That is true. (Florida also, btw) I assume we both agree slave labor is a bad thing, so at least we agree on this point.user_id wrote: In fact, you can find cases of slave-labor in fruit picking in the US...in particular in California.
I didn't ask you about someone killing the rodents to eat, I specifically called him "hammer bunny smasher". I kill rabbits on accident, he kills them on purpose, and in this scenario lets assume he only does it for fun, not food. I definitely think my actions are more moral than his actions. Do you disagree?user_id wrote: This is obviously not a serious comparison, are you better than the person that kills 25 rodents over six months to eat?
If you have to kill an animal to eat, kill the animal. To give you a bit of background about me, unlike most people here, (and I'm assuming you as well, but I may be wrong) I have killed a rabbit by hitting with a hammer, removed it's fur, skin, and organs, and cooked the thing to eat. We were hungry, and humans come first. (If my family is starving and there is no food, I suggest you avoid me if seen walking around with a hammer..

The main point I am trying to get across it that killing an animal is worse than killing a plant morally. If you have a choice, and you choose to kill the animal, that is the less moral thing to do. Trying to suggest that it is just as moral to eat an animal as it is to eat a plant because "animals die for crops too!" doesn't make sense to me. Notice my diet is Pescatarian. I eat fish, but I cannot (and will not) try to argue that my diet is more morally correct than eating a Vegan meal. I simply do it anyway, despite agreeing it is less moral. So I'm not up here on some pedestal trying to tell you that you are evil, but I think you are trying really hard to "prove" that you are just as moral by killing animals to eat as people who choose not to.
So you're saying choice plays into morality?........user_id wrote: I don't think so, in both cases you've decided on a lifestyle that kills 25 rodents every 6 months and you could do otherwise.

Killing animals for food is a normal thing. I'm not trying to suggest that people who still do it are bad people. But when you have a choice in the matter, how do you justify saying killing an animal is just as bad as killing a plant? If you believe that animals can feel pain, and some even have the capacity for simple emotions, does it make even just a little bit of sense that maybe killing them is a least a little bit wrong? The rodents I kill are not on purpose, and if I had a choice in the matter I wouldn't kill them. If the man who killed the cow had a different choice to feed his family, he is morally worse.user_id wrote: So are you morally worse than the guy that just kills one animal (a cow) over 16 years for food? I'm not sure how you'd argue otherwise, do you have an argument?
There is some differing opinions on what caused the Hindenburg blimp to catch fire, but for this exercise lets assume it was caused by a man lighting a cigarette. His actions caused 35 people to die horrible deaths. He did not intend to kill anyone at all. By your reasoning as I see it, he is morally worse than a murderer who tortured only one person before killing them?