Rlfi9ZI.jpg (1024×689)

CNN Opinion columnist John D. Sutter may be barking up the wrong tree with his latest op-ed.

CNN Opinion columnist John D. Sutter may be barking up the wrong tree with his latest op-ed. It’s called “The argument for eating dog,” and it has turned Twitter positively rabid.

Sutter’s piece starts by discussing the story of Southeast Asia’s illegal dog meat trade. He concedes that photos of dogs being shipped off for consumption in Vietnam are “difficult to view,” but he quickly segues into his main argument: We shouldn’t treat dogs any differently than we treat cows.

“I fear you’ll see [these] photos and think only one thing: How awful that people in Vietnam would eat these lovable, intelligent animals,” Sutter writes. “You’ll do what I did, which is to imagine your dog, or your childhood dog, in one of these cages.”

Sutter considers this to be a fallacious attitude. “Unless you’re vegetarian or vegan,” he writes, “you don’t have any moral high ground to stand on.”

In Sutter’s view, “eating dog could be seen as a reasonable alternative to pig, which is another highly intelligent animal, capable of being a companion to the likes of George Clooney.”

We wonder what George Clooney would say about eating dog meat. After all, he does think Mr. Fox is fantastic.

Sutter’s op-ed has inspired quite the discussion on Twitter, where people are: 

Investigating CNN’s agenda:

Noting the terrible timing:

Confessing their sins:

Interpreting scientific studies:

And arguing that resistance is futile:

After all, Sutter’s Twitter profile gives away his true passion:

(The underdog is, of course, the most tender part of the dog.)

Photoshop whiz Jason Reed gave Sutter a new profile pic:

Photo by CMichel67/Flickr (CC BY 2.0)

No, the Dutch plane carrying Malaysia Airlines victims didn’t crash
The Associated Press just wrote a confusing tweet.
From Our VICE Partners

Pure, uncut internet. Straight to your inbox.