[wcarron]

Your attempt to bend my morality to yours doesn't register with me, bud.

Some things die so others may live. That is the way it always has been, and always will be, regardless if some subset of humans decides that "that's immoral". I will continue to eat meat and hunt animals and feel zero guilt. I do not care that something was killed for food when... I dunno, grass juice and pitaya could theoretically sustain me instead (lol). Animals taste good and are calorically dense. That's 100% convincing enough for me.

[boston_clone]

You stated "[t]here is no moral obligation to abstain from meat, whatsoever." Hand-wavy attempts at dismissing entire bodies of study within philosophy won't work with most intelligent people, either.

Peter Singer is an excellent starting point for exploring the dimensions of morality for eating animal flesh.

I can't argue against your own sense of guilt, since it's possible for some people to feel not at all [0]. Your other comment about willingly and guiltlessly drowning mice [1] in a bucket is not indicative of a healthy mind.

0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy

1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29871272#29877761

[wcarron]

It is exceedingly hilarious that you took:

1. I drowned two rodents that lived, shit, probably bred, and carried diseases through my walls and attic

2. I eat meat and feel no guilt

And then used that to call me a psychopath. Thank you for the amusement. Goodbye.

[boston_clone]

I didn't call you a psychopath, and truly cannot make that call since I'm not a psychologist. It remains fair to say that drowning animals is psychopathic behavior, however.

Please try to research a more philosophical approach to morality and ethics. Shutting down in the face of an alternative viewpoint is hardly a productive approach to conversation. Cheers.