Sometimes, I read opinion pieces that are so heartless and cruel, I hardly want to give the writer any additional play by mentioning him or her here. But what John D. Sutter of CNN Opinion posted online is so vile and disgusting that I have to at least wonder why The Most Trusted Name in News is still employing him.
In the op-ed which you can read here — though I suggest you don’t — Sutter says “It actually could be seen as helpful” if we…eat dogs.
That’s right. As if there isn’t already enough deviance in America, this loser parading as an opinion writer believes we should entertain the notion of treating Man’s Best Friend the same way we do cattle and poultry. Here’s a key passage from the piece:
“[U]nlike all farmed meat, which requires the creation and maintenance of animals, dogs are practically begging to be eaten,” Jonathan Safran Foer, a vegetarian and novelist, writes in the book “Eating Animals.” Euthanizing pets, he says, “amounts to millions of pounds of meat now being thrown away every year. The simple disposal of these euthanized dogs is an enormous ecological and economic problem. It would be demented to yank pets from homes. But eating those strays, those runaways, those not-quite-cute-enough-to-take and not-quite-well-behaved-enough-to-keep dogs would be killing a flock of birds with one stone and eating it, too.”
Now, you might point out that Mr. Sutter was merely quoting another author in his column. But it’s the conclusion of the piece that really informed me that this guy is an A-hole with a capital A. He describes the experience of a photographer who was offered dog meat in Vietnam but decided to turn it down. Sutter then explains, “I likely would have done the same thing. Exactly why? That’s a harder question. And it’s the one all of us should further examine.”
What a contemptible, portentous way to cap off an article which should have spent its time drawing attention to the horrible fates that befall many dogs in Asian countries. Rather than shame the behavior, this guy thinks we should “further examine” embracing it too? Sorry, but as a dog-lover, I’m calling foul on this wannabe, provocative jerk.
Personally, I’d have no problem if a real-life Hannibal Lecter decided to saunter on over to John D. Sutter’s house. Sure, it would be deviant and cruel behavior, but hey…it’s something “all of us should further examine.”
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.
Send this to friend