FF-in-ILL, if you don't rely on some religious basis for your ideas and beliefs, when your questions exceed the bounds of known science or personal philosophy, then it simply means you are a-theist, which is fine, but being a-theist leaves you with less tools to deal with life on Earth.
I am not offended at all. And you are perfectly entitled to your own personal views, as is everyone.
Science however will not tell you what is right or what is wrong. Science is a-moral.
Philosophy deals with morality, but primarily with human-to-human morality. Philosophy cannot cope with issues like the morality of hunting.
So scratch science, and scratch philosophy, in the case of hunting ethics, and that only leaves religion.
Ergo if you are a Christian, and your particular Christianity is based on the Bible, then there is nothing wrong with meat hunting.
If you are Hindu or Buddhist, then there may be religious issues with hunting animals or any other life form.
Whether you think religious principles are reasonable or not compared with your ideas of scientific theory, that is a personal issue of your own. It will never convince anyone else other than perhaps a fellow a-theist, since your a-theism is your own primary foundation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism
A-theism is a very small minority on this planet of ours overall, although interestingly there are some nations where they indeed are a majority. Your audience would therefore depend on where you are located.
For examply, I trust that scientific research has amassed significant evidence that red wine helps prevent prostate cancer and alcohol in general helps keep your arteries clean. But obviously several religious groups who shun alcoholic drinks are not going to be swayed at all.