You don't think a pig or a cow have the concept of freedom? And the cow doesn't resist the killing?
You say whales suffer from being enclosed but maintain a cow doesn't if it is forcibly impregnated once a year, having its child taken from it days after birth, milked for ten months until dry? The strain that puts on its body, that isn't suffering? Would taking a whale's child away from it cause suffering?
If you can watch the standardized process by which these products are made, and then conclude there is no suffering, please do. Watching Dominion was a big part of convincing me of the things I believe now and didn't before.
Here's the part specific to Cows -- https://youtu.be/LQRAfJyEsko?t=3183
You haven't yet defined why cattle are not slaves, you said it was their inability to conceive of freedom, their inability to suffer, but you seem to now concede those.
If it's funny to you that the two might be compared, ask why. It's definitely not something traditional society discusses, so maybe that's why it's so foreign of a concept to you.
So wage slaves, who do work of their own volition, are more valid slaves than other sentient beings kept in cages and exploited for their reproductive systems and eventually, flesh? If slavery is not defined by suffering, what is it defined by, the absence of free will?
It's very easy to write ethical questions off as nonsense. That's what the right does when discussion of trans identity come up, that's what they do when discussion of black reparations come up. They're conversations that lack logic to them because they have never been made to consider them before, not in school, not by their peers.
I would challenge that the battery cages that house five chickens in a square meter for their entire lives are a bit more than loose restrictions on their freedom. I think it would be a struggle to find and manage a system that places greater restriction, since capitalism would have been incentivized to do it.
This comes back to just having the knowledge of what I'm talking about here, look at this clip of what a battery cage is: https://youtu.be/LQRAfJyEsko?t=1583
And then let me know if you consider this loose restriction on freedom. I think the cages are the main reason for their suffering here.
You need to ask yourself what thinking is behind the thought that humans have the inherent right to not be enslaved over an animal. It certainly wasn't always that way, and isn't in many places still. That's what we're talking about, so to reference it as a forgone conclusion without justifying it skips over the point of the discussion and the question.
Laws define ethics now? I'm certain that police brutality has a legal definition, but doesn't actually define it properly in our legal system, does it? Definitions are defined at some point by people, they are not immutable. The person who had to define it before you had to have reasoning, and that's the same reasoning you need to explain here to justify the definition.
Did you think I was arguing "putting the cheese in the mouth" was the ethical issue? You're right of course, at that point it's just cheese.
But purchasing those things creates the demand that someone somewhere has to put a living being through torture, a horrible life in a warehouse having child after child stripped away. And if you value the capacity for empathy of a whale, it's the same for a cow.
Other animals don't need to have the same concept of sexuality as people in order to be raped, I hope that's clear enough. We have animal cruelty laws against our pets for a reason. It may not be a sexual violation to them, but it is still physical harm. It is exploitation of another being that suffers.
If you did watch the standardized process of how we produce these things, which I've linked twice now, I think that more than sufficiently demonstrates harm. If the harm shocks you, maybe that says something about you, because there's no other way to present it. The machine lines of individual animals having their throats slit, dipped alive into boiling water, the cows struggling in the pens to avoid another bolt shot into their skulls.
And for what? A meat we can mimic with soy or pea protein? A cheese we can mimic with cashews? There's no rationalizing it.
I have a strong feeling you didn't watch it, and I can't make you, but it would give your arguments a lot stronger ground if you have the full knowledge of what you're talking about in the future.
cows love when people take away their children. Cows love being killed. Cows love being forcibly impregnated and milked everyday, despite common infections of the udders. Just because you don't care doesn't mean they don't
a 5 year old's notion of freedom does not extend further than its immediate living conditions, does that make enslaving them ok?
deleted by creator
so you don't mind if I kill them for food?
deleted by creator
ok lemme sell my five year old for money if that makes you more comfortable
deleted by creator
What distinguishes them, in your definition?
deleted by creator
You don't think a pig or a cow have the concept of freedom? And the cow doesn't resist the killing?
You say whales suffer from being enclosed but maintain a cow doesn't if it is forcibly impregnated once a year, having its child taken from it days after birth, milked for ten months until dry? The strain that puts on its body, that isn't suffering? Would taking a whale's child away from it cause suffering?
If you can watch the standardized process by which these products are made, and then conclude there is no suffering, please do. Watching Dominion was a big part of convincing me of the things I believe now and didn't before.
Here's the part specific to Cows -- https://youtu.be/LQRAfJyEsko?t=3183
deleted by creator
You haven't yet defined why cattle are not slaves, you said it was their inability to conceive of freedom, their inability to suffer, but you seem to now concede those.
If it's funny to you that the two might be compared, ask why. It's definitely not something traditional society discusses, so maybe that's why it's so foreign of a concept to you.
So wage slaves, who do work of their own volition, are more valid slaves than other sentient beings kept in cages and exploited for their reproductive systems and eventually, flesh? If slavery is not defined by suffering, what is it defined by, the absence of free will?
deleted by creator
It's very easy to write ethical questions off as nonsense. That's what the right does when discussion of trans identity come up, that's what they do when discussion of black reparations come up. They're conversations that lack logic to them because they have never been made to consider them before, not in school, not by their peers.
I would challenge that the battery cages that house five chickens in a square meter for their entire lives are a bit more than loose restrictions on their freedom. I think it would be a struggle to find and manage a system that places greater restriction, since capitalism would have been incentivized to do it.
This comes back to just having the knowledge of what I'm talking about here, look at this clip of what a battery cage is: https://youtu.be/LQRAfJyEsko?t=1583
And then let me know if you consider this loose restriction on freedom. I think the cages are the main reason for their suffering here.
You need to ask yourself what thinking is behind the thought that humans have the inherent right to not be enslaved over an animal. It certainly wasn't always that way, and isn't in many places still. That's what we're talking about, so to reference it as a forgone conclusion without justifying it skips over the point of the discussion and the question.
Laws define ethics now? I'm certain that police brutality has a legal definition, but doesn't actually define it properly in our legal system, does it? Definitions are defined at some point by people, they are not immutable. The person who had to define it before you had to have reasoning, and that's the same reasoning you need to explain here to justify the definition.
deleted by creator
If you're acknowledging that eating meat and dairy is cruelty, and wrong, then what argument is there left to have? We agree.
Everyone, including the two of us, should stop creating the demand for those products.
Removed by mod
Did you think I was arguing "putting the cheese in the mouth" was the ethical issue? You're right of course, at that point it's just cheese.
But purchasing those things creates the demand that someone somewhere has to put a living being through torture, a horrible life in a warehouse having child after child stripped away. And if you value the capacity for empathy of a whale, it's the same for a cow.
Other animals don't need to have the same concept of sexuality as people in order to be raped, I hope that's clear enough. We have animal cruelty laws against our pets for a reason. It may not be a sexual violation to them, but it is still physical harm. It is exploitation of another being that suffers.
If you did watch the standardized process of how we produce these things, which I've linked twice now, I think that more than sufficiently demonstrates harm. If the harm shocks you, maybe that says something about you, because there's no other way to present it. The machine lines of individual animals having their throats slit, dipped alive into boiling water, the cows struggling in the pens to avoid another bolt shot into their skulls.
And for what? A meat we can mimic with soy or pea protein? A cheese we can mimic with cashews? There's no rationalizing it.
I have a strong feeling you didn't watch it, and I can't make you, but it would give your arguments a lot stronger ground if you have the full knowledge of what you're talking about in the future.
Yes, this is correct. Continue purchasing meat. My stock portfolio thanks you.
:capitalist:
Most food production is for profit so your stock portfolio will welcome my purchase of kidney beans
Lower profit margin with less cruelty. Agriculture is a very boring category aside from GMO patents.
Yeah less cruelty is a good reason to avoid meat. Capitalists profiting isn't that great of a reason since they'll profit off of anything you eat
cows love when people take away their children. Cows love being killed. Cows love being forcibly impregnated and milked everyday, despite common infections of the udders. Just because you don't care doesn't mean they don't
livestock is not like children, because I say they're different
Removed by mod
deleted by creator