Gravy Boat
Member
The slightly assholish-one.
In that case he'll yeah. Fuck Gavin, he's an asshole.
The slightly assholish-one.
But as long as you do not let the animal suffer gratuitously, who declared it "amoral" to eat animals, particularly raised for such a purpose?You're talking about apples and oranges. People often (even accidentally) use this strawman in arguments.
The way I understand veganism (I was one for a year, now am a vegetarian) is that people who CAN choose to change their diet can do so in a healthy and ethically responsible manner, that benefits animals AND humans. Some people are unlucky enough to just make due with what they have and do NOT have that choice.
I've heard it all. Somebody's Trumper dad told me (after a few drinks) YOU WOULD EAT MEAT IF STRANDED ON AN ISLAND WITH ONLY CHICKEN. Well.. of course I would, because I'd HAVE to in order to survive. But that's not what veganism/vegetarianism is about.
I haven't done any research on the taste of human meat. I don't really care to look haha.
Just a thought. Genuinely curious too, not just "for lolz".
What is Vegans' stance on animals eating animals?
Is that unethical as well?
I'm not even talking about carnivores, but omnivores, like bears. Should we be upset at bears (or others) when they vary their diet with some side meat?
I'd presume it's because we typically hold humans to a higher moral standard then animals
I'm not a vegan, but I imagine it's something like "Animals eat according to instinct. Humans can make a choice." And fairly enough - ethics is fundamentally about the exercise of choice and its relation to morality. Humans can choose to cultivate and consume non-animal food sources, and animals cannot.
As for this story... it is weird. There's a detachment involved with eating animals that seems directly opposed to literally saving them from death. Like, "Oh, hey, I saved this pig! I'm glad I did, because its meats are delicious!"
Ladies and gentlemen, human beings.
I think people are reading more into my comments than are actually there. I love me some bacon. I was speaking more to the attitudes expressed towards livestock. If deceased humans could be harvested as food and was legal, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of GAF (and people in general) in here would consume it without moral quandaries. That also isn't an attack on their character or person - it's an observation without any pedestals attached and is interesting to think about.Just don't say things that are innacurate or blatantly stupid to support it, like somehow meat eaters would want to eat people if it was legal.
Uh... yes they are."Well, would you eat other people?"
No.
Because people aren't animals.
Honestly, not really. Hunters who kill animals to eat them are generally very morally opposed to causing the animal any suffering.
Uh... yes they are.
Hey guys, if you were stranded on an island with your friend, both starving, and your friend died, would you eat your friend?
I think people are reading more into my comments than are actually there. I love me some bacon. I was speaking more to the attitudes expressed towards livestock. If deceased humans could be harvested as food and was legal, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of GAF (and people in general) in here would consume it without moral quandaries. That also isn't an attack on their character or person - it's an observation without any pedestals attached and is interesting to think about.
Funnily enough, many people use this as their reasoning for eating meat. "We're all animals."But as long as you do not let the animal suffer gratuitously, who declared it "amoral" to eat animals, particularly raised for such a purpose?
As per the strawman argument, I see it all too often used by Vegans. I just wanted to poke at the sillyness of it.
"Well, would you eat other people?"
No.
Because people aren't animals.
This very same strawman argument has already been used in this very thread.
I think people are reading more into my comments than are actually there. I love me some bacon. I was speaking more to the attitudes expressed towards livestock. If deceased humans could be harvested as food and was legal, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of GAF (and people in general) in here would consume it without moral quandaries. That also isn't an attack on their character or person - it's an observation without any pedestals attached and is interesting to think about.
I think people are reading more into my comments than are actually there. I love me some bacon. I was speaking more to the attitudes expressed towards livestock. If deceased humans could be harvested as food and was legal, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of GAF (and people in general) in here would consume it without moral quandaries. That also isn't an attack on their character or person - it's an observation without any pedestals attached and is interesting to think about.
I think people are reading more into my comments than are actually there. I love me some bacon. I was speaking more to the attitudes expressed towards livestock. If deceased humans could be harvested as food and was legal, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of GAF (and people in general) in here would consume it without moral quandaries. That also isn't an attack on their character or person - it's an observation without any pedestals attached and is interesting to think about.
But as long as you do not let the animal suffer gratuitously, who declared it "amoral" to eat animals, particularly raised for such a purpose?
As per the strawman argument, I see it all too often used by Vegans. I just wanted to poke at the sillyness of it.
"Well, would you eat other people?"
No.
Because people aren't animals.
This very same strawman argument has already been used in this very thread.
I think the biggest problem I have on this forum is that far too often, people separate humans from animals (as a justification for animal cruelty). While I agree that the well being of humans should be placed above "lesser animals", we can walk and chew gum simultaneously.
No one necessarily "declared" it. It's a way of life. I believe it's immoral to butcher innocent lives when it's not necessary. That doesn't mean I hate you. That doesn't mean I judge all meat eaters. I understand it's a tough thing to break away from. I was there not more than two years ago.
It saddens me to see so many people joyously celebrate the death of lives. And to assume that these animals are only capable of being slaughtered. That they aren't still intelligent creatures who could even make good pets and friends.
They just wouldn't exist in the first place. We wouldn't have farms full of domestic animals for head patting
Doesn't bacon cause cancer? Well if it does, that would be a pretty fitting case of karma.
Thread makes me wonder if you dudes would eat other people if it was legal.
I don't have one. Not everybody is peddling an agenda."People in general" form our society with moral standards and stuff and we don't do that, so what's your point?
This is really just an excuse for not having to think and reason this through for the two or three seconds it should take. I get why people react emotionally, but the point is they shouldn't.
So pig farm slaughters pigs? News at 11
(If you feel sad when pigs burn to death, you should also feel bad when they're slaughtered for meat. The suffering is different but the dying is the same.)
Not liking these comments in here. Total lack of empathy. You don't save animals just to eat them
That's inherently cruel and sadistic
Not liking these comments in here. Total lack of empathy. You don't save animals just to eat them
That's inherently cruel and sadistic
But they do exist and it's possible to make changes. And they've proven to be good, loyal pets as well.
Some could make the arugment that particular dog breeds were bred for fighting, but pitbulls make for excellent pets and are gentle and loyal. I don't see people saying "but they were bred to fight, that's their purpose"
When people have proven, for example, that pigs make for just as good pets. And they were bred for slaughter, right?
I don't have one. Not everybody is peddling an agenda.
I'd probably feel kind of shitty if I ate an animal after I saved it's life.
I'd probably feel kind of shitty if I ate an animal after I saved it's life.
Not liking these comments in here. Total lack of empathy. You don't save animals just to eat them
That's inherently cruel and sadistic
No it's not like that at all, the pigs were going to be eaten either way so yes they were saved but there's nothing cruel and sadistic about this story.Not liking these comments in here. Total lack of empathy. You don't save animals just to eat them
That's inherently cruel and sadistic