I would say there is a distinct difference in killing an animal for food verses killing animals for sport. Dogs and cats can't even be killed as the trophy kill
2007-02-28 04:27:24
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Each person has their own barometer of what is acceptable.
The society in which we live also imposes restrictions with animal cruelty legislation, meat consumption legislation and so on. In some far eastern countries dogs and cats are sold in markets for killing and eating and this is completely acceptable in those places. It seems to depend as much on the culture that has developed over time as anything else.
One thing I do agree with. That is however an animal is viewed, whether as meat, a pet, part of the environment and so on, it is treated with respect. If it is to be killed for meat, or as a danger, then it is done properly and with regard to the welfare of the animal. The same thing applies if it is a pet. I cannot abide cruelty in any form no matter what the animals ultimate fate.
2007-02-28 04:09:07
·
answer #2
·
answered by Spike 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
Even although I am a vegetarian I would not attempt to take the moral high ground on this one. However, I do think we have to draw the line at killing animals for pleasure (or out of anger re. the post shooting dogs for ripping up garbage). I would also question the validity of some of the less humane methods of slaughter, but if the animal does not undergo undue stress then this question would really be about the cultural differences in attitudes across the world.
2007-02-28 04:53:21
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
This is a question of social values. Families in villages to towns to cities to the country.
We look, as a western society, at animal slaughter for food as nessecary to support our beliefs and practice of the "consumption of meat for protein".
Animal right activist's are constanly asking for more humane ways to do this task.
Dogs and Cats are considered a non-source for food protien in our society but are considered differently in other asian societies and so they do fall under the exceptable values of those people like cows/pigs etc. are to us.
So we do not condone as our value's, the slaughter of dogs and cats because it is considered an "innocent killing". Not for food or human use.
Now lets get to the meat and potatoes of the issue:
Animals are bio-chemical beings as we are. They feel pain and think as we do. The difference between us is in the development of higher reasoning and complex thoughts in our brains.
Recent studies on birds found them to be much higher in their thinking processes than we knew. They documented a bird fashioning a tool for the retreival of food.
All that we are is the result of the bio-chemical processes in us. Our character, the way we act, etc. People with traumatic brain injury can act as a completely different person with different tastes, character and speach.
We are therefore not so different from other living beings and if there is a soul they must have one also.
To take life indiscriminantly is a sin against nature and God. We don't need meat as a source for food. Agriculture can provide this need. It is our "developed values and perceptions" as societies that produce the requirement.
Good Luck
2007-02-28 04:08:32
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
I think it is a definition of either food or friend. We, in England, don't eat dogs or cats (unless you know differently) but historically the cows and other carnivores and poultry are fair game. As for the charge of not worrying about the way our food is dealt with pre cooking, there are many ethnic and traditional methods of keeping and killing animals and birds, some not to everybody's liking.
2007-02-28 03:56:19
·
answer #5
·
answered by MANCHESTER UK 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
we dont eat cats and dogs etc... but even the killing of cows, rabbits, chickens etc... for food has gotten cruel ie mass production warehouses no light an dboxes they cant move in etc... so cruel and wrong
but lots of animals kill to eat only humans have done it to make money so sometimes its wrong and sometimes its not
the movie babe example some animals are there to be eaten others arent its the way of the world
sometimes not fair or doesnt make sense
2007-03-02 08:45:36
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
As a vegan I don't believe killing any animal is right.
However traditionally in the west cats were kept for keeping down rodents and dogs as herding dogs or guards or hunters and also companions so they were never seen as food.
2007-02-28 14:38:43
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree with you :) I am not ok with killing any type of animal but i agree that people have an unrealistic and non logical way of classing these types of things. But this is just a perfect example of how subjective the human race can be :)
2007-02-28 04:22:54
·
answer #8
·
answered by Doe 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Okay, personally I would have no qualms about killing chickens lambs, goats, cattle or pigs to eat, since i eat all those thing already and if i had problems with killing them in the way they they are euthanized in slaughterhouses then I shouldn't eat meat.
However, dog and cats are not designed to be eaten, they have adapted to be hunters. Similarly cats, they have the eyes to the front of their heads, as hunters do. Also, it not considered right to eat monkeys in western culture either (see where their eyes are?).
So, as some culture would see us eating beef as wrong (is it Hindus?) we see eating cats and dogs wrong. Nobody is right or wrong, only different.
2007-02-28 04:00:31
·
answer #9
·
answered by DanRSN 6
·
3⤊
0⤋
Everyone is a double edge sword - And you can think yourself to death trying to understand this. It's like politics basically. Darned if you do, and darned if you don't. One might think what right do these people have to pass judgement when they themselves wouldn't be happy to have judgement passed upon themselves!
How many times have you came upon a situation where you felt on the fence because you understood both sides? The best advice I can offer to anyone who finds their mind working to hard to understand is DO NOT try to recruit people on your side. You'll be disappointed at how many people are ready to lash out at you for your view they disapprove of. Keep your view to yourself unless your amoung friends or family that you trust. While I don't recommend you lie, you can say "I haven't thought of it that way" when you find yourself in a large group that has a different view than you.
When you have 100 people telling you wrong, are you going to try and change their minds?
Here's an easier question for you to handle for now. WHO figured out that Milk was a great substance to drink? And WHO classed THAT as acceptable?
2007-02-28 04:01:43
·
answer #10
·
answered by www2000wolfpack 1
·
3⤊
0⤋