To this, they might respond with "wildlife conservation" but why do they care about the conservation of some random species far away while continuing to butcher or hunt species in their local environment?
Unfortunately the same line of reasoning can be used to justify hunting, slaughterhouses and all sorts of atrocities. The other day I was chatting with a guy who said winter is great and he loves being cozy. To which I replied "not so for wild animals, it causes massive suffering to them" and he was like "it's part of nature."
Good luck trying to call it a "part of nature " when humans suffer. You'd immediately get attacked. To them, it's only part of nature if it's not about humans. The same can be said about some religious people being chill about wild/stray animals being abused by other humans and saying bs like "karma" or "god will punish them" but if one of their livestock animals gets abused, they'll immediately step in.
It's a shitty way say "I don't care about animals that don't benefit me" while pretending to sound morally good.
Yeah it's quite positive. The whole "don't intervene in nature" is a lazy argument anyway because we do it all the time. We don't live in a vacuum. I find it frustrating when some random person on the internet tells me that I shouldn't look after stray cats and gaslights me for it while literally slaughtering hens on their farm.
The boundary of humanhood is undefined/undefinable anyway.
This question of mine is plastered all over the internet:
Scenario: An unknown animal, potentially a human, is behind a curtain.
Question: Without using the word ‘species’ or any named ‘species’ (human, dog, pig, etc.), what information would you need about (a) the individual and (b) factors external to the individual to make an informed decision about the ethics of breeding, killing, and consuming the individual?
Purpose: The purpose is to challenge you to clearly state your criteria for making ethical decisions. By avoiding the use of species labels, you are encouraged to think more deeply about what truly matters in ethical considerations, beyond species-based assumptions.
People having this much empathy for penguins on the pole but not for the animals whose dismembered corpse are served at any dinner table...
To this, they might respond with "wildlife conservation" but why do they care about the conservation of some random species far away while continuing to butcher or hunt species in their local environment?
Unfortunately the same line of reasoning can be used to justify hunting, slaughterhouses and all sorts of atrocities. The other day I was chatting with a guy who said winter is great and he loves being cozy. To which I replied "not so for wild animals, it causes massive suffering to them" and he was like "it's part of nature."
Good luck trying to call it a "part of nature " when humans suffer. You'd immediately get attacked. To them, it's only part of nature if it's not about humans. The same can be said about some religious people being chill about wild/stray animals being abused by other humans and saying bs like "karma" or "god will punish them" but if one of their livestock animals gets abused, they'll immediately step in.
It's a shitty way say "I don't care about animals that don't benefit me" while pretending to sound morally good.
Very true… I did find it very positive seeing the intervention in non-human lives being seen as a positive.
Yeah it's quite positive. The whole "don't intervene in nature" is a lazy argument anyway because we do it all the time. We don't live in a vacuum. I find it frustrating when some random person on the internet tells me that I shouldn't look after stray cats and gaslights me for it while literally slaughtering hens on their farm.
The boundary of humanhood is undefined/undefinable anyway.
This question of mine is plastered all over the internet:
Scenario: An unknown animal, potentially a human, is behind a curtain.
Question: Without using the word ‘species’ or any named ‘species’ (human, dog, pig, etc.), what information would you need about (a) the individual and (b) factors external to the individual to make an informed decision about the ethics of breeding, killing, and consuming the individual?
Purpose: The purpose is to challenge you to clearly state your criteria for making ethical decisions. By avoiding the use of species labels, you are encouraged to think more deeply about what truly matters in ethical considerations, beyond species-based assumptions.
lmfao