Wait... why? What's cruel about farming cats and dogs for food?

The traditional belief that cooking the dogs and cats alive will bring good luck and the animal's suffering enhances the flavor may have something to do with it.

Stressed meat is the best.

That was the pornhub tagline i believe during BDSM appreciation week.

But why ban farming when cruelty is the problem? That doesn't make a lot of sense. Unless you think that farming can't be done in a humane way at all, which is fine, but it does beg the question of why dogs and cats get out of jail free when other less-fortunate species are deemed fine to butcher?

It's just Western squeamishness, I think. There's nothing in the farming of dogs and cats that appears any worse than the farming of any other animal for food or fur or whatever. I think maybe some of the people who are signing the petitions need to take a look at what goes on in their own countries with regard to animal cruelty: there's a reason it's illegal to film in American slaughterhouses, and not because cows are shy.

The difference is that we've selected dogs and cats to be able to read and express human body language.

If you're willing to kill and eat one of those, it's a very small line to cross to killing people.

I think that both of those assertions would be rather difficult to back up, particularly the latter.

How dogs read human emotions.
Just one of many studies on canine cognition and human interaction.

I'm not arguing against the emotional awareness of dogs. It's just not something that's particularly unique in the mammalian kingdom. Dolphins interact in equally complex ways with humans and we haven't bred them at all. Surely you could replicate this study with pet pigs also. There really isn't any substantive moral high ground here where dogs are bad to eat but other livestock are OK. I think people really need to pick and camp here - booing and hissing at a dog eater whilst you've got a hamburger on the barbecue is just bullshit.

You're not really paying attention to the argument and the data. It's not the emotional awareness or complexity of dogs that's unique, it's their ability to empathize, communicate with, and live alongside humans. Dolphins are undoubtedly highly intelligent and complex, but they are still wild animals that live in an entirely different environment. But I'd also note that most humans have a disdain for eating them as well. And needless to say, people who might have a pet pig might also have a disdain for eating pork. But pigs are not really common pets or companions, dogs are.
So if you really don't want to believe there are any unique attributes to dogs that would be a barrier to eating them, well bon apetit.

It amuses me when non-scientists make such statements. I'm not paying attention to the data? I think not. The very first highlight in the paper you cited (not the article, mind you, the actual scientific publication) states :

This is the first comparative neuroimaging study of a nonprimate species and humans

So it cannot possibly conclude, nor does it make any presumptions to, that dogs' "...ability to empathize, communicate with, and live alongside humans [is unique]. It shows that dogs do these things. It says absolutely nothing about this being unique. You're inventing this conclusion and then basing an argument around it.

I mean, beyond that, what's your point? That it's OK to eat dolphins because they live in water and we live on earth? That it's OK to eat pigs because mostly people don't have them for pets? I don't really follow your logic. I understand that you wouldn't eat a dog - I probably wouldn't either - but that's hardly a reason to say that, if you would eat a pig, that it's objectively any different. You just feel differently about it for reasons that cannot possibly form any sort of moral justification to tell other people that their meat is bad and your meat is good.

And what about cats? Mine have always treated me like shit - it'll be a cold day in hell when you convince me that cats give a shit about people at all. They're looking out for numero-uno pretty much without exception. At least I've seen dogs be altruistic. Cats... forget about it.

I know more about dogs, so I'll focus my case on them. No doubt there are plenty of cat folks here that can speak on behalf of their feline friends.
But also, even though cats are included in the Taiwan ban, I'm not aware of them being farmed and eaten on the same scale as dogs.

Cats don't have enough meat on them to make it worthwhile.

That would explain why the cannibalism rate in Asia is so high.

Right, first there's the argument that farming any animal for food is cruel, at least in the manners it's typically done.
Regarding the dog meat trade specifically, you have the added issues of keeping the animals in pretty squalid conditions prior to slaughter. Plus the issue that in some places (mostly rural Vietnam and China), unscrupulous dealers are stealing pets to sell as meat.
But yeah, there's the cultural stigma of eating animals that we regard as close companions, even family members. I'll personally reserve judgement on whether we should be imposing our cultural values on others, though ongoing encroachment of western culture and lifestyle seems to be taking care of this, for better or worse.
But I'll confess that as a dog person, I do find the concept and images of caged dogs awaiting slaughter emotionally upsetting.

More so than caged pigs awaiting slaughter? You can get attached to any animal if you try...

I mean, I understand that vegetarians (who are so for animal rights reasons) would call any sort of livestock farming a "cruel and outdated eating habit", and that I'd call fair since, at least, they're being logically self-consistent. It's just the rest of the otherwise happy mammal-eating world that I can't wrap my head around.

Yes, because pigs, cows, and other livestock are bred primarily for food. Dogs are bred as companions and colleagues. As foobar mentioned, they excel at reading human behavior and emotion, more than any other animal. Whether they are more intelligent and socially complex than say, pigs is a matter of debate, but they are uniquely hard-wired to interact and integrate with humans, so yeah, on an emotional level eating them does kind of feel like a type of cannibalism.

That's a pretty fuzzy argument.

That's a very generous assessment. If it's down to how an animal has been bred then why can't these countries breed dogs for food? If an animals worth is down to the abilities humans have bred into them, then surely they can bred those out?

Also, if dogs are a special case, why do puppy farms exist in the West? Surely, if dogs ability to interact with humans makes them special in ways other animals aren't (debatable at best), then why are puppy farms allowed? Why are the penalties for animal abuse so low? Why are so many dogs mistreated? Why is inbreeding to create disabled dogs highly regarded instead of fully condemned?

I can understand that eating an animal you have an emotional bond with is disturbing, but insisting that your bond is universal and should be respected by all people and all cultures (and at the same time that their bonds with other animals are of less importance) is 'fuzzy' at best.

If an animals worth is down to the abilities humans have bred into them, then surely they can bred those out?

Maybe, but they haven't.

13/10 wouldn't nom.

I would definitely eat cat and dogs though I am pretty sure that insects and lab meat are the true food of our/our descendants future

Beans!