• sorata@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    You are right, but I believe putting a cease to life is not inherently bad. If we could kill animals without letting them feel anything, that wouldn’t really be bad.

    • Clompsh@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean sure, but the animal agriculture industry is typically inhumane and cruel to animals while they’re still alive, because it’s more profitable that way. Minimising the suffering they feel when they die is not going to do much really.

      • FlowVoid
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Fishermen are no more cruel to fish than any other predator.

    • whenigrowup356@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ethical consideration has to extend to more than just painless death to be worth a damn. I can’t walk into an infant ward and painlessly murder infants in their sleep for a reason.

    • TWeaK@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is why we should be killing pigs with nitrogen, rather than CO2. CO2 is how a mammal determines it is suffocating, meanwhile the air is mostly made up of nitrogen so we ignore it. However, it’s precisely this which makes it dangerous to humans working nearby (also the fact that CO2 is heavier than air so you can have open pits), and it’s ruled too expensive to do it humanely.

        • TWeaK@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I like bacon. Also there’s something to be said of the simple fact that almost all life eats other life. Why is plant life lesser than animal life to you?

          However, the day they start selling lab grown bacon I will gladly switch to that.

          • McKee@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Because life is not the most important factor to me. Sentience is.

            But let’s entertain the idea life was the most important factor. Raising animals to eat them kills way more plant life than just eating plants directly as you need to clear a ton of land and grow a ton of plant just to feed all these animals you’re raising. So even if that was the differentiating factor not exploiting other non human animals would be the way to go as you would preserve more life.

            Liking something to me is not a solid argument to exploit another sentient being. If I was saying that I liked kicking dogs it would not make it ok to do so for example.

            • TWeaK@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I didn’t say preservation of all life was the most important factor. I said almost all life eats other life.

              There’s a big difference between kicking a dog and eating food.

              • McKee@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                You’ve clearly asked me why I considered plant life less than animal life which I answered. I then went further and showed that this question was actually irrelevant to the point I was making because even if I were to consider it as equal or more important I should still plants instead of animal products.

                There is no difference between the two when not in a survival situation. One is done for taste buds pleasure the other might be done because you enjoy kicking dogs.

                Actually I would dare say that kicking a dog is better than killing and eating them.At least I know I’d prefer getting kicked rather than killed and eaten.

                • TWeaK@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  But what about a choice between being kicked and never being born? Most animals that are eaten are bred to be eaten. They would not exist if people weren’t going to eat them.

                  • McKee@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I think when going this route it helps to view it with an analogy as it makes it more intuitive to understand why I don’t find this an appealing view.

                    If I were to to adopt this view point, this would mean I would be also ok with breeding humans for any given purpose (let’s say Slavery as it’s an easy one) as I could justify it saying: “It’s better for them as they would have never existed otherwise”. However I think intuitively most people would agree that would still not make it ok and that’s why I would not consider it ok for animals. Because fundamentally we’re still violating - I think - fundamental rights. (e.g. most negative rights like right not to be killed)

                    P.S.: I have a rights based approach on how we should interact with animals and not a weéfarost one as I think it leads to these kinds of issues where you end up justifying terrible things.

        • Gabu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          We both know that’s not going to happen. If I want to have bacon, would you rather me quickly and painlessly kill the pig, or use a blunt butter knife to kill them?

          • McKee@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I sincerely believe it’s going to happen. Furthermore of course when presenting between two horrible choices I would the choose the less horrible option. Fortunately the choice is not between these two it’s actually, “Would you rather me quickly and painlessly kill the pig, use a blunt butter knife or not kill them”. I think when not forgetting the third option it’s clear it’s the better one.

          • m532@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Maybe we should eat you instead of the pig. I’m pretty sure the pig does not want bacon.

            • Gabu@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Thanks, now I know you’re completely clueless about even the most basic things. Pigs will happily eat bacon.

      • FlowVoid
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        If an alien civilization harvested all plants from earth but left the animals behind, would that be ok?

        All agriculture kills animals, even farmers who only grow crops.