Vegans being banned and comments being deleted from [email protected] for being fake vegans.

From my perspective, the comments were in no way insulting and just part of completely normal interaction. If this decision reflects the general opinion of the mod team, then from my perspective, the biggest vegan community on Lemmy wants to be an elitist cycle of hardcore vegans only, not allowing any slightly different opinion. Which would be very unfortunate.

PS: In contrast to the name of this community, I don’t want to insult anyone here being a ‘bastard’. I just want to post this somewhere on neutral ground. I would really appreciate an open discussion without bashing anyone.

Linking the affected users and mods: @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected]

  • Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.winEnglish
    31·
    6 hours ago
    1. Didn’t say anything about imprisoning them. They can free range all they want in this example.
    2. The method employed specifically prevents fear. Assume a method that doesn’t induce fear. They exist.
    3. This is a stretch of the definition. Discontinuation of happiness without knowledge before or after is not suffering.
    4. Prevent socializing completely after birth. Got it. Or, more reasonably, the grief of loss is inevitable and a small price to pay anyways to feed a family for the winter.

    Edit: Also, I’m not really trying to justify eating animals. TBH I’m ironically more sympathetic to Vegans due to me being a hunter. Frankly I think meat eaters should have to participate in the harvesting of an animal you eat at least once before age of majority. That would at least confer appreciation for some of what is involved.

    • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
      2·
      5 hours ago
      1. “Free Range” is still limited by fences usually and >99% of cows will not live in the way many people understand free range because it would be prohibitevely expensive.
      2. The methods exist but are never used for the same reason as 1. Pigs in Germany for instance are suffocated to death with CO2 causing extreme - if temporary - suffering. Nitrogen is a bit more expensive which is why it isn’t used.
      3. It depends. Discontinuation of happiness is one argument why killing is immoral, even if they are killed without direct suffering.
      4. Is killing a cow the only way for families to live through winter (without hunger/malnutrition etc.)? Then I’d say killing one is the lesser evil. If a family has other choices that do not involve killing, then I’d say the moral action would be taking them.

      There are various more - and far better articulated - reasons why killing is bad by the way. Here are some: https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/67606/why-is-murder-wrong

      Still, I believe it is hardly possible to reliably kill without involving suffering anywhere.

      Though I would consider hunting to be the most ethical variant. It’s not even a battle when factory farming exists.

      • Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.winEnglish
        11·
        3 hours ago

        I really don’t need reasons why killing is bad :P

        TBH all vegan’s ethics can be countered with ‘check your privilege’.