Response to Abbey, "Stewardship"

While in theory and perhaps in some applications humans treat other humans well, I think we can do a lot more in ways of fairness, education, opportunity, health, and the fulfillment of basic human needs – but I think the essence of the quote is meaningful; that we aspire to treat other humans with respect and as beings that possess inherent value, and that we might extend this concern to others, e.g., animals, and environment.   

The idea that humans have always done something (hunting in this case) somehow translates to a universal moral code of conduct - that it is always right for humans to hunt - presupposes that we might justify other types of (immoral) behaviour (slavery for instance) on this same premise.   I think we have to constantly re-examine our behaviour; and we might justify our actions based on sound reasoning and principles that reflect thoughtful and rational consideration, and not on claims that simply because we have always acted in a certain manner that somehow makes it right or morally justifiable.  

If humans are at the top of the food chain, as you suggest, does that mean we may exploit other ‘lesser’ animals to satisfy our interests, or might it mean something else?   Do we have duties towards others that might conflict with our appetites?   I think a lot of us want to strike a balance between our intuitions that we have some duties to animals (at the very least not to cause suffering) and the satisfaction of our interests; e.g., designating animals as food.   Yet, it seems a difficult proposition for us to respect animals, accept a position of sameness, and care for the ethical treatment of animals all the while denying them a basic natural life and designating living animals as property.   In this sense we deny animals the very thing that we consider fundamental for us; that we belong to ourselves, as Locke says, we are the property of ourselves. This creates an interesting dilemma; if animals have a right to their being, (life), as property, (unless we deny that animals have a right to live their own lives) how is it that we may override their concerns for our interests?    Dominance is one possible answer; but not a satisfactory one.