Q&A: Absolutely
Absolutely
Question
If I told you that your tefillin were made from an animal that was killed specifically for that purpose, would you stop putting them on? Doesn't it seem immoral to you to kill an animal in order to make tefillin from it?
Answer
Indeed, very problematic. Not the killing itself, but the raising of the animal.
Discussion on Answer
Because it involves no suffering, and killing animals for human use is legitimate.
Why is killing animals for human use legitimate, while killing a person for human use is not legitimate?
And why is uprooting a stone from the ground, or a tree, for human use legitimate? Or is that not legitimate either?
Because an animal is a creature just like you, even if it communicates differently from you.
A stone is inanimate.
You remind me of the well-known Haredi demagoguery: if Darwin had known Rabbi Yisrael Salanter, he would have understood what nonsense it is to claim that man came from the ape.
You're making it sound ridiculous, but that won't help you.
What's the difference between you and an ape when it comes to killing for use? There is no difference; neither of you may be killed, except that you have the *ability* to kill him because you have *power*.
*Both of you may not be killed.
I'm really not making it sound ridiculous. You're assuming an absurd premise, according to which there is no essential difference between animals and human beings. So what exactly do you expect me to do with that?
That's reality, like it or not.
What is the essential difference?
If there is no difference between man and animals, then there really is no reason to forbid killing people either (aside from social order, so that they won't kill me). As far as I know, no other animal has reached a different conclusion.
Why is the killing itself not problematic?