lose sleep every night because a cat is yowling all night long. They might not want to have to wonder why the relatives and friends just don't come to visit anymore.
The cat owner who tolerates that is a rare find. And if they can tolerate it, that's wonderful. But, unfortunately, there aren't many people like that.
But we could seriously dent the breeding industry if the millions of kittens bred each year suddenly found no market.
Sadly, I don't think that's going to happen. Those kittens are bought by people who don't do research, and there are enough people who don't research, and buy kittens rather than adopting, that the responsible pet owners aren't going to be able to dent the breeding industry.
What's the difference? We already have millions of homeless cats, and I can assure you the majority have held onto their natural instincts. Don't you get it, yet? Cats pee! Cats sing! The same cats filing through the system now would be the same ones in the system if people decided beforehand they couldn't handle cleaning responsibilities. The only difference would be that the spirits of these animals would still be intact, and breeders would have no reason to destroy more lives.
There would be many more cats that would be homeless, too. If my family had expected all cats to behave like Goldie, we never would have adopted our two cats. However, we adopted Silver and Bituminous (who certainly do not behave like Goldie), and as a result, they have a loving home. Our cats aren't perfect, by any means, but they're usually rather well-behaved. Aren't they better off being with my family, than being homeless?
Spend thousands? I don't recall ever spending thousands. This woman spent thousands, and the cat was destroyed, anyway. Obviously, you don't need to spend thousands to deal with the same and worse issues, so let's x that.
That doesn't quite follow... Just because the cat was put down, that doesn't mean that the thousands spent initially would not have been necessary even if she didn't euthanize the cat.
No, it stayed the same, because most cats will have some sort of problem and end up in some sort of facility. Those who really love cats but don't want to deal with peeing have the option of adopting an older cat who's already been "tested" in multiple situations, and those that don't leave breeders stunned and cats with fewer scars.
No, it wouldn't stay the same. Because as I said, many cat owners --like myself-- who happily own cats, would not have adopted their cats in the first place, if they expected the cats to all behave like Goldie.
I wouldn't even consider giving up my two cats.
But if, before I adopted them, I expected all cats to act like Goldie, I never would have adopted a cat in the first place. And as a result of that decision, two more sweet, affectionate cats would have been homeless. And believe me when I say that I'm not alone in this. People who will adopt a cat even if they expect him to behave like Goldie are a rarity.
See what I mean when I say there would be more homeless cats? There's absolutely no way that so many people (who are now willing to provide a loving and permanent home for their cats) would adopt cats, if they all expected the worst.
Though "love them" would be in serious question. Most people who can't tolerate pets love the pet's love, not the pet itself. It's a lose-lose situation for the animal.
I wouldn't be able to tolerate owning a cat that peed all over the house and yowled all night long. Does this mean I don't love the two cats that I have? Heck no. Why should it?