Quote:
Originally Posted by kayleigh.
If they're endangered then I find it morally wrong. Wiping a species off the earth forever is selfish. But if they're not endangered then I don't have ny special views because it's a whale. I just wouldn't eat it  |
I agree with your moral stance! I don't have a problem with any kind of hunting per se as long as it's sustainable at the most conservative level. By that I mean you should figure out how much you can take out without seriously harming the population (keeping it sustainable) and then set the quota well below that number so that you have room for errors or other unforeseen events. "Safe it" as they say!
Utilitarianism has been used as an argument earlier. From a utilitaristic point of view, I'd say an animal which is hunted has lived a "happy" natural life and, although a natural life can certainly include a lot of suffering, I would argue that on the whole, it causes less suffering than what you find in the meat industry. Therefore, killing and eating an animal may be preferable to "imprisoning" that animal and slaughter it once it's fat enough.