1034
Double standards (lemmings.world)
submitted 8 months ago by to c/lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world
109 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 8 months ago (4 children)

why are some animals allowed to have rights, while others allowed to be butchered and eaten?

The line is generally a combination of social, practical, and culinary. That is, if it's not a companion animal, it's not endangered, it is customarily raised as livestock and it is tasty those are all evidence it probably goes in the latter category. So chicken = food, whooping crane = not food because endangered, german shepherd = not food because companion, blue ringed octopus = not food because taste bad.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    but those are also cultural.

    horses? food in France.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago*

    So, who's asked whether it is "tasty" or not?
    What if someone fed a really bad diet to chicken and as a result the produce was not tasty to anyone that bought it? Can the seller now get jailed for selling non-tasty chicken (or for having killed those chicken prior to selling them)? :P

    Also, I never really found chicken tasty, out of the few times I tried. Once, it was, due to the marination, but then it's the marination ingredients that are really tasty. So I guess you are better off not referring to me when deciding what is legal :P

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent