Eating a Dog

[sun rise]

Do you know much of the history of what we now call "dogs"? For instance, the fact that "canine" as a species is what has been used to breed what is modernly referred to as "dogs"? Wild animals like coyotes and wolves. Where things like "Saint Bernard" or "Doberman Pincer" or "Dalmatian" of even "mutt" didn't even exist "in the beginning". So, to state that "dogs" have any sort of intrinsic or natural role in "creation" (as a reference to "when things were created") doesn't make much sense. Humans crafted them. Humans created them. Therefore, if they have any sort of "role" as pertains to humans it is because we bred them for it. The act of creation was most certainly ours, if we're looking to attribute it to anyone/anything.

Yes, I know the developmental history of dogs.

From my advaita perspective, there is only One and the part of that One which are humans helped develop dogs to fill a spiritual ecological niche.

 

[stvdv]

Something similar happened with my wife & I when staying with her relatives in Sicily, whereas her cousin slaughtered a goat for dinner, and my wife wouldn't eat it because it was her nephew's pet.

I didn't eat it either, btw.

Good example

When young, I was not allowed to say no to whatever was served, so I was trained to say yes, and could not even say no. Huge trauma

Once, while Sai Baba gave a discourse, I mentally asked something like "In Holland there is a saying 'you must eat what they serve you', but should I not be allowed to say no, when someone offers me food I think is not good for me, or non veg".

He immediately answered my question within His discourse stating "It's the duty of the host who prepares food for someone, to only serve what is best for that person".

From that moment I overcame my youth trauma, and finally learned to say no, and feel comfortable doing so

 

[Secret Chief]

That's strange to me.
Even if you would put a dog's life on the same level as a human life in every way, then still it is strange to me.

Then I am strange to you.
I don't think I view the issue as an "every way" check list. I suppose broadly speaking I consider a higher mammal, a sentient being such as a dog or a human, to have (in my mind) the same right to life.

For the simple reason that killing a stray wild dog is then a crime that has only 1 victim.
Whereas if it is a pet, there are 2 victims - one of which experiences lasting suffering.

So no matter how one looks at it: the net suffering increases when it concerns a pet.

How then is it not worse to kill a pet then it is to kill a stray wild animal?

I'm not sure that "victim" is the right word in each case. The being that is killed is "the victim." Those left behind are grieving or whatever, but I would not call them victims. If a big game hunter (AKA a complete ******* ****) kills an elephant, the one that they shot is the victim, whilst the remaining family are not victims (but will grieve).

 

[1213]

....
So, did I do wrong?

Yes, you took it without permission.

 

[pearl]

However, my wife enjoys meat far more then I do, so I eventually somewhat relented by eating a hamburger for dinner one day, and I thought I had just swallowed a hand grenade as it set so heavy. So, we compromised and I still keep my meat-eating at a minimum.

Same with my youngest daughter and her husband. They use very little meat, in fact, they are primarily on plant based foods. Grow their own vegetables, do a lot of canning. He clams, and exchanges some for lobsters. Outside of an occasional steak, they're pretty much non meat eaters. She has said the same thing if they are out with friends and have a traditional meat burger, its so heavy.

Hopefully, the dog you grilled has had his distemper shots

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Correct. However, humans do not nutritionally need to eat meat.

True, you can get your B12 and stuff from dairy products -- still animal products.

But the point still stands. Our bodies are designed to eat both meat and veggies.

 

[KWED]

I am talking about the morality of the act, not the legality.

Morality is subjective. Most people don't even think there is a moral issue there.
Objectively, humans are omnivores and have evolved to eat meat so there is nothing "wrong" with it.

Here in Brazil it is not illegal to cheat your spouse, and it has negligible legal consequences. It is not regarded as moral though.

By whom? Again, morality is subjective. The people doing the cheating presumably don't have a problem with it.

 

[Secret Chief]

True, you can get your B12 and stuff from dairy products -- still animal products.

But the point still stands. Our bodies are designed to eat both meat and veggies.

A vegan diet involves no dairy. (Plus, there are vegan supplements eg for B12).
Humans can eat anything (omni) but don't need to eat everything

 

[KWED]

You're not allowed to posit that argument, as you say you have no religion.

Never heard the expression "devil's advocate"?

 

[KWED]

My OP was a "set up" as it didn't really happen.

He said, frantically back-pedalling.
You should have just said "asking for a friend".

 

[Secret Chief]

Never heard the expression "devil's advocate"?

Don't worry I have, I knew you were being provocative. I keep a sharp stick myself, next to my ipad.

 

[KWED]

A vegan diet involves no dairy.
Humans can eat anything (omni) but don't need to eat everything

Q - How can you tell if someone is vegan?
A - You don't need to. They'll tell you soon enough.

 

[Secret Chief]

Q - How can you tell if someone is vegan?
A - You don't need to. They'll tell you soon enough.

That's as old as meat eaters saying you need meat in your diet. (Btw I didn't say I was a vegan I hope....mainly cos I am not).

 

[KWED]

True, you can get your B12 and stuff from dairy products -- still animal products.

But the point still stands. Our bodies are designed to eat both meat and veggies.

 

[KWED]

That's as old as meat eaters saying you need meat in your diet. (Btw I didn't say I was a vegan I hope....mainly cos I am not).

A bit of lean meat occasionally is generally a good idea.
I'm vegan most of the time (flexivegan). I just find militant veganism funny.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

This thread does make me want to go vegan.

 

[Koldo]

Morality is subjective. Most people don't even think there is a moral issue there.
Objectively, humans are omnivores and have evolved to eat meat so there is nothing "wrong" with it.

Being omnivore entails there is nothing wrong?
I don't follow your rationale.

By whom? Again, morality is subjective. The people doing the cheating presumably don't have a problem with it.

I would bet anything that most cheaters do think of cheating as immoral. I doubt they wouldn't mind if they were the ones being cheated.

 

[KWED]

Moderators, sorry for the repeated responses you read above but so many seem to have thought that this really did happen.

Me thinks the canivore doth protest too much.

 

[KWED]

Some say "humans are animals"

Yes. People who know what they are talking about.

 

[Secret Chief]

A bit of lean meat occasionally is generally a good idea.
I'm vegan most of the time (flexivegan). I just find militant veganism funny.

Is flexivegan a thing? I can't keep up. If it is then.....oh no I won't say...

 

[KWED]

Being omnivore entails there is nothing wrong?
I don't follow your rationale.

Nothing "wrong" with eating meat.

I would bet anything that most cheaters do think of cheating as immoral. I doubt they wouldn't mind if they were the ones being cheated.

Perhaps you are confusing "morality" with "justifiability". They will likely see their own infidelity as justifiable, but that of their spouse as not. Morality might not even be a consideration.
It is generally a mistake to project your own moral values onto others.