Does it count as killing a pet to death?

Generally speaking, the death of a pet at home has nothing to do with killing, and dogs will also have birth, old age, sickness and death, as long as you don't deliberately hurt it and cause it to die, it's not your fault.

Even if you believe in Buddhism, you should not be too casual in determining whether to kill or not, and if you are not deliberately obsessed with killing, it is not killing.

Calculate. As long as it has the breath of life. Will climb. It can walk, it can move. Will travel. It's all killing. If you can. Choose not to kill as much as possible.

Does it count as killing a pet to death? I don't think it can be considered killing, having a pet must be liked, double the love, I hope it grows well and pleased, but because I don't understand its living habits, or illness and other factors, death should not be considered killing.

Raising a pet to death, of course, is not killing, you raise a pet because you like it, and it is not your intention to raise it to die, you may not understand the breeding of animals, killing refers to deliberately killing the two are completely different.

This is not intentional, it should not be considered killing, but if you have a pet, you must be patient and careful, and if you are sick, you must give ** in time, so that you can keep the pet well, and it will also accompany you to bring you happiness.

It depends on whether you deliberately feed the dead. Killing, first of all, a life, and then you have the idea of killing it, and then you actually kill it. So if you have a pet, but you don't raise it well and cause death, it is not considered killing, and if you don't want to raise it, you deliberately raise it, and you have such thoughts, and there are such behavioral results, it is killing.

Tickling a pet to death is not killing. The killer is you with intentional criminals. Killing is the slaughter of living beings. Keeping a pet and he dies is not considered homicide. He could only be regarded as a natural death.

If you raise your pet to death, it is not considered killing, because it is not caused by you, but the pet will die due to its own reasons, and it has nothing to do with you.

Raising a pet to death is not killing, because you didn't deliberately raise the pet to death, you didn't mean it, it wasn't intentional, and it didn't count as killing.

Killing an animal without subjectivity does not count as killing, so keeping a pet to death cannot count as killing, because you are not subjectively going to kill it.

Keeping a pet to death is, of course, killing. So usually there is not enough time to have a pet, it is not recommended to have a pet.

Killing is a Chinese word that refers to the slaughter of livestock, poultry and other living things. Buddhism refers to the killing of all living beings. Uttering "Guanzi Sea King": "Huan Gong said: 'I want to rely on six animals. The pipe said, 'This is also a killing.' ’”

In this way, if you keep your pet to death, it is considered killing.

If you raise it carefully, but the pet unfortunately dies, it is not killed. If the pet dies due to neglect of care, animal abuse, etc., it is killing.

Pets die of natural causes, of course, it is not considered killing, because he sometimes gets sick and does not ** in time, which is also a normal phenomenon.

This is not killing, after all, you are taking care of it very carefully, but it is true that its life is a bit short, as long as you do your best to raise it.

If your friend killed the pet, if it was intentionally injured and killed, it must be considered killing, and if there is a death caused by improper behavior in the process of adaptation, it should not be killed.

This isn't a killing, after all, you raised him, but he didn't take care of him. Or it is due to animal disease.

If you raise a pet to death, no matter what the situation or what the reason, then as long as it is not intentional, then it is definitely not killing.

It doesn't count, because they are not killed by you, they belong to the birth, old age, sickness and death of all things under normal circumstances.

This is not killing, after all, the original intention of raising a pet is to find a companion for yourself and raise him well, but an accident appears, there is no other way, don't be too sad, it is recommended that you choose a pet again.

Does it count as killing a pet to death? If your pet dies due to illness or various reasons, and it is not your own doing, it is not considered killing.

This is not killing. As long as you don't want to keep your pet to death, and you don't abuse your pet, it's not killing.

No, they weren't killed by you, if someone's parents raised you to old age and you fell ill and died of your own causes, then that person's parents are also called killing?!?

Keeping a pet to death is not killing. The characters are the inevitable law of life and death, sickness and disability, you don't have to be too sad, it's normal.

If it is a normal death due to illness, this is not considered killing, killing is intentional mutilation to death, this is not a concept.

Generally speaking, the death of pets in the family has nothing to do with killing, and dogs can also be born, old, sick and die. As long as it is not intentionally injured and causes death, it is not wrong. Even if you believe in Buddhism, you shouldn't be too casual when deciding whether to kill or not.

Each of us is very fond of our pets, and if we raise our pets to death, it cannot be counted as killing.

When a pet dies, it shouldn't be killed.

As long as you don't kill the pet on purpose, it's normal to get sick and get old, it's not killing.

No, because they are all created creatures.

It is easy to welcome God, but it is difficult to send God. Take care of the aftermath.

Raising a dead critter is a wrong act, as it is equivalent to killing. In Buddhism, killing is an extremely egregious wrongdoing, and many Buddhists should avoid it. Although it is a good behavior to feed small animals, when animals are sick and cannot be properly attacked, we should consider euthanizing them, this behavior is out of pity and sympathy for small animals, rather than simply throwing small animals aside to fend for themselves.

It is common to have dead animals, but this behavior cannot be tolerated because of the cuteness of the pet. The lives of small animals are just as precious, and the grief that comes with the death of a pet is something that can be avoided. We should recognize that such acts are equated with killing.

Just like humans, small animals have the right to be respected and protected by life.

In addition, we should also make it clear that euthanasia has moral legitimacy in some cases. If the pet's condition has reached the point where it is impossible or unbearable, then euthanasia may be a practice that takes animal welfare into account more. However, deciding whether or not to perform euthanasia requires caution, and it is best to consult a professional pet residue pants physician or veterinarian to follow appropriate ethical principles.

In summary, raising and killing small animals is the same as killing, and in any case, we should respect and protect the lives of small animals. If your pet is sick and unable to survive or is not sustainable, euthanasia should be considered, but caution must be exercised in this matter. We should have a deeper understanding of animal life in order to better protect animal welfare.

1. Aquaculture is not killing. Aquaculture is a production sector that uses the physiological functions of animals such as livestock and poultry that have been domesticated by humans, or wild animals such as deer, musk deer, fox, mink, otter, quail, etc., to transform plant energy such as pasture and fodder into animal energy through artificial breeding and breeding, so as to obtain meat, eggs, milk, wool, cashmere, skin, silk and medicinal materials and other animal products.

2. Aquaculture is one of the main components of agriculture, and it is an important part of agriculture to be an important part of human beings and nature, and planting is listed as the two pillars of agricultural production.

If in a sense, everything in the world is alive, not to mention that plants also have life, even the water we usually use, there will be a lot of microorganisms and even aquatic animals in the water body, but before we drink water, they are artificially eliminated.

Fry must be fed meat.

Although there are now a lot of aquarists to some large carnivorous ornamental fish successfully domesticated into artificial feed, but these carnivorous ornamental fish fry must be fed back to the meat, because the training of these carnivorous ornamental fish to receive feed most of them are hungry, adult fish their ability to resist hunger will also be stronger than small fish, if small fish can not get food smoothly, they are easy to starve to death, good fish raise it to death, regret that this is not killing.

Feed the fry of these carnivorous ornamental fish with meat, because these fish are born to eat meat as the main food, and these small fish can better absorb the nutrients in the meat, if they are fed feed, they are difficult to eat, and the feed sold on the market is relatively large.

Even if the size of the feed is larger than the harvest shrimp, the harvest shrimp, bloodworms exist in nature, and they are also the most direct contact food for small fish in the wild environment, and the nutritional value of these foods will be much higher than that of feed chips.

So feeding feed fish or feeding meat is killing is simply nonsense, and you can buy it without feeding live food, and the dead shrimp sold in the market are fed to carnivorous ornamental fish, and these dead shrimp are not killed, but just waste utilization.

If you can't even feed dead shrimp to the fish, then you are really not suitable for raising carnivorous ornamental fish, and you can also buy some fish to feed to raise.