debate

false. please dont muddy the waters and pull stuff like "deflecting" when i tell you i only want to debate the ethics on veganism when you start a debate on meta ethics i brought up veganism and the ethics OF veganism. not ethics as a whole. meta ethics is beyond my pay grade unless you want to point out where in your above post you were speaking on veganism, in which i apologize and we can debate that.

yo so just gonna remind everyone this is in the serious thread board if you are not here for serious discussion then i will be giving out warnings and if you dont head the warnings i will be putting you in time out

>and if you want to debate me it has to be based on ethics, not solely dietary I was following the guide from that post. How about this. Pose the topic you are trying to debate in clear terms, because so far you are talking in circles.

" If I hunt and kill my own animal and feel bad for doing it, even if it is a necessity, have I violated your ethics?" this needs a bit more context. i do not shame indigenous peoples who need to hunt to survive, but you are apart of a first world nation so this does not apply to you. i respect hunting more than i do just going to the grocery store sure (as long as its not some stupid shit like a bow and arrow or poison and you use the whole corpse) there is still no need for you to end that animals life so its a needless killing. unless you can defend why you needed to end a deers life? but this isnt on hunting as a whole but as to why you believe that animals arent deserving of moral consideration so can i ask what traits an animal has that if lacking in a human would allow you to take a humans life? what is it that makes animals lacking of your moral consideration? (also, my original debate proposal was debate me on veganism and get epically le owned sorry if you missed it but what you quoted was me talking to someone else, not my debate proposal to begin with, so please stop muddying the waters and debate me full on please)

If the torture of animals is required to maintain the supply of food to major population hubs I won't say a word about it. I worked in wildlife for some time and I don't think anyone with a decent skeleton would willingly enjoy cruelty to animals. But I take the welfare of human communities to be a more important issue to me. So when someone tells me that current methods of farming contribute to large portion of environmental devastation they have my ear. Since a healthy environment is required for the health of human communities. So that argument always has my attention and I would support any endeavour to eliminate this concern. I think its important to maintain ecosystems but when it comes to domesticated stock animals I'm comfortable with the symbiotic relationship they share with people: Humans provide a safe place away from predators and guarantee continued reproduction so the species prosper and in return the carers of the stock get the meat, leathers and other products from the animals. That being said the conditions should be as humane as possible (humane in this context being, the greatest environment the human carer can offer to their livestock). I have no issue at all with hunting for food. Hunting pests is also okay since humans caring for their environment is beneficial. Hunting for trophies makes you an ass but I won't fight you on it. Hunting essential animals that provide health to your environment I will fight you on. So as you can see, my view is generally, if you can eat meat in a fair and sustainable way great! If you have to eat meat in an unfair way to feed the people, FINE! If its unsustainable and hurts the community it has to stop. As soon as someone says we can't eat meat because of animal feelings I'm not as moved.

I dont think anyone should be shamed on what their choice of gaining food is. Also i remember reading something about how veganism isnt exactly that helpful to the environment anyways given the process to synthetically create alternatives.

"If the torture of animals is required to maintain the supply of food to major population hubs I won't say a word about it. I worked in wildlife for some time and I don't think anyone with a decent skeleton would willingly enjoy cruelty to animals. But I take the welfare of human communities to be a more important issue to me." So I too agree that if our society needed to eat animals to survive I couldn't very well tell people to starve. I think humans are above animals in that regard. But in fact the animal agriculture industry actually hurts the food supply because it takes more crops to feed cows then the amount of food cows give back in meat. "I think its important to maintain ecosystems but when it comes to domesticated stock animals I'm comfortable with the symbiotic relationship they share with people: Humans provide a safe place away from predators and guarantee continued reproduction so the species prosper and in return the carers of the stock get the meat, leathers and other products from the animals. That being said the conditions should be as humane as possible (humane in this context being, the greatest environment the human carer can offer to their livestock)." So there are a few points with this. One is that we do not give those animals comfortable homes. 95% of animal agriculture are factory farms where the animals are locked up their entire lives. Male chicks are thrown alive into meat grinders because they have no value and male pigs are castrated without anesthetic with pliers soon after their born so the testosterone doesn't spoil the meat. Chickens are hung upside down and have their necks slit or heads cut off to bleed the meat. Another thing to consider is the effects these working conditions have on humans. Slaughterhouse workers do through tremendous mental trauma to be around these conditions and having to constantly take the lives of these animals. They often end up having PTSD and take out their frustrations and trauma on the animals, which is why physical abuse is so common. I can link you videos as to what actually happens in slaughterhouses if you want. Next is I would ask how comfortable do you have to make an animal before you have the right to kill it? What is the threshold and why doesn't that apply to humans as well? Everything else you said I don't exactly disagree with enough to argue about.

@rei k that isn't an argument. you walked into a thread for debates and got mad because someone wants to debate veganism maybe look at your own actions also about that, can you give me any factual evidence? because i can give you evidence that animal agriculture is much worse for the environment then simple produce agriculture. please dont bother replying if you dont have sources to back up your claims because clearly your not here for a debate and you just want to shit on veganism (funny how meat eaters are the ones who always want to adhom while vegans just want a discussion. its almost like THEYR actually the annoying ones and not us....)

im not even mad, im seeing if you have fact to back up my claim because im unsure if thats true, but given that reaction ill assume that veganism isnt as env friendly as people want you to think. Ad hominems arent proper debating.