Is it Morally OK to Wear Fur?

A resounding YES! Anything and everything that can be used as a natural, renewable, sustainable resource should be used including fur. Whether or not the skin originated as a wild or domestic animal makes no difference! Using animal skins/furs for clothing/protection from the elements is as natural as breathing to a human being.

When a person compares wearing a fur coat to "wearing skin", they're missing a very valid point: It's not an animal anymore. One doesn't call their underwear," Dead cotton plant fibers," or their orange juice, "Blood of a squished orange." People refer to the consumable product they are using by the term that designates its current state of use/being: whitey tightens (cotton briefs), orange juice, leather, fur. We just don't have an alternate consumer's term for "fur", but the name says it all: warm, soft, cuddly.

Natural skins and fibers do not drain on the limited supply of fossil fuels which are the primary building blocks for most things synthetic thus reducing the strain on an nonrenewable resource. Skins and furs are biodegradable. Farming, hunting, trapping, and processing are all industries that provide jobs and economic viability that would have to be replaced by something else. Like what?

What would we do with all of the fur-bearing/leather- providing critters that are currently being used or managed for the production of clothing articles? Wild animals that are properly managed and harvested for these purposes would experience an enormous impact in their health and unchecked populations if we were to remove the variable of managed harvesting. The immediate result would clearly be catastrophic with long term ramifications. What about livestock? We obviously can't just release them all into the wild. The ecological and environmental fallout would be devastating. So, do you suggest we kill them all to keep from having to kill them in the future? Get real! The use and harvest of animals by human beings is an ingrained biological necessity in the circle of life to which we're irrevocably bound. Attitudes can be primitive or sophisticated, but biological processes are just biological processes.

It's pretty arrogant to compare the depth of consciousness of one biological entity to another in the sense that you use your conclusion to decide which one deserves more deference or respect. Who are you to decide that your tomato has fewer rights in the face of a vegetable-bloodthirsty try vegan than a cow whose skin I want to hold my pants up with? Perhaps some people think that having fewer or more primitive biological processes is a FAIR benchmark for determining their prejudices. I have seen research that proves even plants have a degree of consciousness, thus the reason they go into shock when stressed. If lack of self-awareness is the standard of judging, then I know a few people who could be "on the menu".

Let me stir the pot a little with a few examples of so called," Higher organisms," that might have you reconsider human embarrassment over alleged human barbarianism:

1 Bottle nosed Dolphins (you know... the "Flipper" variety)have been observed playing "Football" with smaller Porpoises, mangling and killing them for no other explicable reason except... their own amusement!

2 When a troop of Chimpanzees encounters a rival troop, a vicious deadly battle ensues where the victors rip apart and cannibalize the defeated... Just for trespassing!

3 If you have a house cat and you die in your home, your cat WILL EAT YOU if enough time passes. Either from your smell which he thinks is delicious, or because he runs out of food... it's all the same to me... And you wouldn't even think of wearing your cat as a fur coat.

So, honestly, the fact that humans consume animals is not bothering the animals, even if we borrow their fur to keep warm after they're dead; they do worse than that to each other and even to us when given the chance. The mark of humanity is that we have the ability to recognize the value of life and the importance of deference and respect to the world around us. It's absolutely fair to take our place in the animal kingdom (The rest of the animal kingdom doesn't care if we do or not... They're going to do their thing anyway). Our depth of consciousness as indicated by the fact we're having this debate is what helps us remember who we are: Humans!

Killing an animal, consuming its parts, or wearing its fur are natural processes, and not a slight against the animals we consume. What's important (What's human) is how we treat our fellow organisms while they are alive and the efforts we make to preserve their rights during life (It's kind of arrogant to asses rights for an animal that doesn't have a clue what "rights" means... but hey, we know what they are.). Our methods of harvest should never threaten a species' existence and should not cause undue pain or harm to them. Other than that, where's my leather boots? And, let's recognize and respect the value of all life...

Even if it is the life of a harmless defenseless tomato!