• Jeena@jemmy.jeena.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’ve never understood thy people are so obsessed telling others that they should not eat dog meat while mjnching on a burger with crispy bacon and chicken nuggets.

    If a vegan does it then I get it, but you are not a better person because you arbitrarily chose not to eat some specific meat, but have no problem with cruelty when it comes to other species.

    • whenigrowup356@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      54
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m a vegan, but one argument specifically against allowing dog meat trade is that it often encourages stealing companion animals (aka pets) to make a quick buck. Sometimes they’re held ransom and people have to pay the thieves to keep a member of their family from being killed and eaten. Wouldn’t wish that on anyone.

      Also, dogs were bred specifically to live alongside humans, to form bonds with us. To do that to any organism and then treat it like livestock is a special kind of monstrous.

      So I’m in favor of drawing as many lines as possible when it comes to animal consumption of any kind. And then, if the situation makes you uncomfortable about some of the other lines you’ve drawn around cows, pigs, or chickens, then you analyzing those in more depth too is also a win in my book.

      • Jeena@jemmy.jeena.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is what I was talking about a vegan will have coherent arguments because they have been thinking about it.

      • sederx@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Sometimes they’re held ransom and people have to pay the thieves to keep a member of their family from being killed and eaten.

        thats just blackmail it has nothing to do with commercializing dog meat… that stuff is already illegal

      • Natha@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        It makes no sense to ban the consumption of dogs simply because you are afraid of dog thieves. Do you ban driving a car because some people steal a car?

        Nothing in this world is completely beneficial, but you can’t ban everything.

        • TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Stealing a car takes way more effort than kidnapping a pet. I’d also bet that people have way more personal attachment to pets than cars because pets are beings with emotions and cars are not.

          • Natha@discuss.online
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            What about windows? Should we ban that as they are easy for thieves to break?

            Whether you have more personal attachment to a car, a pet or anything else is a completely personal thing, everyone should have their choice.

            • TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Almost nobody is attached to their windows. Most people treat pets as family members.

              If people stealing pets to consume them is a huge problem, then it makes sense to ban the consumption of pets because the benefits of the law outweigh the drawbacks on a society. People who eat dogs ““ethically”” can easily move on to other animals, and the people who continue to consume stolen pets can be punished more harshly, causing fewer people to steal pets. That law would be a net win because the good it does for pet owners vastly outweighs the bad it does for dog consumers.

              • Natha@discuss.online
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Why don’t you rob the richest people and share the money with the poorest? Or just ignore the interests of the minorities? Apparently, the good outweighs the bad based on your calculation.

                • TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Why don’t you rob the richest people and share the money with the poorest?

                  We should. The opposite literally happens on a daily basis.

                  Or just ignore the interests of the minorities?

                  The US used to do that. It didn’t end well for anybody on multiple occasions. There’s a reason why US politics is so focused on civil rights, because the good outweighs the bad on a societal level.

                  • Natha@discuss.online
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    We should. The opposite literally happens on a daily basis.

                    99% percent of people can be much richer if we share the 0.1% richest people. This never happened. Besides, do you believe Robin Hood is allowed by law in modern society?

                    The US used to do that. It didn’t end well for anybody on multiple occasions. There’s a reason why US politics is so focused on civil rights, because the good outweighs the bad on a societal level.

                    Do you think what China does to Uyghurs, and what Russia does to LGBT is justified? Apparently, they believe the good outweighs the bad, only at the cost of a few people.

    • Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah I personally wouldn’t be comfortable eating dog meat but I do eat meat so I realise I have no moral high ground. In reality if you have a problem with this as a meat eater it should make you question your own choices if anything.

    • MagneticFusion@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      People especially in western cultures have a severe favoritism towards dogs compared to any other living creature

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m not a dog person, but I gave a cat. The idea of cats being farmed and eaten isn’t pleasant for me. I don’t think that makes me morally superior to someone who eats cats, but it does mean I’d prefer it not happen anywhere near me.

    • SuperSaiyanSwag@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not about arbitrary choices; it’s about cultural perspectives. Dogs are often seen as companions, and advocating against eating them is rooted in that sentiment. Just as you might find it odd to eat a pet you’ve grown up with, some feel the same about dogs. It’s about empathy and cultural values, not just personal dietary choices.

      • Jeena@jemmy.jeena.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Nobody eats their pets. The dogs are bred for meet in farms like any other animal. People have pigs as pets and don’t eat them, but they don’t tell other people to not eat pigs, that’s my point.