Oh, I thought you were meming. This is an anti-meat site. I don’t really get it, I don’t have moral compunctions against eating dog and I don’t think most people really do if you press them on it. It’s just a taste thing since we see them as companion animals instead of livestock. Eating dog (for Western non-dog-eating folks) is like using a screwdriver as a hammer, not an immoral act.
It’s interesting that in any other situation, getting raw, unbridled ecstasy at the expense of an animal would be horrible. What is it about taste pleasure that makes it ok?
it took 400 years to convince white Americans to stop keeping slaves. Injustices, however, do not exist forever.
The only question is: Which side of history do you want to be on? On the side of the people who have spent their lives paying for animal suffering or on the side of the people who have worked for the welfare and rights of animals?
I don’t eat animals, but I can guarantee that’s not the thing that’s going to put me on the right side of history. On a long enough timeline, we’re all monsters.
I admire the strength of your convictions if you truly believe that not eating animals is going to put you on the “right side of history” akin to anti-slavery activists. I just don’t see that happening on our lifetimes, and don’t much care - unlike slaveholders, the vast majority of human history has consisted of omnivores. If a future generation of man wants to cast judgement on me, I’ll be in the company of most of mankind.
Correct, but it is still harm being inflicted on animals purely for pleasure, right? I just think it’s interesting that most people don’t have qualms with that, when they would under other circumstances.
For instance: killing an animal because you like the sight of it = psychopath. Killing an animal because you like the sound of it = serial killer in the making. Killing an animal because you like the taste of it = normal.
Hey, I’ve seen you around here a couple of times. Starting to feel like Lemmy is a rather small and tight community after all. Thanks for sticking up for veganism. :)
Does your own pleasure justify harm against others?
I have (genuinely) tried really hard over the years to try and see it that way. To try to feel bad about the idea that an animal died so that I could eat it.
It has never worked, not even a little bit. I’ve been on a farm a few times and have seen my food killed right in front of me, yet it never bothered me neither as a child nor an adult. The most I can do is pretend to care so that other people think I’m a saint, but I genuinely am not capable of feeling anything for the animals that I’m eating. I wonder if that’s a biological thing? Like some people are born without the genes that make you sad about this type of thing.
Idk, but in any case, appeals to emotion have never worked on me, and will never work on me. I know there are logical, non-emotional reasons to avoid eating animals, but when I see vegan discussions online focusing on the emotional side of it, I just eye roll and leave. I guess it’s ironic, but a lot of vegans I’ve met IRL and online are lacking empathy.
That was not an appeal to emotion. It’s asking for a logical justification. Do you think actions that harm others, deserve consideration regardless of whether or not it makes you feel bad? It’s about how the victims feel.
Sorry, eating meat brings me too much raw, unbridled ecstasy to do that.
At least tone it down. People eat way too much meat. Other good food exists.
Loves me some organic dog meat https://www.elwooddogmeat.com/
Oh man for a second there I thought it was real. Kinda wanted to try some
the thing about the vegan “eat dog” things is that yeah people have cognitive dissonance about eating pet animals, i don’t
So you do eat dog?
i likely would if i lived somewhere where it’s available
Oh, I thought you were meming. This is an anti-meat site. I don’t really get it, I don’t have moral compunctions against eating dog and I don’t think most people really do if you press them on it. It’s just a taste thing since we see them as companion animals instead of livestock. Eating dog (for Western non-dog-eating folks) is like using a screwdriver as a hammer, not an immoral act.
It’s interesting that in any other situation, getting raw, unbridled ecstasy at the expense of an animal would be horrible. What is it about taste pleasure that makes it ok?
They’re not alive while I do it, and I (along with most of the world’s population) have no ethical concerns about killing animals for food.
Well its still your eating them that gets them killed, whether you kill them yourself or not.
Yes. I am comfortable with that. Do you think most meat eaters don’t know that?
it took 400 years to convince white Americans to stop keeping slaves. Injustices, however, do not exist forever.
The only question is: Which side of history do you want to be on? On the side of the people who have spent their lives paying for animal suffering or on the side of the people who have worked for the welfare and rights of animals?
I don’t eat animals, but I can guarantee that’s not the thing that’s going to put me on the right side of history. On a long enough timeline, we’re all monsters.
I admire the strength of your convictions if you truly believe that not eating animals is going to put you on the “right side of history” akin to anti-slavery activists. I just don’t see that happening on our lifetimes, and don’t much care - unlike slaveholders, the vast majority of human history has consisted of omnivores. If a future generation of man wants to cast judgement on me, I’ll be in the company of most of mankind.
I figured that when you said theyre not alive when you “do it” you were implying you didnt like them being killed. What did you mean by that then?
I’m really not sure how you got that from what I wrote, so I don’t know how to respond.
Correct, but it is still harm being inflicted on animals purely for pleasure, right? I just think it’s interesting that most people don’t have qualms with that, when they would under other circumstances.
For instance: killing an animal because you like the sight of it = psychopath. Killing an animal because you like the sound of it = serial killer in the making. Killing an animal because you like the taste of it = normal.
Does your own pleasure justify harm against others? Can you think of other actions where this kind of justification might be problematic to you?
Hey, I’ve seen you around here a couple of times. Starting to feel like Lemmy is a rather small and tight community after all. Thanks for sticking up for veganism. :)
I have (genuinely) tried really hard over the years to try and see it that way. To try to feel bad about the idea that an animal died so that I could eat it.
It has never worked, not even a little bit. I’ve been on a farm a few times and have seen my food killed right in front of me, yet it never bothered me neither as a child nor an adult. The most I can do is pretend to care so that other people think I’m a saint, but I genuinely am not capable of feeling anything for the animals that I’m eating. I wonder if that’s a biological thing? Like some people are born without the genes that make you sad about this type of thing.
Idk, but in any case, appeals to emotion have never worked on me, and will never work on me. I know there are logical, non-emotional reasons to avoid eating animals, but when I see vegan discussions online focusing on the emotional side of it, I just eye roll and leave. I guess it’s ironic, but a lot of vegans I’ve met IRL and online are lacking empathy.
That was not an appeal to emotion. It’s asking for a logical justification. Do you think actions that harm others, deserve consideration regardless of whether or not it makes you feel bad? It’s about how the victims feel.
deleted by creator