Because we humans have raised ourselves to the pyramid of creation, we take every right in relation to animals to enslave, slaughter and eat them.
This also includes dogs and cats for China and some other Asian countries.
Recently, there have been heated discussions and even struggles in the circles of animal rights activists.
Some, those with the pet protection mentality, say: “Yes, it is terrible to eat pets, they are more sensitive than others, they are the best friend of man living with people …”
The others say: “Why should we rescue the dogs and eat the pigs? The slain pigs are smarter than dogs and at least as friendly, playful and trusting as dogs are when we let them.” Both arguments are wrong, because it means: If death, then for all! that is justice”.
Although people might have a right to their opinions, it does not follow that their opinions are correct. Especially when it comes to ethical issues.
Regarding the debate of dog food in general, it seems that not the killing is criticized but only the torture.
However, there are a few things to note when it comes to the difference between slaughter and slaughter:
First, there is a crucial difference between the slaughter of animals in slaughterhouses and the private, amateurish slaughter of dogs on the street. While slaughtering animals in abbatoirs is wrong, dissecting a live dog is even worse and deserves special criticism.
Secondly, the rationalization of dog food can not be confirmed by legitimizing the eating of meat in all countries, because it is an argument based on the wrong ethical basics.
And that, for one simple reason: if something wrong is legitimized, it must not be broadened and tolerated at all levels.
For us, the animal rights activists the fight against the atrocities in the slaughterhouses does not stop in pigs, cows, sheep, chickens, but extends to ALL slaughterhouses and slaughter practices of the world.
And even small successes in this direction are in danger of relapsing, when cruel folkloric idiosyncrasies, primitive traditions, and miserable cultural heritage are permitted by corrupt and demagogic politicians.
A cultural practice can be immoral, although it seems immensely logical to its practitioners. This applies to both the Chinese and the non-Chinese.
There is no human meat food culture, all the food cultures on the basis of meat in the world do not represent moral practices.
If U.K actually annulled the prohibition of dog meat internally, that would only prove a pseudo cultural tolerance, a cheap demagogy for “cultural” dog eating, motivated in the reality by their absolute indifference to the suffering of animals; of slaughter animals and domestic animals.
My best regards to all, Venus