Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batlord
I agree that in many ways this doesn't make much sense, but your average person is eating a steak because they are hungry. This scum was just practicing sadism. If he had gone as far in trying to cause serious injury to a person, with the same mindset, then **** yes he'd be going to jail, as that would be a serious case of assault. We make distinctions between regular assault and a hate crime, so it's not unreasonable to make distinctions between eating a steak and kicking a cat like you would a football.
|
But then what if we considered a new claas of victims? Would it be ok to eat a human because you were hungry or is it more morally acceptable to kick a human because you're angry? Assuming the human was killed in a sanctioned industrial fashion, of course.
To me, it's more taboo to eat a human, whereas with animals it's more taboo to kick them. We've grown up eating animals so we're comfortable with it... which kind of makes morality more about personal comfort than an intellectual/spiritual journey.
Whereas ethical vegans consider the suffering and death of animals as morally negative regardless of personal comfort. Of course, there are probably hedonist vegans, too, that are grossed out or disgusted or horrified by death and meat and really only avoid it out of personal comfort.