Social contradiction on how we treat animals

Tar.Aldarion

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

Story from the UK today, "This guy set up a petition on the street to get people to legalize eating dog meat. After a large mob of outraged citizens gathered he began to hand out vegan material."

Perfect.

The people that approached him in anger will now have to consider how hypocritical their choices are.

uptherebels

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Perfect.

The people that approached him in anger will now have to consider how hypocritical their choices are.

How is it hypocritical? Dogs arent raised in Ireland for food!
If they were and people chose to not eat them and only other animals then you might actually have a point.

Tar.Aldarion

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

Story from the UK today, "This guy set up a petition on the street to get people to legalize eating dog meat. After a large mob of outraged citizens gathered he began to hand out vegan material."

Was this story run in the media Tar ?

I’m trying to find a link to send on to nephews and nieces.

gozunda

^^^ Another 'why not eat dog though' huh hur daft argument that some can't seem to get enough of.

I'm surprised people didn't see through it tbh. Same stunt even tried here

https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057856518

This has been brought up again repeatedly and
been thoroughly debunked many times

I wonder whether the above stunt would fall under the remit of false and misleading advertising in the UK:

The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations mean you cannot mislead or harass consumers by, for example:
including false or deceptive messages
leaving out important information

https://www.gov.uk/marketing-advertising-law/regulations-that-affect-advertising

In either case the stunt was certainly harassing / misleading and deliberatly left out important information...

¯\_(ツ)_/ ¯. 

aaakev

Why is eating dog meat so bad? A guy i know from new Zealand killed his dog when it got old and they had a spit roast with all their friends. They saw it as a way to say good bye!

gozunda

Just to push this debate a bit further than a state of constant repetition.

It would appear that "there is much less difference in ethical values between vegans and meat eaters than you may think" with regard to who loves dogs more ....

Contradiction?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vo-o8hDnZzs

JeffKenna

aaakev wrote: »

Why is eating dog meat so bad? A guy i know from new Zealand killed his dog when it got old and they had a spit roast with all their friends. They saw it as a way to say good bye!

Spit roast eh....

davidjtaylor

aaakev wrote: »

Why is eating dog meat so bad?

We've been told several times on this thread that dog meat is inedible and a health risk.

Tar.Aldarion

Deleted User wrote: »

Was this story run in the media Tar ?

I’m trying to find a link to send on to nephews and nieces.

I don't know, I just saw it on reddit.

uptherebels wrote: »

How is it hypocritical? Dogs arent raised in Ireland for food!
If they were and people chose to not eat them and only other animals then you might actually have a point.

I believe the very point is that the man was suggesting that they farm dogs in the UK and people got outraged, and people also get outraged at others in different countries doing same.

Being inconsistent goes both ways, they can either think that both are fine or neither or fine unless they is some form of pressing reason otherwise.

aaakev

davidjtaylor wrote: »

We've been told several times on this thread that dog meat is inedible and a health risk.

That doesnt make it true though. Dog meat is eaten in plenty of places and is most definitely edible. Eating carnivorous animals can pose a risk but it is certainly edible.

davidjtaylor

davidjtaylor wrote: »

We've been told several times on this thread that dog meat is inedible and a health risk.

aaakev wrote: »

That doesnt make it true though.

Exactly.

gozunda

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

I don't know, I just saw it on reddit.

I believe the very point is that the man was suggesting that they farm dogs in the UK and people got outraged, and people also get outraged at others in different countries doing same.

Being inconsistent goes both ways, they can either think that both are fine or neither or fine unless they is some form of pressing reason otherwise.

It's your man pretending to want to advocate for eating dog meat simply to get a reaction. Fairly pathetic and dishonest behaviour tbh

But like that deranged woman who went into a restaurant and stated screaming - why the restaurant was not selling dog meat and then she and her friends started screaming at the restaurant diners.

Stupid dishonest and ignorant imo.

gozunda

davidjtaylor wrote: »

Exactly.

Wrong. The Philippines banned the eating of dog meat for health and animal welfare reasons. Hong Kong Taiwan ditto etc

Dog meat has been linked to cholera
and Ebola and some prion related diseases

Yes some people's do eat dog meat - but it is not recommended as the meat is neither reared for human consumption or killed in a regulated manner.

Plus on a biological level - carnivores avoid the eating of other carnivores as a rule. Yes there are exceptions but this has been extensively studied.

It's quite amazing how some vegan sources attempt to rewrite reality in an aim to push veganism.

I suppose in one way that's not a bad thing - because most people see that for what it is - simply more misinformation

Worztron

To gozunda and co. I'm curious - whenever ye see a story about an animal escaping from a slaughterhouse or truck bound for such place -- do ye root for the animal or slaughterers?

ganmo

Worztron wrote: »

To gozunda and co. I'm curious - whenever ye see a story about an animal escaping from a slaughterhouse or truck bound for such place -- do ye root for the animal or slaughterers?

Neither, a loose animal in an unfamiliar environment can be dangerous so I suppose I’d be rooting for the public.

But your question would never have a black or white answer

aaakev

Worztron wrote: »

To gozunda and co. I'm curious - whenever ye see a story about an animal escaping from a slaughterhouse or truck bound for such place -- do ye root for the animal or slaughterers?

Id be hoping thw animal was caught quick before it did damage to itself or someone in the road.

gozunda

I am in agreement with both of the above replies.

As to the query itself however - imo it is little more than simplified reductionism with the aim of setting the commentator as a moral arbitrator

Worztron

ganmo wrote: »

Neither, a loose animal in an unfamiliar environment can be dangerous so I suppose I’d be rooting for the public.

But your question would never have a black or white answer

It goes without saying that we'd all wish for nobody to be injured. Why should this question not be a clear cut answer?

aaakev wrote: »

Id be hoping thw animal was caught quick before it did damage to itself or someone in the road.

Agreed on the damage part, but that's not what I asked.

gozunda wrote: »

I am in agreement with both of the above replies.

As to the query itself however - imo it is little more than simplified reductionism with the aim of setting the commentator as a moral arbitrator

No, it's a simple question.

gozunda

Worztron wrote: »

It goes without saying that we'd all wish for nobody to be injured. Why should this question not be a clear cut answer?
Agreed on the damage part, but that's not what I asked.No, it's a simple question.

It remains the question makes no sense whatsover.

Why would anyone be 'rooting' (sic) for anyone as if it's a fracking football final or something

You got a number of answers. If they were not what you wanted
¯\_(ツ)_/ ¯

Worztron

gozunda wrote: »

It remains the question makes no sense whatsover.

Why would anyone be 'rooting' (sic) for anyone as if it's a fracking football final or something

You got a number of answers. If they were not what you wanted
¯\_(ツ)_/ ¯

It makes sense alright. Those were cop out answers. Why get caught up over the word 'root'? Change it to support if you please.

gozunda

Worztron wrote: »

It makes sense alright. Those were cop out answers. Why get caught up over the word 'root'? Change it to support if you please.

I disagree - Its remains it's a very stupid type of question.

I suggest you read about this type of questioning here

https://www.wwnorton.com/college/phil/logic3/ch6/falsealt.htm

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

aaakev

Worztron wrote: »

It makes sense alright. Those were cop out answers. Why get caught up over the word 'root'? Change it to support if you please.

My answer was certainly not a cop out, it was a truthful answer based on the scenario you asked about.

At the end of the day the cow was reared to be slaughtered for food so id be hoping it got back to the factory as soon as possible so no one got hurt, nothing got damaged (including the cow) and the food production could start.

Does that answer your question more to your liking?

Worztron

aaakev wrote: »

My answer was certainly not a cop out, it was a truthful answer based on the scenario you asked about.

At the end of the day the cow was reared to be slaughtered for food so id be hoping it got back to the factory as soon as possible so no one got hurt, nothing got damaged (including the cow) and the food production could start.

Does that answer your question more to your liking?

Yes, you just completed your earlier answer there regarding how you'd prefer the escaped animal to end up. Although I never mentioned it was a cow.

Worztron

gozunda wrote: »

I disagree - Its remains it's a very stupid type of question.

I suggest you read about this type of questioning here

https://www.wwnorton.com/college/phil/logic3/ch6/falsealt.htm

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

So if an animal escaped their slaughterhouse destiny, and zero harm came to the animal, people, or property -- you'd still prefer the animal caught and end up in the slaughter house and not for example an animal sanctuary?

Lady Haywire

Worztron wrote: »

Yes, you just completed your earlier answer there regarding how you'd prefer the escaped animal to end up. Although I never mentioned it was a cow.

There's no correct answer, if we say root for the beast, we'll get questioned why send it for slaughter in the first place. If we root for the factory, then we're horrible farmers hell bent on capturing the poor animal who tried to escape.

It's a worst case scenario because the escapee is far far more stressed out than it would be if it hadn't got out in the first place. If it's not able to be safely captured it can require shooters in to kill it while it runs as it's both a danger to itself and society.

If a sanctuary is willing to pay market value, let them have it, but no farmer is going to give it away for free because it got away.

ganmo

Lady Haywire wrote: »

There's no correct answer, if we say root for the beast, we'll get questioned why send it for slaughter in the first place. If we root for the factory, then we're horrible farmers hell bent on capturing the poor animal who tried to escape.

It's a worst case scenario because the escapee is far far more stressed out than it would be if it hadn't got out in the first place. If it's not able to be safely captured it can require shooters in to kill it while it runs as it's both a danger to itself and society.

If a sanctuary is willing to pay market value, let them have it, but no farmer is going to give it away for free because it got away.

like the gay bull that got castrated by the sanctuary in england

gozunda

Worztron wrote: »

So if an animal escaped their slaughterhouse destiny, and zero harm came to the animal, people, or property -- you'd still prefer the animal caught and end up in the slaughter house and not for example an animal sanctuary?

And how exactly did you arrive at that convoluted conclusion from my comment?

Worztron- if you insist on attempting to get a reaction and refuse to recognise the stupidity of your question - I can do nothing for you.

Worztron

gozunda wrote: »

And how exactly did you arrive at that convoluted conclusion from my comment?

Worztron- if you insist on attempting to get a reaction and refuse to recognise the stupidity of your question - I can do nothing for you.

It's a straightforward scenario. You're like a politician trying to avoid answering a question. I'm asking a question but you seem to see it simply as trying to get a reaction -- not so.

gozunda

Worztron wrote: »

It's a straightforward scenario. You're like a politician trying to avoid answering a question. I'm asking a question but you seem to see it simply as trying to get a reaction -- not so.

And if you wish to make use of analogies thats the closest thing to a wanabe chat show presenter looking for reaction imo. No one on boards is obliged to answer any directed 'question' especially where it has already been pointed out that the 'question' make a no sense whatsover. Tbh I have only bothered replying so far out of politeness despite the fact you've liked none of the replies so far and are still badgering posters. That tells me enough thanks.

Your question makes as much sense as this scenario tbh

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3101363/Have-drunk-dinosaur-urine-glass-water-contains-100-Jurassic-pee-claim-scientists.html

How do feel about drinking dinosaur pee as an animal by-product?

Ps I don't expect an answer ....

On the other hand If you wish to debate the merits or otherwise of vegan run sanctruries and / or how Irish slaughthouse operations are run - go ahead.
.

Nekarsulm

Worztron wrote: »

To gozunda and co. I'm curious - whenever ye see a story about an animal escaping from a slaughterhouse or truck bound for such place -- do ye root for the animal or slaughterers?

I would root for the farmer that owned the beast, and hope it was rounded up before it caused a fortune in damage to cars and property, or ran across a bunch of people and injured or killed someone.

I suppose you are using the verb "root" in the Americian meaning, not the Australian/Kiwi one?