EmpireHonda wrote:
You could also make the argument that farm animals like sheep and cows were specifically bred by humans to be food sources, whereas dogs were specifically bred for helping humans in other ways like hunting, guarding people's homes, being guides for the disabled, etc.
Dogs were also specifically bred for food in many cultures, and wasn't limited to cultures that lacked other livestock; Hawaiian Poi Dogs, Nureongi from Korea and Techichi from Mexico being three examples.
Likewise you could make the case that cows exist to pull plows and provide milk, that sheep exist to provide wool, goats exist to provide milk, etc.
EmpireHonda wrote:
I kinda feel that hunting and eating wild animals (especially intelligent ones like whales and dolphins) is more immoral than slaughtering farm animals for this reason.
I find this to be an interesting perspective given that humans are predatory animals. I struggle to view humans hunting any differently than I view wolves or any other predatory animal engaging in the same behaviour.
Beyond that, hunted animals don't spend their entire lives confined to factory farms, so if your sense of morality is concerned about suffering, it's easy to make the case that the wild animal has far less suffering imposed on it by humans than the farmed one.
EmpireHonda wrote:
...but on the other hand animals like whales and dolphins are God's creatures, not ours.
Appeals to authority only carry weight when everyone involved recognizes that authority as real and legitimate, so this line of reasoning can really only carry weight to people who believe in gods.
I understand all that. But theoretically, I see a huge difference between eating dogs that were specifically bred to be food vs eating a golden retriever.