Eating dogs is no different than eating pigs.

[PosPosPos]

It depends how you kill it.

For example, rabbits. Do you need anaesthesia to break their necks to kill them relatively humanely?

You should, just in case you don't do a clean kill.

Nope, castration is NOT ripping their balls of. You sever the bloodvessel to their balls, hardly a cut but the same effect.

Then that's no longer castration.

They're ok, but they don't really match dogs for empathy. Dogs have an advantage though, in that they were selectively bred by humans over thousands of years to be good pets.

http://i.imgur.com/m1OjVuV.gifv

And I'm not really taking a side here, I know lots of people see the issue differently, I'm just saying objectively, we've modified dogs to be companions. This little goggie's breed probably wouldn't survive in the wild.

Eh, I am neutral about pet selection as well(tiger/lions/leopards/wolves/crocodiles etc as pets), I was more referring to these 2 posts:

The "save the cute animals" attitude is extremely prevalent though, not only in the meat industry but in animal conservation as well. Just looks at how much money goes into saving pandas while thousands of other species are driven to extinction without the public caring.

Ugly pet dog.

I am also very certain there are dog breeds that can't survive the wild, can't really see chihuahuas or poodles surviving there tbh.

All I see is BACON! Delicious, juicy BACON!

In all seriousness. Aren't most baby like animals cute? ...

Yeap, I mean that's why there are those who try to breed such adorable micro pigs.

[Hiricine]

The issues raised are usually that the dogs are prepared in an inhumane way (though I think the rest of the meats there are generally prepared inhumanely to the same degree)

Next people worry that it will be THEIR dog that is eaten, but its generally one raised to be eaten as meat.

[Logwyn]

Aren't some of the dogs stolen from their owners? Whats the difference in stealing someones cat, dog, cow, pig, sheep, snake, sister, monkey, snail, hamster, or chicken eating it? Well stealing shouldn't be legal.

[Grimbold21]

Id think it has smth to do with dogs being man's companions ever since we domesticated them thousands of years ago

[Fargus]

You should, just in case you don't do a clean kill.

How do you propose that if you're out in the country and hunting? People don't tend to carry syringes with the expensive compounds necessary.

[Deleted]

dogs don't give us delicious, delicious bacon

[Deldavala]

Aren't some of the dogs stolen from their owners? Whats the difference in stealing someones cat, dog, cow, pig, sheep, snake, sister, monkey, snail, hamster, or chicken eating it? Well stealing shouldn't be legal.

Well in China atleast stealing someones dog for consumption is very rare. Its probably similiar to stealing the neighbours pet bunny and eating it(and just as illegal).

China has had a dog domesticating and eating culture for several thousand years, and do not share the same culture to us when it comes to having a pet dog.

[Maltah]

The main difference is pigs are grown for slaughter while dogs are not. and its highly arguable that pigs are smarter than dogs, when some dogs have been shown to be smarter than chimps.

Horses can read more facial expressions on humans, and have more of their own expressions, than any other non-human animal, including dogs. Where's his indignation towards Europe and countries that eat them, or for Rodeos and Racing?


To be fair though, Vegitarians do have the moral high ground when it comes to eating meat. There are no strong moral or ethical arguments for it.

[Gamdwelf]

Horses can read more facial expressions on humans, and have more of their own expressions, than any other non-human animal, including dogs. Where's his indignation towards Europe and countries that eat them, or for Rodeos and Racing?


To be fair though, Vegitarians do have the moral high ground when it comes to eating meat. There are no strong moral or ethical arguments for it.

Highly doubtful dogs were literally bred to understand us.

[apples]

Horses can read more facial expressions on humans, and have more of their own expressions, than any other non-human animal, including dogs. Where's his indignation towards Europe and countries that eat them, or for Rodeos and Racing?


To be fair though, Vegitarians do have the moral high ground when it comes to eating meat. There are no strong moral or ethical arguments for it.

sure there are.

human suffering counts for more than animal suffering

so until food stops becoming a scarce resource humans will always have a moral ok to eat other animals

[Maltah]

Highly doubtful dogs were literally bred to understand us.

As were horses. Both were bred and worked along side humans. Both dogs and horses have "left gaze bias" (using left eye to read negative emotions). Only animals known so far to have it other than humans. Their ability to express more, doesn't inherently make them better companions, or more useful for working along side humans in all capacities.

sure there are.

human suffering counts for more than animal suffering

so until food stops becoming a scarce resource humans will always have a moral ok to eat other animals

There are other means of feeding humans that doesn't involve killing animals (I'm not talking about eggs, milk, other products). Raising animals for meat is a known negative on environment and overall inefficient food production.
I'm a very proud and avid meat eater, but I have no illusions about where that falls on a moral or ethical scale beyond "it tastes good, and I continue to eat it for purely selfish reasons." The fact that human starvation and suffering exists is a different moral argument.

[apples]

As were horses. Both were bred and worked along side humans. Both dogs and horses have "left gaze bias" (using left eye to read negative emotions). Only animals known so far to have it other than humans. Their ability to express more, doesn't inherently make them better companions, or more useful for working along side humans in all capacities.




There are other means of feeding humans that doesn't involve killing animals (I'm not talking about eggs, milk, other products). Raising animals for meat is a known negative on environment and overall inefficient food production.
I'm a very proud and avid meat eater, but I have no illusions about where that falls on a moral or ethical scale beyond "it tastes good, and I continue to eat it for purely selfish reasons."

for middle class america it may be

but people in china are killing those dogs for a pretty good reason

cuse theyre cheap, everywhere, and its good food

so continue being morally outraged if you want, but its a classic 1st world problem

[Khadgar]

haven't you seen Babe when you were growing up? Pigs are just as smart as Dogs

[Caerule]

Dogs are bred for 10.000 years or something to be our trusting friends, companions, aid and support. No longer wolves, the breeds we have, have been forged by human hands into something different. Social, capable of reading our emotions, and with non-food purposes to all of it. We made dogs what they are, and arguable, the success of our interactions changed humans too.

They weren't bred to be food. They were bred to be friends. We took an entire species and reshaped them like Mogu fleshbinders to see us as friends. To be our support. And now... people are eating them.

To me, that is a betrayal. A perversion. We made this species our loving child. To now murder them for flesh, to me, feels as wrong as incest, or slavery.

[Maltah]

for middle class america it may be

but people in china are killing those dogs for a pretty good reason

cuse theyre cheap, everywhere, and its good food

so continue being morally outraged if you want, but its a classic 1st world problem

I am not morally outraged at all but you seem to be. I'm not making any moral judgments on anyone who does or does not eat meat, other than myself. The fact that human suffering and starvation exists is a different moral argument. If it is assumed that suffering is bad and we should end all suffering, then the logical conclusion is that eating meat is unethical. AND I DO IT! Do you eat meat? If so, what moral or ethical argument can you make, for yourself? Are you starving, desperate, or malnourished?

Just because they have a reason to round up dogs and eat them because it's cheap and easy, doesn't make it ethical any more than the US eating cows and pigs is ethical, nor does it address the larger issues. It's the symptom of a problem, not the solution.

"The basis of morality is, on my view, a concern for the well-being of concious creatures. To the extent that any creature can suffer, or be made happy, or be deprived of happiness…we have an ethical interest, and ethical concerns can come into play." - Sam Harris

Dogs are bred for 10.000 years or something to be our trusting friends, companions, aid and support. No longer wolves, the breeds we have, have been forged by human hands into something different. Social, capable of reading our emotions, and with non-food purposes to all of it. We made dogs what they are, and arguable, the success of our interactions changed humans too.

They weren't bred to be food. They were bred to be friends. We took an entire species and reshaped them like Mogu fleshbinders to see us as friends. To be our support. And now... people are eating them.

There are a significant amount of cultures, including Native Americans, that used them for both. Eating their dogs was as common a practice as using them for guarding camps and hunting. The relationship you're painting is a modern ideal that is still unique to the US and a few other western cultures.

[Vash The Stampede]

Until we have the ability to grow meat for cheap, eating dogs seems perfectly acceptable. It's that or people starving to death. Also, while a vegan diet would be a good idea, but that's not really healthy. Vegans can supplement missing vitamins but people in those areas of the world are unable to afford such luxuries.

My suggestion is to work on lab grown meat faster. Here's a photo to encourage you.

[Nynax]

While academically I agree with you, OP...

Emotionally, as a dog owner, few things will make me pick up a gun faster :P

Just how it is, lol.

[Deldavala]

Dogs are bred for 10.000 years or something to be our trusting friends, companions, aid and support. No longer wolves, the breeds we have, have been forged by human hands into something different. Social, capable of reading our emotions, and with non-food purposes to all of it. We made dogs what they are, and arguable, the success of our interactions changed humans too.

They weren't bred to be food. They were bred to be friends. We took an entire species and reshaped them like Mogu fleshbinders to see us as friends. To be our support. And now... people are eating them.

To me, that is a betrayal. A perversion. We made this species our loving child. To now murder them for flesh, to me, feels as wrong as incest, or slavery.

What about East asian cultures that bred dogs for food 3000-4000 years ago?

[apples]

I am not morally outraged at all but you seem to be. I'm not making any moral judgments on anyone who does or does not eat meat, other than myself. The fact that human suffering and starvation exists is a different moral argument. If it is assumed that suffering is bad and we should end all suffering, then the logical conclusion is that eating meat is unethical. AND I DO IT! Do you eat meat? If so, what moral or ethical argument can you make, for yourself? Are you starving, desperate, or malnourished?

Just because they have a reason to round up dogs and eat them because it's cheap and easy, doesn't make it ethical any more than the US eating cows and pigs is ethical, nor does it address the larger issues. It's the symptom of a problem, not the solution.

"The basis of morality is, on my view, a concern for the well-being of concious creatures. To the extent that any creature can suffer, or be made happy, or be deprived of happiness…we have an ethical interest, and ethical concerns can come into play." - Sam Harris



There are a significant amount of cultures, including Native Americans, that used them for both. Eating their dogs was as common a practice as using them for guarding camps and hunting. The relationship you're painting is a modern ideal that is still unique to the US and a few other western cultures.

as i already said

the moral justification is there and you yourself said it

if the ending of suffering is the ultimate goal then in order to get there we need to end some suffering

because human suffering is worth more than animal suffering the net gain is less suffering

when

scarcity created suffering is alleviated through the eating of meat

and yes, the large majority of people who eat meat would be caused undue hardship if they didnt eat meat

including myself

p.s.

im sad you made me include myself as some sort of justification in an argument

as if a singular persons experience has any bearing on an argument like this

[Shinra1]

I don't think most rational people complain about them eating dogs. Or killing them, for that matter. People complain about their way of killing them, i.e inhumane torture.

Still a silly thing to get your panties in a bunch over, but hey.

Finally, I found a post of yours I agree with.