111–120 of 145 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you think animals in the wild are being cruel to each other when they eat them?
Yes? What nonstandard non-dictionary definition of "cruel" do you use, that would not apply to eating something alive? (And presumably also does not describe what happens in factory farming, which is the actual topic at hand, and which wildlife behavior has nothing to do with)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Space that is currently dedicated to pasture is already currently dedicated to wildlife. In fact, grazing cattle on land serves to rejuvenate the land, since the cattle's hoove's serve as little plows, and the cows walk around and poop and pee, which fertilizes the land and allows for insects and bugs to thrive, which helps the bird population, and the little rodents.
In some cases that land was recently deforested. It was previously dedicated to wildlife but now it's dedicated to agriculture which happens to benefit some different wildlife.
I really wish them to succeed. Imagine centuries from now, a future civilisation where human-inflicted cruelty towards billions and billions of sentient beings is ended...
Beef cattle are almost always raised on open pastureland. They live a very normal, happy, life for all their years. Yes their last moments are perhaps bad, but then so are ours. Would you rather not exist at all if it saved you from dying?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mostly vegan? So you're not vegan.
Hence, "mostly vegan". I was vegan for 6-7 years, now I'm begrudgingly consuming oysters and clams. Both have fewer neurons than a mosquito and no brain or central nervous system. I'm not certain they can't feel pain, but I was having a hard time sustaining my health within my budget on a fully plant-based diet, so until I can get back to a place where I feel like I'm getting complete nutrition on plant-based foods a…
Veganism as a taxonomical distinction between animals and plants/fungi doesn’t make sense because it would entail eating sentient plants which doesn’t track the underlying ethics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hence, "mostly vegan". I was vegan for 6-7 years, now I'm begrudgingly consuming oysters and clams. Both have fewer neurons than a mosquito and no brain or central nervous system. I'm not certain they can't feel pain, but I was having a hard time sustaining my health within my budget on a fully plant-based diet, so until I can get back to a place where I feel like I'm getting complete nutrition on plant-based foods a…
Some vegans including myself consider bivalves to be vegan since bivalves aren’t sentient. Veganism as a taxonomical distinction between animals and plants/fungi doesn’t make sense because it would entail eating sentient plants which doesn’t track the underlying ethics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you think animals in the wild are being cruel to each other when they eat them?
Yes- it’s pretty messed up seeing those wealthy carnivore animals systematically breed, cage and murder billions of the other animals just so it can be conveniently purchased on-demand at their animal grocery store. Factory farming is pretty messed up. We like to paint a pretty picture of a pasture, and I actually do get to see that in the midwest US, but a lot of the meat people buy does come from horrible condition…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some vegans including myself consider bivalves to be vegan since bivalves aren’t sentient. Veganism as a taxonomical distinction between animals and plants/fungi doesn’t make sense because it would entail eating sentient plants which doesn’t track the underlying ethics.
Can you give an example of a sentient plant?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I agree. Honestly, as long as the product isn't contaminated, the consumer doesn't care if it made in roller bottles or futuristic machines. At worse they are misleading investors, but are not endangering the health of consumers. Theranos on the other hand, actually hurt not just investors but the end consumer by promising them blood tests that did not actually work.
> At worse they are misleading investors, but are not endangering the health of consumers. > Theranos on the other hand, actually hurt not just investors but the end consumer by promising them blood tests that did not actually work. Elizabeth Holmes was _acquitted_ of defrauding patients; her convictions were only for defrauding investors. This looks a lot like Theranos.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you think we subsidize meat production? Isn't it sugar and soybeans that we subsidize?
In the west we subsidize water which indirectly subsidizes beef production.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In some cases that land was recently deforested. It was previously dedicated to wildlife but now it's dedicated to agriculture which happens to benefit some different wildlife.
Forests are full of trees and trees tend to convert sunlight into wood, something that very little wildlife can eat. There's typically more food available to wildlife on pastures even when farmers try to fend off wildlife. For example, deforestation in Australia combined with a general reluctance of Australians to hunt brought about a kangaroo population explosion that requires government-mandated culls.
Not all wildlife can be picked up and pet by a human. That doesn’t mean it’s not a living being participating with a vital role in the ecosystem. There was a time before life could eat wood, and that time period is why the energy source is named “fossil fuel” and “dino juice”, that time period was long ago.