Scott Kamps
Readers of this column likely find the idea of eating dog meat repulsive.
But South Korea legislation recently passed banning the production/sale of dog meat – which is worth considering.
Some wrongly believe you can’t legislate morality; the inescapable truth is every law legislates morality. Laws are based on assessing things as right or wrong.
The Main Street speed limit law by the elementary school is based on valuing children’s lives above freedom to drive as fast as we want. Every law makes these sorts of moral judgments; the issue in evaluating laws is not whether or not they legislate morality, it’s whether they’re based on good morality or bad.
Tyrannical laws are those based merely on opinion, imposing one opinion (or majority opinion) on others. For Americans to arbitrarily impose our ideas of what is/isn’t acceptable on other cultures – based on our tradition alone – is the textbook definition of imperialism.
I’m no fan of multiculturalism. I recognize the reality that American culture valuing human life (at least outside the womb) is superior to Aztec culture practicing human sacrifice. My recognition is based on the superior morality of valuing innocent human life because all human beings are created in the image of God.
But, is it morally superior to eat sea scavengers like crabs/shrimp and be repulsed by eating four-legged scavengers?
In other words, is it wrong to eat a dog?
According to the Wall Street Journal article “South Korea Ban Takes Dog Meat Off the Menu,” the legislation will phase out farming, slaughter and sale of dog meat by 2027. After that, violators could face a three year prison sentence or a fine of about $23,000.
To be clear, the new legislation will not make eating dog illegal; it penalizes slaughterhouses and restaurants (there are
about 1,600 dog-meat restaurants and approximately 520,000 dogs were raised for human consumption in South Korea in 2022).
The dog-meat industry argues the law threatens their economic livelihood and “violates their human rights.”
It’s made for interesting conversation in my household, considering arguments for and against this legislation; while we’re opposed to dog-eating, it’s difficult to argue it’s wrong/immoral.
The irony is in our morally-confused society that doesn’t know right from wrong, most would be dogmatic proponents of this law.
But, is it really moral to ban dog-meat industries – and not porn/gambling industries?
It’s important to recognize cultures where dogs were eaten often did so because there was little protein available and dog meat was more available than other meats. Humans will expand their dietary options when desperate. Thankfully, times are not so desperate in much of the world anymore.
Nations that increase in affluence keep animals for companionship, especially dogs. This emotional attachment to pets makes the idea of eating them become offensive. This is true in America and it’s a growing trend in South Korea.
To be clear – while I find it difficult to justify South Korea’s new law – I am 100 percent against the idea of eating dog meat.
Scott Kamps writes a bi-weekly column for The Graham Star. He can be reached via email, thestableguy@frontier.com.