cynicallyinsane wrote:Murder is immoral, right? So, is it immoral to eat animals? We don't kill them in defense, it's murder. Right?
I think first, one would have to believe that animal's lives are as important as human lives. Then, one would have to determine that animals have even near the same rights as humans (since they cannot recognize things that are beyond their conscious level.).
In general, we do not eat animals that are in scared supply (except for the extremely rich who pay the rather large sums to go hunting for animals like lions, etc.) We eat animals that we breed, that we bring up to be our food. It is a form of survival in both ways. One way, it gives us food. The second way, it keeps the animals away from endangering human lives.
As for us eating animals as a form of murder, it wouldn't really be a form of murder. Animals are not protected under the constitution and are not defined as creatures who have rights (why should they have rights when they cannot even recognize those rights? That is why murders are executed because they have violated someone else's right to life and have blatantly shown they do not recognize their own.) The only rights animals have is not to be tortured and abused. I don't think slaughtering animals is a form fo abuse (though there are some cases, once in awhile, that they do horrible things...PETA enjoys exploiting this as much as they can...even when it's decades old!)
You cannot apply the same rights that humans have to animals. I know...Animals are important to the ecosystem...Then again, we seem to breed so many...we're not hurting the ecosystem...and at the same time...we get delicious meals of meat
Still...I guess the question should be "Do animals have the same rights as humans? Should they? Why so? How could they?"
When a man declares: "There are no blacks and whites [in morality]" he is making a psychological confession, and what he means is: "I am unwilling to be wholly good—and please don't regard me as wholly evil!" - Ayn Rand