Don’t confuse what I’m saying as condoning killing for fun. That’s repugnant to me. But killing for food is, in my opinion, morally right.
This decision also doesn’t take place in a vacuum, and given how much environmental damage modern farming does I have reduced my meat intake to very little.
Other examples of morally right killing, in my opinion, are culling wild animals where an imbalance of predators exists, and putting people guilty of serious crimes to death (in the case of incontrovertible evidence)
I don’t think it’s never wrong to kill, but I don’t think the state can hold itself or be held to high enough standards to prevent innocents from being killed.
I agree with this. Murdering other people for any reason is dangerous rhetoric. It only sounds okay when people believe they’re capable and in control of that judgement.
Being willing to kill something does not make it morally right either.
Maybe by your moral framework it doesn’t.
Don’t confuse what I’m saying as condoning killing for fun. That’s repugnant to me. But killing for food is, in my opinion, morally right.
This decision also doesn’t take place in a vacuum, and given how much environmental damage modern farming does I have reduced my meat intake to very little.
Other examples of morally right killing, in my opinion, are culling wild animals where an imbalance of predators exists, and putting people guilty of serious crimes to death (in the case of incontrovertible evidence)
I don’t think it’s never wrong to kill, but I don’t think the state can hold itself or be held to high enough standards to prevent innocents from being killed.
Not a single state, no. I agree with the hangings done by the Nuremberg Trials, which was a multi-state effort with good evidencial rigor
Fair. I can agree with that.
I agree with this. Murdering other people for any reason is dangerous rhetoric. It only sounds okay when people believe they’re capable and in control of that judgement.
We should be willing to eat the people we murder.