No it's the vegans who's wrong
No it's the vegans who's wrong
37 comments
-
-
-
@Neon @nume bro with the taiwan flag talking about how the majority must be right. have you ever been to china? 90% of chinese would say taiwan is an integral part of china. do you think before you fucking type? also, you're forcing YOUR moral values onto animals, you pay for them to perpetually bred, raised, tormented, abused and slaughtered but vegans memeing online is """FORCING""" moral views onto others? jesus christ you're dense.
-
You are literally forcing your own moral values on livestock and/or other animals, resulting in death.
-
Yes, minorities are literally always wrong and never in history has a minority group ever been right or caused a movement in the right direction. The end.
-
If your moral values are that you shouldn't kill sentient animals just for pleasure, we should be on the same page, right?
-
-
I love watching a post from a vegan community get enough traction that it starts hitting people's general feeds and carnists absolutely lose their goddamn minds in the comments🤌
-
-
I've found companion planting works quite well for my garden, marigolds especially for keeping pests away.
-
Marigolds: my beloved
It's totally possible to garden without murdering tonnes of beings
-
-
-
-
Tenderize that meat
37 comments
Carnivores aren't evil because they don't have a choice in the matter. They are acting on instinct and do not care for ethics. Humans have a choice and moral compass, yet still create unnecessary mass death for personal gain.
As a hypothetical, if lab-grown meat becomes viable and scalable, thus offering a 1:1 replacement for meat, wouldn't we be evil if we were to reject it just because it didn't come from a dead animal? If no, why not? If yes, how dissimilar does the meat replacement have to be before humans stop being evil?
I actually eat meat fairly regularly, I'm just curious what other people think about this.
We do. And yet that is not all we are. Should one aspect of what it means to be human being valued above the others? The elevation of critical thinking faculties to being the measure of a man is a very modern post Renaissance concept, one that is slowly losing traction thankfully
Who said anything about inherently evil? First, evil is a very religiously loaded term, harm or suffering is a better one. And we can absolutely morally judge a behaviour without making sweeping moral judgements about the person or being doing the behaviour.
Edit: spelling
lions don't have tofu and supermarkets
Lions have nutritional requirements that can't be met without meat or enough generations and pressures to evolve the ability to process what they need from plants.
That is a major difference between big cats and dogs, as dogs are omnivores and could make due without meat.
Evil is a societal definition. You're seeing the beginning of the definition change to include the suffering of animals. The only way it will take hold permanently is if humans end up more empathetic in the future. The current batch don't have it in them.
I wonder if there's any difference at all between a lion and a human in terms of reasoning. Like does a typical human have the capability to plan outcomes and make decisions based on expectations for the long term?