Green - An environmentalist community

5237 readers

1 users here now

This is the place to discuss environmentalism, preservation, direct action and anything related to it!

RULES:

1- Remember the human

2- Link posts should come from a reputable source

3- All opinions are allowed but discussion must be in good faith

Related communities:

Unofficial Chat rooms:

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

141

Zoos aren’t for animals. They’re for us. | Zoos say they’re leaders in protecting wildlife. But is it true? (www.vox.com)

submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

65 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

Because humans are powerful enough that we are a bit like gods, and we have to make these choices between which lives we keep and which lives we kill.

Is it ethical to allow the hunting of African game if that money funds the conservation of many more animals? We have to make that trade off. Ethics are subjective, and I'm firmly on the side of allowing hunting as are many other people.

In New Zealand, as with other isolated islands, there's a unique population of indigenous birds that are now being massacred by introduced mammals. Is it ethical to hunt and trap and poison the introduced pests to save the indigenous birds. We have to make that choice.

A runaway trolley is going to kill 5 humans unless you switch it to another track where it will only kill 1 human. Is that ethical?

A politician could choose to lower the speed limit of a road to 10 km/h, saving lives but costing the economy, quality of life, and future election wins. Is that ethical?

Ethics are subjective, but we have to choose.