4 ms·

I'm the vegan in this house, not the dogs. Just this morning on my daily pre-WFH walk I was reminded that many non-humans eat other animals (crows aren't quick

I'm the vegan in this house, not the dogs. Just this morning on my daily pre-WFH walk I was reminded that many non-humans eat other animals (crows aren't quick about it, either) and that they do not share my ethics, nor should be expected to. Enjoy the canned rabbit, Rover.

happytoexplain 5y ago
I'm not sure your animal's will simply existing is a reasonable argument for allowing their will to be enacted, which sounds like what you're implying. And even if you're implicitly restricting this to food choice, your dog would not put animals in poor farming conditions of his own volition. But this is only a critique of your statement. I feed my animals farmed pet food.
- borski 5y ago
  No, their dog would chase down and kill animals wherever they are, poor farming conditions or not, of their own volition. Animals are interested in eating meat, full stop. How that meat is raised is consequently of no interest to them, though it may be of interest to you. Technically, if we weren't blocking dogs from leaving the house, they would be out there and eating anything they could get their paws on; they would be enacting their will, on other pets, rodents, etc.
moralestapia 5y ago
>and that they do not share my ethics, nor should be expected to What would your reasoning be if your dog decides to bite a neighbor's leg? Edit: No reply, a classic :^)
- borski 5y ago
  That the dog was doing what a dog is instinctually likely to do, depending on their temperament. This would be a failing of human training, because human training is intended to replace some instincts with learned behaviors, since dogs have such a 'people pleasing' mindset when trained with compassion and positive reinforcement. I'm not sure what your point was. Their dog doesn't share their ethics, nor should they be expected to. I would not expect a dog to 'de-escalate' a situation with another very angry dog, despite expecting humans to try and do that when faced with another very angry human.
  - summm 5y ago
    If a dog has a violent temperament, training is nice but eventually irrelevant. It should just never be kept in a neighborhood where humans live, or where it has any chance of coming close to any human. Instead it should be kept in a fenced area. And it should never breed. Or maybe even put down.
    - borski 5y ago
      Dogs with “violent temperaments” often get that way solely from abuse. In such cases, training absolutely helps, as does unconditional love. I have seen it multiple times, anecdotally.
  - moralestapia 5y ago
    >I'm not sure what your point was. My point is that you DO have a part on what your dog is doing, you cannot just let a pet behave like a feral animal. Hence the argument of "this is what the dog feels like doing" is dull.
    - borski 5y ago
      Dogs won’t, by and large, attack your neighbor’s leg by default, unless they are provoked or have previously been abused. Nobody is advocating for letting them act like a feral animal. But just as you teach your kids to have manners, we teach our animals to have them too.
      - moralestapia 5y ago
        >My point is that you DO have a part on what your dog is doing Thanks for supporting my argument
mssundaram 5y ago
From a strict vegan perspective, you're supporting the killing of other animals in support of your pet. Isn't that inconsistent?
- mikestew 5y ago
  Ah, I see the Hypocrisy Police are as responsive as ever. When the shelters are empty of animals, we will no longer have pets. Mull that over and you'll have your answer.
  - mssundaram 5y ago
    If I understand correctly, then I would say it's your choice to perpetuate owning a pet, specifically a dog. And in fact, as pointed out elsewhere in this thread, with careful planning dogs can be plant based, and there are even synthesized amino acids available that normally only come from animals but can be grown from yeasts and mushrooms. So you can have your dog and not need to support killing other animals.
  - summm 5y ago
    There is this popular meme that pet ownership is inherently good and makes owners morally superior. Hint: That is factually wrong. But it leads people to deceive themselves. And as long as this holds, pets will be bred to meet the demand, pet owners will give them to shelters and shelters will never get emptier. Worse: Every pet you take from the shelter will increase market pressure to resupply. The only way to get less pets in shelters is to decrease the supply. That means decreasing pet ownership overall. Make pet ownership frowned upon like smoking. Prohibit breeding altogether.
jjj123 5y ago
You’re getting a lot of comments along the lines of “aren’t you being inconsistent by letting your dog eat meat?” And I just want to add one point (not for you, OP, but for the group of replies). We don’t have to be perfectly consistent beings, and it’s often better that we are not. Being a vegan owner who has a carnivore dog is still better than being a carnivore owner with a carnivore dog. It’s better to be inconsistently ethical than it is to be consistently unethical. I think we can get into logic traps here on HN that ignore the realities (and benefits!) of the messiness of human behavior.
- borski 5y ago
  THANK YOU. Nobody is perfect, and it isn't hypocritical to be imperfect.

happytoexplain 5y ago

I'm not sure your animal's will simply existing is a reasonable argument for allowing their will to be enacted, which sounds like what you're implying. And even if you're implicitly restricting this to food choice, your dog would not put animals in poor farming conditions of his own volition. But this is only a critique of your statement. I feed my animals farmed pet food.

borski 5y ago
No, their dog would chase down and kill animals wherever they are, poor farming conditions or not, of their own volition. Animals are interested in eating meat, full stop. How that meat is raised is consequently of no interest to them, though it may be of interest to you. Technically, if we weren't blocking dogs from leaving the house, they would be out there and eating anything they could get their paws on; they would be enacting their will, on other pets, rodents, etc.

moralestapia 5y ago

>and that they do not share my ethics, nor should be expected to What would your reasoning be if your dog decides to bite a neighbor's leg? Edit: No reply, a classic :^)

borski 5y ago
That the dog was doing what a dog is instinctually likely to do, depending on their temperament. This would be a failing of human training, because human training is intended to replace some instincts with learned behaviors, since dogs have such a 'people pleasing' mindset when trained with compassion and positive reinforcement. I'm not sure what your point was. Their dog doesn't share their ethics, nor should they be expected to. I would not expect a dog to 'de-escalate' a situation with another very angry dog, despite expecting humans to try and do that when faced with another very angry human.
- summm 5y ago
  If a dog has a violent temperament, training is nice but eventually irrelevant. It should just never be kept in a neighborhood where humans live, or where it has any chance of coming close to any human. Instead it should be kept in a fenced area. And it should never breed. Or maybe even put down.
  - borski 5y ago
    Dogs with “violent temperaments” often get that way solely from abuse. In such cases, training absolutely helps, as does unconditional love. I have seen it multiple times, anecdotally.
- moralestapia 5y ago
  >I'm not sure what your point was. My point is that you DO have a part on what your dog is doing, you cannot just let a pet behave like a feral animal. Hence the argument of "this is what the dog feels like doing" is dull.
  - borski 5y ago
    Dogs won’t, by and large, attack your neighbor’s leg by default, unless they are provoked or have previously been abused. Nobody is advocating for letting them act like a feral animal. But just as you teach your kids to have manners, we teach our animals to have them too.
    - moralestapia 5y ago
      >My point is that you DO have a part on what your dog is doing Thanks for supporting my argument

mssundaram 5y ago

From a strict vegan perspective, you're supporting the killing of other animals in support of your pet. Isn't that inconsistent?

mikestew 5y ago
Ah, I see the Hypocrisy Police are as responsive as ever. When the shelters are empty of animals, we will no longer have pets. Mull that over and you'll have your answer.
- mssundaram 5y ago
  If I understand correctly, then I would say it's your choice to perpetuate owning a pet, specifically a dog. And in fact, as pointed out elsewhere in this thread, with careful planning dogs can be plant based, and there are even synthesized amino acids available that normally only come from animals but can be grown from yeasts and mushrooms. So you can have your dog and not need to support killing other animals.
- summm 5y ago
  There is this popular meme that pet ownership is inherently good and makes owners morally superior. Hint: That is factually wrong. But it leads people to deceive themselves. And as long as this holds, pets will be bred to meet the demand, pet owners will give them to shelters and shelters will never get emptier. Worse: Every pet you take from the shelter will increase market pressure to resupply. The only way to get less pets in shelters is to decrease the supply. That means decreasing pet ownership overall. Make pet ownership frowned upon like smoking. Prohibit breeding altogether.

jjj123 5y ago

You’re getting a lot of comments along the lines of “aren’t you being inconsistent by letting your dog eat meat?” And I just want to add one point (not for you, OP, but for the group of replies). We don’t have to be perfectly consistent beings, and it’s often better that we are not. Being a vegan owner who has a carnivore dog is still better than being a carnivore owner with a carnivore dog. It’s better to be inconsistently ethical than it is to be consistently unethical. I think we can get into logic traps here on HN that ignore the realities (and benefits!) of the messiness of human behavior.

borski 5y ago
THANK YOU. Nobody is perfect, and it isn't hypocritical to be imperfect.