Asking for a friend.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] 2 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

I'm not sure I understand. I'm speaking specifically about this particular situation you mentioned : what's the difference in terms of legitimacy between the two kills, if both were made to be sold to feed someone else?

I understand the legal aspect, like endangered species protections, etc, but that's another topic entirely. Or is it actually not and you actually meant "legality"?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [โ€“] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    The point would be it was killed for unrelated reasons, and then is made available post-mortem for consumption somehow. And verifiably so!

    As for the ethics:

    Eating endangered animals is generally agreed to be a dick move.

    I feel like that sums it up pretty well. I don't know OP but I'd bet money that they would agree it's to be avoided, so that's the light I answered the question in.

    If this is a vegetarian thing, I did make a mention of that in my OP. Dispensing a lecture instead of answering the spirit of the question would have been unhelpful.

  • source
  • parent