Another Response to Sarah

Sarah asks, "Are we morally obligated to save animals in shelters that have been abused or forgotten about?"

I feel horrible for animals who have landed in shelters for whatever reason they are there, be it abandonment or inability to be taken care of. However, I do not think that people have a moral obligation to save these animals. If someone purchased an animal and decided to take on the responsibility of caring for it then they are morally obligated to care for that animal, not to send it to a shelter. Once the animal lands there, it is not the responsibility of pet seekers to save those animals. I think it is more agreeable to save a pet from a shelter than to go out and buy a shiny new one, but it is not morally wrong if you choose not to.

An example that I am thinking of is when people have their own children as opposed to adopting one. We all know that there are children in the world who need good homes, who have been abandoned and are suffering. But no one will look down on people for having their own children simply because there are less fortunate ones in the world who need to be saved.

My question is: In this case would speciesism be a valid moral argument if one were to say that we should adopt a needy child before a needy pet?