CosmicScientist wrote:Stickymayhem wrote:I read about 20% of that and it was really badly wrong but not really solveable without solving some deepseated issues you seem to have about this and I've run out of effort
so im only pretending to be retarded haha epic troll
ok you can go home now
The vegan is faced with an argument that vegan ethics are deeply and inherently flawed. The vegan gives up.
You think that because animals get hurt they should not. The method of preventing harm is to remove the reason for their existence. The perfect and final solution.
The problem is your arguments are based on compassion and the horrible feelings the industry generates yet your solution is equally grim. You demand everyone to choose between perpetual removal or a final removal.
Tell me why the middle ground of industrial regulation is wrong? Why we cannot still have beef, pork, chicken, egg, leather, feather, wool, milk, silk and honey? These things bring joy to the world and are cheaper or have differing qualities to alternative products.
You never answered me about pets, recreation, law enforcement, medical testing and now I shall add zoos. You never said if these must go or if they must not go. You demand removal of animal harm. That will remove these.
Actually to be fair you summed up your points reasonably here lets keep it from getting over bloated
I think we should stop DELIBERATELY INTENTIONALLY hurting animals. Veganism is about preventing harm and exploitation. The biggest harm and exploitation is the billions of animals we breed to exploit and harm. Veganism is almost entirely focused on this aspect because it's the biggest problem to solve first. Once it's solved we'll worry about the next biggest thing and so on. This is where the fight is.
The problem is your arguments are based on compassion and the horrible feelings the industry generates yet your solution is equally grim. You demand everyone to choose between perpetual removal or a final removal.
My solution is simple: Stop paying people to intentionally deliberately harm animals. This is where 90% of your harm to animals comes from: Your diet. So improve the situation by 90%. That's all. No world scale deletion. Calm down
Tell me why the middle ground of industrial regulation is wrong? Why we cannot still have beef, pork, chicken, egg, leather, feather, wool, milk, silk and honey? These things bring joy to the world and are cheaper or have differing qualities to alternative products.
They are inefficient due to the basic energy economy of the food chain. There are alternatives that may not taste identical but serve the same purpose, and the exact taste is not worth the suffering and inefficiency. The joy to the world is not worth the suffering they caused, and profit does not mix well with ethics. As long as there is a profit motive to commodifying animals there will be abuse somewhere for the sake of that profit. It's not worth the risk, and I believe the killing is inherently wrong and realistically cannot be done quickly, painlessly with regard for their ethical well being while being done for profit.
I am anti-zoo, I am pro pets that can be put on a vegan diet (So not cats and other obligate carnivores basically) but I believe we should adopt and stop breeding them until we bring the numbers down. Zoos are bad you can research that yourself, the animals get bored out of their minds in many of them. Medical testing is ineffective on animals I elaborated on this elsewhere. I have no opinion on law enforcement I suppose it depends on how the dog is treated and injury rates for them I haven't looked up.