4 ms·
> because they are food That’s purely subjective. It’s just how you’re choosing to view animals and thus doesn’t absolve you of moral responsibility for how th
by adriand 4y ago
> because they are food
That’s purely subjective. It’s just how you’re choosing to view animals and thus doesn’t absolve you of moral responsibility for how they are treated or for their killing.
The same species of animal may be viewed as food, companions, workers, pests, etc. Again these designations are entirely subjective. The suffering of a living being is not excused by virtue of the category we choose to place it in.
- b4je7d7wb 4y agoSame can be said for plants
- kcplate 4y agoSure, it’s subjective. However, you realize that I am not an outlier here right? For all of human history, it’s been universally regarded that some animals are food
- adriand 4y agoThat’s not true (e.g Hinduism), but even if it were, the fact your views align with the views of other people alive or dead does not make them correct, nor does it absolve you of the moral and ethical responsibility to consider their consequences. At this stage in human development, eating meat is a choice not a necessity. Many other customs that were once as popular are now seen in a much different light.
- kcplate 4y agoNot sure that calling out a single homogenous religious group as an example (which even within itself is not fully vegan), when literally almost every other culture on earth has and has had meat as a part of their diet is going to do much to convince me that vegan or vegetarianism is the default dietary behavior of the human race. Your morals and ethics are your own, I do not need absolution for nor am bound by your dietary ethical standards.