What animals are morally wrong to eat?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've seen a couple of people claim that's immoral to eat animals because they experience pain. What if the animal could be sedated before being killed, would that be ok?
 
Morally speaking, factory farming seems pretty terrible in my research. I'm reading "Eating Animals" right now and I'm thinking some of my eating habits will change.

I can understand people saying morally there is no issue with eating any animal, but isn't there a huge concern with the journey they take from farm to our plate? According to "Eating Animals," 99% of our meat comes from factory farms.
 
The consumption of meat requires the intention to cause harm, even if you are not causing the harm yourself you are supporting the professions that do. If animals were non-sentient or incapable of suffering then there would be no moral problem, I think some species of mussels might qualify for that criteria? idk. Anyways I think it's essentially always morally wrong, though that said I still eat meat :/
 
Any animal is morally okay for me to eat if I will die from not eating said animal.
With that said, if I have to kill in order to do the above, I'd chose to starve to death over killing the following animals:

Humans
Orangutangs
Chimpanzees
Gorillas
All cetaceans
Some cephalopods (dependent on their size)
Canines
Dogs
...

Actually, it'll be easier for me to say which animals I'd be okay to kill in order to consume in a life-or-death situation:

Smaller mammals, all reptiles, all fish, some birds, crustaceans, molluscs (excluding cephalopods) and of course insects.
And any animal I happen to kill in self-defense.

In a non life-or-death situation, I wouldn't kill any animal in order to consume it.
The only animal I eat for pleasure (though I rarely do it) are the non-cephalopodian molluscs that lack a brain.
Insects are fine too, but I've never had them.
 
As a rule, endangered animals are a no-no.

Also take note of eating toxic animals.

And foremost - energy loss levels. People tend to eat herbivores because there is less energy loss compared to eating a carnivore (which ate a herbivore, thereby reducing energy gained).

Whoops, forgot the term is called energy flow in ecosystems.
 
Covered it:



If I won't die from not eating the animal, I simply wouldn't eat it.

You just said you'd starve to death before killing any of the kinds of animals listed in your last post. The point of my question is what is your thought process if you are not the actual agent of the killing. Would you still choose to starve to death if someone provided you with a freshly grilled whale steak?

whale-steak-by-ChrisGoldNY_3671440407_47c1be38c3-400x350.jpg


http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/food/2010/06/whales-on-the-table/
 
You just said you'd starve to death before killing any of the kinds of animals listed in your last post. The point of my question is what is your thought process if you are not the actual agent of the killing.

Sorry, editing my post a couple of times after posting it makes for a confusing discussion :p
If I'm not the killing agent I'd be fine with eating any animal, including human, if the alternative is starving to death.
If it is dead and in front of me the only thing lost from me not eating it would be another life (me).

Sometimes practicality makes for a good moral tenet.
 
Animals capable of personalities, are reasonably intelligent (obviously this would have to be defined) and/or self awareness shouldn't be killed imo (ideally none should be killed but you feel worse about a dog's death than an ant for example). And no organism should be tortured for food.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom