LogFAQs > #923828384

@Frolex posted...

If you're concerned about the suffering of animals, why should how an animal was raised matter? Would you still care if they were dogs bred and raised for slaughter? If you would still care, why even make this argument?

Wow, did you just try to move the goal posts there? My point is that the situation is different because these are PETS THAT GOT STOLEN. You don't get to re-frame my point and the pretend you answered with another set of question.

Just accept it, it's different to steal pets and murder them than to raise cattle and then eat said cattle. It's not a hard thing to accept.

2)

If "profit" it is a noble enough motive for you to absolve people of the morality of torturing animals, why pretend to care about the way animals are treated? Are the profits gained from the slaughter and sale of dogs in other countries not enough justification for their treatment of animals?

Did you just try to re-frame my point again and pretend to "answer" it with a set of other questions?

I never said that "profit" was noble. Show me where I said "profit is noble". Am I seeing a pattern here? Will you keep going around my points, re-framing the points (moving the goalposts, strawmanning) and answering with a set on different questions?

3)

If the social relationship dogs have to humans in your culture is the thing that affords them moral value, why should we not equally value animals that carry equal social value to other cultures?

Ah, so you're finally getting honest here. Your motivator was the "fuck western culture" angle. Ok, that makes more sense. Kudos for finally getting honest.

So, if in a specific culture it was considered admirable and high to beat the shit out of babies and torture them and then drink their blood while they're alive, you would be arguing in favor of that here? Got it.

I am NOT referring to any culture or specific cultural context in my point, my point is the biological and evolutionary bond between dogs and humans, not cultural context. The dog doesn't give a shit if you say "ni hao" or "konichiwa" or "hello", or whether you use chopsticks or forks or your hands, he still secretes "happy hormones' when he sees humans, he is still hard wired to seek human companionship even above that of other dogs, and it still understands stuff such as what a smile is or what pointing with a finger is. "Fuck the west" isn't a factor here.

4)

Like I said before pigs serve as service animals and react to humans socially in all the same ways dogs do, and even posted academic sources to back my claim. Why don't you post some proof that they don't?.

Aaaaaaaandd the goal post moving and pretending to answer my question with a question continues.

I can show you hundreds of instances showing the existence of dogs that lead blind people or serve as attack-detecting dogs (e.g. diabetic attack) or dogs that serve in search and rescue missions, or dogs that fight other animals to defend their humans. It's a lack of common sense to ask me to prove those things exist. I asked YOU to show me a good number of cases where pigs do the same. Come on, I'll wait.

I used bold to emphasize my points again, which you could not answer and instead tried to reframe. Good luck.