yes You are asking for an absolute answer. Absolutes are often wrong, due to interpretation, or are at least incorrect or inaccurate. Because of the spread of "civilization" over this planet, the areas of wildlife have gotten smaller and smaller. Humans have encroached on nearly every natural habitat on Earth. As a result, wild animals are forced to graze, hunt, or scavenge closer and closer to human dwellings and communities or starve. Instinct will not let them starve, so wild animals and humans "bump" up against each other. Often, these meeting are benign; I see a deer, it sees me, it runs away. Sometimes these meeting are not so benign. My child sees a puma, the puma sees my child, my child is dragged off by the puma to be eaten in private. Human sprawl has made benign encroachments a nuisance. Deer will strip a corn field bare, and will destroy fruit orchards in a matter of days. Fences are not effective, either in real world situations or financially. So, the only humane solution is herd control. The only humane form of herd control is a controlled hunting season. A skilled hunter can bring down a deer in a single shot, will require no "clean up," and the animal is dead before it hits the ground--or knows what happened. The twenty or so animals I harvested in 15 years of hunting went like this. The key here is "skilled hunter." Too often, any redneck with a rifle can get a hunting license. I've seen too many kills by others that were neither quick nor clean, leaving me with the desire to strap the hunter over the hood of my truck. Was what I did when I hunted a sport? You betcha! But, I ate what I killed. My family relied on it. To not eat what you kill is reprehensible...unless, what is harvested is given to a needy family instead. There is no question that humans have created the plight of wildlife in the world today. However, to stand by and let an entire herd, pack, pride, or mob suffer at the expense of human sensibilities is just as irresponsible as leaving a kill laying to rot in the field.
killing an animal for sport is wrong at least eat the meat
yes, there is. Some would argue that the taking of life (killing someone) is morally wrong. A counter-argument might be if in self-defence, the taking of a life might be morally right, since it preserves another's life. However, this does not contradict the point that the taking of a life is still morally wrong. Indeed, the taking of a life can be both morally right and morally wrong.
is it morally wrong to do so? I can not kill my morals.
Which do you think is morally wrong between the worms and viruses?
Yes, slavery was morally wrong because it went against human rights.
The term morally wrong refers to an act of human behavior that is not accepted as right by society.
The Abolitionists thought that slavery was morally wrong and should be ended.
YES It is morally wrong to abuse any living thing. Cats, dogs, parents, children, yourself. All abuse is wrong.
It's not morally wrong because you are both adults.
Some people do firmly believe that breeding is a morally wrong thing to do. Others believe that breeding is perfectly moral.
no
obviously
Slavery was and is morally wrong.