debate

Acacia that’s a joke we all know women are still more oppressed in America Than anyother country and we need reparations for slavery What are you a boomer or a millennial trader to your generation

By the way, what's the overarching issue being debated. Is it if slavery is bad? Veganism? Why white people are obviously irredeemable monsters? Some clarity would help.

Acacia it’s always Veganism and another subject remember that Social contract goes back to veganism Slavery goes back to veganism Abortion goes back to veganism

Ofcourse I know the answers. Slavery is always bad. Veganism is acceptable life choice but not a requirement. And of course white people have no souls.

It’s a good thing I’m brown Gingers have no souls whites are rascist not soulist they;re worse then soulist Gotta keep your facts straight, Vice and other news outlets told me so

Sure, so the argument is whether or not meat eating is morally acceptable. My position is that anything that is capable of engaging in social contract should be extended moral consideration, and this extends from the idea that I care about maximizing the happiness of me and the people close to me. As a counterargument to this, lamby asked if I would be okay with slavery if it would greatly benefit me.

It would;be been more funny if lamby used her question to attack what you meant as utilitarian position of maximizing benefit which isn’t necessarily always utilitarian if Mio is focusing on his in group. But it;s still funny attack because of “whiteness” therefore benfit Unless she;s getting at both.

I see. This might be an unemphatic view. But many animals engage in mutuallistic relationships where one offers protection and safety in return for the promise of nutrition, like ants and aphids. Not unlike how we shear sheep or milk cows. The difference of course is that sheep and cows are more intelligent creatures that have emotional attachments to their herd, families and, yes, even their human owners (if you've lived on a farm you know what I mean). Its this emotional intelligence that raises the question if we have the right to dominate and play god with the lives of these creatures? The answer is yes. We can and we should. People might not like it but its the natural world we live in and I would and have killed many creatures to feed other people and myself. And I don't lose a wink of sleep over it. Sure I don't like to kill animals for no reason and definitely don't want to cause suffering, but taking advantage of animals to improve our lives is just how humans do. You might compare this to slavery but realistically that isn't a fair comparison. Humans are communal creatures with no cannibalistic instincts. Humans need each other to survive and to have any ounce of happiness and purpose. Therefore to enslave and oppress others is an unnatural arrangement formed when a human doesn't see others as the same status (the same way we don't see animals as equal). This happens because humans are clever cookies with large brains that are very plastic and can trick themselves into thinking other humans are less human than they. Easily observable from words like savages. Sadly this is easier to do when humans look different which is why racial slavery is prevalent through history. But humans are smart (or dumb) enough to find any trivial reason to dehumanise other groups. Eating and farming other creatures is acceptable simply because they are not us. Slavery and genocide are not acceptable because they ARE US. And our nature dictates we pacify the wilds an build social constructs with other humans. And I'm all about nature. That all being said, we should strive to reduce the discomfort of our chattel and employ more humane methods. Things cannot remain as they are if we are to become more civilised. But that is another issue. What a bother. I'm actually writing a paragraph about this.