Why do some people believe prenatal infanticide — a more precise and easy-to-understand term, I believe, than “abortion” — is acceptable while dog meat consumption isn’t? It doesn’t make sense to me.
For the moment, let’s leave aside humane treatment and assume we’re talking about humanely slaughtered dogs. You cannot then rationally find eating their meat repugnant and want to ban such a thing and still say nobody has any business telling people whom they can and cannot kill.
The reverse is not true. You can consider it perfectly fine to eat human-slaughtered dog meat and a tragedy to kill a human being except to save the life of the mother, where it may very well be two deaths versus one.
Something for Westerners to consider. Perhaps there is nothing wrong with being opposed to eating dogs, but I think something is wrong when we care more about what happens to a dog’s body after he is dead than what happens to a baby while he is alive and made dead.