|
Strictly speaking, the 'Dog meat
legalization debate' is not right
expression. Because it's already legal to
eat dog meat in Korea according to the
existing law.
In accordance with the current provisions
of Livestock Act Article 2, the dog is
titled to livestock and dog meat is
livestock product. Dog meat has been a
traditional food since the age of the
Three Kingdoms and ranks in five most
consumed meat next to beef, chicken, and
duck meat in the present.
However, the only one that is in the
hygienic blind spot is dog meat. It is
because the dog meat is not under the
influence of Livestock Processing Act.
As a result, on the inspection in
January, E.coli bacteria was detected
4000 times more than that of
International standard. What I was
interested in to do was to include dog
meat in the bill for the public health.
So this is not 'Dog meat legalization
debate' but 'public hygienic debate'.
Every country and people establish their
own culture on the basis of historical
tradition. This could also be applicable
to the food culture. It results from an
ignorance of 'Cultural Relativism' and is
nothing but an arrogance from
'Cultural Egoism to have a say in our
dogmeat eating culture for foreigners.
Also it is another worship of the
powerful and is timeserving attitude in
obedience to the perspective of other
country. I heard that countless dogs were
hungered to death on the street during
their masters' vacation in Europe. So do
they deserve to advise us on Animal
Protection?
It is better to have dog meat under the
Livestock Processing Act in terms of
Animal Protection. The law will make
provisions from the butchery to
distribution hygienically.
The Dogs are beaten to death hung from a
tree or scorched to death without any
prohibition.
But, once it is within the bounds of the
law, it is only legal to butcher the
animal in the registered facilities.
Which is the Animal Protection, letting
behind the dogs to be beaten to death or
slaughtering in the appropriate
facilities?
|
