Most cats and dogs (especially dogs) are too domesticated to have any chance of survival without human intervention (I think cats are, by nature, much better equipped overall), especially if they aren't working dogs and are bred with undesirable survival characteristics (but desirable appearance characteristics), like pugs and bulldogs. Which, I think that kind of breeding is immoral, but that's not in the scope of this conversation. (But, if you must know, it has to do with purposefully giving an animal a significantly lower quality of life through forced genetic mutations, just so we can enjoy their snuffles and caved-in snouts, among other things.)
Abusing pets or fulfilling only their most basic needs (if that) is certainly immoral. One should NEVER take on a pet unless they're willing to go the distance with that creature. I cry silently inside every time I see a dog chained to a tree for the better part of its existence. That's not a life. And, judging by the plaintive barks of the dog, it's pretty clear it's fully aware of that, too.
Abusing pets or fulfilling only their most basic needs (if that) is certainly immoral. One should NEVER take on a pet unless they're willing to go the distance with that creature. I cry silently inside every time I see a dog chained to a tree for the better part of its existence. That's not a life. And, judging by the plaintive barks of the dog, it's pretty clear it's fully aware of that, too.