What makes this evil cowboy that is raping the land and murdering cows any different from American Indians and their buffalo. With the exception of the cowboy not literally worshiping the cow, and literally making his house out of its skin, the relationship seems fairly similar, yet one is revered and one is damned.
Is it the theoretical "Indian only taking what it needs" vs. "Cowboy taking what he needs in addition to what he needs to stay alive in this world of taxes, houses, bills, etc"
Is it that the Indians didn't confine the buffalo and raise them to be genetically superior (larger, heavier, more meat per animal thus requiring fewer animals to be slaughtered)?
One can hardly argue that methods of slaughtering today are far superior to those of the Natives, running them off of cliffs or riddling them with arrows is hardly common practice in the cattle industry...
Again though, before you reply, take into consideration what I've said, and that it doesn't include factory farming.