Eating them allows us to survive, for fun is literally torturing them.

by Anonymous 4 years ago

No people are eating them for taste, they can survive by eating plant products. And instantly killing them is not torturing compared to how they are raised in factories.

by Anonymous 4 years ago

Yes but eating animals provide us with nutrients that vegetables just don't provide, that's why vegans/vegetarians need to take vitamin pills to survive, i do agree with the factories thing though.

by Anonymous 4 years ago

No that's not entirely true, plants lack protein, something that a lot of people need to survive with, meat is part of most people's diets. Anyways, if I'm wrong please correct me

by Anonymous 4 years ago

Actually there are literally millions of people who eat vegetarian food without taking vitamins. Yes, you have to be careful with your diet, you have to include multiple variety on your food. A healthy vegetarian diet is still cheaper and healthier than a non vegetarian diet.

by Anonymous 4 years ago

If you dont understand the difference then something is seriously wrong with you. There is a difference between killing animals for food and taking pleasure in their deaths.

by Anonymous 4 years ago

Weirdo

by Anonymous 4 years ago

Hypocrite

by Anonymous 4 years ago

Try better

by Anonymous 4 years ago

Meat eating, fighting for animal's right Hypocrite?

by Anonymous 4 years ago

Try harder

by Anonymous 4 years ago

Honkus ponkus, you meat eating donkus.

by Anonymous 4 years ago

We choose which animals we eat because of how convenient they are to raise in captivity. Even with hunting, usually people have more fun because they know (or just romanticize) that animal had a good life and dies quickly. Trophy hunters are the scum of the Earth and should be sent to Monster Island.

by Anonymous 4 years ago

So if I raise some animal in captivity just to set them free when a grow up, and then hunt them. It is alright, right?

by Anonymous 4 years ago

Well sometimes. For example, feral pigs. Sometimes it's more right to hunt them than to leave them to naturalize and become an invasive species. Also, orphan wildlife is often rescued and rehabilitated and released back into their natural habitat where hunting happens. Hunting is regulated and there are legal limits to how many of which species, where and when you are legaly allowed to hunt on public land. In fact, much of the money raised for wildlife services is through the sale of hunting licenses and ticket lotteries for specific species. So, yeah I guess it is alright.

by Anonymous 4 years ago

We hunt to gain access to meat if you are going to use the body then there is nothing wrong if your just killing just for the sake of killing and leaving corpses to rot then ther is something wrong it's the circle of life and that's why if you whant to kill then don't be surprised if something hunts you and eats you it's no different to if we hunted them

by Anonymous 4 years ago

In my opinion no one has right to take someone's life. Animals don't have a sense of moral and immoral but we humans do have that. Killing them if there is no other way for survival is right but if you do have access to other food source then it is killing for taste. If that is right then it is same as thinking that humans are at apex and can do whatever they want to lower species. So why not kill them for fun and leave the corpse as it is. Other animals will eat it, microorganisms can decompose the remains. Still circle of life.

by Anonymous 4 years ago

Maybe a long life means slow evolution

by Anonymous 4 years ago

First, I don't want to offend someone. If I did, I apologise. But this is a real question not intended to offend someone.

by Anonymous 4 years ago

No comparison between the two. And you even had to phrase the question a certain why to even get the ridiculous point across. People don't kill them for taste, they kill them for survival or because they are hungry.

by Anonymous 4 years ago