People often have conflicting opinions on whether it is morally permissible to raise, kill, and eat animals in society when other substitutes are available. Some argue that it is morally permissible, while I am of the conflicting opinion and believe that it is wrong. Killing animals and eating them is a form of discrimination against the animal species. This form of killing other animals and eating them because they are non-human is speciesism and is morally wrong (Kahn, 2020). Eating animals is also wrong because of the health risks compared to the healthier alternatives. Partaking in animals has been associated with increased chances of coronary diseases, stroke, or some forms of cancer (Kahn, 2020). This makes the killing of animals not only morally unethical but also dangerous to people. Rearing animals to kill and eat them violates the animals’ fundamental right to live.
In circumstances where a non-animal food supply is inadequate, the morality aspect would be preceded by the basic instinct of surviving. One should try cultivation or gathering as a means of sustenance, but if it is not a possibility, then the eating of animals would be justified. This would make it appropriate as it would ensure that one keeps on living, and this preservation of life for the greater good would make it justifiable. The utilitarian argument would be most consistent with my outlook as the results of actions would be the most important. One should perform actions that result in the most good, but killing and eating animals reduces the amount of good due to its cruel nature (Pulina, 2020). Being vegetarian would ensure that people do not rear and kill animals for food, contributing to the overall goodness in the world.
References
Kahn, S. (2020). Veganism, animal welfare, and causal impotence. Journal of Animal Ethics, 10(2), 161. Web.
Pulina, G. (2020). Ethical meat: Respect for farm animals. Animal Frontiers, 10(1), 34–38. Web.