Comments
-
qxva 23 days agoeat guinea pig or make another post about it -
Gerg 23 days agoWhy? -
qxva 23 days ago
i like the posts -
Gerg 23 days ago
I would eat a guinea pig but I'm not in Peru at this very moment. A species hate post light come soon, though. -
qxva 21 days ago
let's both do one -
Gerg 21 days ago
I've been posting too frequently recently, let's leave it for tomorrow -
qxva 21 days ago
proceeds to post twice -
Gerg 19 days ago
I forgot -
qxva 18 days ago
alr lets do it now -
Gerg 18 days ago
I already posted twice in less than an hour. I'll go to sleep and then. -
qxva 18 days ago
your posts gut buried its fine. also it could be a comment on my post
-
not since, when. it's not cruel since something, it's cruel when something. and you're generalising. "eating" is not cruel. only some is. -
I'm sorry but I don't understand what you wrote at all. Talking about syntax here btw, not anything else -
It's either always cruel or simply a necessity depending on how you see it. If you would eat a cow, a pig, a chicken, you're no better than someone who would eat a dog, a guinea pig, or a capybara. And not eating any of them also doesn't make you any better. -
Regarding your last sentence: why? If you choose not to eat a pig once, that's 1 pig you didn't contribute to the death of. -
note the contribute
the pig might be dead already but you aren't encouraging the industry to kill more -
why? provide me a good reason why not encouraging the meat industry to kill animals doesn't make you any better than those who do -
Because it doesn't truly do anything for the environment. And eating meat is not a bad thing. And because we have to kill animals to eat them that is also not a bad thing. -
here's the truth nuke..... there's no moral argument in favour of eating meat. but people don't imagine slaughterhouses and the animal that once was when eating meat, they just see it as food. that kinda is the double edged nature of empathy... our sense of empathy is practical, not truly moral. it sucks that we humans aren't morally angels but.... evolutionary adaptation exists... womp womp....
personally i eat meat even though i shouldnt but boycotting the industry wouldnt be right for me as i'm already underweight. my behavior does not follow my morals as I know there's no moral argument for the consumption of meat it's just practical -
1. yes it does, by not encouraging the industry it'll produce less meat hence less methane hence slower climate change
2. you've been implying this the entire time, provide an explanation
3. it is, visit a slaughterhouse and you'll see how the animals suffer -
It does not. If you don't eat meat, you eat more plants, and to grow those plants they need pesticides, which not only pollute tremendously, but also kill millions of bees, which are the animals we have to protect the most.
Also guess what. Slaughterhouse owners are not economists, they will not care unless they see a huge change. You are not making a difference. Those animals are still being bred to be killed. And I have been to a slaughterhouse. I know what happens there. I have helped dismember pigs and seen as they are killed. I see they suffer. It is, however, a necessity. -
Morally I see no problem in eating meat. We need it. Being omnivorous means you need to eat both meat and plants, not that you can drop one of those. -
1. counterintuitively, eating less meat means eating less plants as the forests are cut down to create space for cattle grazing. meat requires enormous amounts of land, which are primarily used for the plants as the animals are usually kept indoors. a field used to grow corn to feed a few cows to make a few McDonald's meals could sustain generations of farmers if used for something other than meat
2. to your last 2 sentences: you're clearly just a monster then -
I'm perfectly healthy and I don't eat meat. Your argument is wrong; being omnivorous means you are privileged in that you make a choice to eat meat or not. you are not a carnivore, your canines aren't even close to being those of a wolf. primates historically have eaten some animal products, but not to the point of chomping into a pig or chicken -
I believe you need way more space to grow crops. Way more than you would need for a bunch of animals under one roof.
Corn is not that nutritious at all. So while in raw quantity that may be true, it's not true in quality of life. I don't see why any of this makes me a monster. I could call you an oversensitive baby and be just as correct. -
Your behavior shows you are not perfectly healthy. Either way, it's natural to eat meat and it is not wrong or cruel. It is nature.
And humans are actually really different from other primates, even other apes. Not only that but some herviborous beings have great canines. This shows that teeth structure does not directly reflect diet.
And seriously, just ask any nutritionist and they will tell you that it's preferable to consume animal products regularly. -
you can't just call someone unhealthy based on behaviour. i could say your behaviour is unhealthy because you state you "believe you need way more space to grow crops", which you have no rational argument for. however, i:
The land use of livestock is so large because it takes 50 to 100 times as much land to produce a kilocalorie of beef or lamb versus plant-based alternatives.
"Corn is not that nutritious at all." we wouldn't grow corn, the corn grown for animals is inedible to us
"It is nature" in nature, thinks kill and rape each other. do you think we should do the same?
at the end of your comment you are using a straw man fallacy. meat is not animal products. animal products which do not kill the animals are a completely different topic, which we are not debating here, because the debate is about meat.
-
there's something called morality 😛
some people don't eat specific foods because their religion says no
some people don't eat specific foods to respect their moral code-
Sure but I'm not part of any religion, and I was raised under different morals involving animals. So why should I be concerned about other people's choices on that? -
no need to be concerned about other people choices, you don't control them and if it's not illegal in their place then you can even do less I guess
not saying that we should kill animals for food, that's another thing and not something i would want to talk about
