• Skoobie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Personally, I just think the moral middle ground would be to be the person that slaughters and butchers the animals you eat. It would allow the most respect for all parties imo.

    • chetradley@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      The moral middle ground is to not kill animals (or pay someone to) if you don’t need to.

      • Skoobie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t know. That feels a bit off-center to me rather than middle considering one end of the spectrum is “kill nothing ever” and the other end is “How many endangered animals can I make extinct just for funsies.” If everyone killed what they ate themselves, manually, I bet we’d have a bunch more vegetarians hanging around.

        • chetradley@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think it’s morally neutral to ask why we kill animals. Do you kill the animals you eat?

          • Skoobie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I agree that question is morally neutral. And not yet, I don’t, but that is the long term goal. I’ve got the land I would need and am working on fencing. In the interim, I have switched to meat raised and butchered by hand.

              • Skoobie@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Hmmm, I hadn’t considered it in those particular terms, previously. I would definitely say my actions are less moral than they would be if I was doing the raising and butchering myself. Evil feels harsh but if we are using clear cut terms like good, neutral and evil, then I have to put my current actions in the evil column. And since my entire argument is based on a moral middle ground, I would say yes. I am attempting to move into morally neutral territory.

        • jaackf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Surely one side would be “kill nothing” and the other would be “kill animals”?