this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2024
694 points (92.5% liked)

Vegan

2970 readers
2 users here now

An online space for the vegans of Lemmy.

Rules and miscellaneous:

  1. We take for granted that if you engage in this community, you understand that veganism is about the animals. You either are vegan for the animals, or you are not (this is not to say that discussions about climate/environment/health are not allowed, of course)
  2. No omni/carnist apologists. This is not a place where to ask to be hand-holded into veganims. Omnis coddling/backpatting is not tolerated, nor are /r/DebateAVegan-like threads
  3. Use content warnings and NSFW tags for triggering content
  4. Circlejerking belongs to /c/vegancirclejerk
  5. All posts should abide by Lemmy's Code of Conduct

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] nyctre@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Most western nations have a declining population so there's no need for that. When needed you can implement a 1-2 kid limit and that'd be fairly ethical, no? You can control human populations without killing, not sure why the comparison was necessary.

[โ€“] DarthFrodo@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

With our current lifestyles, 7 billion humans aren't sustainable for earth, which results in a lot of habitat destruction, pollution, climate change and so on. That's what my analogy to deer overpopulation was getting at. Even if we had a global 1 child limit, it would take a few generations until an actually sustainable population is reached.

If we have a right to live even though we cause so much destruction, it's inconsistent to kill deer for causing way, way less damage than us.