View Topic

Praise be unto the mighty Holy Potatoe! I wrote a resolution for once.

Anti-Dog-Eating Act

Title
1. This act shall be cited as the Anti-Dog-Eating Act.

Definitions
2. For the purposes of this act:
(a) Dog shall be defined as anyone belonging to the species Canis familiaris;
(b) Arctic fox shall be defined as anyone belonging to the species Vulpes lagopus.

Resolution
3. Wintreath recognizes that:
(a) Many of her noble Citizens are dogs;
(b) There are a great many similarities in demeanor between dogs and the national animal, the arctic fox; and that
(c) All Citizens have a right to self-preservation both for themselves and for their kind.

4. Wintreath declares the consumption of dogs and arctic foxes to be illegal.

A bit of a joke resolution, but I approve, arf

(a) Many of her noble Citizens are dogs;

I legit checked to see if there was a Furry regional tag after reading this.

But that raises the question, why should only dogs be protected? What if we have Citizens that are other animals or creatures? Nay! Either all forms of meat should be legal, or all forms of meat should be illegal!

Why should only dogs be protected?

Because dogs are useful pets and provide valuable services of aid and companionship
I can add that line in there too, haha.

(c) All Citizens have a right to self-preservation both for themselves and for their kind.

If you want to take this to mean that we should enforce a ban on all animal eating, then that's fine by me. I'm fine with a vegetarian state here

* Barnes is not a vegetarian in real life

Though I don't believe any Citizens are any other animal.

You raise that many citizens of Wintreath are in fact dogs. I propose that Wintreath citizens should not be eating other citizens in general, so the main impact this act would have would be in protecting non-citizen dogs.

Why do certain dogs have citizenship and others do not? What is the difference between these two groups? Should we be reaching out to these dogs and encouraging citizenship?

Finally, what about cats?

It's a matter of residence, mostly. The Citizen dogs have fulfilled the requirements of the Citizenship and Demonym Act and its amendments.

My thoughts on cats are summed up in my previous reply.

Why should only dogs be protected?

Because dogs are useful pets and provide valuable services of aid and companionship
I can add that line in there too, haha.

So are other commonly eaten meats, such as pigs.

Dog eating specifically being repulsive is an arbitrary social construction due to which animals have ended up commonly being seen as pets and which ones have been seen as food in the Western world.

Though I don't believe any Citizens are any other animal.

Is Pengu a penguin?

It's a matter of residence, mostly. The Citizen dogs have fulfilled the requirements of the Citizenship and Demonym Act and its amendments.

So then wouldn't this be worthless since the laws basically already condemn any citizen from killing another citizen and the citizen dogs are already citizens?

I know it's a social construct. I'm just hurt from a specific thread in the Discord today, and I figured this was the best way to do something about it.

Is Pengu a penguin?

Probably, actually.

So then wouldn't this be worthless since the laws basically already condemn any citizen from killing another citizen and the citizen dogs are already citizens?

Actually, the regional laws don't forbid killing another Citizen.

So then wouldn't this be worthless since the laws basically already condemn any citizen from killing another citizen and the citizen dogs are already citizens?

Actually, the regional laws don't forbid killing another Citizen.

I was going to say something about there not being a bill of rights or laws against murder.

wow what an intensely eurocentric bias
east asia, the pacific islands, many pre-columbian native american cultures all consume/d dog
if there is to be any credence to the notion that Wintreath is a region that accepts all cultures, beliefs, and practices equally then we must either allow the slaughter of all animals for meat and/or culturo-religious practices, or none at all
also i believe the underhusen must be destroyed

(I'm mostly busting your balls in the above but I should confess there's a bit of me that is a tad resentful of the privileged space dogs/cats hold as 'solely pet animals' within the Western mindset, concerns which don't extend universally to other things people keep as pet animals e.g. snakes, ferrets, or in my cousin's case, chickens (no, she's not raising them for eggs, they're literally pets, she carries this horrifying modern velociraptor around lovingly and calls it 'Kylo Hen', a pun I appreciate much more when it doesn't involve talons dangerously close to eye level).
And, I mean, I'm not a super huge fan of pet snakes or, evidently, hens, but it just seems callous to me that because Western Society traditionally keeps certain animals as pets and not others that we then place the former on a magical pedestal that is subsequently enshrined into law, rather than accepting that that is merely the practice of a particular sociocultural group and protecting all of them equally.
tl;dr ban all slaughter or none at all
also i do actually believe the underhusen must be destroyed)

Hmm... I would support a law which prohibits the eating of Citizens.

Or at least the eating of a Citizen without their consent.

I'm convinced you guys just hate dogs.

Though I don't believe any Citizens are any other animal.

Is Pengu a penguin?

Last I checked, yes.

Dog eating specifically being repulsive is an arbitrary social construction due to which animals have ended up commonly being seen as pets and which ones have been seen as food in the Western world.

(I'm mostly busting your balls in the above but I should confess there's a bit of me that is a tad resentful of the privileged space dogs/cats hold as 'solely pet animals' within the Western mindset, concerns which don't extend universally to other things people keep as pet animals e.g. snakes, ferrets, or in my cousin's case, chickens (no, she's not raising them for eggs, they're literally pets, she carries this horrifying modern velociraptor around lovingly and calls it 'Kylo Hen', a pun I appreciate much more when it doesn't involve talons dangerously close to eye level).
And, I mean, I'm not a super huge fan of pet snakes or, evidently, hens, but it just seems callous to me that because Western Society traditionally keeps certain animals as pets and not others that we then place the former on a magical pedestal that is subsequently enshrined into law, rather than accepting that that is merely the practice of a particular sociocultural group and protecting all of them equally.
tl;dr ban all slaughter or none at all
also i do actually believe the underhusen must be destroyed)

It probably also has something to do with the traditional Western religious aspect. The eating of dogs, cats, snakes, etc... is forbidden in most Western religions I know because they are seen as unclean to eat. Chickens are fair game however. In most Eastern religions this is not the case.