undefined | Better HN

0 pointsaerostable_slug3y ago0 comments

No, they don't. They highlight the issue of killing. The animal is being killed, so it makes moral and practical sense to exploit the carcass as much as possible.

I'm not sure why this is hard to grasp, unless your entire premise is that killing animals for human use is innately immoral and unacceptable. To that, I simply disagree.

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

zasdffaa3y ago· 2 in thread

Using the carcass 100% or 0% after death will not affect by a jot the fact the animal was killed, nor erase in the slightest any suffering it went through. If an animal died in agony then how the carcass was used does not erase any of that suffering. That's my point you seem unable to grasp.

FYI I do not necessarily see killing an animal as wrong, though you want me to as that would fit me into a neat cliche of vegan or hippy or whatever you can file me away under (or so ISTM). People aren't necessarily that simple.

aerostable_slugOP3y ago

Who says there was terrible suffering? Modern slaughterhouses minimize this possibility (Grandin's legacy), and 'bespoke' slaughtering effectively eliminates it in my direct experience. One day it's munching away on some sweet feed and then BANG cow/pig/etc. heaven.

The same is true with ethical hunting — I'd far rather take a well-constructed bullet to the boiler room and quickly fade out than have predators ripping me up while I'm still alive.

The point of fully exploiting the carcass is recognizing that a life was taken, regardless of suffering, and choosing to make as much use of it as possible. Nothing I've written is intended to minimize suffering or other inhumane treatment.

zasdffaa3y ago

> Who says there was terrible suffering?

jesus. Nobody. I said 'if'

> Modern slaughterhouses minimize this possibility (Grandin's legacy),

EXACTLY MY POINT IN THE ORIGINAL POST! https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33657818

> — I'd far rather take a well-constructed bullet to the boiler room and quickly fade out than

I'd want the same.

> The point of fully exploiting the carcass is recognizing that a life was taken, regardless of suffering, and choosing to make as much use of it as possible

While economically that makes sense, that is a money/efficiency issue not an ethical one. So I agree fiscally but say that has no ethical bearing.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse