Is it morally acceptable to euthanize animals?

  • Thread starter Thread starter hmikell7
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

hmikell7

Guest
I know that it’s Church teaching that animals do have souls, albeit of a different nature than that of a human, and that the Catholic Church opposes ‘assisted-suicide’ (i.e. taking active steps to end a person’s life in order to ease suffering in lieu of a prolonged natural death). With this in mind, what would the morality be of having a dog euthanized for the sake of putting it out of its misery (let’s say this dog has terminal cancer that is causing the animal extreme anguish)? Because animals also have souls, and lives, and according to recent scientific studies may even have some degree of sentience, is it really right for us to be putting animals down?

My first instinct is to answer that it is not immoral, but I’m interested to know if the Church has ever touched on this topic (I doubt it, doesn’t really seem like something that necessitates addressing), and what the other members of this forum think

DISCLAIMER: I do have a dog, but he is neither sick nor do I have any indication that he may become so
 
TK421

19m

Yes, it’s morally acceptable.

It’s hard for us to put animals down, especially those pets that we have adopted into the family. But, it is better than to have them suffer needlessly and pointlessly.

Your hidden question is why doesn’t that logic apply to humans? For one thing, it is easier to diagnose and treat humans who can communicate what their ailments are. So, they can be cared for more appropriately. Humans are made in the image and likeness of God and have special dignity. Scripture says the number of days of a person’s life is appointed. We should learn (easy to say) to unite our suffering with that of Christ. People should be cared for until natural death.
 
I think you have to recognize the unique character of a human; that we are made for eternity and not just for this mortal life, and that every moment of our life needs to be used for the greater glory of God in prayer and service. From a materialist/atheistic perspective I’m not sure how you would go about defending the view that euthanasia is inherently wrong.
 
c1949 said:
We should learn (easy to say) to unite our suffering with that of Christ.
Click to expand...
You may implicitly have said this but I’ll make it clear.

Human suffering has value because it can be offered up and united with Christ’s. Animal suffering cannot be and therefore has no value.
 
Last edited:
c1949 said:
Your hidden question is why doesn’t that logic apply to humans?
Click to expand...
Wasn’t really trying to disguise any hidden agenda. I should be clear here that I’m neither in favor of, nor am I advocating for, legalizing assisted-suicide, just in case anything should be misconstrued.
 
If we can kill animals for meat and leather, then surely humane killing to end suffering is allowable.
 
It is acceptable, but it is so very hard to do. My wife and I have had to have several of our dogs euthanized to prevent their suffering a long, painful death. :cry::cry::cry:
 
Animals (dogs) have mortal souls, not immortal. If they are euthanized, they are not robbed of the chance to repent any sins they may have committed, which is in a nutshell the reason why we shouldn’t euthanize people.
 
It is both morally acceptable and sad. But, as much as animals mean to us, especially pets, they unlike rational beings, have no soul.

Pet owners euthanizing animals do so out of charity to God’s creation, to keep them from suffering.

And, how might euthanizing animals be any different from slaughtering them for food…didn’t God, as part of the First Covenant, accept the sacrificial offering of animals?

Disclaimer – I am expressing my opinion and not looking for validaiton or argument, so I limit my (name removed by moderator)ut to a single post per thread. Send me a PM, and I will be happy to continue the discussion without monopolizing this fine venue.
 
Every living thing has a soul. Humans and Angels have immortal ones. Humans have Bodies, and immortal souls angels have no bodies but immortal souls. These are basic Catholic beliefs. Working from that animal suffering has no uniting value with Christ on the Cross. They do not understand Jesus or even choose to unite said suffering. That being said a certain kind of suffering CAN be used here and that is the human suffering of the pain of loss. That can be united with Christ. So, an animal, in suffering can be alleviated by death as an act of mercy. A human cannot.
 
This is a secondary point, which a person might not believe unless being convinced of other points first, but while every animal has a natural tendency to always want to stay alive in the moment, a human has a natural tendency to want to stay alive for always.
 
Yes, I believe it us morally acceptable. We had to make that decision in early January after our older (labrador retriever) dog’s cancer that we had operated on twice finally metastasized and went to her brain, causing frequent major seizures. My wife and I decided it was the humane thing to do after consulting with our veterinarian and praying about it. It still was an emotionally painful decision because she was a loving, protective, and loyal dog to us. When I mowed the backyard she would follow close behind like she was my bodyguard.😀
 
Last edited:
AZ42 said:
40.png
Elf01:
Animal suffering cannot be and therefore has no value.
Click to expand...
Why?
…………
Click to expand...
Humans have immortal souls. Animals don’t.
 
I can offer up my suffering to unite with Christ. This makes it easier (?) to go to a Catholic hospice instead of minimizing my suffering as a terminal patient, which is legal in Oregon. By waiting for God’s time, I die uniting myself with Christ. May all this happen a long while from now. Perfectly healthy (God willing) at this time.
 
We will very likely be putting down our dog. He just bit someone recently, frequently attacks my husband and anyone who tries to come into the house, and the vet just warned us that if he bit a child that we could face a terrible lawsuit.

We have tried correction, crating, all kinds of things, but he is becoming increasingly dangerous and I don’t want to be exposed to the possibility of a huge lawsuit.

I am quite torn up about this. Please, no replies to this post unless they are supportive. I do not need criticism or directions at this point. Thanks for listening.
 
AFAIK, it’s morally neutral (neither intrinsically good nor bad) both to euthanize animals and to have them spayed/neutered because, while we must be good stewards of the world and all its creatures, they still don’t have the same “dignity” as we do.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top