OK, then, given that each person has their own conception of what "moral" is, maybe it's useless to even consider whether it is "moral / immoral"
to kill animals for the sheer fun of it. Basically, you would be taking a poll as to each individual's stance on said "morality". Unless, of course, that was your intent in the first place...
OK... so what do you thank "moral" is.???
Perhaps a consensus of what a given society finds acceptable? Especially if you look to the "ideal" conduct, as opposed to the totally subjective acts or attitudes that many use in definitions of "moral". This "universal" code alludes to what behavior would be preferred over other alternatives,
regardless of circumstances. This is why we can almost universally say "murder" is immoral. (without splitting hairs as to what, precisely, constitutes, murder) Still, we are assuming an "objective" stance, which may or may not exist.
How bout... concerned wit our own plessure wit-out reguard for the feelins of the animal bein killed.!!!
Oh, my, this one is so much easier. Many people, including myself, have killed animals
with regard "for the feelins of the animal bein killed.!!!" I certainly have experienced killing an animal without any pleasure felt by myself. Call me a liar on this, and I will report you up to the highest authority in the land. The reason you may, or may not
(depending upon your sensitivity) be able to relate here, is probably because you have not experienced this event.
You talk a lot about things of which you have no clue (hence "clueluss", I would imagine) and cause confusion and dissension amongst the participants. Exactly what type of person would have
no regard for the feelings of animals? If you've read any of the mythology associated with the American Indians (who had a great respect for wildlife in general), you would see the great respect that they had for the very animals that they slaughtered and ate. They killed and ate these animals basically because they had no alternative, or at the least because their culture survived that way. For real, it is possible to kill animals for food without the "sheer fun" that you allude to...
As to today's diet, do you eat hamburgers? No? Bully for you...
However, those that do, probably pull up to McDonalds and order a Big Mac. Nonetheless, these cows were originally killed by someone who shows up for an 8:00AM - 6:00PM shift to do their job - put a slug in the poor, pitiful cow's skull. Guess what - bet they don't sit around "concerned wit our own plessure". They have a job to do.
Now that you
understand (giving you the benefit of the doubt, which you will surely refute in your next idiotic post) some of the ways in which an animal may be killed "wit-out reguard for the feelins" of the
humans involved, perhaps you can give us a more realistic opinion. Or perhaps, you can continue regurgitating the same BS...
Nobody contends that that i know of.???
No one excepting you, perhaps. Or were these people
inexcusably "concerned wit [their]
our own plessure wit-out reguard for the feelins of the animal bein killed"?
I thank somone whos starvin woud realy enjoy eatin a dead animal... an i dont thank a starvin person woud care if they killed the animal or it got struck by a car... ther fun/enjoyment woud be from how the food itself makes 'em feel as they eat it an ther fun/enjoyment woud have nuthin to do wit whether they took part in the animals death.!!!
Perhaps we could experiment by starving you for a while and then feeding you skunk collected from "road-kill" - let us know whether the majority of your "fun/enjoyment woud be from how the food itself makes 'em feel as they eat it an ther fun/enjoyment woud have nuthin to do wit whether they took part in the animals death.!!!"