how can someone eat meat but are very much against the idea of hurting a puppy or a cat?

Question

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE

today i read an article online about 2 teens sentenced to jail time because they baked a dog.. just typing that makes me want to throw up.. but i just started wondering.. the law goes through such extents to support animal rights yet consuming animals is taken very lightly.. im in no way supporting either choice but i was just wondering.. thanks for all the answers .. waiting for everyone's opinions

i myself am a meat eater

Answer 1

First of all, I am an ovo-lacto vegetarian.

However, I think that there's a very large difference between eating meat and deliberately hurting animals. You can eat meat respectfully; much as the Native Americans did-- recognizing that it is supplying you with the nourishment you need, and doing your best to eat meat in a way that ensures a merciful death and limited harm to the population.

The reason I'm a vegetarian, actually, is not because I object to the idea of eating meat, but because I object to the meat industry in the United States-- because animals are treated cruelly, and because they are pumped full of antibiotics and such.

People who hurt puppies and cats, however, are directly cruel to the animal.

It's the difference between the culpability of someone who knows that a murder or crime is committed, but does nothing, and that of a person who actually commits the crime.

Answer 2

Dogs like cat food because it's easier to digest for a canine. Dogs eat out of litter boxes for the same reason.

Answer 3

Catch a clue - the place or function of an animal in society is whatever we humans decide it is. Those designated as 'pets' are not to be harmed. Those designated as 'food' can be killed, though the process should be as quick and painless as possible; this is different from harming an animal just for the sake of hurting it.

Answer 4

Because a dog or cat is not raised or bred to be eaten. They raise many other animals to turn them into food; they have no other purpose but to be eaten. Plus there is a reason why humans have canine teeth, we were meant to eat meat. So there is a difference.

Answer 5

The difference is that eating is necessary for survival, while the latter is just cruelty. Nature intended for humans to eat meat.

I think it's just fine for someone to not eat meat. I'm even willing to discuss vegetarianism. However, I cannot abide those who make stupid comments and are incapable of presenting a logical arguement.

Answer 6

Easy not to many people eat cats and dogs so it would be considered a waste of life if you killed them. As for a cow well they are not wasted they are consumed and the leather and sued are used in our shoes belt and hand bags

Answer 7

culture- we are taught that some animals are pets and some are food.

but most people want the animals that they will one day eat cared for while they are alive and are not in any pain at the time of their death.

meat is healthy and good for people.
animals eat other animals and humans are just a form of an animal.

Answer 8

Meet comes from animals raised for the purpose of selling the meet. The farmers don't abuse the cows or harm them, and they are cows not pets. Oh and by the way you are dumb!!!

Answer 9

We were raised on eating meat. I was never given a cow as a pet and have never cuddled up to one. I was given a kitten as a pet and it never occurred to me to eat it. That is lame reasoning isn't it?

Answer 10

because we usually have those as pets and get really close to them. they become part of the family and their are emotions envolved and when we see other dogs and cats, it remindes us of our own....i guess in a weird way we give them human characteristics..... people really don't do that with chickens and pigs and cows and stuff.....except that place where cows are holy