4 ms·

Care to elaborate? Just to be clear, I was referring to no one caring (at least, the vast, vast majority) about animals killed for food. Else 98% of us wouldn't

• stubish 7y ago
  > no one caring (at least, the vast, vast majority) about animals killed for food. Else 98% of us wouldn't be meat eaters This is a false dichotomy. It is common to care about the animals you eat. Maybe not in the way you would like, and maybe it is hypocritical in the same way as giving a condemned prisoner a final meal is. Caring is why we have free range animal products.
• protastus 7y ago
  Someone else addressed the false dichotomy which is an obvious problem with your argument. But for the sake of completeness, let's discuss vegetarians specifically. I don't know where you got the 98% number for meat-eaters, but it's not correct. Worldwide stats: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetarianism_by_country#Demographics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetarianism_by_country#Demog... US stats: https://news.gallup.com/poll/267074/percentage-americans-vegetarian.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/267074/percentage-americans-veg... Most vegetarians give up food for ethical and animal rights reasons (I'll leave the easy to find sources as an exercise for the reader). Vegetarians and vegans are frequently reminded of animal suffering -- a visit to the grocery store or a look at a restaurant menu is all it takes. So in effect you've reduced to "no one" a 5% slice of the population (in the U.S.) which repeats the same principled decision on a daily basis. That's a lot of people to call "no one".