7 ms·

What are the consequences of my choice? An animal dies, and I eat it. I'm fine with that. I have yet to hear a compelling argument for why it's bad for me to ef

What are the consequences of my choice? An animal dies, and I eat it. I'm fine with that. I have yet to hear a compelling argument for why it's bad for me to effect an animals death, but fine for a wolf. If it's actually wrong, let's kill all the predators on the planet. Or least capture them all and feed them kale.

colordrops 5y ago
This is a simplistic child-like logic. Not even sure how to address it.
- rantwasp 5y ago
  I does raise an important question. Why do we have predators and why do we even have a food chain? Is it possible that evolutionary consuming meat gives you an advantage?
  - user-the-name 5y ago
    There is no "why". We do, that is a fact of life and we can not, at the current time, do anything to change this. It is not due to a choice that we made, nor can we make a choice to change it. If, one day, we are in a position where we can make that choice, then that will be a relevant moral question to decide.
    - colordrops 5y ago
      Do you mean predators in general or just humans? Because humans can definitely make a choice right now.
      - user-the-name 5y ago
        Predators in general was the topic, for some reason.
- prepend 5y ago
  Maybe take it apart piece by piece. For example, the argument that killing animals for food is immoral. If that’s true then nature is immoral. Perhaps because humans are uniquely sapient, we can avoid this. But that presumes that humans are uniquely superior to recognize this over all other carnivors.
  - colordrops 5y ago
    Thanks for helping break it down. I'll address it using your help. > But that presumes that humans are uniquely superior to recognize this over all other carnivors [sic]. It doesn't need to involve a value judgment that we are somehow "superior". It just requires recognizing the obvious, that we are indeed uniquely sapient. Furthermore the argument for killing animals is using the flawed appeal to nature, which doesn't work for rape or any other of the countless "natural" activities we overcame with our sapience.
    - prepend 5y ago
      To clarify, I wasn’t saying that because meateating occurs in nature, it is correct. I was pointing out that if meateating is wrong, then there’s lots of other things we have to deal with. That is just one of the simplest, pragmatic I think, reasons to dispute “all meateating is bad.” Note, I think we should eat meat in a humane way so actually think this california law is helpful. I just don’t think that all meat eating is bad.
  - geofft 5y ago
    Birds poop on car windshields all the time, so how come when I do it, it's "public indecency"? If that's true then nature is immoral. Why is this cop presuming that humans are uniquely superior to recognize this over all other animals? And don't get me started on this law that I have to be clothed.... No other animal is clothed. Maybe humans are the ones who are wrong? Really makes you think.
  - user-the-name 5y ago
    True, true, and true.
bserge 5y ago
It boils down to scale. Wolves are not running animal concentration camps. Raising and slaughtering your own animals, or hunting wild ones yourself is much more humane/natural than industrial level farms and slaughterhouses. You don't eat animals that just "die". I'm not saying that to argue anything, I eat meat like most people, it's just how I see it.
user-the-name 5y ago
Not "an", but many animals not only die, but suffer their entire lives, and then die.
- danaris 5y ago
  Then let's solve that problem, rather than abandoning meat, dairy, and, for reasons that no one I've encountered has ever been able to explain rationally, honey. I totally agree that we have an awful problem with inhumane treatment of animals at factory farms in our society, but the logical answer to that is absolutely not veganism.
  - colordrops 5y ago
    > absolutely not Why not? Why not both? As it is, there are huge powerful interests that drive factory farming are preventing much movement in the right direction on farms. In the meantime abstaining from meat is a fine option, especially since it is also healthy.
    - danaris 5y ago
      To be clear, I'm saying that veganism is not the logical solution to the problem of animal abuse by factory farms. The logical solution to animal abuse by factory farms would be measures preventing factory farms from abusing animals. Veganism, specifically, is only a logical solution to the purported problem that killing animals for their meat, or getting any other animal product by any means, is unethical. Personally, while I can see some logic in the claim that killing animals for their meat is unethical (I disagree with it, but see where it's coming from), I find the claims that milk, eggs, and wool are unethical to be highly questionable, at best, and the claims that honey is unethical to be truly absurd.
  - user-the-name 5y ago
    Yes, let's solve that problem. It will take decades, maybe centuries. It will require turning entire economies upside down. It will make meat unaffordable to many. And at the end of it, animals will still die, just less miserably. But yes, it would be an improvement, it is worth doing. However, meanwhile, you can still stop eating meat, and save a few animals form their miserable torture and death.

colordrops 5y ago

This is a simplistic child-like logic. Not even sure how to address it.

rantwasp 5y ago
I does raise an important question. Why do we have predators and why do we even have a food chain? Is it possible that evolutionary consuming meat gives you an advantage?
- user-the-name 5y ago
  There is no "why". We do, that is a fact of life and we can not, at the current time, do anything to change this. It is not due to a choice that we made, nor can we make a choice to change it. If, one day, we are in a position where we can make that choice, then that will be a relevant moral question to decide.
  - colordrops 5y ago
    Do you mean predators in general or just humans? Because humans can definitely make a choice right now.
    - user-the-name 5y ago
      Predators in general was the topic, for some reason.
prepend 5y ago
Maybe take it apart piece by piece. For example, the argument that killing animals for food is immoral. If that’s true then nature is immoral. Perhaps because humans are uniquely sapient, we can avoid this. But that presumes that humans are uniquely superior to recognize this over all other carnivors.
- colordrops 5y ago
  Thanks for helping break it down. I'll address it using your help. > But that presumes that humans are uniquely superior to recognize this over all other carnivors [sic]. It doesn't need to involve a value judgment that we are somehow "superior". It just requires recognizing the obvious, that we are indeed uniquely sapient. Furthermore the argument for killing animals is using the flawed appeal to nature, which doesn't work for rape or any other of the countless "natural" activities we overcame with our sapience.
  - prepend 5y ago
    To clarify, I wasn’t saying that because meateating occurs in nature, it is correct. I was pointing out that if meateating is wrong, then there’s lots of other things we have to deal with. That is just one of the simplest, pragmatic I think, reasons to dispute “all meateating is bad.” Note, I think we should eat meat in a humane way so actually think this california law is helpful. I just don’t think that all meat eating is bad.
- geofft 5y ago
  Birds poop on car windshields all the time, so how come when I do it, it's "public indecency"? If that's true then nature is immoral. Why is this cop presuming that humans are uniquely superior to recognize this over all other animals? And don't get me started on this law that I have to be clothed.... No other animal is clothed. Maybe humans are the ones who are wrong? Really makes you think.
- user-the-name 5y ago
  True, true, and true.

bserge 5y ago

It boils down to scale. Wolves are not running animal concentration camps. Raising and slaughtering your own animals, or hunting wild ones yourself is much more humane/natural than industrial level farms and slaughterhouses. You don't eat animals that just "die". I'm not saying that to argue anything, I eat meat like most people, it's just how I see it.

user-the-name 5y ago

Not "an", but many animals not only die, but suffer their entire lives, and then die.

danaris 5y ago
Then let's solve that problem, rather than abandoning meat, dairy, and, for reasons that no one I've encountered has ever been able to explain rationally, honey. I totally agree that we have an awful problem with inhumane treatment of animals at factory farms in our society, but the logical answer to that is absolutely not veganism.
- colordrops 5y ago
  > absolutely not Why not? Why not both? As it is, there are huge powerful interests that drive factory farming are preventing much movement in the right direction on farms. In the meantime abstaining from meat is a fine option, especially since it is also healthy.
  - danaris 5y ago
    To be clear, I'm saying that veganism is not the logical solution to the problem of animal abuse by factory farms. The logical solution to animal abuse by factory farms would be measures preventing factory farms from abusing animals. Veganism, specifically, is only a logical solution to the purported problem that killing animals for their meat, or getting any other animal product by any means, is unethical. Personally, while I can see some logic in the claim that killing animals for their meat is unethical (I disagree with it, but see where it's coming from), I find the claims that milk, eggs, and wool are unethical to be highly questionable, at best, and the claims that honey is unethical to be truly absurd.
- user-the-name 5y ago
  Yes, let's solve that problem. It will take decades, maybe centuries. It will require turning entire economies upside down. It will make meat unaffordable to many. And at the end of it, animals will still die, just less miserably. But yes, it would be an improvement, it is worth doing. However, meanwhile, you can still stop eating meat, and save a few animals form their miserable torture and death.