You could just as well say that a feeling of well-being is not "necessary", nor are any of the proven benefits of keeping a pet. I could show you where the studies have been mentioned that prove that keeping at least one pet tremendously increases the chance that a human will survive having a heart attack. I could also show you stories about how people have died shortly after losing pets or after having them forcibly removed. When a pet helps us keep ourselves up, that is a necessity, not a luxury. A shortened lifespan and poorer health are the result of the loss of a necessity.
The propaganda also tells us to open our homes but they soft-peddle the fact that they're going to pick those homes to pieces.
I'm not real hip on the idea that poor people shouldn't have luxuries, either.
I am quite willing to risk my own life, however, to opt out of a system where the people who want me to bring them money and take their living liabilities off their hands want to control so much of what I do with what I am allegedly doing them a favor by taking. If it isn't my property when I pay for it or when it is given to me, I don't want it. One way or the other I'm investing time, energy, and money in something that is not mine. I am also inviting scrutiny by people who I do not know, have every reason to distrust, and ridiculous penalties and ridiculous harsh treatment if I am seen as somehow out of line.
So, I am going to make a point of either accepting a free puppy from an individual, or going to a breeder, or even just allow that if I have a heart attack my chances of long-term survival won't be as good. Any of those options are better.
I have learned that pets are a necessity for several reasons, including a longer lifespan. Unfortunately I have also learned that sometimes for the sake of one's own personal integrity it is better to do without some necessities.