Can leather be ethical? - Page 3

+1

Ya the bulls really need your help. Thank god for 10000 years of breeding docile cattle.

See all the poop on its butt?

And the real question is who is worse off. The bull or the guy wiping the bulls ass?

I have decided to use leather only from animals that die a natural death. 100% ethical and environmental friendly.

All my leather comes from cows that died naturally. Once the head was removed it was natural that the lack of blood resulted in death.

While it is true that most indigenous peoples hunt animals for food/byproducts, an argument can be made that they simply have no choice in the matter. We, on the other hand, are fully capable of using synthetic or plant materials to replace all animal products. If we can build an A320 jet from structural composites, we can make veggie leather.

Furthermore, the point is that indigenous subsistence hunting is in no way comparable to industrial farming. Most red meat consumed in North America comes from cows pumped full of antibiotics, as otherwise they would die due to lack of proper nutrition and exercise.

Saw this nature show a while back.

A seal and her babies were hiding under the snow, trying not to be detected by the polar bear and her babies lurking around above them.

If the seal is discovered, she and her babies will be eaten.

If the seal isn't discovered, the polar bear and her babies will starve.

Life's a bitch that way.

At least we have the decency to kill the animals before we put them in our mouths.

It's a nonsensical question. There's a rational disconnect somewhere there. All animals die. Some die young, some die old. Humans too. To deny the cycle of life or to so disassociate yourself from it...out of delicate sensibilities or an attempt to ascend to a level of self-righteousness that elicits universal admiration (not) and ten compliant virgins (maybe)...is to disdain what little harmony is yet available to modern man. It's a guarantee of alienation...but an alienation that is self-inflicted. And in the end, it only leads to self-delusion--such as convincing yourself that the deleterious effects of producing synthetic substitutes (mostly from petro-chemical precursors) for natural products is somehow less damaging to the environment or more ethical than accepting life as it is. We can use nature; partake of life as it comes to us...as it was meant to be. Or we can so twist reality that nothing we do or use is native or natural to this world...and everything we do is harmful to the environment, ourselves, and those who come after. The endangerment of the native shrimp fisheries in the Louisiana deltas is as much a result of our sanctimonious drive to create "clean," "antiseptic," conscious-soothing, replacements for products that are all around us in nature. A brave new world brought to you by Dow Chemical. Margarine...another example of misguided attempt to supplant nature. The result?--trans fats, saturated fats, and obesity--which we turn a blind eye to or redefine as normal. The credulous assert that modern man doesn't need to eat meat or wear leather...but that brave new world also is brought to you by the Dow Chemical companies of the world...or near-as-nevermind analogues. "Can leather be ethical?" It's pointless navel-gazing, in my opinion. It is, however, highly unethical to either use leather or eat meat if you have never participated in the killing and butchering of an animal. And best on a regular basis.

Damn, son. That's an extremely well-put series of thoughts. If I had a philosophy professor in college that capable and succinct I would have stayed to get my PhD.

Respek.

Leather is an inanimate object that is incapable of either ethical or unethical behaviour. Question is meaningless.

Do paperbags have souls?

Much hipster sleep has been lost pondering this very question. Williamsburg demands answers.