The trick is not to kill them yourself, but have factories and animal farms do it while deluding yourself into believing that there is a humane way to killing a living being when the reality is there are only less painful ways. Also, from the other side of the aisle, the trick is to delude yourself into thinking that animals would have any problems eating and preying on you. If cattle had no place in human society, their numbers would significantly decrease. What does that say about human societies with large socioeconomic disparity who are treated by cattle by the rich as they get increasingly automated?
There’s no point to this comment, it has been released into the wild so that it may be free.
wait… are you suggesting everyone just slaughter their own food? Because the specialization of labor and labor of scale was to blame, not the desire to distance oneself from slaughter. That may be the case nowadays but 150 years ago it was nothing for most families to slaughter their own chickens.
An actually modestly reasonable amount of chips, but they were homemade and extremely seasoned. Salsa with the chips, and a squeeze bottle of a different sauce with the burrito.
Nah. You’ll be pumped full of preservatives so that your funeral and viewing can be held 2 weeks later to give your relatives time to travel. Then you’ll be buried in a plastic coffin in a hole filled with cement.
It’s in the definition. Murder is the killing of one human being by another. Vegan fanatics try to shame everyone else by calling it murder but it just makes me laugh. They try so very hard but just sound silly.
Using linguistic prescriptivism to shut down an argument and calling it “the truth” and “reality” to avoid thinking about what somebody means when they say a word is… certainly something
Fanatics try to expand the meanings of words to make their message more inflammatory in an attempt to bully and shame people who don’t agree with them into doing what they want. It’s a standard play from the extremist playbook.
People use words in varied ways to make rhetorical points and get people to consider things they might not have otherwise. Oh no! I’m sorry that cognitive dissonance is stressful
Your approach was and continues to be a complete failure. You can triple down and fail again or you can choose to try something different. Do you want to talk or do you want to walk away? Those are your only two options at this point.
When did I say that? My statement points out that rituals to make yourself feel better about killing an animal do not change that animal’s experience of being killed or the moral weight of that action
You said they were morally equivalent when you called it murder, and you said it again just now. Why does killing an animal for food carry any moral weight? Cheetahs don’t get any flak for hunting caribou.
I actually didn’t say anything and just followed this dude’s logic. But actually I’d say it’s not equivalent. The non-human animals are always innocent. Man is rarely.
Oh, I disagree. Ant colonies go to war with each other all the time. Basically all mammal species see every male in a 5-mile radius fight to the death over a single female. I’m curious what exactly it is the animals are supposed to be innocent of.
They don’t act on intellect. They just do without knowing what they’re actually do. If a dog kicks over your vase, do you see malignant intent? Is the ant-colony going to war for survival acting on greed or lust or the desire to spill blood?
Do they rape because they despise women? Do they kill because they love the control? Do they build political systems made to opress the dumb and/or weak? Do they actually have crab-mentality like we do? Do they actually destroy the planet for their own desires to own as much stuff as possible?
I probably could go on for ages but you get the picture. We do most things while knowing better. We do horrible things, even though we know what others feel. We do most things with intent and knowledge.
We might be innocent as long as we’re a toddler crawling around the world, knowing nothing. But now we buy cheap shit made in china, knowing very well that we keep horrible slavery running this way. We know and we ignore. Examples are legion, but you live on this planet too, so you know.
You said they were morally equivalent when you called it murder
I didn’t, actually
and you said it again just now
I didn’t, actually
Why does killing an animal for food carry any moral weight?
Because humans aren’t special unique beings with souls that make us the only ones with moral worth. Many animals are capable of suffering and emotion.
Cheetahs don’t get any flak for hunting caribou.
We are the ones with the social system allowing for moral frameworks to guide our decisionmaking. Cheetahs aren’t moral agents. And if they are, they follow cheetah morality. Plus, they are obligate carnivores anyway (which is why your cat should not be deprived of meat)
There are no creatures with souls. But no, I wouldn’t say keeping a cat in general is immoral. There are definitely ethical concerns around things like kitten breeding mills and letting cats roam around outdoors, though
We are the ones with the social system allowing for moral frameworks to guide our decisionmaking. Cheetahs aren’t moral agents … Plus, they are obligate carnivores anyway (which is why your cat should not be deprived of meat)
please act in good faith or let me know that you’re not interested in doing so
Why is me killing a chicken to feed to my cat morally acceptable, but me killing a chicken to feed to myself is not? In both cases the one with the moral code is doing the killing.
Do you believe that if there were a race of intelligent aliens who were obligate carnivores, they should be allowed to slaughter humans for food? It sounds like you think the answer is yes. I would agree, provided the humans were treated humanely.
lemmy.world
Hot