If you're against fox hunting but not a vegetarian you are a hypocrite

When you eat vegetables, do you not know that thousands of animals are killed in the process of harvesting the crops. Even if pesticides are not used, transporting the crops and washing the crops kills so many animals e.g. insects etc.
We don't ask these animals to be killed do we?

If you were educated on this subject you would know that growing crops take up a lot less water, energy and space than rearing livestock

Rice, beans, fruits and veggies are the cheapest products to produce, meat is considered a luxury that is why people in third world countries have rice and beans as their staples

as for animal agriculture, it accounts for more greenhouse gases than all transport combined

In what way is killing animals better for the economy? Please do not go around mouthing rubbish without the facts

Stop avoiding my question... do you even know the answer? Do you want me to answer it for you?

Stop avoiding my question... do you even know the answer? Do you want me to answer it for you?

Wrong. Fox hunting is wrong because it involves killing for sport and not eating it. Eating meat and hunting for food is not wrong because presumably, you are hungry and do so to survive. Although with humans that idea may see watered down- but it still applies. Ever heard of a tiger killing/ hunting?

Except you need to eat far more of it to maintain a similar quality of diet, counterracts the whole argument of using less resources especially since several livestock can just be fed on grass which isn't exactly used by us. People in 3rd world countries also do not have optimal diets as they cannot afford much outside of those staple foods.

What are you on?

Take a cow, for example.
The slaughter of cows involves the systematic stunning, then cutting of the neck of said cows. They try limit pain for the cows, and this is why they stun them beforehand. It's nothing to do with enjoyment, its just a business for farmers. The farmers want the quickest and most efficient death for the animal, and animal cruelty laws have set standards for how the humane death of an animal can be initiated.

The other involves rich people on horses sending packs of Terriers to rip a fox to shreds, tearing into its limbs, genitals and body, meaning that the fox is in excruciating pain. This is not systematic either, and if you were to kill foxes, there are more humane ways. The foxes involved die horribly slow and savage deaths, and their deaths neither supplement the meat industry or are used for personal consumption.

I'm pretty sure you asked me how animals are killed. They are killed by being stunned and then they are bled. This is completely humane, since the stunning means they feel no pain.

Moronic reasoning. I'm sure the American slave owners back in the day could have made similar arguments for their mistreatment of black people.

Both involve killing animals for pleasure

Discuss

And also answer the question I have posed to you. Are animals killed in the harvesting process asked before they are killed?

Animal welfare groups in Britain will inevitably talk about fox hunting. In fact, this, and the badger cull, is all they will talk about. I’m not angry because I disagree with their campaign. I, for one, inherently oppose to all forms of action that maintain the cruelty factor that is currently sweeping this country. What angers me about these campaigners is that their passion for the issue doesn’t justify the rationale of why they want to ban fox hunting. The whole reason why farmers want these amazing animals killed (they will refer to them as ‘pests’) is because foxes attack livestock; the livestock many of these anti-hunting campaigners will happily sit down at dinner and consume on a day-to-day basis.

And so it comes down to the question… What are these animal welfare groups campaigning for?

If they are indeed campaigning against needless killing, then why is the mass-production of meat and dairy an exception to them? And if they are indeed campaigning to stop fox hunting because foxes are cute and cuddly, then what you have is moral selection.

If we want to stop people going around tearing foxes apart because they enjoy it, or it’s a convenience for them, then we have to hit it at its source. Any industry that commoditizes animals for profit and pleasure is spreading the notion that violence against animals is alright, in assumably any circumstance. It is my belief that we cannot be a civilized society until our barbaric attitudes towards animals is changed.

Nope, but I am limiting the amount of animals I harm (it takes more crops to rear livestock than it does to eat crops directly), wherever we go we harm someone or something, it's all about doing the least amount of harm practical

Would you like to die that way?

You sound like a sensitive btch that has to take vitamin B pills to stay alive.

Exactly this

Posted from TSR Mobile

I'm not a vegetarian

And why do we eat it? For pleasure... whether it's food pleasure or hunting pleasure makes no difference

You still sound like a sensitive btch that has to take vitamin B pills to stay alive.