this post was submitted on 12 Apr 2025
121 points (94.8% liked)
Asklemmy
47416 readers
940 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I know you think that it's a real gotcha moment and that you totally destroyed my views, But you forgot the meaning of murder.
You see, to murder is to knowingly and purposefully kill someone.
If I saw you walking on the sidewalk and decided to go over and run you over and I killed you, that would be murder. But if I was driving and was in a car crash and ended up killing you, that is not murder.
Similarly, if I accidentally, without intent, killed an animal, it was not murder.
And yeah, even ants deserve to live. I wouldn't kill ants purposely. Is it hard not to kill ants by accident because they're so small and you can accidentally step on them without seeing them? Yeah, but it doesn't mean that I would knowingly kill them.
I dont mind killing cows/chicken/similar for their meat, bones, skin, and others. But I might understand your views if we are talking about needlessly murdering animals. Torturing animals.
But just killing animals in general? I lost you there.
Define needlessly?
You see, you probably define it as a subjective catch all for anything that you are used to having in your life.
But if you really inspect that idea you can reach all kinds of extremes, like do you really need a home? You can live on the street, do you really need a car? You could walk technically, do you really need meat? You could live perfectly healthy without it technically, do you need a towel after a shower? You can just let yourself dry, what about chocolate? Just a nice snack, is that a necessity? And marshmallows? Bread? Flavoured drinks?
So the line is individual and non linear. One might say they can live without cars but not without a home, one would say the opposite, one would claim that chocolate is more important than having towels, etc. Some can also say that the joy they get from turturing an animal is more significant for their own happiness than chocolate, or towels or eating meat, these people are 100% with the parameters of your logic, yet you lable it as unnecessary.
You could redefine necessity as things that would cause you serious harm if taken, which is still subjective but a little clearer. Most people can agree that never eating chocolate again would suck but not cause any serious harm. Most can also probably agree that not having a home would cause you serious harm. And while you might not like to admit it, scientifically going vegan won't just not cause you harm, it would actually be healthy for you, and just like people who go on all kinds of diets, it sucks at first, but it does not cause any serious harm.
So ask yourself, what justification can you use to inflict serious harm on to others for the sake of simple pleasure to you?
I'm not trying to argue for veganism here. I'm just saying killing animals needlessly is bad. If you need the animal dead, kill it. For its resources.
If you think that going vegan is good, then do it. If you think eating meat is not the "min max meta" way of living, then you do you. But I think, as long as you don't mistreat the animals, its worth it.
If you still want more discussion about avoiding mistreating animals and why it matters even if we are going to kill them anyway, ask your friends.
I find it interesting that you consider killing not a mistreatment.
You say that killing them for their resources is worth it, but worth it to who? Obviously not the victim. Most horrible things are worth it to the ones committing them.
All I'm saying is, while we might have different moral opinions, at the very least provide logical, consistent arguments.
I see you haven't asked your friends, no matter though, I'm just some guy on the internet. You do you!