Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

sottedlayabout t1_j4e9r7z wrote

Reply to comment by Trim_Tram in Study: Feeding Goats Hemp Enhances the Health, Flavor Profile and Shelf-Stability of Their Meat by GivenAllTheFucksSry

Yes, because there’s no human or animal suffering associated with commercial vegetable farming.

−1

Trim_Tram t1_j4e9udn wrote

Who said there wasn't?

4

sottedlayabout t1_j4eajc7 wrote

If there’s human and animal suffering in vegetable farming it makes your argument that eating vegetables is morally superior appear pretty superficial, if not completely detached from the reality of food production.

4

KeepAwaySynonym t1_j4ejnpj wrote

While I don't agree with people who have a chip on their shoulder and feeingl morally superior(while simultaneously admiring them for having principles they stand by and a passion they believe in)... you know that the level of deaths brought on by combines is smaller than the harm of caused by the food industry.

From needless animal suffering, to the environmental impacts, such as the Amazon rainforest being burned down for cattle ranching, there are tons of problems that come from using animals as a food source, especially in a modern society

8

sottedlayabout t1_j4eytpw wrote

You do know they are burning the Amazon to create arable farmland to feed their families right?

How about the fact that significantly more arable farmland will be required if we want everyone to make the “morally correct” choice to switch to a plant based diet than if we continue using animals as a food source.

0

Allegedly_Smart t1_j4funil wrote

>You do know they are burning the Amazon to create arable farmland to feed their families right?

Beef is an expensive commodity, and grass-fed beef is especially so. In our globalized food production network, beef raised in one place can be sold anywhere around world. The best places to raise cattle for grass-fed beef have high rainfall for faster grass growth; you can have more cattle on the same amount of land and/or can supplement their diets with less grain.

The Amazon is not being burned to make room for family farms so the people can grow food to eat; it's being burned to make way for cattle ranches, because it's a highly profitable use for that land by the capitalist class of Brazil. Brazil is the largest exporter of beef in the world.

5

sottedlayabout t1_j4ik1u4 wrote

So what’s your solution? Given that beef is one of Brazil’s biggest exports and the money that is generated by this production and exportation improves the lives of countless Brazilian people. Should they simply suffer and die in poverty? Morality is simple when you don’t have to actually suffer the consequences firsthand. When you can simply sit on your high horse and say “meat bad” when you drive to your local market and enjoy the privilege of being able to purchase any number of globally sourced out of season fruits and vegetables with no thought to the suffering involved in their production.

1

tornpentacle t1_j4fohn6 wrote

That...is just not remotely true

(The second part)

That's a ridiculous argument to make in the 21st century

2

sottedlayabout t1_j4ii005 wrote

And yet you seem wholly unable to actually rebut the argument.

1

shadar t1_j4edw5r wrote

Arguing that eating plants causes comparable deaths or suffering to eating animals demonstrates how detached you are from the reality of 'food' production.

It's not comparable. One choice minimizes suffering, the other maximizes harm.

7

sottedlayabout t1_j4ey4fr wrote

In your opinion

There will always be suffering. Raising animals for meat, milk and cheese doesn’t automatically equate to animal suffering or cruelty. Just as farming and plant based diets are not inherently ethical. There is a great deal of human and animal suffering and cruelty inherent in the labor required for large scale food production and distribution. Your privileged esthetic choice to eat plants is not in any way morally superior to the alternative, despite your assertion to the contrary.

5

shadar t1_j4f27v4 wrote

Killing animals for taste pleasure is morally equal to not killing animals for taste pleasure.

It is a privilege to not eat dead bodies for taste pleasure.

Suffering will always exist so it's okay to kill animals for taste pleasure.

Farming potatoes isn't inherently ethical so its morally equal to stabbing baby goats in the throat because their dead bodies taste nice..

That's a fantastic set of arguments you've collected. In my opinion.

1