"Responsibility"isn't quite as catchy a phrase as "cute pics", true. As a responsible adult, however, I prefer the former over the latter.

Alec- It's interesting to hear that Norway deems it cruelty, as it is encouraged here in the US for animals that are not intended for breeding. Spaying a cat reduces risks of ovarian cysts, uterine infections, and mammary cancer. Also, she will be unlikely to spray in her efforts to attract a mate. I've had two cats spayed and after the anesthesia wore off, they were playful, active, and healthy. Inhumane would be declawing, in which there is a very painful and crippling recovery.

Alec, most things in life are a choice, but that doesn't preclude a wrong or a right. You mention that Norway doesn't have an animal overpopulation problem. However, the rest of the world does. Careful to not twist *facts* to suit something that is only your opinion (that de-sexing harms sentient animals more than it helps).

@Lars Ellingsen, and quoting from sciencenordic(dot)com: The Norwegian Animal Welfare Act makes it clear that surgical procedures are not to be used to adapt animals to the needs of humans, unless strictly necessary. “It’s not the dog’s need, given there are no medical considerations,” says Torunn Knævelsrud, head of Section for Animal Welfare and Fish Health at the Norwegian Food Safety Authority (NFSA). According to the NFSA it’s essential for vets to make decisions regarding the necessity of a neutering or spaying on a case-by-case basis.

You really need to check where you get your information. Neutering/spaying is NOT illegal in Norway.

and that, ladies & gentlemen, is why there are so many stray and unwanted animals in shelters :/

@Alec-this was food for thought. Thank you. I agree with that castrating a male animal does harm the individual, but at a far greater benefit to the community and environment. Especially considering the malnourished, disease-ridden, homeless offspring an un-neutered cat would produce. If all cats were de-sexed, then the birth rate would drop, immediately. I'm on the fence regarding uncastrated tomcats dominating the gene pool. I'll have to give it some thought.

@Sweep the Leg Yes, I am aware that in the US there is a lot of pressure to spay/neuter, but what you have to keep in mind is that, as Norway serves to demonstrate, it is possible to be a responsible pet owner without resorting to a scalpel. Also, while most animals recover just fine in the short term, that doesn't mean there are no long term consequences, and while some cancers are reduced/eliminated, others become more common (some very lethal forms of bone cancer are far more common in large dogs that were neutered before they were fully grown), and there are endocrine problems that tend to arise later in life, such as incontinence, diabetes and thyroid issues (and those thyroid issues are often behind the characteristic weight gain, which can lead to heart failure. No, it's not just that people fail to adjust their pets diets). In other words, those immediate reactions can be misleading. As for declawing, don't even get me started on that one!

@It's Caturday the endocrine system is an extremely complex one, and removing one of its key components does have a significant effect on the whole. Whether that is worth it is open for debate. For females pregnancy does take a lot out of them, plus once you spay them the puppies/kittens they would have produced are out of the equation, so that may be worth it. For males there is no such cost, and you would have to neuter 80 to 90% of them before you see a reduction in the number of births, as the females would simply be inseminated by other males. In addition to that you would see a decline in genetic diversity long before that decline in the birth rate becomes apparent, so the cost benefit analysis is fundamentally different. So I stand by my assertion that, especially when it comes to castration, the harm done to the individual outweighs any potential benefits. As for the community, that may be a different story.

You need to look up the definition of minimal risk, as what you euphemistically call de-sexing is an irreversible procedure that throws the endocrine system completely out of whack, causing the rates of diabetes and thyroid problems to skyrocket. Yes, the consequences are rarely immediate (though sometimes they are) but they ARE devastating and even deadly. Also, Norway doesn't exactly have much of an issue with animal overpopulation, so your argument doesn't exactly hold.