Personally,
I have never understood people's aversion to the eating of dog meat. It's a dog, I mean, who really cares? Why is eating a dog any different than eating a cow, a pig, a squid, a salmon, a lamb, or a duck? Really, I feel that the only people that have any right to object are vegetarians and vegans. When did we decide that a dog was a sacred animal?

I've known some people who are so impressively disgusted with the practice of consuming dog meat, and I just cannot understand it. It's a cultural practice in someplaces. As in, somewhere, someone eats dog. Big whoop. It's an animal. Long ago, we decided that we would be at the top of the food chain. We eat other animals. With rather impressive abandon, I might add, unless they are endangered, and even then...The point is, why take up issue with eating dog?

Some people I've spoken to have said "A dog is a pet, not dinner". In America, by and large, that's true. What about in India, where they seem to give the cow just a smidgen more respect than we do? What is it that makes our cultural practices so much more valid? I wonder, is this the same kind of issue as Americans and their incompatibility with a bidet?

Really, so what?! Who cares? At least Lassie won't be late for dinner again. Bitch.

Some of the more intelligent opponents of this practice have made arguments such as " 'there is no recognized humane method of killing' dogs." ([link]) This actually comes from an argument between organizations in Korea. The same article relates that the same activists who complain about the inhumanity of the practice are also preventing the industry from being legalized and regulated. In other words, they would rather prolong a fight that they're not going to win than end the cruelty in the practice. Eventually, even these people fall back to the same old B.S. argument " 'Dogs are "friends, not animals," Bardot told a Korean radio interviewer. "Cows are grown to be eaten, dogs are not. I accept that many people eat beef, but a cultured country does not allow its people to eat dogs.' " Nice one, Brigitte. I'm impressed that in between her five counts of "inciting racial hatred" and opposing homosexuality, she even has time to defend animal rights. It seems that she (and so many others) care about animals more than they do about actual people. I can't stand these people. Like, "let me worry about the safety of this cat, but I don't believe in charity". Or, "Oh, sweatshops? Those people are lucky to have that work. What was that you said? 'Someone killed a dog in self-defense'?! Well, let me wage a personal war on them'.

People need to get lives. People need to realize that there are more ways than their own way. They need to realize that if you grow a cow for food, its food. If you grow a dog for food, if you use it for food, its food. This says nothing about the actual value or dignity of the animal. At the end of the day, its about a human's ability to determine the value of animal. It's about supremacy. Some things never change, eh?

I don't know how many of you remember the controversy with Guillermo Vargas. He was the gentleman who took a starving dog from the streets and tied it up in has art exhibit. How horrible, to starve a dog for the sake of art! Right? The controversy is a little bit ludicrous at its roots. It was a starving street dog. No one was feeding it. It was dying slowly in the streets of Nicaragua, apparently. If it had been someone's dog, or if someone had cared for it, I doubt that Vargas would have taken it. However, there was this huge backlash about animal cruelty. Why? All of the teenagers, artists, housewives, landscapers and underwater basketweavers who signed petitions to attack Vargas and ban him from art conventions, are they in Latin America feeding dogs? Are they sending money or doing anything to stimulate the economy of these countries or bettering them? People are dying in the streets of Nicaragua. People are dying in the streets of the United States, but somehow this is the most important thing on the radar? Somehow, we're worried about a dog. We let people starve to death as we sit on our asses with our SUVs and frappucinos and were worried about one emaciated dog? There's a serious failing of priorities in our world then. Alright, I'm done ranting.

What brought the whole dog rant on, anyway? I read an article on the BBC here: [link] Apparently Chinese officials are worried about offending those who would attend their Olympics, and while it is certainly a wise PR move on their, I feel that they really shouldn't have to restrict their culture or eating habits for the rest of the world, if the rest of the world is so unwilling to tolerate.

The measure has been implemented to "respect the habits of many countries and nationalities," the Beijing News quoted the municipal food department as saying.

The BBC's James Reynolds says the ban is one of several steps taken by China to avoid foreign visitors being amused or offended by local customs.

Authorities have also told people to queue up politely, to smile and not to spit on the streets.

What about having some modicum of respect for someone's own culture in their own country? I'd understand if these were serious human rights violations, but spitting and eating habits? What-ever. Anyway, I'm done.