3 ms·

> that [only] humans have rights I'm not dignifying this with a rebuttal; go back and read the second paragraph. > And reflect on whether you are able to decr

by a1369209993 6y ago

> that [only] humans have rights I'm not dignifying this with a rebuttal; go back and read the second paragraph. > And reflect on whether you are able to decrease your financial contribution to a system that abuses animals. Of cource I'm able to. I'm also able to feed lead to toddlers. The relevant question is whether one should, not whether one can. > the format of the response is problematic The format of the response is irrelevant: "Could we all stop infringing copyright?" "Since you asked, no, but if people stop creating things that are worth watching/reading/etc, I may consider it." "Could we all stop donating to charity?" "Since you asked, no, but if they stop doing good deeds, I may consider it." And so on. > whether in 50 years we will consider abusing animals as morally problematic as well Popularity doesn't make something right, and speculations of future popularity definitely don't.

yboris 6y ago
This is not about popularity. It's about moral growth. As a child you do things you later regret doing (e.g. hurting people). As a society we look back, and while we realize the circumstances were very different before (and we don't have to make a judgment about moral problems), we can still recognize that some things were problematic (enslaving other human beings, not letting women vote, not letting people of color vote, etc) and that we do not want to do that now. This is best understood (not as "popularity" or "fad", but) as moral growth. And it's good. You are fighting over semantics "able" vs "should". I am trying to use language that is not confrontational. I am not calling you a bad person, I do not think you are. I am asking you politely, in the privacy of your own mind, to reflect on some practices we take for granted. And to realize that the parallel is that in the past we've made moral mistakes, and that we are likely making a moral mistake now. I proclaim that it's good to mature and grow up. I hope we as a civilization grow out of this phase where we abuse the shit out of billions of sentient creatures for a the unimportant goal of having food taste slightly different.

yboris 6y ago

This is not about popularity. It's about moral growth. As a child you do things you later regret doing (e.g. hurting people). As a society we look back, and while we realize the circumstances were very different before (and we don't have to make a judgment about moral problems), we can still recognize that some things were problematic (enslaving other human beings, not letting women vote, not letting people of color vote, etc) and that we do not want to do that now. This is best understood (not as "popularity" or "fad", but) as moral growth. And it's good. You are fighting over semantics "able" vs "should". I am trying to use language that is not confrontational. I am not calling you a bad person, I do not think you are. I am asking you politely, in the privacy of your own mind, to reflect on some practices we take for granted. And to realize that the parallel is that in the past we've made moral mistakes, and that we are likely making a moral mistake now. I proclaim that it's good to mature and grow up. I hope we as a civilization grow out of this phase where we abuse the shit out of billions of sentient creatures for a the unimportant goal of having food taste slightly different.