3 ms·
You would likely be well served by watching Penn and Teller's PETA episode. And perhaps some wildlife documentaries - there's nothing quite like getting eaten
by abandonliberty 9y ago
You would likely be well served by watching Penn and Teller's PETA episode. And perhaps some wildlife documentaries - there's nothing quite like getting eaten alive.
Most captive animals exist because we tend to them. Are you suggesting that we let them die of starvation or simply eliminate them (as PETA does with many of their 'rescued' animals)?
- animal_dude 9y ago> Are you suggesting that we let them die of starvation or simply eliminate them A reasonable person might suggest we not purposefully birth 150 billion+ animals every year just so they can be killed. The "let them starve" argument is a strawman, since the whole world would not eschew animal products overnight, but rather as a gradual progress.
- abandonliberty 9y agoInteresting. Wouldn't it be much more appropriate to argue a false dilemma in this situation? You suggested gradual elimination, which is an elimination process. I would argue that neither fallacy apply. I wonder what proportion of animals would chose non-existence over existence if they could understand such concepts. That's quite the decision to make for them.
- animal_dude 9y ago> I wonder what proportion of animals would chose non-existence over existence if they could understand such concepts. May I suggest you look at some footage from slaughterhouses to make that determination for yourself? Or, if you're particularly stoic, I dare you to watch Earthlings.
- jlebrech 9y agoit's a cause and effect reversal, no need to birth so many animals if you can't eat them.