what's wrong about breeding 2 different types of dogs together?

Yabbit..your bitch must be bred once to prevent cancers is PARTLY true..its not BRED once..from the "new" articles that are coming out it's ONE heat cycle...not being bred...

Honestly..if you read both sides of the issue your head would spin in circles..some say spay at 6 mos to prevent issues..others say after one heat cycle.

Also..Ashley..I'm sorry I dont even know where to start with answering your question.. Breeding 2 different dog Breeds together is just assinine. It creates mutts. We have enough of them in our shelters to last 12 lifetimes...there's no reason I can see to breed a lab and a poodle..or a whatever and a whatever.

I have no preference when it comes to mutts v. purebreds.  I have a lab/standard poodle mix.  I did not adopt her because she was a "designer dog."  I don't view her as that.  I adopted her because I just fell in love with her, she has so much heart.   Also, in some cases, purebreds have more health problems than mutts.  I have personal experience with this as my parents have a purebred black lab.  That dog has been to the vet more times in his 9 years than I have been to the doctor in my 25 years!  He has allergies, an itchy skin condition, an easily upset stomach and has to have special food.  My mutt on the other hand goes to the vet for her shots and yearly checkup.   That said, I have nothing against purebreds or mutts (I seriously love ALL dogs, no matter what they look like)  Just adopt from a shelter!!! 

Yes there are enough mutts in shelters to last 12 lifetimes.  All the more reason to go to a shelter.  Rescue a mutt because there are so many loving dogs that just want a good home and a family.

Hi, I would like to jump back in here.  I have volunteered at my local shelter, I write generous donations to them every year, and pretty much all of my prior pets have been from shelters.

HOWEVER, last year my family acquired--that is, paid hard currency for--two purebed Birman kittens.  There were a number of reasons we did this that I won't go into, but one of them definitely was "because I wanted one."  I've always wanted one--they are beautiful cats.

Now, I know there is a shelter full of cats not very far away who get one week to find a home and then that's it for them.  But this is what I thought:  I've done my part for those animals.  And even if I take one, there is still going to be a ton more. And lastly, I am about as responsible a pet owner there is--I did not create this problem.  My cats and dogs don't reproduce.  I don't bring them back when I don't like them, or when they start vomiting all over my carpeting and furniture, or for any reason.  I give them a happy and healthy life and love them as members of my family.

So why is it that my choices have to be limited simply because there are tons of irresponsible pet owners out there?  Being a responsible pet owner is a good thing and there is nothing WRONG with getting a purebred animal.  Perhaps there is an opportunity foregone to help out a homeless animal, but I will adopt other animals in the future.  You can't always be penalizing people because they failed to take the highest road.

And let me tell you guys this . . . I reached this conclusion because I had already been through all the arguments pro and con when my husband and I were deciding if we should have our own children or adopt.  Any moral argument you can make about adopting animals can also be made about adopting children versus having your own.  At the end of the day, we decided to ignore the fact that millions of children are languishing in orphanages in third world countries and contribute to the overpopulation of the earth by having our own.  And I still am not entirely sure how we got there but I do know that vanity played a part in it and, at the end of the day, it came down to what we WANTED.  And, in some ways it was even more morally objectionable than paying for Birman kittens because, you know, at least the cats have been neutered.

I've got to pull out that article. We're already up to four pages on this board. Wow.

I, too, have thought about the similarities between this debate and the having a child vs. adopting a child debate.  Weirdly enough, it was this line of thinking that first lead me to seriously consider adopting a child (you know, in the future, when I'm a little bit older and ready for that sort of thing...).

At the same time, though, I don't think they're quite the same debate.  You're not, afterall, giving birth to the purebred animal. ;)  While a biological child would share your genetic make up, with an animal, in either case, you're adopting.  So, the choice is more like choosing to adopt a rich baby, who will be fine whether you adopt her or not, or a poor baby, who will almost certainly die if you do not adopt her.

If you're veg or vegan and giving money and/or time to a shelter, you're already doing more than most people ever will and deserve a round of applause, IMO.  A really big standing ovation, actually.  :)

For me, though, it isn't about denying myself a purebred animal in order to adopt a shelter animal; I just actually can't imagine wanting a purebred animal given the beautiful shelter animals that need homes.  I'm totally with DeuceO on this one.  I love all animals, purebred or mutts, it doesn't matter.  I just want them to come from a shelter.  Both my kitties are "mutts" (can you use that word for cats?) who came from the shelter and they're smart and funny and basically everything you'd want out of a cat, so I just can't imagine what a purebred could give me that a shelter cat or dog couldn't.  My family did own 2 purebred, reputable breeder-bought dogs when I was young, and they were great, much loved dogs, but no better than the mutts we've had since.  In fact, given the many health problems purebreds have, they were worse, in some ways.  I guess if getting a shelter animal over a purebred feels like denying yourself something you genuinely want, that's a different thing...

...It's so interesting to see the many strong and divergent opinions this thread has produced!  Very educational.

Also, 7, I realized after reading your post above that I've taken to thinking of you as like the unoffical moderator of this forum.  Keep up the good work!  ;D

Both my kitties are "mutts" (can you use that word for cats?)

Well, technically, "mutt" cats are usually referred to as "American (or European) shorthairs" if they do indeed have short hair...a nice way of saying "We don't know where it came from aside from the actual continent it was born on"  :D. If the "mutt" has long hair it is usually  referred to as a "Persian cross", conformation notwithstanding...kind of a blanket term as Persians are the most easily recognizable long-haired breed.
Interesting, no one ever refers to a cat as a "Heinz 57." (Edit: because no self-respecting cat would allow it...can you imagine the dirty look you would get? LOL)
Was having a conversation with DH the other night about the immense variety of conformations, coats and sizes in dogs (chihuahua or terrier vs. St. Bernard vs. whatever else) as opposed to cats. A cat is basically a cat, though length of coat and colour may vary. Even horses aren't as diverse, tho you do have the Shetland and the huge Clydesdale types. There is of course Prezwalsky's horse...didn't they decide that one had another name over the last 30 yrs, though?