There is actually adequate scientific evidence that many animals have a much greater awareness and emotional intelligence then we often attribute to them, this includes most if not all of our domesticated animals. You could argue that the act of meat eating isn't in itself amoral, but the mass suffering facilitated by the conditions within the meat industry certainly is. Not to mention the conditions it subjects its workers to. There is no ethical industrialized meat consumption.
idk, what does "feel" mean? the ones with nervous systems and appropriate receptors probably have a stimulus response. do they have an experiential self that sits in that stimulus and dwells on it like people? do they have opinions about pain?
Because no life should ever have been born and no life should ever be born after this according to you, all sorts of cruelty and suffering and unnecessary death and environmental devastation are okay if you get le epic bacon and big car go vroom vroom. This is a tenable leftist position.
Says the ideologically pure antinatalistic clown that declared that all life that has been should never have been and that everyone alive today should not exist because they didn't sign a consent waiver before being born and that no future life should be born either, all while trying to justify "fuck you got mine don't tell me what to doooooooooooo" takes on everything from speed limits to dae le epic bacon. 🤡
Recognizing the capacity of animals to understand and suffer is basic science, not idealism. People with pets understand this and we know they should protect the health and well-being of the animals they keep. In fact, they often support laws requiring that pets are treated well enough.
But the moment it's a designated food animal, this goes out the window and brains shut off.
So anyways are you gonna eat dogs and cats or are you an "idealist"?
Removed by mod
There is actually adequate scientific evidence that many animals have a much greater awareness and emotional intelligence then we often attribute to them, this includes most if not all of our domesticated animals. You could argue that the act of meat eating isn't in itself amoral, but the mass suffering facilitated by the conditions within the meat industry certainly is. Not to mention the conditions it subjects its workers to. There is no ethical industrialized meat consumption.
yes, the labor conditions are something that harms people, especially in slaughterhouses.
do you think non-human animals dont feel pain
idk, what does "feel" mean? the ones with nervous systems and appropriate receptors probably have a stimulus response. do they have an experiential self that sits in that stimulus and dwells on it like people? do they have opinions about pain?
brb, chopping a cat's foot off without anesthetic
and that has what, exactly, to do with eating the cat?
you're not seriously doing this debatelord bit lmao
Because no life should ever have been born and no life should ever be born after this according to you, all sorts of cruelty and suffering and unnecessary death and environmental devastation are okay if you get le epic bacon and big car go vroom vroom. This is a tenable leftist position.
Says the ideologically pure antinatalistic clown that declared that all life that has been should never have been and that everyone alive today should not exist because they didn't sign a consent waiver before being born and that no future life should be born either, all while trying to justify "fuck you got mine don't tell me what to doooooooooooo" takes on everything from speed limits to dae le epic bacon. 🤡
Recognizing the capacity of animals to understand and suffer is basic science, not idealism. People with pets understand this and we know they should protect the health and well-being of the animals they keep. In fact, they often support laws requiring that pets are treated well enough.
But the moment it's a designated food animal, this goes out the window and brains shut off.
So anyways are you gonna eat dogs and cats or are you an "idealist"?