• hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I have never understood this logic. If a lion eats a zebra, there’s nothing wrong with it, but when a human eats a cow, they’re a horrible person. (also I know that not all vegans think like this)

    I personally believe there’s nothing inherently wrong with eating meat, and instead the problem is how we treat the animals we eat and that we eat way too much meat, taking it for granted.

    • BraBraBra@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      We are intelligent and capable of considering the idea that an animal may not want to die, and we have it within our means to survive without meat, or with much less meat than we currently consume.

      Animals who are being lead to slaughter have been observed to panic and try to flee. They do not want to die. What right do we have to take the life of an animal that wants to live as much as any other person? We are capable of considering this question. Animals are not. That’s the difference.

      Even as a carnivore you would not eat a freshly born baby straight out of the mother’s womb, whereas any other predator would see it as an easy meal. There IS a moral implication in taking life.

      • qwertyqwertyqwerty@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        We can only afford to question this because we are in a utopia of sorts compared to just a few hundred years ago. We are capable of understanding that there are philosophical, moral, and ethical dilemmas to eating meat in 2023. However, if the world went to shit and say an electrical storm wiped out all electronics on Earth, we would not even hesitate to eat meat in as little as a few months in.

        • Kftrendy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          People have been able to “afford to question this” since antiquity - it’s not some modern affectation. You see plenty of instances of people arguing for or outright mandating vegetarian or vegan diets dating back thousands of years. I am not sure if PETA’s specific reasoning (“you shouldn’t eat a fish because the fish would prefer you not do that”) is represented, but you definitely see scholars and rulers in the ancient world arguing for a variety of reasons that people should not kill or eat animals.

        • Pili@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Socrates was already criticising it in 450 BCE. Also all Indian religions were championing non-violence as early as mid-1st millennium BCE. This is nothing new nor revolutionary and people were already questioning their actions when “the world was shit” as you put it.

          People can strive to become better in any situation.

    • voxel@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      the issue is that we’re doing it on a massive scale semi-automatically.
      keeping small amount of animals in decent-ish conditions (like on a small farm) and killing some for food/meat is fine.
      keeping thouthands of animals in tiny cages where they basically can’t move at all is not.

    • Ilandar@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree with your second paragraph, but the appeal to nature is not a good argument and routinely gets exposed as such in debates on the ethics of meat consumption. There are very clear differences between a lion and a human.

    • alamani@lemmy.fmhy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Arguing that something’s okay because it’s a natural behaviour is the naturalistic fallacy. The difference is that other species don’t have any choice over how they live or even the mental capacity to think about the morality of their actions. Humans that are well-off and don’t have medical conditions that clash with veganism do.

      I used to agree with the second paragraph, but watching videos of pigs/cows/chickens being slaughtered changed my mind. Imo their prior treatment doesn’t really negate what happens there- and even if it did, I couldn’t use ideal farm conditions as a defense when the vast majority of meat I’ve been eating is raised under less ideal conditions.

      (This isn’t calling anyone who eats a burger satan, to be clear. Just trying to say my views in good faith.)

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

        I used to agree with the second paragraph, but watching videos of pigs/cows/chickens being slaughtered changed my mind. Imo their prior treatment doesn’t really negate what happens there- and even if it did, I couldn’t use ideal farm conditions as a defense when the vast majority of meat I’ve been eating is raised under less ideal conditions.

        Methods of slaughtering them are terrible and absolutely criminal.

        One good thing PETA has done is raise awareness about how the meat industry treats its animals - I’ll give them that, definitely.

        PETA itself is an organization I place in the same category as a cult, though. Their own practices make the sincerity of their intentions almost blatantly questionable.

        • alamani@lemmy.fmhy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Agreed. Not the biggest fan of PETA; am very much a fan of animal welfare and rights being advocated for. CO2 ‘stunning’ of pigs especially gets to me.

      • TrismegistusMx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Moralizing about eating meat is a fallacy as well. You have no qualms with killing bugs or plants. You might even support killing humans in some cases. The thresholds you describe are nothing more than your own subjective, personal comfort level. Every single life form in the universe consumes other life forms in order to survive. The way we treat our food, now that is the real issue.

        • alamani@lemmy.fmhy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The difference between killing animals and plants, which do not have a CNS and therefore almost certainly aren’t sentient, has been discussed thoroughly elsewhere in this comments section. Do you believe mowing a lawn is equivalent to harming a dog?

          Regarding insects, it should be emphasised that veganism is avoiding anything that causes animal suffering or exploitation as far as is practical. Necessary cases, like the unavoidable death of insects for plant agriculture, aren’t morally equivalent to unnecessary cases in the same way that killing other humans can sometimes be justified by circumstances, eg. self-defence. (EDIT: And any livestock raised on feed are indirectly causing more insect death regardless.)

          People can indeed have different personal comfort levels when it comes to moral debates, but we can also discuss whether those comfort levels are reasonable. Otherwise ‘we have different personal comfort levels’ could be used in response to any moral question. It could be within someone’s ‘personal comfort level’ to kill and eat babies as long as they were treated well until then.

          Edit: TL;DR: context matters for any moral question and I’m not a fan of total moral relativism.

          • TrismegistusMx@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            There is no proof that the central nervous system is responsible for sentience. Mowing a lawn is a mass extinction event for the residents of that lawn. Does a broken grasshopper suffer less than a broken human, simply because it can’t wax poetic about its experience? Veganism promotes monoculture and environmental destruction as well, it’s just easier to pretend that it doesn’t.

            My point about personal comfort is that it’s the ONLY metric by which you measure your moral code regarding consumption of other life forms to extend your own life.

            • alamani@lemmy.fmhy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              While we can’t be completely sure, our current understanding of sentience makes it a reasonable assumption. Even if plants are sentient, eating from higher trophic levels causes more plant deaths than eating plants directly.

              Regarding the rest, I feel like I addressed all of that in the comment above. I’m a fallible human being and personal discomfort with killing animals no less cognitively complex than our pets, and sometimes toddlers, is definitely a factor, but I’ve been arguing based on necessity and quantity instead of that.

              EDIT: And to be clear, I’ve never claimed veganism is environmentally perfect. It doesn’t solve every problem with food production, it just helps with some, and it seems largely better for the environment (albeit with nuance around grazing certain types of land) even if we keep doing monocultures.

                • alamani@lemmy.fmhy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  If by that you mean both sides were civil, ty haha. I’m trying not to replicate the toxicity of the average reddit argument (which I got sucked into a lot) but I worry I still get too logic-as-my-blade, so I’m glad if my intentions still got through.

                  A great tip I’ve heard is to try to read others’ comments in the most good-faith tone possible, since it’s easy for that not to carry over text.

      • TrismegistusMx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Peta kills more animals in their shelters than most other organizations. It was never about protecting animals. It was always about hating humans.

          • alamani@lemmy.fmhy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Tyvm for this, though to be fair this is a PETA source; do you have anything external?

            Regardless, their claims about the petakillsanimals site being run by a disinformation org seem to be true. The wikipedia article on the CCF is damning; they seem to have a general goal of opposing any environmental, public health or social justice campaigns that harm certain industries.

      • alamani@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        To add to this, I’ve read recommendations from public health orgs to eat no more than two portions of oily fish a week, and minimise consumption of especially high sources like tuna steaks.

        Some consumption is still recommended for omega 3s, though there are algae-based supplements for EPA and DHA as well as the fish ones. Flaxseed and some nuts are great sources of ALA, but afaik its conversion to EPA and DHA isn’t great and consuming all three is a good idea.

        (Disclaimer: I am not a nutritionist. Verify things yourself before making dietary changes.)

  • HaleEndGrad@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Fish eating fish doesn’t lead to ecological disturbance. Humans have put multiple species on the verge of extinction.

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

    sigh Came from reddit to lemmy, still see stupid af carnist memes like this. Don’t know if it’s a win or what for the fediverse

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

        Relax, I’m a carnist/flexitarian. There’s nothing wrong with attributing a name to non-vegans/non-vegetarians. The world isn’t divided into vegans/vegetarians and so called ‘normal people’. It’s just as normal to not eat meat in some parts of the world.

          • debil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Well, there are others like cheese breathers, pus quaffers, bee vomit suckers, chicken period munchers and so on.

            • Ghostc1212@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Apart from cheese breather none of those hit the same, you need to get better slurs. Cheese breather also isn’t metal enough for my tastes. Stick with bloodmouth.

              • debil@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                IMO pus quaffer has some grind core vibes. That said, in real life, there’s nothing “metal” in animal exploitation. If your mindset is truly like “they call me bloodmouth, it’s metal, I’m a bloodmouth”, then I guess you’d be either a 12 year old or trolling. In either case, i hope you grow out of it.

                • Ghostc1212@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  That said, in real life, there’s nothing “metal” in animal exploitation.

                  Bro, pull up a video of a McDonald’s meat factory and tell me that shit ain’t metal as fuck

                  Also why are you mad that I’m not being serious this is the meme community not the philosophy community

  • Marxism-Fennekinism@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    You consider humans superior in intellect and ability compared to all other animals yet can’t grasp the fact that some humans have chosen to use said superior intellect and ability to avoid killing other animals?

  • MiddleWeigh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Something needs to die for you to survive, what and how much is up to your individual tolerance for input/output ratio.

    Death and suffering is a natural state of being in nature. I can reduce it, but I still need to survive.

    I hate fishing. I don’t need to fish in my current station. If I did, I would fish.

    • Zozano@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Exactly. Pretty common misconception about vegan ideology. Vegans don’t think people in developing nations have a moral imperative to change their ways because they don’t have an alternative.

      I don’t need to eat meat, so I don’t.

      • Takatakatakatakatak@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I genuinely wasn’t aware of this. Have never heard that argument made.

        So their position is basically that as soon as you have a sufficiently developed supply chain to buy refrigerated lab-grown or fake meat and get it home before it smells like a rotten protein shake, that’s what you should do? But until that happens, killing animals is ok?

        • door_in_the_face@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Nah, you don’t necessarily need lab grown or fake meat to have a healthy delicious varied vegan diet. Legumes like chickpeas, different kinds of beans and lentils as well as soy products can provide enough protein and variety if you put some effort into your cooking. You do need B12 supplements on a vegan diet though, as well as some specific nuts and seeds to cover omega 3. So those can be a problem if there’s not a lot of variety in the stores near you and you can’t order it online for whatever reason.

            • door_in_the_face@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Maybe not necessarily the dairy cow herself, but she needs to be pregnant about once per year so she doesn’t stop producing milk. That means that the calves inevitably need to be slaughtered (as well as older dairy cows) or else the herd would keep growing year after year.

            • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              I will happily drink any woman’s milk if she’s offering, but it’s actually extremely weird that y’all steal cow milk.

              • Zozano@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I think it’s extremely weird that you would happily drink any woman’s milk.

                But it is MUCH less weird than drinking bovine lactate and somatic cells.

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Uh, I only eat fake meat once every few weeks and that’s just for fun. I can live off of beans and rice just fine and it’s literally cheaper than meat lol

  • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m not on either side of the argument, but would guess a good argument would be that fish need to eat other fish in order to survive as it’s their only source of food. We don’t. Provenly.

    • nxfsi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      A person does not need to eat meat.

      People absolutely do need to eat meat, specifically cooked meat in order to be intelligent. It’s what made cavemen smarter than other animals. Also the recent rise in average height and IQ from good nutrition is in part directly related to cheap meat from factory farming.

        • Gabu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Except in most cases we can’t. You may be able to, in which case, good job, but meat is much cheaper per quantity and quality of nutrients, not to mention people like me, whose only real source of dietary iron is meat.

          • Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Iron is just a mineral, where do you think the cows get it? Plenty of plants have iron. Meat is also typically a lot more expensive than rice and beans. Like you want to eat meat, that’s cool, just stop acting like it’s for your health when meat is literally a carcinogen.

            • Gabu@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Nails have iron, try eating one of those! The air is mostly Nitrogen, why do plants even need N2 in the soil?

              It’s basic fucking science that nutrients take different forms which can be absorbed differently.

            • Gabu@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              1kg of chicken breast meat costs me less than 5 USD and covers multiple days of meals. To get equivalent nutrients out of plants would cost me way more than that.

              • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                wtf you can? Where I am chicken breast is USD $11.64 per kg!

                Compare that to beans. Where I live I can get a kg of dried pinto beans for $3.50, and with 67% as much protein per serving as chicken it would cost $5.25 to get the same amount of protein as a kg of chicken breast.

                What’s the price of 1kg of dried beans where you live? That’d be a more apt comparison.

                • Gabu@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Depends a lot on brand and quality, but I’d guess the average is somewhat close to yours, at $3.00 US. Beans are a major source of protein for most people, where I live. Doesn’t help me, though - I don’t much mind the flavor, but they make me incredibly nauseous.

  • tweeks@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    As far as value goes, I don’t particularly value my own life or that of a fish. I do value the suffering of both while living though, as in I want to minimise that as much as possible.

      • tweeks@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’d be placing a thank you letter in advance.

        Don’t get me wrong, in general I’m not a cynical person and have most things one would wish for. I just don’t think life is worth anything in itself and being alive is just a chance of experiencing or producing needless suffering. The (incredible) good feelings don’t make up for all the bad ones that exist.

        If someone where to kill me, I’d be glad it’s over. While being alive I’d feel bad for my loved ones of course, but if I’m dead I wouldn’t be able to feel that. I know that is kind of selfish, so I would try not not to kill myself as I have too much responsibilities, but if I’m just being honest, one can dream.

  • ziltoid101@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Nobody is saying that fish are moral agents that can empathise with other beings. That doesn’t man that they’re not moral subjects; the ability to understand that one is causing harm is not a prerequisite for the ability to suffer oneself. I think everyone knows this intuitively, but it does feel good to have our less moral habits be justified by memes that we would otherwise find to be illogical.

    • corvus@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      By eating vegetables you are doing harm anyway, they are living organisms after all.

      • whenigrowup356@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Even if we grant that plant “pain” is 100% morally equivalent to the pain of other beings (it isn’t, and you don’t earnestly believe that), we still have to eat them as a matter of biology, since humans aren’t producers and must consume nutrients from other life. It’s the same reason we can’t pass moral judgment on a carnivore like a lion for eating a Zebra.

        • corvus@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Morality depends on culture, what is wright in one culture is wrong in another. This is easy to see and pretty obvious, unless that you are some kind of supremacist that thinks that your beliefs are the only valid. If your problem is pain you can kill the animal with one shot in the head and it will be painless, some farmers do this in order to avoid suffering.

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

            “Bro I really wanna eat your dog bro. Bro it’s my culture bro just let me take a little bite bro I swear it’s the most delicious thing you’ve ever tasted. Bro just let me eat your dog bro, what are you some kinda racist?”

        • gloriousspearfish@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I am curious. Do you believe that humans has always had the option to not eat animals?

          What I am asking is, is there some point during the evolution of homo sapience where it shifted from being morally acceptable to being morally wrong to eat other animals?

          • corvus@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Morality depends on culture. What appeared through evolution is culture, but no one culture or the right culture. What is right in one culture is wrong in another one.

    • sorata@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      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.

      • whenigrowup356@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        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
        0
        ·
        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
            0
            ·
            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.

          • Gabu@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            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?

            • m532@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

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

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

      Build a man a campfire and he’s warm for the night; set a man on fire and he’s warm for the rest of his life

  • BachenBenno@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The difference is that the fish needs to eat the other fish. We don’t need ANY animal products. So every killed animal suffered and lost their life for 10min of taste for us that we didn’t need. Being vegan is so easy in 2023.

          • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            No you don’t. Literally every plant contains EVERY amino acid in varying amounts. You don’t need to supplement protein as a vegan.

            • people_are_cute@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Literally every plant contains EVERY amino acid in varying amounts.

              Guess we can all survive on grass then. Agriculture and societies were a mistake, let’s just become cattle and chill all day /s

              • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Or you can just eat plants that you can actually digest but that wouldn’t make for a snarky comment huh?

            • osmn@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Would you believe that I don’t want to eat just plants and pills for each meal? Would you also believe that I disagree with the industrialization of farming and the animal abuse that is so commonly paired with it.

              There are humane ways to eat meat, and while they’re difficult to find, it’s a lot easier than eating what most people would consider disgusting everyday.

              • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yes you don’t want to just eat plants, hence you are eating animals for taste pleasure.

                Why do you think it’s okay to kill someone for pleasure? What’s humane about that?

                • osmn@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Animals other than humans aren’t people, that’s why it’s okay. You should be the first law enforcement official that prosecutes predatorial non-human animals

        • m532@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          “Whataboutism” was invented by the british to say whenever the irish talked about oppression. It was invented to oppress. It is not a fallacy, saying “Whataboutism” is.

      • agoseris@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        There are plenty of plant sources of Omega 3. Flax seeds, walnuts, soybeans, and canola oil all have decent amounts of omega 3 in them. As for protein, legumes generally have a bunch.

        Really, the only thing a vegan needs to supplement is B12, but even that gets added to a bunch of stuff like breakfast cereals and plant milks if you consume those.

        • Gabu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Flax seeds, walnuts, soybeans, and canola oil all have decent amounts of omega 3 in them

          They also take an enormous amount of resources to cultivate and process at industrial scale.

            • Gabu@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Wait until you learn that industrial 'murica isn’t the entirety of the planet.

              • Vii@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I am not american and I dont want to be one. The feed for animals raised for their meat in the EU and a lot of other countries that have industrial animal farms is comprised out of several plants and nutrient supplements, and a big part of that feed is soy and corn, both things that are grown mostly to feed animals.

          • Resonosity@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            You can make your own plant milk usually by soaking/boiling nuts/seeds in water and then blending that together. Some people use juicers for this, and then some people run the blended liquid through a filter to remove any bits. Cashew milk is lovely if homemade!

      • Azathoth@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        You can take them as supplements. It’s the same for your body. Oh and you are already doing that, because they give supplements to the animals they raise and kill, we are just eliminating the middleman.

          • projectd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Worth noting that many non-vegans are vitamin deficient and some medical authorities, including the UK’s, even recommend that everyone take vitamin D supplements. Also, please reconsider using your Internet connection, that isn’t very natural either.

            • vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              as I said to the other guy, I’m not saying not natural is bad. But what op is implying is that getting the same stuff from natural sources is bad. That I just don’t agree with. It’s just the natural order of things. I have other options, yes, but I don’t consider the default natural source of things to be bad, so I don’t feel the need to switch. Animals eat animals all the time. And they don’t do it “humanely” either.

              • m532@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Those factory farmed animals are further away from “natural” than a smartphone

          • Azzu@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Cyanide occurs naturally. Water can be made in a lab by mixing Hydrogen and Oxygen and applying heat.

            Is Cyanide good for you when occurring naturally and water bad for you when artificially synthesized?