Ethics of Fur

  • Thread starter Thread starter Marfran
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
wabrams said:
Have you ever been hunting?
Click to expand...
Have never been inclined to. Have had it described to me in graphic detail with much glee on the details by hunters. This while I was trying to make it clear that I was against it and was not interested. These hunters were rich and not very ethical in other ways. I cannot judge or condemn someone hunting purely for food for his/her family for survival.
 
fultonfish said:
The most rigorous of Catholic abstinence rules say that we abstain from eating meat only on Friday.

So we can eat meat the other six days of the week.

What can be plainer than that.

Not sure if we are COMMANDED to eat meat on Saturday, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday. But we certainly PERMITTED to eat meat.

Gotta do something with the skin of the animal and the furry part attached to the skin.

If we can wear the furry stuff, then why not raise animals just for the fur and feed the meat of the furry animals back to the live animals.

Many of the fur bearing critters are omniverous and will eat most anything anyway.

[So, what is the issue here, anyway?]
Click to expand...
Go to this link please.bringyou.to/apologetics/p80.htm

At the very least you should not cause or allow needless suffering. There is n accoutng to God.
 
Brendan said:
OK, what if the animal doesn’t suffer when it either raised or killed. Say, I go hunting a free range deer, and I kill it with a head shot with a high caliber rifle. From the physics perspective, the round is supersonic, so the deer doesn’t even hear it coming. Biologically, the round destroys the brain faster than the nerve impulses can be processed.

So no suffering involved. What is the issue there?
Click to expand...
I don’t know. I guess if someone forgoes all animal products except for expertly killed game animals every once in a while, that would be pretty good. I don’t know anyone who does that, though. Most hunters I know eat factory farmed meat and dairy for most of their meals, as well as the meat they hunt. If one was a vegan except for a bit of hunting now and again, and was an expert shot, well, that would be an interesting lifestyle.

As for me, I can’t think of any reason why I would want to go hunting, I would get absolutely no enjoyment out of it, and I have no need to eat deer meat or any other game animal, so I’ll pass.
 
Newbie2 said:
You still didn’t ask a question. You gave a statement. I’d be happy to answer any question you’d like. 🙂
Click to expand...
🤷
Third time is the charm!

My question is - given your comment - would you agree then that factory farms should change the way they do business? Be closed? Or…?
 
There are several threads on similar topics that many of us are posting on - I just want to draw attention again to the OP ---- the ethics of fur —

On this topic I think many meat eaters here also see no necessity for fur - but defend it because they may feel acknowledging that it is unnecessary - would lead to some of us saying ‘see you think this is wrong, so then this other practice is wrong’ ---- Isnt’ it possible just to agree here that fur is unnecessary?
 
I think a lot of the debate boils down to the two words needless suffering.

First, we could debate on animal suffering. Does an animal suffer when it is killed to make a fur coat? When it is slaughtered in a slaughterhouse, or when it is shot in a hunt? Is an animal capable of suffering?

Then, there is the question of need. How do you define need? Some people take need in this context to mean, ‘have a use for’. In this view, it’s important to use the animal products. So, fur is OK as one has a use for fur in winter clothing, meat is ok, as meat can be used for food, etc. So a person who has a use for animal products and tries to get them in a way that doesn’t include unnecessary suffering would be ok.

Others take it as “have a need for”. The difference could be seen in lots of areas. For instance, living where I do, I have a big need for warm clothing. I do not have a need for fur, though, as I can meet that need through other options that are available to me. I have a need for reliable transportation, but I don’t have a need for a brand new Porsche. I need computer access at home, but don’t need to update my laptop right now, even though the mouse sticks a bit. Finally, I have a need for nutritious food, but I can meet that need easily where I live without meat or other animal products.

Some might argue that they have an actual physical need to eat meat. I’m not a doctor (well not a medical doctor anyway) so I can’t debate on whether or not some people can’t survive without meat. I know that I can thrive without it. It would be harder to make a case for needing fur and purchasing new fur coats as there are many other options for staying warm.

So, if you take needless to be the opposite of having a use for (e.g. it’s not needless if you eat the meat, or wear the fur), then it’s probably hard to understand where those of us who take needless to be the opposite of having a need for (e.g. it’s not needless only if you have an absolute need for the meat or fur) are coming from.

Until someone can show me that I personally need to eat meat or wear fur, I will believe that it is needless for me to do so. You may well think differently, and I’m sure, as vegan and vegetarians are a minority, that most of you do. That’s your prerogative, of course, and you are not breaking any laws or sinning by doing so. So, I sometimes wonder why threads like this get so heated.
 
pete_29 said:
But, is eating meat or wearing fur necessarily a sin?
Click to expand...
I don’t believe eating meat is a sin (see my post above). Even if I did, well, it’s certainly not up to me to say what is a sin and what isn’t. Wearing fur, well, once again it comes down to need. Is it a sin? Well, if one was the next Cruella de Ville, causing intentional suffering in order to have the latest fashion trend, that might not be so good.
I’ve wondered, though, what would I do if someone gave me an old fur coat that had been in the family for a while. I wouldn’t wear it, as I would not feel comfortable doing so. However, there’s nothing I can do for the animals where it came from, and it would seem wasteful to throw it away, so I would donate it so that it could keep someone warm. If I later saw that person walking down the street wearing it, I wouldn’t think "wow, there goes someone who is sinning’.
 
athansor said:
I don’t believe eating meat is a sin (see my post above). Even if I did, well, it’s certainly not up to me to say what is a sin and what isn’t. Wearing fur, well, once again it comes down to need. Is it a sin? Well, if one was the next Cruella de Ville, causing intentional suffering in order to have the latest fashion trend, that might not be so good.
I’ve wondered, though, what would I do if someone gave me an old fur coat that had been in the family for a while. I wouldn’t wear it, as I would not feel comfortable doing so. However, there’s nothing I can do for the animals where it came from, and it would seem wasteful to throw it away, so I would donate it so that it could keep someone warm. If I later saw that person walking down the street wearing it, I wouldn’t think "wow, there goes someone who is sinning’.
Click to expand...
We are on two pages of the same book. You choose not to use animals, which is not a wrong choice, and I choose to use animals, which also is not a wrong choice.
 
severus68 said:
Please read it again. God directed what animals and Man was to eat, it did not include flesh.
Click to expand...
Hmmmmm…perhaps you missed that part about the passover meal…
4elise said:
🤷
Third time is the charm!

My question is - given your comment - would you agree then that factory farms should change the way they do business? Be closed? Or…?
Click to expand...
I think that there is room for improvement in the way animals are raised in a “factory farm” setting.
 
athansor said:
I think a lot of the debate boils down to the two words needless suffering.

First, we could debate on animal suffering. Does an animal suffer when it is killed to make a fur coat? When it is slaughtered in a slaughterhouse, or when it is shot in a hunt? Is an animal capable of suffering?

Then, there is the question of need. How do you define need? Some people take need in this context to mean, ‘have a use for’. In this view, it’s important to use the animal products. So, fur is OK as one has a use for fur in winter clothing, meat is ok, as meat can be used for food, etc. So a person who has a use for animal products and tries to get them in a way that doesn’t include unnecessary suffering would be ok.

Others take it as “have a need for”. The difference could be seen in lots of areas. For instance, living where I do, I have a big need for warm clothing. I do not have a need for fur, though, as I can meet that need through other options that are available to me. I have a need for reliable transportation, but I don’t have a need for a brand new Porsche. I need computer access at home, but don’t need to update my laptop right now, even though the mouse sticks a bit. Finally, I have a need for nutritious food, but I can meet that need easily where I live without meat or other animal products.

Some might argue that they have an actual physical need to eat meat. I’m not a doctor (well not a medical doctor anyway) so I can’t debate on whether or not some people can’t survive without meat. I know that I can thrive without it. It would be harder to make a case for needing fur and purchasing new fur coats as there are many other options for staying warm.

So, if you take needless to be the opposite of having a use for (e.g. it’s not needless if you eat the meat, or wear the fur), then it’s probably hard to understand where those of us who take needless to be the opposite of having a need for (e.g. it’s not needless only if you have an absolute need for the meat or fur) are coming from.

Until someone can show me that I personally need to eat meat or wear fur, I will believe that it is needless for me to do so. You may well think differently, and I’m sure, as vegan and vegetarians are a minority, that most of you do. That’s your prerogative, of course, and you are not breaking any laws or sinning by doing so. So, I sometimes wonder why threads like this get so heated.
Click to expand...
Very, very well said! ---- and I think you’ve boiled this debate down to the crux of the matter… NEED and how we define this.

From other threads I think the reason it does get heated is that those who chose to eat meat, wear leather or fur, feel judged by those of us who do not.

I am going to admit 😊 that I would love to convince everyone that since we do not NEED meat, dairy, eggs, everyone would stop buying products from factory farms for 1) the animals 2) the environment 3) the resources ---- but I know that many will not make this connection — but I would really hope that we (all Catholics) could all advocate for changes to factory farming - the CAFO (confined animal feeding operations) do not treat animals like part of God’s creation, they create terrible pollution to both land and water, and are terrible for the communities in which they are located… I think we’ve come a long way in this discussion and as we all try to be respectful of each other, i.e.
Newbie2
I think that there is room for improvement in the way animals are raised in a “factory farm” setting.
Click to expand...
 
4elise said:
There are several threads on similar topics that many of us are posting on - I just want to draw attention again to the OP ---- the ethics of fur —

On this topic I think many meat eaters here also see no necessity for fur - but defend it because they may feel acknowledging that it is unnecessary - would lead to some of us saying ‘see you think this is wrong, so then this other practice is wrong’ ---- Isnt’ it possible just to agree here that fur is unnecessary?
Click to expand...
Yes, it’s understandable that discussions wander and include related issues/topics. We do have a thread on hunting for “sport” going at the same time. I will re-post the OP. The intention was to discuss animals raised in captivity for the sole purpose of their fur. I did note what I considered to be an ethically related situation, that of “trophy hunting.”
Marfran said:
Is it ethical for modern, civilized man to raise and kill animals for their fur?

Something like 85% of the fur industry’s skins come from animals living captive in fur factory farms–is this ethical???

Any compelling reasons/moral imperatives to cease procuring animal fur, specifically by these methods?

Any additional thoughts on hunting animals for the sole purpose of trophies, e.g., canned hunts that are designed specifically for the hunter to bring home an exotic trophy skin?? (This may be a related corollary to the fur farming topic–as it is about killing animals for their skins/fur and not for “food.”)
Click to expand...
 
Newbie2 said:
Hmmmmm…perhaps you missed that part about the passover meal…

You need to go back to the post I was responding to, on how God created the world. I am quite aware about what happened after the fall of man.
Click to expand...
 
severus68 said:
You need to go back to the post I was responding to, on how God created the world. I am quite aware about what happened after the fall of man.
Click to expand...
So it is your contention that we must be vegan because that is the way it was in the Garden of Eden?
 
Seems to me the basis of a number of arguments concerning hunting are based on the idea of ‘needless’ killing.

Apparently if there is no absolute need, then the belief is that the hunt and kill is wrong.

However, I just read through Genesis again as it seems to be pertinent here and noticed something I had previously overlooked.

When God sends Adam and Eve out of the garden, he does not send them naked.
He sends them clothed in animal skins.
Now Adam and Eve had already fashioned themselves clothing from leaves and such.

Was there a need to kill off the animals just so God could clothe Adam and Eve?
Seems to me they already had clothes.

So where exactly is the need here?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top