‘Your Love For Animals Has Nothing To Do With Your Food Choices’
Aradhana, a pet parent an animal lover, says it is not the fault of stray animals to be born without a home; they too deserve dignity and safety. Her views:
I had felt deeply disturbed by the August 11 order by the Supreme Court which asked municipal authorities to pick up stray dogs from localities, especially from what they call the “vulnerable” areas of our city, and cramp them into shelters. To me, this order was not only unfair but also inhumane and impractical. Thankfully, that decision has now been altered; the dogs will now be released to their original habitat after sterilisation and immunisation. It comes as a big relief for animal lovers and feeders.
I share my home with a German Shepherd, who is not a rescue but a beloved family member. Having a pet has only strengthened my empathy for the countless strays living outside. When I look into my dog’s eyes, full of trust and security, I can’t help but think of the dogs on the streets who are deprived of the same. No one chooses the streets. It is not their fault that they were born without a home. They, too, deserve dignity and safety.
That is why it pains me to see the authorities treat stray dogs as a “problem” that can be solved by rounding them up. Removing them from neighborhoods where they have found shelter, food, and affection is not the answer. Instead, it only creates more fear and suffering.
The government, in its defence, argues that many so-called animal lovers are meat-eaters, and therefore their love for animals is not genuine but a contradiction. I strongly disagree with this claim. My family happens to be vegetarian, but I firmly believe that being an animal lover has nothing to do with one’s diet. Compassion is not defined by what is on a person’s plate but by how they treat living beings around them.
ALSO READ: ‘Dealing With Strays Needs A Practical And Humane Policy’
I know many friends who eat meat but are still incredibly caring toward animals. They adopt strays, feed them regularly, and take them to the vet when they are sick. Does their dietary choice cancel out their compassion? I don’t think so. The truth is that love for animals is about empathy and action, not labels like “vegetarian” or “meat-eater.”
Yes, there are concerns about dog bites and rabies, but those issues require better management, not cruelty. Sterilization programs, vaccination drives, and awareness campaigns have shown results in the past. Why abandon these humane solutions for a quick fix that only causes suffering?
The Supreme Court’s decision feels particularly harsh on vulnerable localities, where community members often develop close bonds with the strays they feed and protect. For many people in these areas, street dogs are not just “strays” but part of the neighborhood family. Picking them up without considering the emotional ties people have built with them ignores the compassion of ordinary citizens.
As a society, we need to move beyond narrow definitions of who qualifies as an “animal lover.” Whether vegetarian or meat-eater, rich or poor, anyone who extends kindness to animals deserves to be respected. And the animals themselves deserve safety, not removal.
For me, the measure of humanity is how we treat the voiceless. If we want to build a compassionate society, we must protect, not punish, the most vulnerable. Mercifully, the Court withdrew their order and replaced it with solutions rooted in empathy, responsibility, and respect for life.
As told to Deepti Sharma
