5 ms·
If you do assume animal life is equivalent to plant life, all you're saying is that consuming animals is less efficient. It would be like saying we shouldn't co
by d0lph 10y ago
If you do assume animal life is equivalent to plant life, all you're saying is that consuming animals is less efficient. It would be like saying we shouldn't consume icecream because drinking milk directly saves more milk (not sure if this example is true).
- the_gastropod 10y agoThe assumption I pose is that (given the very generous notion) if plant life is equivalent to animal life, and destroying life is undesirable, then eating animals is worse (in this regard) than eating plants because it destroys _more_ life.
- JoeAltmaier 10y agoIts pretty complex. For instance, growing plants means essentially sterilizing the ground under them, killing tens of thousands of small rodents. Millions of insects. Billions of soil microorganisms.
- codezero 10y agoAlgae is the future!
- fmueller 10y agoA small detail: While destroying more life this process is _creating_ more life at the same time... Not that is has to matter.