this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2025
58 points (95.3% liked)

Wikipedia

2156 readers
274 users here now

A place to share interesting articles from Wikipedia.

Rules:

Recommended:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (7 children)

That's sad, what an illogical approach to an ethical dilemma.

"Oh well, people died before laws were introduced, may as well go on a killing spree" - right? Nothing else matters?

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 month ago (6 children)

"Oh well, people died before laws were introduced, may as well go on a killing spree"

this is a strawman. my argument is more like "you may object to killing animals for food, but your method is not an effective way to stop it"

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

Which is an incredibly stupid point, because it presupposes that reducing needless deaths only has value if absolutely every single death is prevented. This, of course, is completely illogical - even one death that was prevented has value.

But we don't care about silly things like "logic" here, right?

Not to mention that your original point was that you bear no responsibility for the deaths of animals you consume, but who cares as long as you can keep giving stupid arguments ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 month ago

your original point was that you bear no responsibility for the deaths of animals you consume

right. and this speaks directly to that.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)