Reply #32: I see the point, but still disagree [View All]

And possibly didn;t explain very well.

They may very well be horrible and bigoted people.

They may very well have some horrible and bigoted ulterior motives for what they are doing.

But what they are doing is not horrible and bigoted. If they are feeding any number - even just a few - hungry people then they are doing something intrinsically good.

Think of it this way. If I see a person on the street who needs food and I buy them a meal am I horrible and bigoted? Nobody would say so - wouldn't even occur to them. But I have selected, for whatever reason, ONE hungry person to feed and left all bar that one with no food. This group, at least implicit in the article, do far more than that - they hand out food to MANY people who need it. They may be doing it to make a point - they may be pissy little xenophobes while they are doing it, but I am a utilitarian above all else and what they are doing benefits the hungry who CAN eat pork - and they far outnumber the ones who cannot, I suspect. I would rather allow that beneift to exist than ban it because it cannot benefit those who choose not to eat pork.

Remember that to reduce benefit is to cause harm. Ban this and do you want to explain why to the hungry who DID get food before you banned it?