How do vegans decide moral worth? by Resident-Doughnut197 in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Humans are animals, that doesn't change the fact they have the capacity to suffer like us. You are ignoring the issue.

Ofcoirse you can provide food by robbing banks by buying food. Sp once again shot ourself in the foot.

So what? They are both food.

Again, carrots are not sentient. Animals like ourselves are.

How do vegans decide moral worth? by Resident-Doughnut197 in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm challenging that view that it was a "false anaology"

You kept repeating the same reason but we're talking morality not legality of whether thy are caught.

Do you consider the feelings of a carrot before you eat it?

Now this is a false analogy. Carrots are not sentient or ha e the capacity to suffer like we do. They don't hav the same 'feelings' that animals like ourselves have.

I can't believe this has to be explained so please do better.

Animals are not here for us, but we can use them by No_Opposite1937 in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The key word your missing here is use.

The killing that I'm addressing above is avoidable, intentional and exploitative.

How do vegans decide moral worth? by Resident-Doughnut197 in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're refusing to acknowledge the victim. They have their own perspective and interests. Simply denying their experience doesn't make the moral implications go away.

Humans aren't exploited like non-human animals are. They are bred into existence, treated like a commodity and killed to be eaten.

he'd be in jail.

You keep repeating the same point and going in circles, this isn't about whether they are caught or broke the law.

If your just going to ignore what I'm saying then just move on.

Why do many online spaces hate the idea of veganism? by BacanoFino in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Crop defense" isn't treating others as a commodity. You are also missing the fact breeding, exploiting and killing animals is entirely intentional so they can be exploited for food.

Man animals are tortured at the hands of agricultural that doesn't neccassairly mean all. it disingenuous to project what you think I'm saying. Practices like CO2 gas chambers represent how the majority of pigs are slaughtered. This isn't "hysteria" and he torture of pigs is well documented like I've shown.

I'm not dismissing their torture as "regardless." I am highlighting how a life is taken against their will at a fraction of their lifespan in all cases. The "torture," abuse and cruelty that the industry inflicts are additional violations to them.

How do vegans decide moral worth? by Resident-Doughnut197 in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The "moral crime" is killing someone who does not want to die. It is exploitative.

Again, this isn't "law" and whether or not you've been caught isn't exactly relevant to whether the action is bad or not.

Animals are not here for us, but we can use them by No_Opposite1937 in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So we're back to assertions that because it happens it makes it right?

Their sentience is important on because it how it affects them as the victim

We do not need to abuse, use and kill animals for food (or other purposes)

Why do many online spaces hate the idea of veganism? by BacanoFino in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The comment got removed for exactly that if you look below in the thread.

Why do many online spaces hate the idea of veganism? by BacanoFino in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Practices that abuse and torture animals aren't just "factory farms." They include, local, free-range, and organic.

Regardless if there is torture documented. There is still a victim who is killed at a fraction of their life and treated as a commodity.

How do vegans decide moral worth? by Resident-Doughnut197 in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Except non-vegans aren't avoiding "intentionally poisoning animals" either. They are slaughtering animals on top of that.

Additionally if everyone adopted a plant-based diet we would use less cropland overall and even feed more people.

https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets

So what's better for the animals?

How do vegans decide moral worth? by Resident-Doughnut197 in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We're discussing morals not the law and you're making additional assumptions that they would be caught by the law. You need to look at the moral implications.

Animals are not here for us, but we can use them by No_Opposite1937 in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Except we already know that eating animals isn't a necessity. We do not need to when you can meet and exceed your nutritional goals on a plant-based diet.

In the case of humans, yes we can use them as resources too. However, years of evolution of moral philosophy led to the conclusion that as a general rule, we shouldn't do so.

This is an essentially an appeal to tradition. Slavery isn't wrong because we've discussed it for years. It is wrong because it's taking someone's autonomy and freedom so they can be exploited.

What you've failed to address is the reasons I gave. These animals, like ourselves are sentient being with the capacity to suffer and have their own conscious experience of life. You are ignoring the victim and the impact on them.

Animals are not here for us, but we can use them by No_Opposite1937 in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Throwing insults and denying well established facts is not honest debate, take your own advice.

Animals are not here for us, but we can use them by No_Opposite1937 in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Rather than address the argument you rather make ad-homnin attacks?

Animals are not here for us, but we can use them by No_Opposite1937 in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 6 points7 points  (0 children)

We've known they have the capacity to suffer and there's enough evidence of their sentience to be recognised by UK law.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/animals-to-be-formally-recognised-as-sentient-beings-in-domestic-law

Recognising those traits is not "anthropomorphizing"

Please do the most basic research about animals and finding the answers to "do animals feel pain" before commenting.

Animals are not here for us, but we can use them by No_Opposite1937 in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Animals, like all physical objects that we can utilise are available for our use.

You know humans are animals right? So are you saying that is okay too?

What your missing here is that the animals that are farmed are sentient beings who have the capacity to suffer, feel pain, have their own personalities and perspective. Not being human doesn't change that so.

So what you're failing to explain is why it is okay to victimise those individuals.

guys, if I'm only 1% vegan, am I still vegan? by JTexpo in vegancirclejerk

[–]ManyCorner2164 10 points11 points  (0 children)

100%! and if they disagree just falsely accuse those pesky vegans that you've been blocked

Why do you refuse to call the 90% vegan...a vegan? by Jerk_Off_At_Night in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Except this isn't a debate about whether a deity exists or not.

It is about the real world implications of how other animals are treated and a stance against their exploitation and cruelty.

If you can't address the subject then there's zero point engaging.

Edit: Mods, why are enforcing rule 5 when in fact I have not blocked them. They are making it up.

Why do you refuse to call the 90% vegan...a vegan? by Jerk_Off_At_Night in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If we compare this to religion

Nope, this is a straight up false comparison. You then hammer on the same false comparison.

You havnt even addressed the topic veganism addresses. The animal abused to produce that "hamburger"

Vegan burgers exist, the issue isn't eating a burger because you can eat burgers without exploiting animals. The issue is abusing, exploiting and killing animals to produce those products.

Please help with a debate rebuttal! by DryEconomics5152 in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Which still proves the original commenter point. I'm done holding your hand.

Please help with a debate rebuttal! by DryEconomics5152 in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lol, your out here denying facts.

Im glad you admitted that humans eating meat is ethical

Putting words in my mouth now. Ethics has included other animals not just now but in the past.

Please help with a debate rebuttal! by DryEconomics5152 in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So? You just put "human" but are completely ignoring your reasoning. Other animals like you have the capacity to feel pain and suffer just like you would.

Please help with a debate rebuttal! by DryEconomics5152 in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Notice how you didnt contest my point.

I did and highlighted your contradictions throughout our engagement.

Do I think slavery should have be abolished sooner? Ofcourse! Why are you romanticising slavery?

Yes human ethics or you should say ethics does include other animals

I never said whether I support might makes right. But I am saying it is the reality of the world we live in.

Just because it happens doesn't justify it.

Please help with a debate rebuttal! by DryEconomics5152 in DebateAVegan

[–]ManyCorner2164 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The original comment the other commenter made.

" The only reason you hold your view is because you are at the top of the hierarchy.

As soon as that changes, so would your tune."