• anon6789@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t totally disagree with you, if that means anything. I don’t get any personal satisfaction from it, but I don’t feel bad about it either. Animals eat animals.

    People can choose to not eat animal products, and I can admire that. I try to progressively reduce my use of them too. But we’re both doing things to actively try to do something better for the world and ourselves, which is more than many will bother to do. Even if we don’t agree on some things, we’re both doing what we feel is making a better and informed choice. You don’t have to agree with me, but I don’t feel there’s either side that can claim a moral superiority based solely on what’s on our plates. I’m sure you could find someone who’d claim they’re “more vegan” then you or some other gatekeeping nonsense like that.

    • the_q@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I disagree. There is a morally correct choice here. Animals feel pain, experience grief, play and form bonds. They don’t exist as some sort of resource, but people think of them as such. To willingly inflict suffering and pain on these creatures is wrong. Full stop.

      • anon6789@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Again, I don’t disagree with you. But no food supply chain has zero cost to animals. Land is cleared to farm. “Pest animals” and insects are killed to protect yields. Animals are killed or burned by pesticides, rodenticides, and fertilizers. More animals and insects killed at storage facilities. Pollution from transport. Waste from scrapping “ugly” produce. There is still a cost, and you can’t quantify what it is.

        I get about 2/3 of my annual meat from a single deer, with no waste, no pollution, and no further cost to the environment and it leaves more food through the winter for the other deer. During the rest of the year, I supply them with essential mineral supplements so they stay healthy.

        If you want to judge my decisions, you’re free to. But to think you still don’t require any sacrifice from animals is a bit naive, and if you have a pet, I find that mildly hypocritical. But you do you. We’re allowed to be different and have different values and beliefs. I’m not here to force mine on you or anyone else.

        But we should probably leave this chat here. We’re kinda off topic, and I dont want us to get mad with each other. Keep doing your best.

        • the_q@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          But that single deer didn’t need to die. That’s my point. You don’t have to eat meat. That deer has just as much right to live as any human. You keep using mass suffering as justification to kill that one deer as “better” but it isn’t.

          • anon6789@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            No attempt at justification, it’s accepting my biological footprint and having a personal understanding and a decision on what e cost of it is. We both have one. But you can’t say for sure the cost in animal lives of your choices.

            You can downvote this like the other respectful comments I’ve given you, but it doesn’t change the blind eye you’re turning on the fact that your food still has a cost of life, you just hand those responsibilities off to someone else. I don’t feel like you’re open for discourse on this, so I’m going to politely disengage with you now. I’m sorry we couldn’t find any common ground, because we both spend more time thinking about these things than the majority of people ever will.

            • the_q@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              I get the whole ‘respect’ schtick probably gives you an easy out for arguments like this. It also probably makes you feel like your opinions have the same importance or weight as anyone else’s, but you hunt. You hunt and don’t need to. Any kind of explanation or discussion of balance etc is negated by the fact you hunt.

              You are right though. I’m not open to discussion because you’re objectively wrong.

              • wildginger
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Its such a shame that anyone who actually knows about this topic objectively calls you a liar tho, right?

                Like damn, it really must sting that every single professional who studies ecosystems for a living wholeheartedly does not agree with you.