Comment on Double standards
Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org 2 weeks agowhy 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.
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? :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
IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
but those are also cultural.
horses? food in France.
humorlessrepost@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
If only different countries had their own laws and courts.
IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
was bringing up how arbitrary those costumes are. eating horse is legal there.