do you think it is right to kill animals to save human life .give reason for your answer
Answers
Answered by
126
Thanks for asking the question.
Well in my point of view, I think it is insane to kill animals just for our needs or whatever. They are also living things. They also have the right of living. They maintains the balance of food chain. We kill them without even thinking that this might disturb the food chain. Disturbance in food chain can also be dangerous for our existence. So, we can conclude this conversation by saying that we depend on animals for our needs. Killing them means we are creating a hole for ourselves.
Hope it helps.
Well in my point of view, I think it is insane to kill animals just for our needs or whatever. They are also living things. They also have the right of living. They maintains the balance of food chain. We kill them without even thinking that this might disturb the food chain. Disturbance in food chain can also be dangerous for our existence. So, we can conclude this conversation by saying that we depend on animals for our needs. Killing them means we are creating a hole for ourselves.
Hope it helps.
Answered by
9
Yes, Just as it is right to do the opposite.
If all life is equal, and I believe it is, gratuitous torture or murderous behavior towards any life should not be tolerated.
If I was trying to kill someone's dog, an animal that a family loves as one of their own, a friend they enjoy very much, I would expect they would defend his life, possibly by ending mine. Even if that was by accident. Especially if I was hurting it unprovoked.
Likewise, if a someone's dog is chasing let's say, my daughter and has latched onto her arm and has begun maiming her I have a choice to make, I can allow this, or I can attempt to stop the dog. The likely scenario is I hurt the animal, and it's likely I'll end up killing it by doing so. Likely provoked or not.
There is justification to protect life by ending life on both sides. Is it *right* as in correct? Maybe not, but it seems *just* depending on the situation
If all life is equal, and I believe it is, gratuitous torture or murderous behavior towards any life should not be tolerated.
If I was trying to kill someone's dog, an animal that a family loves as one of their own, a friend they enjoy very much, I would expect they would defend his life, possibly by ending mine. Even if that was by accident. Especially if I was hurting it unprovoked.
Likewise, if a someone's dog is chasing let's say, my daughter and has latched onto her arm and has begun maiming her I have a choice to make, I can allow this, or I can attempt to stop the dog. The likely scenario is I hurt the animal, and it's likely I'll end up killing it by doing so. Likely provoked or not.
There is justification to protect life by ending life on both sides. Is it *right* as in correct? Maybe not, but it seems *just* depending on the situation
Similar questions