EPTEthics of dog meat? - Page 7
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Dbars
United States273 Posts
| ||
|
meatbox
Australia349 Posts
On April 15 2012 09:53 Derez wrote: It is. Ever thought about how your pork chops make their way to the butcher? The concept is very similar. I only eat seafood, and coming from Australia, live exports have been banned given the way animals were treated overseas. Eating man's best friend.  | ||
|
r.Evo
Germany14080 Posts
Actually I can't take anyone seriously who eats meat but is unable to kill the animal himself and/or has never seen how it is done live and in person, but that's another topic. | ||
|
Gulf
Scotland213 Posts
On April 15 2012 11:19 Dbars wrote: That is still a very quick death for that animal in the video imo. Being inhumane would be making the animal suffer. It's not a very quick death, taking 3-4 shots to the head with a stick is not the fastest way to kill an animal, when it could be done fairly cheaply with a bolt gun, the same as we use to kill cattle. | ||
|
meatbox
Australia349 Posts
On April 15 2012 11:31 r.Evo wrote: As a vegetarian I have the clear view that it's okay to eat dog meat if you eat other meat anyway. Why? Because I can't take people seriously who gladly eat pigs or cows but then suddenly dogs, horses or cats are "too cute" to eat them. Actually I can't take anyone seriously who eats meat but is unable to kill the animal himself and/or has never seen how it is done live and in person, but that's another topic. That's not the issue here, the real issue is the treatment of dogs before they're eaten. Fancy being skinned alive then cooked alive, it is disgusting and inhumane. | ||
|
Jay Chou
45 Posts
On April 15 2012 11:19 Dbars wrote: That is still a very quick death for that animal in the video imo. Being inhumane would be making the animal suffer. Might as well post parts two and three: | ||
|
ecstatica
United States542 Posts
On April 15 2012 08:29 Emnjay808 wrote: Oh god, really? I have had the displeasure of eating dogmeat before without knowledge. My dad brought home food from a party, and told me it was goat. Ill still never forgive him. And in case anyones wondering, I am filipino. Just be thankful it wasnt your uncle Babaylan | ||
|
Quintum_
United States669 Posts
On April 15 2012 09:38 Caphe wrote: Yep, most westerner I know are cool with other eating dog meat but not themselves till I take them to a restaurant I told them they are eating pork. You really should try it sometime, cos these dog are from dog farm, not your dog or someone else's dog, and the taste is just really nice. That is really not cool, if i found out a good friend of mine was doing that i would never want to see them again. I see it has more of a culture thing then ethical one. Just how i think some people from India frown on eating beef while it is fine in western culture. | ||
|
ecstatica
United States542 Posts
On April 15 2012 11:33 meatbox wrote: That's not the issue here, the real issue is the treatment of dogs before they're eaten. Fancy being skinned alive then cooked alive, it is disgusting and inhumane. The real issue here is whether its okay to eat dogs from moral standpoint. Whatever way you cook them is entirely separate subject. | ||
|
Jindo
United States1305 Posts
| ||
|
Silidons
United States2813 Posts
On April 15 2012 11:31 r.Evo wrote: As a vegetarian I have the clear view that it's okay to eat dog meat if you eat other meat anyway. Why? Because I can't take people seriously who gladly eat pigs or cows but then suddenly dogs, horses or cats are "too cute" to eat them. Actually I can't take anyone seriously who eats meat but is unable to kill the animal himself and/or has never seen how it is done live and in person, but that's another topic. well then it seems your opinion is completely irrelevent, and you have no idea how dogs were used in tribes and shit. they were used to help hunt, and what would they hunt? shit like deer and probably horses (eventually led to pig/cow farms once they got their shit together) and dogs were never hunted down and killed to consume, unless they were hungry and chased a pack of wolves or something. i can't take vegetarians seriously who have no idea of human history and would know that if everyone was a vegatarian, you wouldn't be alive today. the #1 problem with dog consumption? there is absolutely 0 reason to eat a dog compared to other ways to get food. this is 2012, there was many many many more ways that are also cheaper in order to get food onto someones plate. | ||
|
ecstatica
United States542 Posts
On April 15 2012 11:47 Silidons wrote: dogs are not bred for consumption. how much meat is on a dog? i can't believe the poll here. More than on a chicken I would think. Dogs are actually bred for consumption too, whats so shocking about it? | ||
|
Friedrich Nietzsche
Germany171 Posts
The issue is simple. On the primary level, it is nothing more than discriminating between sources of meet. What rationalizes the consumption of one source of meet over another: is it human habit? superficial assignment of values? What? If we go much deeper, in the history of Philosophy, animals existence has always been justified to provide for the needs of humans. Aristotle explicitly assigned animals roles as the providers of food and clothing. The Christian bible endowed man with the dominion over all plants and animals. St. Paul even posed a rhetorical question, “Doth God care for oxen?”, to which his obvious answer is "no" as only man was made from the image of God, and is therefore divine. Even as late as Bentham and Mills, the philosophical formulation on animal cruelty (killing, eating) has always been conservative, namely that, even risking logical falsity, cruelty to animals is only to be prohibited because it may open to cruelty to humans. The animals themselves are of no consequence. Of course, there is the whole Eastern tradition to consider as well, in the belief of soul and reincarnation. Now let us focus on the actual "dog meat" and "ethics". The actual argument of ethics lie not in the proximity humans have developed with animals, especially domesticated once such as dogs, but in the greater essence of life, of all forms, that they are capable of fear and suffering, and they deserve a degree of dignity. The easiest example of this to strike at the heart of pro-dog meat eaters is the manner in which dogs are commonly extinguished, usually electrocuted, hanged, or plain bludgeoned. Many have argued that legalizing dog meat would regulate the "breeding" and manner of producing dog meat (ie killing dogs) to state sanctioned humane methods. Now, beyond essentialist "ethics", I would like to redescribe Levinas' "ethics of the human face" and extend it to dogs, which you could guess results in my disagreement with killing dogs for their meat - but that is me talking as a dog person. But I am not much of a cat person, but I also don't agree to cat meat. To further this complication, I would say that I am a bit of a cow person as I have fond memories of youth when my parent take me to farm on vacation and I get to feed and ride on the few cattles that we have - yet I have no objection whatever to eating beef. | ||
|
Silidons
United States2813 Posts
On April 15 2012 11:50 ecstatica wrote: More than on a chicken I would think. Dogs are actually bred for consumption too, whats so shocking about it? dogs have only began starting being bred for consumption for a small amount of time, and in the asian countries | ||
|
Silidons
United States2813 Posts
On April 15 2012 11:31 r.Evo wrote: As a vegetarian I have the clear view that it's okay to eat dog meat if you eat other meat anyway. Why? Because I can't take people seriously who gladly eat pigs or cows but then suddenly dogs, horses or cats are "too cute" to eat them. Actually I can't take anyone seriously who eats meat but is unable to kill the animal himself and/or has never seen how it is done live and in person, but that's another topic. also, i guess you're completely fine with human consumption too? we're only an animal, one with a conscience. that's the major difference between us and our primape relatives. you're fine with cannibalism since meat is meat? what argument do you have for that? | ||
|
Imbu
United States903 Posts
On April 15 2012 11:55 Silidons wrote: also, i guess you're completely fine with human consumption too? we're only an animal, one with a conscience. that's the major difference between us and our primape relatives. you're fine with cannibalism since meat is meat? what argument do you have for that? This has been a major point of contention within the philosophical community, and the general consensus has been a murky one. There are some that say humans have a higher order than animals, and as such are allowed to be eaten, but that is an extremely weak statement (How does one say humans are of a higher order?). We're okay with eating cows, and we're okay with eating pigs, but when it comes to dogs (merely another animal) we all of a sudden say "NOPE!". Since we're debating the ethics of eating an animal, if you can justify eating a pig then logically you can transfer that justification onto a dog. There was an interesting debate that I once I got to see talking about the morals of eating animals at all. If you want to argue that eating any animal is morally permissible, then you should be able to extend that to humans. However, almost universally, we disagree with that jump, but on paper it looks fine. Is it because we're human that we are essentially species-ist in that we won't eat our own? If you are into debating however, avoid the slippery slope argument that you just gave, looking at extremes rarely allows you to get your point accross (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope) | ||
|
xsenemy
Canada4 Posts
I could never eat dog meat and i can`t accept it. | ||
|
Jay Chou
45 Posts
On April 15 2012 11:55 Silidons wrote: also, i guess you're completely fine with human consumption too? we're only an animal, one with a conscience. that's the major difference between us and our primape relatives. you're fine with cannibalism since meat is meat? what argument do you have for that? What argument do you have for the one you propose that animals somehow don't have a conscience? Of course animals have a conscience. They're just not as intellectually developed as us. But that does not mean the pain and fear etc. That they feel is any less significant (like saying a mentally handicapped person cannot feel pain). | ||
|
Jay Chou
45 Posts
On April 15 2012 12:04 xsenemy wrote: “A dog is the only thing on earth that loves you more than he loves himself.” I could never eat dog meat and i can`t accept it. Wouldn't say the only thing. Did you know that pigs are more intelligent than dogs and can be trained in the same way and develop the same bonds of loyalty etc? | ||
|
smokeyhoodoo
United States1021 Posts
On April 15 2012 11:55 Silidons wrote: also, i guess you're completely fine with human consumption too? we're only an animal, one with a conscience. that's the major difference between us and our primape relatives. you're fine with cannibalism since meat is meat? what argument do you have for that? There's nothing inherently wrong with consumption of human flesh either. I wouldn't care if someone ate me after I was dead. | ||
| ||
