singularity
Today 12:33 AM
A number of people have written racist comments
about the Chinese. Theseare appalling.
You can oppose eating dog on two
rationales: You are against eatinganimals altogether, or consider dogs to have a
special status. If you areagainst eating all animals, then eating dog is not
more sinister then eatingother types of meat, and there is no reason to single
out the Chinese. If youconsider dogs to have a special status, then the only
rational reason for thiswould be that dogs are intelligent animals; with that
intelligence comessensitivity and awareness.
The problem with the
intelligence argument is that pigs are sensitive creatures,and are believed to
be more intelligent than dogs or cats. The consumption ofdogs is no more cruel
than the consumption of pigs. If you are against eatingdogs, then you should
also be against eating pigs. In that case, there is norationale for singling out
the Chinese, since pigs are eaten throughout theWest and suffer in factory
farms.
Commenters are angry because they consider dogs to be pets. There is
nouniversal standard for designating certain animals as pets and others as
food.Those attacking the Chinese are trying to impose their own cultural
standardson another people, and are using animal rights as a cover for
racism.
One also should note that the article is about Chinese
activistsprotesting the dog meat festival. Even within China, there is not
universalagreement on which animals should be eaten and which should be
pets.Regardless, people are spewing out racist
comments.
一些人写出了对中国人非常歧视的评论。这很令人震惊。
你可以根据两项基本原则反对吃狗：你反对吃任何一种动物，那么吃狗并不比吃任何其他种肉更罪恶，所以也就没有理由单把中国人挑出来。如果你认为狗有一种特殊地位，那么唯一合理的理由就是狗是一种高智商动物，非常敏感并有意识。
智商这个理论的问题是，猪也是非常敏感的生物，并且被认为比猫和狗还聪明。吃狗并不比吃猪更残忍。如果你反对吃狗，那么你应该也反对吃猪。那么，也没有理由单把中国人挑出来，因为猪在西方也被普遍食用，并且在农场里也忍受了痛苦。
评论者如此愤怒是因为他们认为狗是宠物。没有一个世界公认的标准指定某一种动物就是宠物，其他的是食物。那些攻击中国人的人试图把他们自己的文化标准强加给其他人，并且用动物权益来掩盖种族主义。
我们也该注意，这篇文章是关于中国动物保护积极
