If a topic keeps coming up no matter how much you try to censor it, consider that it’s not going away. Some changes are long overdue.
If a topic keeps coming up no matter how much you try to censor it, consider that it’s not going away. Some changes are long overdue.
Animals all over there earth eat each other constantly, often while the meal is still alive. Grow up.
I don’t use lions as my moral compass otherwise I would be eating toddlers.
You’ve never tried toddler meat?! You’re missing out there!
I didn’t say that, just that I don’t make a habit out of it
I’ll assume you’re not someone who’s ever said “eat the rich” then
I have to moral issue with eating the rich or feeding them to the lions for that matter.
I don’t think you should be using wild animals as your moral compass? Or do you actually think you’re as incapable of controlling yourself as a wild dog or something?
Have you met any humans lately? 🙄
The fact that you’re making this moral judgement about other people proves that you understand you shouldn’t follow their examples either. Grow up.
Oh no, our treatment of food animals is most definitely well controlled and light years beyond the morality of nature
The foxes are keeping hens immobilized in boxes their entire life and throwing male chicks in a massive grinder because they’re economically useless? Here I thought they were just savagely but quickly tearing individual birds up to eat.
The problem is the scale at which we do it. I don’t have a problem with small and ethical farms killing some animals to sell or use themselves, but I don’t remember lions breeding their prey into slavery, injecting them with chemicals, and turning them into bigmacs millions of times over.
Also corporate industrial waste that throws away hundreds of pounds like it’s nothing. But that’s a different argument from eating meat.
Saying that scale is the problem is the epitome of collectivism. The individualist approach sees the moral landscape as the experience of the individual.
In collectivist terms, which cannot help expressing these things in terms of numbers, the individualist view can be expressed as “one is too many”.
But in individualist terms, it’s not about numbers at all. It’s about pain, pleasure, hope, fear, sadness, anger, etc.
This concept of “well anything over fifteen thousand is too many”, drawing a line between numbers and calling that line the divider between good and bad, is a sure path to evil.
Animals do it for survival. Humans do it for fun. By your logic, should we legalize murder because animals of the same species kill each other without consequences?
This fckn argument shows how brainwashed we as a society are. You didnt even think for 0.01s before posting this, but you did anyway because it is branded into your brain.
I eat to survive. You apparently eat to have something to proselytize about. An omnivorous diet that your distant ancestors had enabled you to have that large brain you aren’t using here. While the last part of the previous sentence is speculation based on evidence you’ve provided freely, the first part is pretty much established fact at this point.
It is true that we evolved because of our omnivorous diet, that has absolutely nothing to do with our current diet though. Vegan proteins were not as common 300,000 years ago as they are now.
This argument has been refuted in dozens of publications. 1 minute of googling could save you from looking like a fool (except to those who believe the same bs, which is unfortunately still the majority).
You eat to survive, you dont eat meat to survive. Please do not pretend you do. You eat meat because it tastes good and because you like it, not because you need it. Im not trying to stop you from eating meat, everyone needs to make their own decisions, but if you start talking bs I will correct you.
This viewpoint is valid as long as you agree you aren’t morally or intellectually superior to a fish.
Well, actually, many fish are obligate carnivores, so they don’t have a choice, so maybe more like a rat or a bear.