It’s actually way worse, because you can have a dog put down that is perfectly healthy, even when other people want to adopt the dog.
If you have a dog you literally own it, and the only regulation that protects the dog are rules against animal cruelty.
You cannot own a human being.
How come if my dog is sick and I take him to get put out of his misery its ok? On a human its not? How come human laws don't apply to animals? I think of our dog as family and he's one of us?
Submitted 6 hours ago by Patnou@lemmy.world to [deleted]
Comments
Buffalox@lemmy.world 6 hours ago
pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 5 hours ago
You cannot own a human being.
Anymore. Humans can be amazing and very cruel.
But yes, ask a veterinarian and they will tell you sadly why.
BurgerBaron@piefed.social 4 hours ago
Slavery still exists, in fact there’s more slaves today than ever before. 50 million slaves last I checked. Mostly because overall human population has obviously increased drastically too but I digress.
Buffalox@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
Anymore
Exactly, and when you could, it was also allowed to beat them to death, as long as they didn’t die immediately, but it took a day or two. Those are the rules of the bible.
RaoulDuke85@piefed.social 4 hours ago
From experience, it was hard to have a healthy dog put down. It was my dad’s dog and he had dementia. It was a very aggressive dog and killed other dogs in the pack. I had to keep convincing the vet it was a danger to have. It wasn’t an easy process.
zxqwas@lemmy.world 4 hours ago
Society does not value animal lives as much as human lives. You’re free to draw your personal line elsewhere.
BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 1 hour ago
Because religion.
Bishma@discuss.tchncs.de 5 hours ago
My stepfather made use of Oregon’s Death With Dignity law. Him scheduling his death a week out was… weird, but I’m always glad it was an option.
Though at one point a doc did legally have to inform him that instead of the painless and easy medical assisted death he could instead choose to stop eating or drinking.
homes@piefed.world 2 hours ago
It depends on the state, actually. Some states allow that.
r0ertel@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
Ibfind it ironic that to put an animal out of it’s misery is called being “humane” though to do it to another person is called “homicide”.
DrSleepless@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
Humans should be allowed to be put out of their misery as well
Whitebrow@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
And shouldn’t need to be terminally ill or old.
If I wanna peace out (humanely) at any age past adulthood, I should be able to.
its_prolly_fine@sh.itjust.works 3 hours ago
I agree in theory, but often the desire to end one’s life is often symptom of a treatable disease, or short term situation. Less than 10 percent of people who survive a suicide attempt, latter try again and succeed. There would need to be a lot of safety net in place, just like there is for the terminal.
Honestly I think it could save people. Knowing there is a way out, so to speak, could prevent people from attempts on their own. Not to mention it would prevent traumatizing whoever finds a successful suicide. Needing proof that other treatments are inactive would get even more the help they need.
IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 5 hours ago
Some countries allow it. The major difference is that other people cannot choose for you. Your family can’t “put you down” but you can choose to have a doctor assist.
TheFrirish@tarte.nuage-libre.fr 2 hours ago
People downvote but don’t read the name of the community the post is coming from.
cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 hours ago
This is a tough question. I’ve had to put down a dog and a cat. They were both basically messed up beyond any kind of reasonable care. Like we could have spent tens of thousands of dollars to keep them alive, but they would have been suffering. I haven’t had a dog since that dog, and was almost brought to tears when I saw a dog like him last weekend, but it was cool because the owner let me pet it and it was super friendly.
Cats I honestly don’t care as much about, I guess because cats don’t really bond with people like dogs do. I see cats as more of a utility. You get a cat and it kills things. They’re also way cooler, IMO. But cats like to get hit by cars, they’re dumb as hell, you get another cat, it’s fine. I guess dogs do too, they chase cars, they don’t know any better. My dog was an inside dog (small breed). You can’t do that with cats (or big dogs).
As for people… there are ways. I mean, once you’re of legal age and if you aren’t impaired, you can get a DNR (do not resuscitate) order. There are bracelets. Some people get it tattooed on them. If you’re DNR and you go to the hospital, they can treat you with your consent, but if you cannot consent, they are not allowed to treat you. If they do, it’s legally considered assault. So they won’t do it. They will make you comfortable, but they will let you die. They won’t do anything to quicken your death, either — except in some places where they will.
I believe anyone should be able to choose to have their life medically terminated, if they are suffering and of sound mind and body. I have no religious opposition to it. If someone I loved made that choice, I would be sad, but I would not tell them they can’t. That’s not for me to say.
theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
I guess because cats don’t really bond with people like dogs do.
I used to believe this, too, until I bonded with a cat. It’s definitely a different relationship than with a dog but just as valid, in my experience. Their personalities are different from dogs and vary much more from cat to cat than dog personalities do.
cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 hours ago
Oh, don’t get me wrong, I absolutely do not think any less of people who bond with their cats (my wife, for instance — she was very upset when our last cat got hit by a car). I just don’t. I like cats, but again, I see of them more… maybe “as a thing” is less humane than I meant to be. Maybe “as a force of nature” would be a better way? But not as a family member or friend. I like cats, but I like more the idea of cats, I guess.
And I consider myself a cat person.
I’m also on the spectrum, so I don’t really bond well with people. It’s easier with kids, who basically have a “if you’re nice to me I will be nice to you” kind of ethos. Or adults who are exceptionally kind. Everyone else is like hard mode. I also realise I’m the weird one. So the experiences I speak from, I do not expect to be a base line for humanity.
unabart@sh.itjust.works 4 hours ago
Dogs don’t pay taxes or create new parishoners.
LastYearsIrritant@sopuli.xyz 5 hours ago
Because legally, pets are chattel.
www.law.cornell.edu/wex/chattelhomesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
Jesus.
Frozengyro@lemmy.world 1 hour ago
Surprised I didn’t see this higher. Mostly it’s due to religion.
Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org 5 hours ago
I think
Democracy is, when the laws are NOT according to what you think.
Ideally the laws are according to what most people think, but this cannot be guaranteed. Therefore democracy is not the best possible form of government, but unfortunately no better one is known.
Proprietary_Blend@lemmy.world 4 hours ago
Like the Hammer Maniacs?
zifk@sh.itjust.works 5 hours ago
One other point that I think no one has mentioned yet is the importance of informed consent when treating people with otherwise fatal conditions. Surgery and other treatments e.g. chemotherapy for cancer incur a lot of pain and suffering in those going through it as well. A person can understand that all that suffering is for the greater good of extending their life, but for a pet that is far from the case, and they may in fact need to suffer more than if they weren’t treated.
I love my dog with my whole heart, but I would never put her through chemo if she had cancer.
sudoMakeUser@sh.itjust.works 5 hours ago
In my country they’ll put people down for free as long as a doctor signs off on it.
Scipitie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 hours ago
As someone else said: helping humans find a dignified death is legal in some countries.
Your second point is more complicated though: I don’t know the laws in a lot of countries but where I’m from animals are strictly treated as property - emotional connection isn’t taken into strong consideration at all when it comes to assessing their value when it comes to legal fights but they are treated like a distinct thing different from both humans and objects in a lot of other cases (e.g. dedicated laws like “unnecessary” animal cruelty is forbidden ).
About the reason you can discuss as much as you want, the two arguments I’ve stumbled across are:
-
there must not be a distinction in terms of value because that value must be purely subjective and cannot be assessed.
-
There is no objective way to classify animals based on emotional connection and therefore the law can’t create categories.
Culturally we treat animals like different to humans all the time - even your dog is not treated “family” to the extreme a child would (think of child protection laws and what that would mean if they’d apply to a dog or a hamster). And now expand this to find a definition which covers both a cow someone has as a beloved pet or a meat animal.
Note that I’m trying to not say wether this is “right” or “wrong”: morale categories and laws have some overlap but they are quite lose as soon as you get specific.
My primary source was an interview with a judge who went into an hour long discussion about how complex the relation between animals and the law is and how “emotional connection” and the need for the law to be objective and repeatable are an inherent contradiction.
In short:
It’s a very tough question because there isn’t the one correct answer. Law, morality and personal subjectivity collide and make a mess out of us.
tyler@programming.dev 4 hours ago
It’s murder if you do this to humans, not euthanasia. The human has to want it.
-
slazer2au@lemmy.world 6 hours ago
In some countries it is.
LodeMike@lemmy.today 6 hours ago
Including the U.S.
The answer OP is looking for is: if you make it easy to kill people in pain you make it easier to kill people who aren’t. This is true for any animal including dogs our law just cares about their lives less.
cattywampas@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
Another answer OP is looking for and probably doesn’t want to hear: most people value human life more than non-human life.
CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
Bad example. In the US it’s super cool to deny care for dollars. Illness and death are built into the system from for profit hospitals to health isurance and pharma pricing.
Buffalox@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
You cannot put a person down for being sick. Even in countries where euthanasia is allowed, the person has to ask for it, under formal circumstances following formal rules.
slazer2au@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
O.o
So it is allowed.