Billie: “You can eat meat. You can love animals. But you can’t do boooooooooth.”

[Ladle Ghoulash 53,164]

26 minutes ago, ARTPOPe said:

The circle jerk of the proud carcass eaters in this thread...

A hit dog... oh wait, those are precious animals, worthy of respect and a life free of pain, rape and torture... cow/pig/sheep/goat/chicken/duck/goose/turkey will holler 

I do kinda love how vegans will never even bother to buck the stereotype of being insufferable. Admire the commitment to the bit.

[Ladle Ghoulash 53,164]

22 minutes ago, Bronco said:

Genuine question, but in a meat-free world.

What do you expect to happen to animals near exclusively raised for livestock? 

This is not to say that life as livestock is a positive one. Its just I never see proponents of veganism who argue about ethics and morality actually answer what would happen to no longer needed animals? 

Yeah, apparently ethical farming isn’t an option (we’ve arrived at the infamous binary again), which I wouldn’t say is an unpleasant life for a lot of animals (especially of they’re cage free, cared for etc.), so I’d be interested in hearing the alternative.

Edited April 29 by Ladle Ghoulash

[TaylorSwift 162,475]

what do you think? @Rat Boy

[darkgaga 7,115]

You can make good and interesting music. 
 

You can be named Billie Eilish. 
 

but you can’t do booooooooth

[uglysexy 243]

I wonder, in a world where everyone eventually becomes vegan, would we turn to animals next? Since we could make meat alternatives, or come up with complex diets, would we seek to get rid of the "unnecessary" suffering that animals inflict upon each other to survive or for fun?

This is not to say that veganism and vegan choices are bad, but where would we stop? Because we would probably think that it's right for animals to keep their diets, but then wouldn't we also need to keep our diet (which, throughout all of history, has been omnivore, more plant-leaning in some places but never without meat)? If not, then should we also change animal habits? What about pets, should they also need to change?

For sure though, I think we should get rid of meat in every fast food. It's become too cheap and available when it should be something of great value because I know from experience that raising animals the right way is hard and takes time. We should be consuming it for a need, not on a whim. And we don't need THAT much of a production. It would be a benefit for human health as well.

[ARTPOPe 10,169]

4 hours ago, Bronco said:

Genuine question, but in a meat-free world.

What do you expect to happen to animals near exclusively raised for livestock? 

This is not to say that life as livestock is a positive one. Its just I never see proponents of veganism who argue about ethics and morality actually answer what would happen to no longer needed animals? 

I mean, in an ideal meat-free (or largely meat-reduced) world, the livestock wouldn't exist in the absurd way and numbers it currently does in the first place.

Realistically, it wouldn't and couldn't be a "everyone stops eating meat from one day to another" solution, but a gradual reduction in the consumption of animal products and the reduction in breeding of further livestock.

They are bred into existence to meet demand after all.
If demand goes down, breeding would go down as well, therefore reducing the livestock numbers in total, minimizing exploitation and suffering of animals in the future as much as possible, which is what most Vegans strive for.

Ugly truth to face: most of those animals currently alive would still be slaughtered, while some could live the rest of their lives in sanctuaries. Harsh, but probably the most realistic outcome.

And since some livestock breeds have been selectively bred to completely disregard animal welfare, such as certain chicken breeds who grow so quickly that their bodies struggle heavily to support the growth, basically making their entire lives purely pain and misery - wouldn't the most ethical thing be to let these breeds go completely extinct?

That being said, I am also fully aware that a small minority of humans would face health-related issues and can't live truly healthy lives without (some) animal products in their diets and/or would need a lot more careful planning or heavier supplementation.

Though for the majority, plant-based diets (especially those focused on whole foods rather than mock meats/substitutes for animal products) are viable, and usually healthier in the long run.

They'd most likely become more affordable as well, since governments would be forced to stop subsidising animal agriculture practices and the artificial lowering of animal product prices, especially in Europe and Northern America.

For those individuals who truly couldn't live without for health concerns, animal products would have to be farmed in "the most ethical ways" possible, but again, it's a very small minority that would face these concerns.

3 hours ago, Ladle Ghoulash said:

I do kinda love how vegans will never even bother to buck the stereotype of being insufferable. Admire the commitment to the bit.

Ah yes... as if those who consume animal products posting pictures or unoriginal comments regarding their love for bacon, burgers, steaks and whatnot under basically every vegan post aren't "insufferable".
Admire the commitment to the bit.

Well, I’d rather be called “insufferable” over a snarky comment, than support and pay for the unnecessary exploitation, rape, torture, and killing of billions of sentient beings each year.

But to each their own, I guess.

[Bebe 17,289]

5 hours ago, Ladle Ghoulash said:

Yeah, apparently ethical farming isn’t an option (we’ve arrived at the infamous binary again), which I wouldn’t say is an unpleasant life for a lot of animals (especially of they’re cage free, cared for etc.), so I’d be interested in hearing the alternative.

“I MeAn I APpaRentLy ETHiCal TrEAtment oF sLaVEs ISn’T aN oPtioN. It’S tHE iNFaMoUs BiNAry AGAin “ 

The southern slave owner said to the radical, annoying, abolitionist.

Please provide an example of this mythical “ethical farming” that reduces suffering and environmental impacts more than a vegan diet. How do you raise livestock in a way that meets demand for animal products, eliminates the problems of land use and methane emissions and doesn’t result in the exploitation and slaughter of a sentient being?

You are not the first person to mention this magical farming practice please be the first person to explain what this actually looks like.

The reality is that animal agriculture will always involve breeding animals into existence, controlling their bodies, taking what they produce, killing or discarding them when they are no longer useful.

To go back to the dairy example:

Cows do not just “make milk” for humans. Like all mammals, they produce milk after pregnancy. So dairy requires repeated impregnation, birth, calf separation, and then milking.

These dairy cows are living in constant physical discomfort and suffering. We know that cows get highly distressed when its calf is taken from them, we know the physical discomfort/pain that comes from repeated rape, forced insemination and back to back pregnancies. 

Male or unwanted calves may be killed on farm, slaughtered at around five days old, or raised for veal. These aren’t easily fixable quirks in our current system of animal agriculture - it’s how industrial farming works. There isn’t a magical “ethical farming” practice that eliminates this reality.  
 

It’s this reality that you are currently supporting by supporting the dairy industry. Can you concede that the most ethical option, when a choice is available, would be to have oat milk in your morning coffee instead of cow’s milk?

 

Edited April 30 by Bebe

[Hadrian 2,639]

I don't care what she thinks I can or can't do btw

[Evan Peters 10,776]

humans have eating meat for thousands of years. there's a reason you have canines and molars. the issue isn't eating meat or meat eaters, the issue is the industrialization of meat in general. vegans won't say this because it is much easier to blame the consumer vs. hold industries accountable because that takes effort, lobbying, activism, etc. and i don't say this as a dig to vegans lol. any vegan who is only vegan for 'animal welfare' is extremely ignorant on animal welfare to begin with. i mean, take a look at peta. i really don't think i need to bring up the various controversies of the 'savior of animals' company 

to even things out: carnivore diet people are also insufferable and ignorant, most people have anthropopathic views on animals because you, as a human, can't comprehend that animals are not humans nor do they think or act like us, and there are far too many out there who have weird vitrol hatred for animals in general 

 

[Old Gregg 46]

9 hours ago, elegidadedios said:

ok let's make this CLEAR

do i think the level of consumption we as a society make of meat is way too over the top? absolutely, i do consider we progressively should reduce it

do i think the animal abuse and exploitation is by any mean good? not at all, macro farms are a serious issue and I do believe other ways of producing meat have to be consider (although at a large scale i know that'd be hard; there has to be more ethical ways of doing so regardless)

i don't rely on veganism mostly because its principle of considering animals and humans equal beings doesn't sit right with me. i care about environment and how to live on this world on a more sustainable way

not everyone has the same reason for avoiding animal products. 

some do because of allergies

some for the environment. 

and sure, some do because they think animals are the same as humans, but I think the vast majority of vegans don't think that and if there was a real life trolly problem, it would be a no brainer for them to pull the lever, killing the animal in order to save the human. Where veganism kicks in is that in a different trolly problem where there's an additional lever they can pull where the animal and human both survive, if it's feasible for them to pull it, they would. Based on what you said about animal abuse and exploitation, I take it you'd pull the animal and human saving lever too in such a situation. 

Edited April 30 by Old Gregg

[Old Gregg 46]

8 minutes ago, LadyEnigma said:

the industry, treatment of animals, overfeeding, overbreeding, etc. and the moral/ethical implications there are completely valid, but I feel like simply eating meat itself as an action is not enough to invalidate someone's love for animals imo. 

I feel like I get both sides at least to some extent.

I don't think that knowingly subjecting innocent, sentient creatures to the abuse you mention (when it's feasible to avoid) is consistent with loving them 

Edited April 30 by Old Gregg

[Bebe 17,289]

36 minutes ago, Evan Peters said:

humans have eating meat for thousands of years. there's a reason you have canines and molars. the issue isn't eating meat or meat eaters, the issue is the industrialization of meat in general. vegans won't say this because it is much easier to blame the consumer vs. hold industries accountable because that takes effort, lobbying, activism, etc. and i don't say this as a dig to vegans lol. any vegan who is only vegan for 'animal welfare' is extremely ignorant on animal welfare to begin with. i mean, take a look at peta. i really don't think i need to bring up the various controversies of the 'savior of animals' company 

to even things out: carnivore diet people are also insufferable and ignorant, most people have anthropopathic views on animals because you, as a human, can't comprehend that animals are not humans nor do they think or act like us, and there are far too many out there who have weird vitrol hatred for animals in general 

 

Why does the fact that humans have eaten meat for thousands of years justify the practice from an ethical perspective? Why does the fact we have evolved canines justify the practice of eating meat from an ethical perspective?

Humans have engaged in violence and war against each other for thousands of years. Humans evolved the ability to lie as it was socially advantageous. You would be right to be horrified if I stated lying, cheating, stealing, murder, rape, violence and war crimes are morally justified because we’ve done it for so long and we have evolved traits  that allow us to be violent towards each other. 

You are another user hinting at some alternate form of animal agriculture that is both more environmentally friendly than plant based food production and eliminates unnecessary suffering. Can you please be the one that outlines what this looks like? How do you want to hold the industry accountable and what reforms would you lobby for?

Edited April 30 by Bebe

[Old Gregg 46]

3 minutes ago, Bebe said:

Why does the fact that humans have eaten meat for thousands of years justify the practice from an ethical perspective? Why does the fact we have evolved canines justify the practice of eating meat from an ethical perspective?

Humans have engaged in violence and war against each other for thousands of years. Humans evolved the ability to lie as it was socially advantageous. You would be right to be horrified if I stated lying, cheating, stealing, murder, rape, violence and war crimes are morally justified because we’ve done it for so long and we have evolved traits  that allow us to be violent towards each other. 

You are another user hinting at some alternate form of animal agriculture that is both more environmentally friendly than plant based food production and eliminates unnecessary suffering. Can you please be the one that outlines what this looks like? How do you want to hold the industry accountable and what reforms would you lobby for?

in case you're interested, this site addresses basically every relevant point i've ever come across. it addresses the canines argument, length of time of eating meat, basically everything  https://www.godfist.com/vegansidekick/guide.php I've just copy pasted from it a zillion times. 

[Ladle Ghoulash 53,164]

20 minutes ago, Old Gregg said:

I don't think that knowingly subjecting innocent, sentient creatures to the abuse you mention (when it's feasible to avoid) is consistent with loving them 

I don’t think ethical farming constitutes abuse. 

[sarahb 17,188]

"You can't eat meat and love animals too"

Me, looking at my shelves full of non-fiction animal books I've had since I was a kid, nature documentaries, my collection of Zoo Tycoon and animal related games, my fish tanks, my uniform from when I volunteered at an animal sanctuary, my letters opposing development threatening wildlife habitat, my attempt at a marine and wildlife biology degree at uni (damn you maths and chemistry), me visiting zoos everytime I go to a new city and my reputation as the "animal nerd" at school: hmm, well that's a false statement