I agree with you in principle, but until at which point we have the technological and production capabilities in place to fully feed the planet without the need for livestock and other animal sources of nutrients, the distinction has to exist. We may have gotten to the point of being technologically capable but the human population is very much reliant on animal sources to sustain itself. And so the distinction is necessary. I’m not arguing that it’s right or just or morally correct. But it’s where we are and what is required to continue existing as a species.
And by no means am I saying that those animals we see as livestock don’t deserve to be treated with care and respect while they are alive. I just believe the distinctive categories of pets and livestock are an unfortunate requirement of our current situation.
I’ll pass.
You wanna share your opinion as it differs to mine, I’m happy to engage with that. But I am absolutely not interested in whatever tit for tat, nit-picky debate that wants to be.
I’m saying as long as the consumption of animals and animal products is part of the most viable means for satisfying the nutritional debt of the human species, the human psychological need to distinguish between pets and livestock is necessary.
Do we need, or is it right to keep pets? is its own set of moral questions.