"Ron" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Dutch" >
> wrote:
>
>> "Scented Nectar" > wrote
>>
>> [..]
>>
>> >> If you really thought it was "wrong" you would find a way to do much
>> > more
>> >> than you are doing.
>> >
>> > There's that absolute or nothing demand.
>>
>> If you get to decide what is the right amount of animal killing then so
>> do
>> I. Mine includes killing some livestock.
>
> Why just livestock.

I didn't say *just*, I also eat hunted meat occasionally.

> What "wrong" with a little tiger stew

Endangered species.

>roast dog,

Cultural taboo

> or
> elephant burgers?

Both of above.

> It seems to me that there are religious and cultural
> elements to OUR dietary needs,

Yes, defintely, dietary *rules* actually, not so much needs.

> just as the vegan is accused of following
> some religious ideals.

I agree, but tell a vegan that they follow some "religious ideal" and they
will argue that is nothing of the sort, that is strictly based on compassion
for animals.

> I seem to recall a Christian perspective on what
> animals are acceptable to kill for food and which aren't. Oddly, we do
> seem to follow this as a culture.

Not only Christian, most religions and cultures have such customs. It's a
curious hodge-podge, the human mindset towards animals.

> I wonder the outcome for a person living in largely religious society
> that refuses to comply with those dietary expectations.

Isn't it apparent? If one hears that a particular Asian family in the
neighbourhood is eating dog meat, all hell ensues.