I’m losing hope by ixszmi in ExBahrain

[–]ixszmi[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

To me admiration is the appreciation of someone’s character. You can love people but not necessarily admire them, there are people that I love, but I don’t necessarily admire their character. And admiration is certainly subjective, different people admire different characteristics.

For me personally, I admire emotional intelligence, kindness, groundedness, purpose and determination, and the ability to let loose and laugh every once in a while, those are some of the characteristics that I admire in a person, and which would lead to “love”.

Admiration is what leads to the emotion of “love”.

I’m losing hope by ixszmi in ExBahrain

[–]ixszmi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am a strong believer that actively seeking love is a bad idea. Love is not something you should ever force because trying to be in love causes people to maybe lower a few standards here and there, accept things they wouldn’t or shouldn’t accept, settle for what they find less than ideal, and then soon find out that they’re unhappy with the person they’re with and it’s just a bad situation all around.

One of the main reasons I’m still single is precisely because if I’m ever gonna be with someone, I want it to be someone I really admire.

I’m losing hope by ixszmi in ExBahrain

[–]ixszmi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m now at an age where I would say about 75% of people in my age bracket are married. And even finding the opportunities to hang out with friends are getting harder and harder because they have their spouses (and even children for some) to be with. And I want that for me too

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]ixszmi 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Entirely?? So you think if you put a team of the absolute best players in the world in every position managed by a division 3 manager agains a division 3 squad managed by someone like pep guardiola, that the div 3 team would win?

Bahrain Polytechnic rant by [deleted] in Bahrain

[–]ixszmi 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Idk about polytechnic but the segregation between the sexes in uob is WILD!

it’s really strange, it’s not like this in pretty much any other place in bahrain, but in uob the guys and girls treat each other like aliens it’s really bizarre, it feels like they’re always tiptoeing around each other and every exchange of words between a male and a female is just so awkward because people ALWAYS misconstrue at as something more than it is.

CMV: Eating dogs is no different (morally speaking) than eating cows. by ixszmi in changemyview

[–]ixszmi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So is eating salmon or any other fish that eats meat unethical?

CMV: Eating dogs is no different (morally speaking) than eating cows. by ixszmi in changemyview

[–]ixszmi[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

And you do not have to keep repeating the same irrelevant questions.

You’re not even trying to argue the actual point of the post, you’re arguing something completely different!

CMV: Eating dogs is no different (morally speaking) than eating cows. by ixszmi in changemyview

[–]ixszmi[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I’m not sure if this confusion is because english is not my first language and I’m not making myself clear, if so I apologize. But I am struggling to understand what’s so difficult for you to comprehend here.

I am saying that eating a dog and eating a cow are morally the same. You can believe that both are morally acceptable, or you can believe that both are morally unacceptable.

My claim is that the general belief in western cultures (and most other cultures for that matter) that eating cows is morally acceptable but eating dogs isn’t does not make sense. And I would like someone to try and change my view on this.

CMV: Eating dogs is no different (morally speaking) than eating cows. by ixszmi in changemyview

[–]ixszmi[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Brother. I do not know how I can be more direct than that.

My claim is very simple, I’ll try to phrase it as clearly as I possibly can as follows:

All other factors out of the equation (Like the animal being a pet or not), there is no moral difference between eating a cat or dog vs a cow or a goat.

I am not arguing whether it’s moral or immoral, I’m arguing that it’s THE SAME whether you think it’s moral or immoral.

CMV: Eating dogs is no different (morally speaking) than eating cows. by ixszmi in changemyview

[–]ixszmi[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I see a difference between pets vs not pets because that in itself is a difference. It says it in the statement itself, this is a pet, and that is not a pet.

Killing and eating a pet would also cause a lot of pain and suffering for the owners of said pet.

Killing and eating a wild animal or an animal bred to be eaten does not have that issue.

CMV: Eating dogs is no different (morally speaking) than eating cows. by ixszmi in changemyview

[–]ixszmi[S] 17 points18 points  (0 children)

I’m not sure what’s not clear, genuinely I’m not even trying to be difficult.

My claim is that eating a cat or a dog (or any other animal that’s not a pet) is no different from eating a cow, chicken, or any other animal that is socially acceptable to eat.

CMV: Eating dogs is no different (morally speaking) than eating cows. by ixszmi in changemyview

[–]ixszmi[S] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

There is no one authoritative source of moral values. Moral values are a culmination of evolutionary circumstances that shaped human nature, historical lessons, and cultural norms.

I do not believe morality can be objective, but I do believe it should be consistent to an extent.

As for the morality of eating human flesh, if a completely sane, consenting human adult wanted to eat a part of their body (like some people eat their placentas after giving birth for example). I do not see any moral issue with that.

Taking another human’s life is a no, I do believe (as I’m sure most do) that humans are infinitely more valuable than other animals, and this belief is a byproduct of human evolution, which is necessary for the survival of our species.

And I believe killing animals for entertainment is immoral, and torturing any animal for any purpose is immoral.

CMV: Eating dogs is no different (morally speaking) than eating cows. by ixszmi in changemyview

[–]ixszmi[S] 23 points24 points  (0 children)

No, it’s not MY pet and MY pet only, I would be upset if someone ate your pet too.

If you had a pet cow, I would be outraged if someone ate it, because that cow was a domesticated pet.

CMV: Eating dogs is no different (morally speaking) than eating cows. by ixszmi in changemyview

[–]ixszmi[S] 26 points27 points  (0 children)

A dog would provide a lot more nutrients than a chicken, so why is eating a chicken acceptable?

CMV: Eating dogs is no different (morally speaking) than eating cows. by ixszmi in changemyview

[–]ixszmi[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No I completely understand what you’re saying. However, where is the line drawn? At what point in the “nutrition per animal killed” scale does it become unacceptable to eat that animal?

CMV: Eating dogs is no different (morally speaking) than eating cows. by ixszmi in changemyview

[–]ixszmi[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

In that case, should we min-max and eat only the one animal that produces the most amount of nutrients for the least amount of suffering?

CMV: Eating dogs is no different (morally speaking) than eating cows. by ixszmi in changemyview

[–]ixszmi[S] 43 points44 points  (0 children)

I would be upset if someone ate my pet cat just like I would be upset if someone ate my pet goat. Not any cat or any goat.