JUST PHILOSOPHISING ON - 'THE THING ABOUT MEAT EATERS IS THAT...' PART 2.

 

The deliberate taking of life, or, more graphically stated, the killing of a person or other primate, by an apparently sane person, requires a potent, even if not necessarily logical justification. 

Normally it is one based on the premis of 'them not being like us', where 'them' can be perceived as 'the enemy', 'the bad guys' 'those of the wrong religion or ethnic group or nationality.'  

Or, where it pertains to animals produced for human consumption, 'not capable of feeling pain and perceiving death like humans do.'

In that, if, as is clearly the case, we are counted on the 'demand' side of the meat-eating equation, then, we do have some responsibility for the existence, the health and the morbidity of the meat producing, supplying and selling industry. 

No demand should, with all or most things being equal, choke of production and supply of meat. 

The thing is that, with the growth of the meat industry, what might have been in the past been a reluctant and more poignant industry, has now become a vast and more commoditised industry. 

With the animals being more often seen and treated as if, in the scale of meat versus life, their lives have little or no value, compared to that of us humans.

And herein lies this morality 'thing about meat-eaters', regarding whether they really do not value or care about the lives of the animals which have been slaughtered to 'supply their demand for meat'. 

Or whether they do care, but not enough to cease their consumption of meat and lessen the demand, which, in turn, would reduce the production and supply. 

Is it a case of the 'drug-addict' resenting the producer and pusher, but not actively doing anything which could affect then, and preventing him/her, the addict, from getting their fix?

It is, of course, not enough for us meat-eaters to site the case of the animal being 'stunned' before its throat is cut. 

To be continued!