Investigation finds 70,000 dogs killed in Bali each year are fed to unsuspecting tour

[shrunken]

Which is capable of empathy

But then so are humans they are just animals too.

dogs are delicious, and I bet long pig is as well.

[Orange Joe]

Dogs have been domesticated by human beings as companions on a massive scale to the point where that is their primary purpose. Killing a creature that primarily exists as a human companion is morally reprehensible.

Says who? Bleeding heart liberals?

[Rhaide]

So are cows, chickens, pigs, and sheep.


I wouldn't eat a dog but the whole but they are pets argument is kind of weak.

Dogs have been domesticated by human beings as companions on a massive scale to the point where that is their primary purpose. Killing a creature that primarily exists as a human companion is morally reprehensible.

[urasim]

You dont need to same reason i dont believe in what you are saying in this topic.

Is your argument that dogs are magically not part of the animal kingdom? You also seem to think it's impossible for Orange Joe to have had dogs... I think you're delusional, but I may be reading your posts incorrectly. Please elaborate on what you think.

[yetgdhfgh]

Most livestock is capable of empathy. You think this is a trait only found in dogs/cats?

Do you know this personally?

[Orange Joe]

Dogs have been domesticated by human beings as companions on a massive scale to the point where that is their primary purpose. Killing a creature that primarily exists as a human companion is morally reprehensible.

Repeating the same exact thing 3 times doesn't make it any more true than the first.

[callipygoustp]

Love me some dog. Mmmm mmmm MMMMM!

[Dequanacus]

Oh yeah? Why can dogs alarm and scare off invaders in your property while pigs would just walk around trying to find something to eat? They don't seem to be so smart now, do they?

Sounds like a bias based off ignorance. Not only do you likely have more experience with dogs, but dogs that actually function in the way you're trying to promote them. You can point at useless dogs that sit around doing nothing just as much as you can point at a pig for doing nothing. Some dogs can perform certain functions and some pigs can perform certain functions. Overall, it has been proven that pigs are smarter.

It's all arbitrary lines being drawn to claim that one is acceptable and the other is not. You can personally feel that way and have that be warranted, but to treat it as an objective standard is silly. I doubt many people would choose a dog to die over a pig, but that stems more from emotional attachment than dogs having some sort of inherent value as you seem to imply.

[Spectral]

Dogs have been domesticated by human beings as companions on a massive scale to the point where that is their primary purpose. Killing a creature that primarily exists as a human companion is morally reprehensible.

They're also bred as food.

Your statement is basically just a tautology.

[Rhaide]

Says who? Bleeding heart liberals?

I'm no bleeding heart. Dogs have been bred (a controlled evolution) to serve a purpose that does not include eating. We altered their evolutionary course to suit companionship, not food.

We literally created them to be friends. That's why it is bad - not some pointless ideological party line.

[Dequanacus]

Dogs have been domesticated by human beings as companions on a massive scale to the point where that is their primary purpose. Killing a creature that primarily exists as a human companion is morally reprehensible.

within certain cultures. Other cultures value other animals to an extent you dismiss. It's all arbitrary line drawing.

[urasim]

Dogs have been domesticated by human beings as companions on a massive scale to the point where that is their primary purpose. Killing a creature that primarily exists as a human companion is morally reprehensible.

Morals are one of those strange things that don't apply to everyone. They're pretty much subjective.

[yetgdhfgh]

Is your argument that dogs are magically not part of the animal kingdom? You also seem to think it's impossible for Orange Joe to have had dogs... I think you're delusional, but I may be reading your posts incorrectly. Please elaborate on what you think.

No its just iam very skepitcal person when people say oh ive had lots of this but i think that way.

[Rhaide]

They're also bred as food.

Your statement is basically just a tautology.

You don't understand what tautology is cleary - but beyond that. The dogs that are bred to be food - are food I suppose. That makes me sad, but my sadness isn't important. That is a food source.

Feeding these animals (regardless of their purpose) under false pretenses to people who don't know what they are eating is still wrong.

[WskyDK]

I'm no bleeding heart. Dogs have been bred (a controlled evolution) to serve a purpose that does not include eating. We altered their evolutionary course to suit companionship, not food.

We literally created them to be friends. That's why it is bad - not some pointless ideological party line.

We should have bred the taste out of them then.

[Rhaide]

Morals are one of those strange things that don't apply to everyone. They're pretty much subjective.

When a situation is globally true, it is globally applied.

That being said, animals bred for food are different than animals bred for companionship. It was wrong to feed people something other than they were knowingly eating - but if the animals were bred to be food, that's a tiny bit (.00001%) better.

- - - Updated - - -

We should have bred the taste out of them then.

Your point has no:

1)Validity
2)Accuracy
3)Potential for actual implementation

This makes you a troll

Fuck you

[Dequanacus]

I'm no bleeding heart. Dogs have been bred (a controlled evolution) to serve a purpose that does not include eating. We altered their evolutionary course to suit companionship, not food.

We literally created them to be friends. That's why it is bad - not some pointless ideological party line.

Who is this "We" and why is it being treated as a standard meant to dictate the behavior of everybody? The consumption of certain animals, consumption engaged in by the same societies that are generally involved in dog breeding, is considered morally reprehensible to some so your argument doesn't seem very consistent. Apparently, because some groups worship dogs, it's morally reprehensible, but if some groups worship cows, fuck them.

[urasim]

No its just iam very skepitcal person when people say oh ive had lots of this but i think that way.

How can you be skeptical about someone saying they've had dogs before? I mean... Most people own dogs. I own dogs and have no issue with people eating dogs as long as the death is humane and not someone's stolen dog.

[WskyDK]

When a situation is globally true, it is globally applied.

That being said, animals bred for food are different than animals bred for companionship. It was wrong to feed people something other than they were knowingly eating - but if the animals were bred to be food, that's a tiny bit (.00001%) better.

- - - Updated - - -



Your point has no:

1)Validity
2)Accuracy
3)Potential for actual implementation

This makes you a troll

Fuck you

There's nothing invalid about my statement. It's also true that dog meat tastes good. I'll give you the third.

[yetgdhfgh]

This thread is just full of edgy trolls who would prolly throw up at the sight of dog meat let alone play devils advocate in condoning it.

I could show you a video of some guy boiling a dog to death and i bet very few of you would go Hmm that must taste nice.