Horses usually hate chipmunks. They kill them out of spite or meanness. I have never seen a horse eat one, though.
Um. Prey animals in the wild almost certainly lead considerably more stressful lives than farm animals. It isnāt like you are the only one hunting them.
No, you see, there is a difference. A wolf hunting down an animal and killing it. Thatās survival. That wolf, and its pack, has no other means of survival than to go into the forests and hunt down another animal. That is nature. You, on the other hand, are a human. And if you live in an industrialized nation, that means that you have access to a vast array of options to get your daily meat. When you decide to go into the forest to hunt down an animal, kill it, and eat it. Thatās a luxury. Thatās the difference. That is the reason I am of the opinion that it is morally wrong to hunt animals.
Care to elaborate on what you mean by that?
I think it depends on the animal. And the farm. Right now, I have cows in the same valley as a large herd of elk. The cows are trained to come back to the feed station every day, but otherwise, they just mill around and eat. I am not even sure that the cows know that they are not elk. If anything, the cows are more likely to fall to a predator, because they are slow, very poor at jumping, and not terribly bright. But we have not lost a cow in years.
But I think some degree of stress is the default condition for all creatures. For me, it is a required part of life. Maybe lack of predation leads some animals into ennui.
Also, people react to perceived threats, which is often subjective. One person can work up just as much stress over some sort of paperwork error as another person might experience in an actual risk of life situation. That might apply to animals as well.
Tell that to the legions of poor folk in the Ozarks, Appalachia, and the rest of the nation. Nor is hunting your own meat somehow āevilā, compared to buying it in a supermarket; you obviously have very little comprehension of how our meat industry generally operates.
You have no idea what youāre blithering about, that simple.
5 Likes
Itās a takedown bow, so I think that being able to carry it with you is a consideration. Donāt get me wrong, I think Survival Lilly is pretty silly and annoying most of the time - sheās clearly leaning towards the āsurvivalistā end of the survival spectrum - but sheās at least picked a practical bow if thatās the scenario sheās got in her head.
Meat is a luxury full stop, unless you live in the 70% of global grasslands that cannot support cereal agriculture, and thus you have to rely upon pastoralism.
1 Like
In other words, NOT āfull stopā.
You should probably wait for at least a paragraph before directly contradicting yourself. You also completely ignored the situations of a large part of the 3rd World/the poor ā hence, much of the globe ā not just grasslands. Simply put, a cow, pig, sheep, chicken, or goat can turn many forms of nutrition you cannot process into edible, high-quality protein, and NOT necessarily just meat (although meat is certainly part of it). Milk, cream, cheese, and eggs are perfect examples.
And yes, itās the same in Appalachia as Peru as the African bush, in that regard. Your 1st-World-supplied, fully-opaque lenses are firmly in place, I see. Just because YOU can afford a vegetarian/vegan diet and you have access to the foods necessary to do so, has absolutely no bearing on whether anyone else can or does.
My point was that for most people living in Western societies, meat is a luxury - so any attempt to cast hunting as a luxury in opposition to farmed, shop-bought meat is weak at best. I think that your butt-hurt supplied, fully opaque lenses may have prevented you from seeing my point.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
