why is it bad to eat cats and dogs (4 Viewers)

[igor9]

oi who u calling dimwitted, ur the ones debating this shit mate, i wouldn't call anyone else names when ur tryna question this shit.

 

[Solarised]

oi who u calling dimwitted, ur the ones debating this shit mate, i wouldn't call anyone else names when ur tryna question this shit.

The facts don't lie. I don't support this, nor would I promote this, nor would I do this, but in reality there is no valid reason that can stop someone from eating a cat or dog. Cold hard facts win and that sadly is the truth

 

[igor9]

firstly congratz on not being a tard and eating dogs and secondly if its abt physically eating then yea i can eat tree bark if i wanted to, but i thought this was abt ethics?

 

[Solarised]

firstly congratz on not being a tard and eating dogs and secondly if its abt physically eating then yea i can eat tree bark if i wanted to, but i thought this was abt ethics?

Yea man I tried to debate that it was ethically wrong, but again there is no proof in supporting this. Also I apologise for the name-calling, as this is just a friendly debate.

 

[TheSmartGuyRises]

for those who don't wanna read a science report or half hidden sarcastic remarks, we essentially don't eat dogs and cats for TWO MAIN REASONS.

1. moral reasons which stem from cultural reasons within Western socetiety. Dogs are considered pets and companions. You don't eat your friends!
2. Meats from animals like cats and dogs are just generally less viable than other types of protein.

Therefore, the thinking goes why would you eta cats and dogs when they're your friends and there are better options? It's a no brainer!

However, some cultures didn't go down the route of 1. and that's usually where you find them eating dogs and cats.

It's also important to note that most people in the asian countries where the consumption of dogs and cats usually occur have never touched these kind of meats.

I might be wrong tho as I have never thought more about this topic than before stumbling on this stupid thread that I am now forever part of.

 

[IStrokeItDaily69]

Yea man I tried to debate that it was ethically wrong, but again there is no proof in supporting this. Also I apologise for the name-calling, as this is just a friendly debate.

i accept your apology

 

[igor9]

Yea man I tried to debate that it was ethically wrong, but again there is no proof in supporting this. Also I apologise for the name-calling, as this is just a friendly debate.

ok, i guess its just perceived ethics, if a chicken was regarded the same as a dog then maybe we wouldn't eat it, but still it would be quite retarded to eat one.

 

[Solarised]

for those who don't wanna read a science report or half hidden sarcastic remarks, we essentially don't eat dogs and cats for TWO MAIN REASONS.

1. moral reasons which stem from cultural reasons within Western socetiety. Dogs are considered pets and companions. You don't eat your friends!
2. Meats from animals like cats and dogs are just generally less viable than other types of protein.

Therefore, the thinking goes why would you eta cats and dogs when they're your friends and there are better options? It's a no brainer!

However, some cultures didn't go down the route of 1. and that's usually where you find them eating dogs and cats.

It's also important to note that most people in the asian countries where the consumption of dogs and cats usually occur have never touched these kind of meats.

I might be wrong tho as I have never thought more about this topic than before stumbling on this stupid thread that I am now forever part of.

Yes but morality has no question in this as its not moral its just influence of western upbringing and two viability does not really matter, as if it tastes good then that's really all that matters right, even if it does I would never do it. It is a stupid thread, but at least it brought a lot of people together and was sure fun.

 

[Solarised]

i accept your apology

All good Jon Jones

 

[katiekms]

Yes but morality has no question in this as its not moral its just influence of western upbringing and two viability does not really matter, as if it tastes good then that's really all that matters right, even if it does I would never do it. It is a stupid thread, but at least it brought a lot of people together and was sure fun.

i don’t think morality and upbringing are completely different things - like then wouldn’t morality not be relevant for eveything? because some upbringings are quite negative compared to others, where everything we know to be wrong is right for them, or vice versa. what’s the point of morality if you can disregard it just because one group doesn’t have the same morals? morality is 100% the biggest factor in this question, in my opinion.

 

[totally_screwed]

synthesis must be proud of this thread it took off

 

[Solarised]

i don’t think morality and upbringing are completely different things - like then wouldn’t morality not be relevant for eveything? because some upbringings are quite negative compared to others, where everything we know to be wrong is right for them, or vice versa. what’s the point of morality if you can disregard it just because one group doesn’t have the same morals? morality is 100% the biggest factor in this question, in my opinion.

I understand your point, I commend it its true. Although morality is based upon opinion not fact. Morals do not really play a role IMO in this convo. The consumption of dogs and cats have no problem other than morals which are based upon opinion. Thus, if we leave it to this than all there will be is conflicting answers as some will say yes others no. So I believe the facts for this question provide the basis for the answer outside of any moral influence and that is yes it can be considered ok to eat cats and dogs. The reason I said considered is my morality says HELL NAH I AIN'T EATING THOSE THINGS, I MEAN LOOK AT THEM!

 

[TheSmartGuyRises]

I understand your point, I commend it its true. Although morality is based upon opinion not fact. Morals do not really play a role IMO in this convo. The consumption of dogs and cats have no problem other than morals which are based upon opinion. Thus, if we leave it to this than all there will be is conflicting answers as some will say yes others no. So I believe the facts for this question provide the basis for the answer outside of any moral influence and that is yes it can be considered ok to eat cats and dogs. The reason I said considered is my morality says HELL NAH I AIN'T EATING THOSE THINGS, I MEAN LOOK AT THEM!

no but ur missing the whole point. Differences in culture - those that stem from different values and morals dictate our perception of consuming animals. It's an integral part of understanding the differences between the cultures that do consume dog and cat meat as opposed to those like ours which do not.

By ignoring the concept of morals, its like saying murders alright coz if u take morals out of the equation (since people might have DIFFERENT MORALS AND OPINIONS ON TAKING SOMEONES LIFE YK) than there's nothing wrong with murder. The universality of humanity's condemnation of murder lies on the basis of morals as well as order (coz yk order is important).

When you eliminate the idea of morals from this equation, there is still the obstacle of the nature of dog and cat meat which usually discourages its consumption in favour of more traditional proteins such as beef, chicken and pork.

I guess what it boils down to is that its not a matter of not being able to eat dogs or cats because you can, but the reason we don't or we choose not to or however u want to think about it comes down to this: "it g goes against the values (which come from our morals) that involve dogs and pets. This combined with the fact that dog meat and cat meat are just worse than normal meat (smell, sanitation ect) means that there are just better options and over time its become a unwritten rule in society"

^biggest yap ive done all week by far.

 

[Solarised]

no but ur missing the whole point. Differences in culture - those that stem from different values and morals dictate our perception of consuming animals. It's an integral part of understanding the differences between the cultures that do consume dog and cat meat as opposed to those like ours which do not.

By ignoring the concept of morals, its like saying murders alright coz if u take morals out of the equation (since people might have DIFFERENT MORALS AND OPINIONS ON TAKING SOMEONES LIFE YK) than there's nothing wrong with murder. The universality of humanity's condemnation of murder lies on the basis of morals as well as order (coz yk order is important).

When you eliminate the idea of morals from this equation, there is still the obstacle of the nature of dog and cat meat which usually discourages its consumption in favour of more traditional proteins such as beef, chicken and pork.

I guess what it boils down to is that its not a matter of not being able to eat dogs or cats because you can, but the reason we don't or we choose not to or however u want to think about it comes down to this: "it g goes against the values (which come from our morals) that involve dogs and pets. This combined with the fact that dog meat and cat meat are just worse than normal meat (smell, sanitation ect) means that there are just better options and over time its become a unwritten rule in society"

^biggest yap ive done all week by far.

Moral viewpoint understood, thus I don't want to talk about that part cuz let's be real we are all westernised. As for it being worse than normal meat is just not a valid enough point, as how do we know whether it tastes better or not, or well all be eating high protein, vitamin foods etc. On the side of facts dog and cat meat can be eaten, and that's that. So know we have two answers. It is morally incorrect, but factually incorrect. My brain has rotted enough lets just say Yes and No.

 

[Solarised]

Me rn

"You can only use Alien X if you say that dog/cat meat can be consumed"