I guess it appears in the local Lemmy.world feed which is followed by much more random people and a bigger audience, while solarpunks are mostly people who care about ecology.
Slrpnk.net for a happy safe place and Lemmy.world to fight and shitpost with carnists.
The second one can be useful in certain contexts, after all we have a message to share with the world, even if we get shunned by it.
I didn't follow anything. This appears in my page.
But I think it is a silly saying. If I eat meat, then I might as well kick every dog I see in the street and shoot BBs at cats, because I am already an abuser anyway?
Is it more cruel to kick a dog or to cut its throat?
To be fair, it's culturally very normalized to just buy meat and not think about how the animal was treated at all. But I also think people who are genuinely opposed to animal cruelty would agree that cutting their throats is a very cruel thing to do (aside from the treatment on factory farms).
Meat eaters usually lie somewhere between
"I've never thought about how the animals I eat were treated"
"I'd rather not support that but I've not managed to break the habit yet"
"I'm fine with it if I don't have to see it"
"I don't care"
The first two aren't animal abusers imo, but the last two are.
Yeeehaw fellow meat eater, wanna go murder some endangered species for our cannibalistic glee? I got plenty spare space on my monster truck once I took those filthy seabelts and pollution filters off.
what is this argument? you can abuse animals without eating them? like that was a thing?
because it doesn't work the other way, unless you are pedantic and say that killing an animal is beyond abuse therefore it isn't
Well about being quick I can't promise anything, but telling everyone that I killed you humanely afterwards is something I can commit myself. I can even post images of you being happy and shit.
But you won't get emotional nor make a drama about it, right?
It will be painless and you will be gone with a smile in your face knowing that your body parts will serve a purpose to make my friends happy for a while in my great BBQ!
"Killing humanely" is just about minimising abuse, not nullifying it. Who decides when the abuse is small enough to be called humane? The slaughterhouses marketing their slaughtering as humane.
Yes, it is about minimizing abuse, reducing suffering. There is no nullification of suffering, existing necessarily entails some amount of it, but that's no reason not to try. I agree that veganism is the more ethical decision, and that the people who profit the most from the suffering can't be trusted to define what is and isn't abuse.
I swear more carnists follow this channel more closely than vegans, just to downvote.
Also, this place is kind of unmoderated, you should go to ![email protected]
Now you're just playing victim.
I guess it appears in the local Lemmy.world feed which is followed by much more random people and a bigger audience, while solarpunks are mostly people who care about ecology.
Slrpnk.net for a happy safe place and Lemmy.world to fight and shitpost with carnists.
The second one can be useful in certain contexts, after all we have a message to share with the world, even if we get shunned by it.
No, this happens on slrpnk as well, but the mods actually ban serial downvoters and remove the ragebait comments.
But yes, .world has a larger base. Still, instead of blocking this community, carnists just try to bash and deliberately downvote every post.
I didn't follow anything. This appears in my page.
But I think it is a silly saying. If I eat meat, then I might as well kick every dog I see in the street and shoot BBs at cats, because I am already an abuser anyway?
Is it more cruel to kick a dog or to cut its throat?
To be fair, it's culturally very normalized to just buy meat and not think about how the animal was treated at all. But I also think people who are genuinely opposed to animal cruelty would agree that cutting their throats is a very cruel thing to do (aside from the treatment on factory farms).
Meat eaters usually lie somewhere between
The first two aren't animal abusers imo, but the last two are.
Yeeehaw fellow meat eater, wanna go murder some endangered species for our cannibalistic glee? I got plenty spare space on my monster truck once I took those filthy seabelts and pollution filters off.
I do agree though that this meme is needlessly offensive.
To quote The Joker, “It’d be funny if it weren’t so pathetic. Oh what the who…I’ll laugh anyway.”
It's entirely possible to do one without doing the other, but you already know that
what is this argument? you can abuse animals without eating them? like that was a thing?
because it doesn't work the other way, unless you are pedantic and say that killing an animal is beyond abuse therefore it isn't
Killing can be done humanely
Hey I want to humanely kill you for my weekends bbq with friends, it's okay if I come this afternoon for you?
Just make it quick. Or not. As long as i don't have to see it and have to think about it.
Well about being quick I can't promise anything, but telling everyone that I killed you humanely afterwards is something I can commit myself. I can even post images of you being happy and shit.
I've seen it often enough to know exactly how important it is to make it quick and clean
you will have to defeat the entire military of the country I am a citizen of as I outsource my security to them with my taxed
Great, that's going to be A LOT of meat.
You can try
But you won't get emotional nor make a drama about it, right?
It will be painless and you will be gone with a smile in your face knowing that your body parts will serve a purpose to make my friends happy for a while in my great BBQ!
Lol nah I'll fight you, winner eats the loser
I don't understand, humanely means that you'll be happy about it. I'm literally doing you a favor.
"Killing humanely" is just about minimising abuse, not nullifying it. Who decides when the abuse is small enough to be called humane? The slaughterhouses marketing their slaughtering as humane.
Yes, it is about minimizing abuse, reducing suffering. There is no nullification of suffering, existing necessarily entails some amount of it, but that's no reason not to try. I agree that veganism is the more ethical decision, and that the people who profit the most from the suffering can't be trusted to define what is and isn't abuse.
say the sentence slowly
I did, now what