In general, I agree with you, but there are degrees of morality. I hope most would agree that someone who's tastes include hunting endangered animals should not be accommodated. Likewise, if you were to go fishing in someone's koi pond or go hunting for a buffalo that someone was raising on their land, you'd also be rightfully punished.
So it stands to reason that all of these "tastes" exist on a spectrum from morally repugnant to the Buddhist practice of refusing to kill anything. And while we all draw our own line on that spectrum between what we consider acceptable and unacceptable, society will also draw that line and consider some of those activities to be illegal.
Re:Go Fishing
by RadioactiveMan on Monday July 02, 2018 @08:41PM
(#17446581)
There's room for people whose tastes include hunting endangered species too! https://www-m.cnn.com/2015/05/21/opinions/rhino-hunt-is-cons...
I think the Western myth that Buddhists are somehow all peaceful people who wouldn't hurt anything is debunked by events in Sri Lanka and Myanmar. Yes, you can say "well, the Buddhists who attack minorities aren't True Buddhists", but that's the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.
Just because not all Buddhists live up to it doesn't make it not a Buddhist practice nor a "no true scotsman" fallacy. The fact that it's part of Buddhist teachings and many Buddhists do live it does make what I said correct.
If you have a strong opinion about eating or not eating fish or meat harvested in one fashion or another, that also is a matter of taste. You and everyone around you will be happier from the moment you accept that.