I’d give up the bacon and the server farms for affordable consumer grade hardware and tobacco.
At least give the animals a nice time until slaughter. Stress fucks up the meat.
Yeah, we shot it from a helicopter…their meat tastes sad. But this one we shot from a helicopter…The last moment they have is running free. And then we kill him from the helicopter
Hot take incoming, I think hunting is largely ethical, and hotter take, pigs are invasive so shooting them from a helicopter isn’t all that terrible. Fawns would actually be grateful considering they are routinely eaten by hogs.
Yeah, I’m sure getting chase by a giant noisy metal bird is not stressful at all …
I doubt it’s more stressful than being shot from a giant noisy metal bird.
Just let the pig live on a nice farm omg.
How come is water bottle and medicine producing evil?
It’s not about the water it’s the enormous load of plastic going into the ocean. Just bring your own bottle. Simple.
Bottle water is in reference to giant corporations like nestle privatizing access to clean water.
These corporations usually end up buying up rights to an entire water source and restricting access from locals, even if locals had used the water for generations
Medicine is more about the markup of life saving drugs (at least how I interpreted it). Insulin costs less than 10 dollars to make, but gets marked up to 300 dollars. Insurance doesn’t cover it all, so you end up paying most of it out of pocket.
Because clean, fresh water should be free and easily available. Not sold by large corporations in throwaway bottles.
I… Want a randomizer for this. Add in like, half a dozen random retail brands, software companies, car makers… Just hit a button and they’re placed in there at random.
One of my ideas for slowing the rate of meat consumption: You may only buy meat if you are under the age of 18, or you have a Meat Medallion.
Medallions are obtained by successfully killing an animal over the size of a rat, on your own, with only close-ranged weaponry.
That put you off? Good! It should! Some people would still stomach it.
Fair enough. I’m on board if we also don’t allow the purchase of any plant based products to anyone who hasn’t put in a season working in the fields. If I can’t exploit Porky for meat without having skin in the game, you can’t exploit Manuel for labor without doing the same.
What’s the meat allotment per Medallion? It sounds like abstracted hunting
Infinite. Whatever you can afford with your wallet.
The point being only people who have one may buy it in restaurants/etc.
Ah, it’s more a “license” than a “token”. Then, it should expire at the end of the year.
Plenty of people will continue to take things for granted, if it’s not reinforced.
Caplyta is an anti-psychotic.
Do you really want to take that from me?!?
https://www.drugs.com/imprints.php?color=19&sort=rel&maxrows=89
A blue and white capsule could be a lot of things, I’m not sure the original image is actually supposed to be any individual drug at all
Lol, no doubt you’re right. It just made me lol when I saw the image and immediately thought, “wtf did caplyta ever do?”
It could be made vegan. As someone who has to take nonvegan medication this and all the animal testing is a real issue.
all the animal testing is a real issue.
Ok, straight to human testing then.
OMG 🤭 I needed your sense of humor so bad this morning. I was in a real pit and your wit has started something positive. I just want you to know how much I appreciated it. 🙏
What the fuck. We can do without factory farming!
Whether you’re for or against factory farms, this is funny. Dark, but funny.
There are people who are really like this, which makes it a lot less funny. Same reason you can’t satirize the American Right anymore.
Like, the whole world is burning, and we really can’t get people to stop even the easiest things. Yeah the solutions should be systemic, but everyone’s against those solutions too.
It’s like a dead baby joke, but way more dead babies and the setup is the punchline.
I hope when I die my corpse is cut up, fried in my own body fat, and fed to pigs.
Fuck factory farms, things dont have to be this way. For this and many other wrongs in our world.
You need at least 16 pigs to do the job. So
be weary offind any man who keeps a pig farm.I hope when I die my corpse is cut up, fried in my own body fat, and fed to pigs.
Wow, this is legitimately fucking metal. Yeah, I do hope that, damn, that’s cool AF
Same, but I wanna be secretly fed to my family like a reverse version of South Park’s Cartman and Scott Tenorman.
Context: My family are cunts.
Pretty much my stance on it. Things don’t have to be this way. They don’t have to stop existing in order to not be this way either. We can eat pork and not be cruel to the pigs we eat.
We don’t really have factory farms in Australia, but holy shit the consistent difference in quality between free range and regular pork MINCE from the same shop is insane
The documentary “Dominion” is literally about factory farms in Australia.
The producers claim the footage is from slaughter houses, which is it?
It’s both.
Here is a map of factory farms in Australia: https://www.farmtransparency.org/map
Take this with a large grain of salt, the criteria of the locations on this map is they are locations know OR SUSPECTED to be engaging in animal cruelty or exploitation. And not all of these locations are in operation currently
But we absolutely have a ton of factory farms unfortunately, this is why it’s important to shop as carefully as you’re able to.
That seems to be a map of all farms? How do you filter to factory farms
Not even just farms, tour companies too?
Heard they serve some fine local delicatessen as part of their tours!
It is already filtered to factory farms. Although as I said, take that website with a huge grain of salt. Their criteria for what they add is pretty loose, as you’ve seen.
My point was just that we definitely have factory farms Inghams for example operates over 300 farms across Australia and New Zealand
Your point is severely diminished when you have to tell someone to take your evidence with a grain of salt.
Ye nah, absolutely fuck the meet industry.
fuck the meet industry
It all started going downhill with Zoom.
It’s amazing how hard Microsoft dropped the ball on that one.
I am still baffled by Microsofts incompetence. Skyping was literally used synonymously for video conferencing in general,
And the absolutely crazy thing is that they already have contracts with just about every university and major company.
All they had to do was read the room and reach out!
But… Mah hahmbergz!
long-time vegan here, this argument is as old as time.
is it ethical to kill? no.
do humans need meat to survive? no.
is animal agriculture equivalent to slavery? yes.
if you eat meat, deep down inside you know you’re supporting: murder, rape, entrapment, torture, and slavery. that includes eggs and milk.
bonus fun fact: pigs are smarter than dogs
The argument is as old as time and yet yorie absolutely wrong about all of it.
is it ethical to kill?
Under many circumstances, yes it is.
do humans need meat to survive
Not all do, but approximately 1/3 humans have any one of half a dozen different conditions that make them unable to thrive on a vegan diet, even with the expensive supplements that price many working people out of veganism.
Is animal agriculture equivalent to slavery?
No, and you saying so is an insult to every enslaved human on Earth.
if you eat meat, deep down inside you know you’re supporting: murder, rape, entrapment, torture, and slavery. that includes eggs and milk.
Works cited: crackPipe.png
And your salad has much more exploited human labor in it than my steak has exploited animal labor. Maybe work on ending the exploitation of your own species before trying to equate your fad diet with ethics?
Why is it inherently unethical to kill and eat animals? Let’s say I raise some free range chickens on my land, consume their eggs and occasionally eat one. Why is this unethical?
I’d argue it’s unethical to kill animals inhumanely or to force them to live so long they suffer like we do with many pets
Good question :)
-
Most people imagine only female chickens which means the male chicks are killed soon after birth which is unethical
-
Chickens eat their non fertilized eggs to recoup the nutrients it takes to lay them so stealing them has negative consequences for their health (eg fragile bones) causing which is unethical
-
The idea itself that you can take something from someone else just because you are stronger or smarter and they can’t stop you is the mindset of an oppressor or a bully and is inherently unethical
- Is easily fixed by just not killing the male chickens
- Is easily fixed by giving your chickens nutritionally balanced food
🏃♂️ 3? 🦢
1 is easily fixed
Then why does everyone I know who keeps chickens in their backyard only have female chickens?
The animals are also guilty of #3 , but two wrongs don’t make a right
Yea, what animals do is not considered ethical in plenty of cases. We wouldn’t kill someone else’s baby because “lions do infanticide too” right :p
- has nothing to do with the ethics of killing
- again, the same (especially if they are kept in good nutrition, shells returned, etc.)
- they aren’t a person, and that would make all of nature existing unethical
they aren’t a person, and that would make all of nature existing unethical
are you a person? ethics and morality are human concepts…
arguing that eating meat isn’t unethical because it happens in “nature” is like arguing you should be allowed to rape people because ducks do it…
-
Exactly, I do just this with my dogs and these fucking militant vegans always be on my case.
Amen 🙏🙏
wrong on every account. (well, maybe not about pigs intelligence)
Very convincing argument from you here
I’ve presented just as much evidence as the user to whom I’m replying.
Even just a general reduction of meat consumption in the populace could eradicate this kind of farming.
“Reduction of slavery could eradicate whippings”
Abolish it
Yeah, good luck with that. I guess you don’t understand how humans and humanity work. Without incentive, you can’t expect humanity to change anything, especially if the consequences don’t affect them directly.
Theres also a difference between having a factory farm and having a normal more traditional farm, ignoring that is just deliberately being obtuse.
“There’s also a difference between having a full plantation and a couple helping hands at home”
Abolish it
Good luck with that. I wish you well with changing the mind of some 6 or 7 billion people, with your and the previous commenters attitudes, I’m sure you’re going to win everyone over.
Reinforcement of the whole “vegans are insufferable” trope I guess.
changing the mind of some 6 or 7 billion people
You think we needed to change everyone’s mind before we abolished human slavery?
🫡
you are stating oppinions as fact
the humans not needing to eat meat one is a fact
you don’t know what anyone else needs
Healthy humans, unfortunately.
//Seems like at least someone reading this, has not experienced trying to digest stuff like legumes, without a large chunk of their intestines.
yeah I guess that specific one maybe, but the rest is still true, he is just stating oppinions as fact and that’s just not a good way to argue about anything.
Hey man if you’re gonna be a debate club stickler the least you could do is be accurate in your critique
deleted by creator
I disagree. They are very likely the worst of the industries in seeing here. Not even in just one way either.
r/woooosh
Not so sure, have you seen these comments?
As much as I find chickens, and all avians in general, cute and I find it sickening the way they are treated… I do love eggs, they’re tasty, versatile, easy to cook, and unbelievably healthy.
I think the differential we have to identify is one thing, and that is scale.
I am not a vegan, I do not believe it is wrong to consume animals or animal-sourced products, however I do support animal welfare and believe that if we are to raise livestock for consumption they should be treated as the sentient, thinking, feeling creatures that they are and cared for accordingly.
Imagine instead of human and animal rights we just had “sentient rights”, for example.
Being able to test for sentience is a topic in and of itself, and out of scope for my argument.
I think there is no harm done in, a hypothetical world where people had the space to do such a thing, raising our own livestock, limited to individual homesteads or the immediate settlement (a local town market, for example).
The line where it becomes unethical is quite obvious really, are the animals treated as living things, or machines to simply fuel and feed to grow them for slaughter and harvest? Yes, in my example of fair treatment the goal may be to raise them for eventual slaughter, but its their lifelong treatment where this applies, not the overall objective.
if we are to raise livestock for consumption they should be treated as the sentient
this is a contradiction in itself.
It is normal and healthy for people to empathize with the animals they eat, to be concerned about whether or not they are living happy lives and to hope they are slaughtered humanely. However, if it is unethical to harm these animals, then it is more unethical to kill them.
Killing animals for food is far worse than making them suffer. Of course, it is admirable that people care so deeply about these animals that they take deliberate steps to reduce their suffering (e.g. by purchasing “free-range” eggs or “suffering free” meat). However, because they choose not to acknowledge the right of those same animals to live out their natural lives, and because slaughtering them is a much greater violation than mistreatment, people who eat ‘humane’ meat are laboring under an irreconcilable contradiction.
I don’t even eat meat and I disagree completely with that lol. There is nothing wrong or unnatural about killing animals for food. There is something wrong and unnatural about abusing the lives of those animals and treating them with no respect.
I don’t even eat meat and I disagree completely with that lol.
care to give a reason why? Why do you think hurting animals is bad?
The better treatment balloons costs by requiring more land and more care, which significantly inflates the cost of the final products. This could be an effective measure for reducing meat consumption by people buying less to save money, many people would be against those increases.
Its just like mass produced clothing. Since they dont see the abuse and destruction, they are satisfied with the lower prices at the store.
Again, scale.
How much of the meat produced is actually eaten? What’s the chance for each garment produced to actually be worn more than once?
The current system can downsize significantly without needing to raise prices, as we’re already in a significant surplus.
The point at which products are no longer guaranteed due to demand is when the prices have to go up.
That surplus is factored in to the companies making money and providing consistant demand. Prices will increase if the treatment gets better because the capitalists and oligarchs will not willingly take a profits cut. The surplus waste in the current system could be utilized better, for example fast freezing and being provided to food banks or soup kitchens.
No matter how you cut it, if labor and land demand increases, the price will increase.
Obviously if treatment got better, the capitalists and oligarchs would no longer be a problem.
Guillotines
I don’t really disagree with you, but land area isn’t actually a significant factor. When you consider how much land is used to produce feed for the pigs, it’s clear that the stables themselves take up very little space.
The land use would be significantly higher if the pigs were pasture fed instead of crop fed.
Sure, but we don’t have to go all pasture fed. Maybe just 10x more space for them in their stables could be a start. Would it be more expensive, absolutely, but either people will have to eat less meat, consumption has almost doubled the past 70-ish years, or they’ll have to pay more for it.
I’m not saying people shouldn’t get to eat meat, I’m just saying it’s rediculously cheap for what it is, and really not needed in the amounts people eat.
Doubling the cost to raise chicken wouldn’t double the shelf price. Most of the cost of food comes from the distribution network. Chicken raised this way costs double because that’s what some consumers will pay over cheaper chicken.
I think there is no harm done in, a hypothetical world where people had the space to do such a thing, raising our own livestock, limited to individual homesteads or the immediate settlement (a local town market, for example).
That’s fundamentally what I’m doing. My girlfriend also loves chickens and ducks so we bought a couple, build a big, nice coop for them (with fucking floor heating because why not lmao), also dug a pond for the ducks and now we have plenty of eggs and my girlfriend can just sit in the chicken enclose when depression kicks and the chickens and ducks take care of that. Best decision we made so far.
100% this, thankfully I’m lucky enough that in the near future I may be living in a quiet cottage. It’s always been a goal of mine to be self-sufficient, and that process will begin there.
Same, I moved to austria for that goal alone. There’s plenty of lone areas around and we’ve been able to find a massive piece of land with an old farmers house which took a lot of work to restore it. We’re not at full self-sufficiency yet, which honestly won’t happen anyways since for some things like internet access, you always need some dependency, but we aim to produce most of the stuff we eat and most of the power we consume ourselves until 2030.
I’m certainly no expert, but a heated floor in a chicken coop seems like a bad idea.
It seems like it would be a fire hazard in a coop and regardless of that, seems like you would have to keep it much cleaner as it’s going to create a breeding ground for germs (and potentially attract critters)
It’s certainly no fire hazard. It’s heated with hot water. If the water gets hot enough to ignite the coop, I might have a completely different problem because that same water is used in my house lmao.
The cleaning part is also not that true since we don’t heat the stable to like 30°C at all times. It’s only for winter when temperatures drop massively where we heat the stable to like 15°C. But we clean the coop every two days anyways, I’ve designed it to be easy to clean. It’s fundamentally just a plywood plate that I can take out. Only takes like 15 minutes - remove the hay, remove the floor, pressure wash it, put it back in, add new hay, done. The pipes are directly below the plate, covered in styrofoam, heating it very reliably in winter without being some kind of danger to the coop.
Not sure why my mind went to electric heated floor lol. Must be too used to Jerry-riggers.
I think if I just thought about installing an electric heated floor in anything on my ground, the austrian construction safety office would raid my house. I highly doubt that is legal here.
Btw, veganism is really about just minimizing the harm you cause to the world. Don’t let any puritans tell you otherwise. What you have described is a form of veganism! Admittedly, it’s a little bit minimalistic, but it’s still something!
“Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals.”
From thevegansociety.com, emphasis mine. I’d argue strongly and vehemently that what is described above is not “as far as is possible and practicable” at all! It’s firmly within “as long as it doesn’t really inconvenience me” territory
I’m not a perfect vegan, I do my best, and I’m getting better. The expectation of perfection is self defeating. Ideally, though, I would have zero captive slaughtered animals in the world.
Right, I’m explicitly talking about “as far as is practicable and possible”. For instance I have to take a certain medication in order to function but there is no vegan derivative, they all contain gelatin. It is impossible for me to “exclude all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals”. But I do it “as far as is possible” which (at least initially) went far beyond what I considered comfortable.
And that’s the distinction I’m trying to make, if you are sure it is impossible, if it is not practicable (as in, not possible to be put into practice no matter how you twist or turn it), then sure it is what it is. what can you do. No ethical consumption under capitalism. But if you still have holdouts because you aren’t “ready” to give up certain treats or comforts then you aren’t (yet?) vegan.
Not being able to reach perfection is no excuse to not get as close as possible to it.
I don’t know that there’s any one thing that veganism is “all about”, per se. There are a ton of good reasons to eat fewer animal products, and everyone can cut out some level of extra saturated fat in their diets. The ability to cull and harvest a disgusting level of animal meat is the reason heart disease is the number one killer of modern humans
There are a ton of good reasons to eat fewer animal products…
And none of those reasons are veganism. Veganism provides a singular reason to not exploit animals any more than we need to for survival.
Just because your vegan doesn’t mean you don’t eat saturated fats. Coconut oil exists and I use way too much of that shit.
I’m not even fully vegan, I just eat animal fats in heavy moderation and balance them with lots of plants and exercise. I’m not perfect, I like eggs, but eggs aren’t fucking healthy in any context. And that’s only one of the several phenomenal reasons to eat way fewer animal products and more plant based & home-cooked.
Then as a vegan you would support raising chickens, pigs, and goats on a small hobby farm where the animals are extremely well cared for and happy?
animal sanctuaries exist for this reason
You didn’t answer my question. Would you/do you support the ethical and mutually beneficial raising of animals? Chickens for eggs, milk for dairy animals. No abuse, good healthcare, no premature slaughter, etc.?
Edit. I just realized I’m not responding to the same person. But the deflection still stands.
How will you get the milk and eggs without abuse? Cows don’t just automatically start producing milk and chickens were bred to lay more eggs at the cost of their health. If you really tried to get these products without abusing the animals it would be so inefficient that only a tiny fraction of people could afford to consume them in bigger amounts.
But surely in the present state of affairs where that treatment is not the norm, veganism is the only ethical approach, no?
Actually, counter-intuitively, strict veganism would objectively increase animal suffering if authentic alternatives exist. Which they do. But they are admittedly not easy to find. Ethical farms do exist, and typically self-regulate and self-support by selling the products the animals produce. Wool clothes, free-range eggs, end-of-life meat, excess milk & honey, etc. If your only 2 options are torture products, or nothing, then yes I 100% agree that veganism would be the correct choice. Between these 3 options though, giving your money to an ethical farmer objectively increases the livelihood of the animals under its care, more so than complete avoidance.
The way I see it, the tiny fraction of meat that’s produced ethically should go to the tiny fraction of people with dietary restrictions that require meat.
The vast majority of people are not going out to investigate small farms to see if their practices are ethical. They are buying meat from a grocery store, and if they consider it at all, they might pick one with a label slapped on like “organic,” completely meaningless thanks to lobbying.
Practically speaking, it is almost always a choice between torture products and nothing.
That’s an argument for vegetarianism, not veganism. What about wool, honey, milk, eggs. And different countries have different mechanisms. Using the USA as a basis, is admittedly a bad example.
Here in Germany, there are very strict regulations on how living conditions can be claimed, ranging from 1(literal torture) to 5(outdoor access, pasture raised etc.) I’m not saying it’s a perfect system, but I can’t agree that it’s impossible and pointless to try when there are places actively trying and actively supporting l.
What about wool, honey, milk, eggs.
Again, it’s a matter of whether you’re looking at things in the abstract, or in terms of how things actually work.
Take eggs for example. Eggs aren’t just a byproduct of having chickens around, there are specific breeds that are dedicated to egg-laying. Because only a small number of males are needed for reproduction, most male chicks are put on a conveyor and ground to death. While I can’t claim to be an expert in German laws, I did find that German courts have allowed this practice.
It’s a similar story with milk. Because dairy cows are a different breed, male calves are typically slaughtered at birth. Dairy cows are kept in a constant state of pregnancy, suffer the stress of being separated from their young, and are killed as soon as the milk slows down, typically a quarter of their natural lifespans. Dairy is also similarly bad for the environment as beef, and there are widely available plant-based substitutes like oat milk that taste just as good, if not better.
No matter what animal product we’re talking about, maximization of profits is almost always going to involve cruelty, environmental harm, and selective breeding to the point that any expectations about natural by-products aren’t true. Even with regulations (which can be difficult to enact effectively), there are tradeoffs: limiting cruelty can increase environmental impact (as well as the price). If animal products were appropriately priced based on offsetting the harm they cause, they would be unable to compete against plant-based alternatives.
The line where it becomes unethical is quite obvious really
Yeah the exploitation and killing part
no, that’s fine, actually.
Not sure where our definitions of “healthy” foods differ, but I literally wouldn’t call eggs “healthy” whatsoever. There is no single animal product that can even be considered “nutrient dense” much less healthy. Even in world war II, the world had enough saturated fats and excessive animal products that most of the soldiers even in their thirties had already started developing intravascular plaques, and brother, we’re a hell of a long way from that these days…
Just wanted to jump in and correct you because I don’t know where this eggs are. Healthy thing came from. They are certainly not. They are like eating butter essentially with some protein on top
Well unfortunately you haven’t got what you wanted, you clearly have a very simple view on nutrition, and a concerning lack of intelligence.
What is an egg? It is a vessel to grow a living organism in a self-contained environment, providing all the resources needed to do so.
Resources such as:
- Vitamins
- Amino-acids
- Antioxidants
- Healthy, unsaturated fats
If an egg was so bad for your health, I ask you quite simply, how the hell do they support a chick during a very intense time of rapid growth?
That’s like saying being in a womb is unhealthy for a developing foetus.
Please, next time, perhaps try updating your knowledge to something a bit more modern than WW2 before “jumping in and correcting” anyone again. With the constant stream of AI slop onto the internet, the last thing we need is human slop too.
a concerning lack of intelligence.
This reads like you are so insecure you have to personally attack people to cope with your own emotions.
I have a health degree, but ok mr. Expert. Have fun with ur heart disease. I’d just appreciate if you didn’t confidently lead others down ignorant health courses like “eggs are healthy” lol
Proof that degrees are meaningless and idiots come in all levels of educational achievement
Clearly wasn’t a particularly good university, and anyway, this is nutrition, not health.
I could guess that the 31 replies I see referenced but cannot view are from a fairly insane vegan I recently blocked for being insane and rude.
No one cares about your block list as much as you will. No need to share your mundane account activity with us.
But this response here is vital info that I need to know. I’m guessing the real issue here is “insane rude vegan” struck a nerve with you personally.
Yes, slaves are super convenient. No one ever said that slaves aren’t nice to have, dude. YOUR experience is not the fucking point.
There is no way to create a creature for the express purpose of exploitation that is okay. There is no way to create a creature with the intention of forcing it into a state of total dependence that is not actually evil.
So it’s fucked up to have pets because they fully depend on you? 🤔
comparing slaves to animals is what slavers do
Yes! Good on you for noticing the speciesism that racism is built on! If non-human animals have less worth than humans then liking some humans to non-human animals means they have less worth. The issue is at the very start, that
a) non-human animal and human are a meaningful distinction
b) non-humans have inherently less worth than humansspeciesism is necessary. racism is bad.
for once in your life make an argument and don’t just throw out claims.
what I said is true. nothing more need be said
Slavers do that because they think other Animals are worth nothing and want to say Human Slaves are also worth nothing.
Here quite the opposite is done. All Animals have a Worth. Every living being has the same worth. Modern Science says that Humans are also Animals.
If you still think its something only a Slaver would say then in your head other animals probably have no worth at all. So you think someone else wants to degrade humans with that comparison. Even tho its not degrading at all. You just think less of other animals, and you probably deny the science that Humans are Animals. Which is the reason why @[email protected] says you sound like a “human supremacist”
Every living being has the same worth.
if this were true then harvesting grain or chopping down a tree or using hand sanitizer would be murder.
All Animals have a Worth
value is subjective. this is not an objective fact.
But that we can’t objectively say what kind of worth something has is pretty much the point.
How can you say that only humans have worth but other animals do not? What gives you the right to say that you’re better than a pig, a cat, or any other animal? Some humans even do the same with their own kind and say that women have less worth or that someone with another skin color has less worth. I hope you agree with me that a white person has no right to decide if someone else has more or less worth than them. So why does a human have this right over other animals? What gave humans this right?
This is not about personal worth in something like a friendship. Obviously your best friend is more worth to you then a stranger. Obviously your own cat is more worth to you then a stranger cat. But in general worth, you would probably also be angry if millions of stranger humans would be slaughtered, right? You are probably against Genocide, right? Even tho you don’t know these humans.
Just trying to find a baseline. If you’re not even against these things when talking about Humans, then you probably have other problems.
But in general worth, you would probably also be angry if millions of stranger humans would be slaughtered, right? You are probably against Genocide, right? Even tho you don’t know these humans.
none of this has to do with “worth”. i can be opposed to genocide and mass slaughter without trying to quantify the value of people.
Stop Spamming me and respond in one single Comment man. Is this your first time on a social media platform. How old are you. Maybe you’re way to young to even argue to.
Some humans even do the same with their own kind and say that women have less worth or that someone with another skin color has less worth. I hope you agree with me that a white person has no right to decide if someone else has more or less worth than them. So why does a human have this right over other animals? What gave humans this right?
i don’t believe in rights, at all. they’re a european fiction.
What gives you the right to say that you’re better than a pig, a cat, or any other animal?
i didn’t
How can you say that only humans have worth but other animals do not?
i didn’t
Well I concluded that because you didn’t deny that in the previous comment. I tried to make clear why you were called a “human supremacist”. I tried to understand why you think that comparing slaves to animals is only something slave owners do.
First, this is denying of Science. Humans are in fact also Animals. So I thought, if you think only Slave owners say that, you probably deny that and think your self that animals are much less worth then humans, because you see it a comparison as degrading. This way it would make sense why you think only slave owners would say that. And you didn’t deny it, so went with it in the next comment.
If you actually do not think that you are more worthy then other animals, then you need to explain your first comment. From what viewpoint are you looking that you thought this comparison is something only slavers are doing. Maybe we just have a misunderstanding.
Talking like that is what human supremacists do.
it’s not about supremacy. it’s about treating different things differently.
Like white people and black people?
no. no one is advocating that pigs be allowed to vote, get healthcare, or education. they’re obviously different, and treating them differently is necessary for right behavior
killing them is “right behavior”?
Cool, so what is the difference that makes it ok to exploit and kill pigs for taste pleasure, that if applied to a human would also make it okay to exploit and kill them for taste pleasure?
You realize putting googly eyes on a toaster doesn’t give it feelings, right?
Assigning human values and desires to non-humans is not a coherent philosophy or ethical position.
Animals “Exploit” each other throughout the animal kingdom. Ants Literally farm aphids by protecting and herding them in exchange for what they produce. How is this wildly different from keeping a cow or a goat for milk?
Is the cow version evil because we’re humans, but the ant version okay because they aren’t?
Because that’s just making rules based on your desired outcome, not reason.
I would argue that animal husbandry is a symbiotic relationship rather than simple exploitation. While we gain resources, animals receive guaranteed food, protection from predators, and medical care that they would otherwise lack in the wild. Overall, the life with humans is better for the animals from a survival standpoint. Mind you, I’m only talking about animal husbandry on a smaller scale, not those disgusting meat factories as seen in the image above.
And before you drop the “How can a relationship be symbiotic if the animal has no choice in its dependence?” question that I’ve heard so many times before: Symbiosis is defined by mutual benefit instead of autonomy. Many biological partnerships happen without conscious choice, such as the relationship between fungi and algae in lichens, or ants and the small things they herd (forgot what they are called in english lmao). The lack of choice is offset by a massive increase in survival rates and resource stability compared to life in the wild.
I feel like I’ve been standing my entire life and I just sat down
Big sigh, no lie.
What’s this from?
I think it’s called Orville?
Thanks!
You’d be correct.
