634
Rule (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org 64 points 7 months ago

You also don't need to eat the animals to survive.

[-] el_abuelo@lemmy.ml 55 points 7 months ago

True...and you don't need to live in a house, or use the Internet, or have a bank account, or have a computer/mobile...all things that have caused catastrophic damage to the environment and killed countless animals.

One has to draw a line somewhere- perhaps you shouldn't be holier than though just because you draw the line at "I don't want to see the evidence of the death"

[-] Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 7 months ago

I mean I just said a fact, sorry if I upset you.

[-] trevor@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 7 months ago

Just a very common case of leftists being anti-exploitation until it involves reconsidering what goes on their plates.

[-] StoneGender@lemmy.blahaj.zone 19 points 7 months ago

Maybe YOU don't have to eat animals to survive. What a privilege u you have that you live in a place where vegetation can be grown in your area or more likely shipped there cheaply(not free of harm to the environment or people\animals). But your experience is not universal there are places on earth that people live where that is not an option. And some of those people have been living there sustainably for 10s of thousands of years. Not to speak of people who's body needs meat to live because of some other reason. You can not eat animals and that's fine but it doesn't replace the science of how to stop environmental damage.

[-] Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org 18 points 7 months ago

Obviously if someone needs to eat meat to live I'm not going to object. And people living sustainably and not just supporting the animal ag industry are also off the hook in my books.

But in regards to your weird vegetation stuff, I hope you're aware that the livestock are raised on vegetation and will typically consume more calories of feed than they provide with meat? This is a large part of why the Amazon is being deforested, it's to feed livestock, not vegans. The science on how to stop environmental damage is pretty clear on that one.

[-] SkippingRelax@lemmy.world 13 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

It's more sustainable to eat the animals you make clothes from.

[-] spikespaz@programming.dev 11 points 7 months ago
[-] WldFyre@lemm.ee 14 points 7 months ago

Is that a rule here??

Go vegan.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 9 points 7 months ago

Vegans in western cultures have access to dietary supplements derived from non-animal sources. That's basically impossible without access to modern industrial food processes.

If we're talking about cultures without ready access to plant fibers for clothes, then they're not going to have vegan supplements, either.

[-] debil@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago

Let me guess, you're a westerner with access to plant-based dietary supplements? I suppose you're vegan then? If not, you must be part of some indigenous people.

[-] SkippingRelax@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

Let me guess [...] I suppose [...] if not you must be

Do you really think that is how logic is supposed to work?

[-] debil@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

Logic? No. Sarcasm? Yes.

[-] Bo7a@lemmy.ca 9 points 7 months ago
this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2024
634 points (100.0% liked)

196

16450 readers
2296 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS