It is September 18th and carnists are still murderers.

    • maya [she/her, they/them]
      ·
      2 years ago

      We're talking about animal agriculture, but if you'd rather disengage because you realize how stupid you look I can just drop a PPB and end it.

        • maya [she/her, they/them]
          ·
          2 years ago

          Also the irony of saying that nazis and vegans use the same language, only to be using the phrase "inferior beings" unironically a few comments later.

            • MF_BROOM [he/him]
              ·
              2 years ago

              Nobody is saying that humans and animals is an apples-to-apples comparison, carnists put these words in the mouths of vegans all the time and it's really fucking annoying and a straw-man argument. However, you'd have to be a moron to not see the parallels between human and animal suffering, because animals, just like humans, very much have a capacity to suffer. As for myself, I don't think "superiority" and "inferiority" are morally relevant characteristics anyways, so long as an animal has a capacity to suffer, which they do. If I have the choice to not participate in a cruel, sadistic industry that tortures animals by the billions, why the fuck wouldn't I abstain from that?

              If we perceive ourselves as superior to all other life on Earth, one could argue that that's exactly why we should hold ourselves to higher moral standards and not needlessly slaughter billions of animals each year for human consumption when so many plant-based alternatives exist.

              • 420blazeit69 [he/him]
                ·
                2 years ago

                Nobody is saying that humans and animals is an apples-to-apples comparison

                Using "murder" to describe killing an animal is kind of saying that, right?

                • edwardligma [he/him]
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  is it though? we mostly use the same words for animals as we use for humans, we dont have a whole parallel set of words we use. we would say someone would punch, kick, push, hurt, hug, help etc etc etc an animal (as we would also say an animal walks, runs, eats, likes, dislikes, is afraid of etc etc), and its mostly really in the particularly uncomfortable areas of animal agriculture where we start moving into specific euphemistic language.

                  and if someones dog was deliberately killed for pleasure, nobody would bat an eye at that person saying their dog was murdered. nobody would think that person was saying that people and dogs are apples-to-apples, they would think that this person understood their dog as a thinking, feeling being worthy of moral consideration. the apples-to-apples comparison thats closer to that is someone deliberately killing a pig for pleasure, and so the real question is what is the difference between a dog and a pig that justifies the difference in moral consideration between them?

                  • MF_BROOM [he/him]
                    ·
                    2 years ago

                    Maybe we're supposed to use the carnist-approved term "humane slaughter" instead

                  • 420blazeit69 [he/him]
                    ·
                    2 years ago

                    If you ask a bunch of people to define murder, vegans would be about the only ones who would include animals without prompting. Even among non-vegans who might refer to killing a pet as murder, few would support treating pet killers they way we treat people killers.

                    the real question is what is the difference between a dog and a pig that justifies the difference in moral consideration between them?

                    This also strikes me as arguing -- at least from a moral standpoint -- that you can make a roughly apples-to-apples comparison between how humans and animals should be treated. Of course you're going to get people thinking you're saying that.

            • maya [she/her, they/them]
              ·
              2 years ago

              When you say "animals are objectively inferior to humans" what you mean "non-humans are objective inferior to humans." Since humans are animals, there must be some trait that you think makes a human more worthy of moral consideration. What is that trait?

          • newerAccountWhoDis [they/them]
            ·
            2 years ago

            I don't eat meat and I try to avoid all animal products. Si no hay café para todos, no habrá para nadie.

            • maya [she/her, they/them]
              ·
              2 years ago

              If that's the case you agree with 90% of the vegan position anyways, so I don't know what you have to gain from coming here and stirring shit.

            • MF_BROOM [he/him]
              ·
              2 years ago

              Sounds like you could try harder, you better get on that