NEWS: Bill to Bar Eating Cats, Dogs Stirs Debate

A state legislator in Hawaii is pushing a bill that would make it illegal to kill cats and dogs for food. The bill has drawn protests by several groups claiming that it is aimed at unfounded and racist stereotypes. Glenn Wakai who introduced the measure, claims that recent reports of dogs on the island of Oahu being stolen and butchered proves that this is an ongoing issue. Both the Humane Society as well as the local police have failed to turn up any evidence of this practice in the islands.



This is a surprising measure given the easy going diverse nature of the Islands. While there may be a few cultures that do not condemn eating dogs, most do not. I was surprised however to not that California has such a ban in place. As does six other states according to the article. Having been to China and several other countries in South East Asia, I can attest to the diversity of food you will find in thier markets. Items that I would never consider palatable for a mean is commonplace. However, in the multitude of places I have been I never once say a dog or a cat chopped up and ready for eating. I tend to agree with the groups protesting this, it simply reinforces existing stereotypes.

[edit on 2/22/05 by FredT]

Dammit thats outragious!

Why can't I have my favorite cat casserole?
Roast dog is my favorite.
Shall we post some recipies to entice people into pet eating?

I love basted laborador with a fresh green salad.

If the animal is edible,
and is harvested in a humane fashion for consumption,
(and isnt someones stolen pet)

then why not let people eat them?

Im not going to get into what animal can and cant be eaten from my perspective near the top of the food chain...if its edible....look out!
The government shouldnt get into this either, next it will be lobster, or even cows....come on....this not only seems like a dumb feel good law, it would really squash cultural diversity if enacted.

I love dogs, have one myself, but if you want to eat one it should be your right, as long as you dont eat mine in which case I'll kill you.
See this type of stupid # is why all animal rights laws should be repealed.
Hmmm anyone want to organise a "counterprotest" to the next PETA protest?
I figure we go out and buy a bunch of rabbits from a petstore along with other assorted cute animals, butcher them at the protest or outside PETA's headquarters, and then bar-b-que them and sell the meat so we can do it again. Who's with me?

If they want to eat cats and dogs then let them hunt wilds ones.

If they want to eat domestic ones then NO!

Why not? What if they buy it legally from a petshop and breed them specifically for food?
Are saying that people should not have a right to use thier property as they wish?

What I meant to say is they should not use a pet store as a grocery store.

[edit on 22-2-2005 by Bourgeoisie]

Again why not?
Once you purchase the animal its yours. I used to buy rabbits from a pet store to feed my snake, whats the difference.

People should take a few things into account here.

Firstly, where, according to the legislator, is this problem? Are the animals he claims are disappearing strays or are they people's pets?

If it's been pets, well then I'm sure that would be classified as theft and would not require any further law. Personally, I feel it should be kidnapping since pet lovers consider their pet as part of the family, but that's another story.

Why dog and cat? Because those are the animals we've domesticated and made into companions. I'm sure a parrot owner would be mortified at grilling up Polly, and the same would go for a rabbit owner not wishing to eat rabbit.

To pass a law dealing exclusively with dog and cat seems rather silly in that sense doesn't it?

Look at farm animals. Kids go see them all the time and love the cows pigs goats and chickens, but you don't see us banning spare ribs now do you?

It's a matter of personal taste. If the animal is bred for food, frankly I don't see the difference.

Personally, I don't care what species the animal is, because other cultures have very different diets than I do here in America, and I have no right to criticize what they eat. The only issue I have with this is the cleanliness of the animal. If we've established that they're not cooking Rover and Spot, then it must be strays, and strays have diseases (at least in NYC anyways). I would look at this more from a health point of view.

This is not something for a state legislature to be banning. People have different diets. If it's done properly and humanely, I don't see the issue.

Personally, I'll stick with more conventional stuff myself.

Originally posted by Bourgeoisie
What I meant to say is they should not use a pet store as a grocery store.

[edit on 22-2-2005 by Bourgeoisie]

Pet stores are where alot of animal owners go to get live food for thier animals they love so much. Ever see a snake become a vegan

In New York City if your cat disappears - eg gets out the apartment ect - your chances of getting it back is virtually zero as the homeless and others frequently sell them to laboratories for experimentation. Nice?

Well myanearis, f you are careless enough to lose a pet you "love" what do you expect.

Originally posted by mwm1331
Well myanearis, f you are careless enough to lose a pet you "love" what do you expect.

Accidents happen, cleaning ladies leave the door open for too long, a seventy year old ladies best friend slips out the door before she can shut it. However you are missing the point, its wrong for this kind of behavior to take place. Where do you draw the line, your little girl gets lost in a mall is it ok for people to eat her or to experiment on her? Oh wait ," f you are careless enough to lose a pet you "love" what do you expect. "

Mynaeris are you another one who's been so polluted by liberalism you can't tell the difference between a child and an animal?
Heres a hint, ones human, none of the others are.

Originally posted by mwm1331
Mynaeris are you another one who's been so polluted by liberalism you can't tell the difference between a child and an animal?
Heres a hint, ones human, none of the others are.

Why did you have to go and say that? Why couldn't you have addressed her point without resorting to namecalling? It's very easy you know...

Where did I call Mynaeris a name?

You insulted her, implicative labeling.

Is saying someone is infected with aids an insult as well?
Liberalism is a disease, she seems infected as one of the symptoms is the inability to distiguish between the value of human life and animal life.

I know some cultures think this is perfectly o.k. to eat dogs and cats. In China small mammals such as large rats, possums, and anything they can trap that is warm blooded is fare game. Pardon the pun. Personally, I don't think I could eat my next door neighbors pet unless I had some A1 to go with it.

Originally posted by mwm1331
Is saying someone is infected with aids an insult as well?
Liberalism is a disease, she seems infected as one of the symptoms is the inability to distiguish between the value of human life and animal life.

I must say your debate about me is becoming more and more offensive. Initially, I stayed away from your little barbs, I must however inform you that I am not a liberal, and even if I were that would have nothing to do with your puerile responses. Secondly , I am quite aware that humans are animals too, and that in some cultures, albeit less frequent in modern times, they eat human flesh. So in conclusion is it my "liberalism" that would want to prevent that from happening in the states should they choose to live here? Secondly man has chosen to place cats and dogs on the level of best friends and as such have the duty to protect them.