3 ms·
Many, many people disagree with you. It is not at all a logical, ethical, or emotional contradiction to say that we should have humanely-raised livestock whose
by danaris 8mo ago
Many, many people disagree with you.
It is not at all a logical, ethical, or emotional contradiction to say that we should have humanely-raised livestock whose purpose is to be slaughtered for meat. We can ensure that they are kept in healthy, safe, and humane ways during their lifetimes, and are killed as quickly, cleanly, and painlessly as we can reasonably manage.
And, um, the meaning of "humane" is only loosely related to "treat like a human." It means "treat well, view with compassion", and similar. We talk of things being "humane" or "inhumane" in how we treat each other, too. [0]
Humans have been raising meat animals with compassion and treating them well during their lifetimes for longer than we have had written language. Veganism/vegetarianism is not even physically an option for many people, excludes many cultures' traditional practices, and very, very often requires (or at least tends toward) supplementing with foods that are at least as unethical as factory farming practices.
[0] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/humane https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/humane
- aziaziazi 8mo ago> supplementing with foods that are at least as unethical as factory farming practices That's the first time I ear about supplement being unethical, let alone "compared to factory farming". Stretching the usual arguments, it may be almonds' water or soy in brazil ? I'd be glad you clarify your point.
- danaris 8mo agoThe harvesting of a number of the common foods used to supplement vegetarian and vegan diets—eg, soy, agave, quinoa—are variously destructive to the environment and based on labor practices exploitative enough that they sometimes verge on slavery.
- aziaziazi 8mo agoOh I understand the confusion: soy, quinoa and agave are not supplements but food. I guess we might agree on "alternative" but the word choice isn’t your point. Soy is a strange pick at it’s mostly cultivated to feed livestock (77%) and using it instead for humans instead would require substantially less crops. https://www.deforestationimportee.ecologie.gouv.fr/en/affected-products/article/soy https://www.deforestationimportee.ecologie.gouv.fr/en/affect... Agave… is mostly water and glucose, without much minerals or protein. How does vegs requires or tends toward that aliment more than other? Quinoa original region doesn’t have the same working standards as un US/UE but I’m not aware of a difference with banana, coffee, avocado, cacao, vanilla, coconut, palm oil (or soy)… however Quinoa also grow in other regions: here in France you can find local quinoa at the same price as the one from Bolivia: around 8€/kg (organic). It’s super healthy but not very popular through. Beans and lentils are more popular I think (self non-scientific estimation) but yeah soy is great and tasty.
- blks 8mo agoAs unethical as purposefully murdering animals? I don’t think you can call it a compassion when you own an animal with sole purpose of efficiently growing it and then killing it so its body can be dismembered and sold off. This is treating animals as property, that produces profit.
- vrighter 7mo agonot any more unethical than any other animal that "murders" to eat
- danaris 7mo agoWhich is more unethical: Raising animals compassionately, slaughtering them for meat as painlessly as possible after a healthy, happy life OR Letting people who require meat in their diet to live (there are a number of reasons this may be the case) die slow, painful deaths as their bodies fail around them? It's real easy to say that "no one should ever kill an animal to live" when you ignore the disabilities and chronic conditions that make surviving on plants alone impossible, or prohibitively expensive.