VeggieBoards banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
349 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
This is simply out of curiosity, I'm not trying to argue from any standpoint here. How do you feel about a human hunting and eating animals/fish if they should live in the outback? I'm not talking about someone just going out to do a documentary, but if someone actually lives in that environment day to day.

Just curious where people's belief of veg*nism extends to. Do you reckon animals shouldn't be consumed whatever the situation?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
674 Posts
Against in principle, but if I would have no choice, meaning I would die if I didnt eat meat, then I would eat it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
0 Posts
I think there's no compelling reason to need to kill animals for survival.

Granted, I've never been to the outback but I have lived in very remote locations. If someone chooses to live there, it's there choice, but it doesn't make it morally acceptable to kill animals IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,260 Posts
There are some parts of the world that are quite remote and supplies are short, in which case, animal killing may be necessary for survival. That's one of the few reasons I would "agree" with killing an animal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,067 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne_D View Post

pkk & Sevenseas, would you care to elaborate on why you feel that way, please?
If I was starving and there was no other way to survive, I might kill a non-human. But in that situation, I might also kill a human. (And I say 'might' because I have no way of predicting what I would do in such an exceptional situation.) That doesn't mean that I think it's acceptable to kill others simply because of where you live. For me, a real survival situation is such that you have no reasonable control over being in that situation, and you have used all other means of surviving, etc. "Live in the outback" doesn't sound like such a situation to me.

You know, I've been on VB for many years and one of the most ridiculous things I have ever read here was when it was suggested that people killing animals on the show Survivor was okay because they did it for survival. Uh.. They ****ing did not do it for survival -- they were on a show from their own free will and were anyone of them really going to die, the tv crew would have intervened. (I'm not saying that that comment has anything to do with this thread, just clarifying what I understand by 'survival'.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
393 Posts
in theory, survival in a place with limited edible-to-humans plant life does require the consumption of critters who can eat the plants.

Still, I'd rather go for the grubs for grub than take larger life forms, but balance that with taking a roo down would be food for much longer than a small animal such as a rabbit, fish or bird.

I question IF people should be trying to live in great numbers in such environments.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top