One might indeed eat horse. Horses, however, are too much for one to eat.
Dogs are carnivores. Raising carnivores just for meat consumption is an unnecessary waste of resources for no additional gain, because you also need to spend resources on raising the prey they eat.
Also I beg you pardon, horses are very cute. :v
I wouldn't have a problem eating either... What makes dogs and horses different from cows or chicken or fish?
For the past four questions or so it’s been going back and forth between “One does not eat horses” and “One does not say no to food,” and I feel like I’ve stumbled into some sort of bizarre etiquette argument.
Yes, the "d" on the end on the end of "mand" applys a "stød" or the glottal stop. So the word ends abruptly instead of being dragged on. Its the same in "hun" and "hund".
To my knowledge we don't have the glottal stop in English, but an example is when spelling "be" its b' e' there's a cut off between the letters.
I'm a native speaker English but this is what I've learned so far, hope it helps!
Because horses used to be used for transportation, and back in the day it was easier to just ban the stuff than to find other ways of ensuring that you weren’t getting meat from an old or sick horse that had just dropped dead in the street.
Don't get confused with the Danish "mand", meaning "man" in English. The Danish "man" translates to English as "one" or "you". For example: "One is surprised" or "You are surprised" = "Man er overrasket".
The English "you" in this case is being used for people generally and not personally.