Helping animals is self-serving
You guys asked so here it is - this guy just responded.
He wrote back to say that he understood and appreciated compassion and kindness but that they are misplaced. He said that cats should not be fed because it is interfering with nature, and that if crocodiles and elephants were to be fed, this would be problematic. He felt that every animal should look after itself. He feels that animals should not be kept indoors or in a sanctuary, or a farm, or in any way harmed or mistreated. He also felt that while feeding the cats stops them from scavenging, they are abandoned by people and this does not solve the problem.
He also said that people should help other people, whether they be deprived, hungry, sick or oppressed.
He kept reiterating that Mother Nature must take its course and that sometimes, it can be cruel like in the case of earthquakes and tsunamis, but that the best way to respect animals is by not feeding them.
He also said the woman was self-serving and that the desire to do good is no different from any other desire. He said that that people like her think they are doing good but doing harm.
I wrote back to say that firstly, cats aren't quite crocodiles or elephants, since they share an urban environment with us. Having said that, I said that the reason a lot of animals are going extinct is precisely because of human beings. I pointed out that we are encroaching on their territories, driving them out of their natural environment, and in many cases, cutting down their food sources. I said that we don't have to look far - the macaques for example are being seen more often as their homes get encroached upon.
Secondly, I pointed out that cats are living with us in their 'natural environment' which is the community about is but there really isn't anything very natural about it at all. The housing estates and urban areas that we see around us weren't even here a century ago but cats (and people too) have had to adapt. I'm not sure what nature there is in that sense.
I also pointed out that abandonment is a problem - that cats are living indoors and are suddenly put out on the streets. There isn't anything very natural about that either.
Since he never elaborated on whom he is helping, I asked him about that. I was curious to know what his criteria for helping people was - which category was most deserving of help?
I also said that using his analogy that nature can be cruel, then we really shouldn't BE helping people who are say, tsunami victims or victims of an earthquake. Also using his analogy we certainly should not be helping people in places with famine - after all, Mother Nature has clearly shown those areas cannot grow food, so we should, using his line of reasoning, let them starve to death.