What if you raise a dog, for the intention of having him as a pet, call this situation A. The only difference is that after he dies from old age (humans often euthanize the dog- as it’s less painful than natural wild birth). Is that ethical? Yes? Okay good, now- And then after he dies you harvest him- isnt it now more ethical? Less wasteful? Akin to hospitals and scientists using dead bodies for research. As opposed to laying them down on land to rest (which is btw arguably more wasteful).
So isn’t the consumption of the meat more ethical in this case as it leads to flourishing?
And because this situation B is more ethical than situation A, then how can you argue against a system that was created for the sole purpose of B?
How does the intention of raising them for the harvest nullify the pet thing in situation A?
This is like- after humans die, why not consume them (either for nutrients, or for sciebtific research)- it dies after seem to be completely natural and part of cycle of life (consciousness consuming consciousness).
Is truth itself good? Yes. And truth is an inherent property of being itself. Lying is always bad since it is synonymous with violence. But if the violence of truth usurps the violence of a lie (is Anne frank in your attic) then you should lie, only to avoid violence and the evil of ideology.