No Stupid Questions
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
view the rest of the comments
I don't think they're more morally correct. Because I don't think it's morally incorrect to eat another animal.
We can debate the treatment of animals in how they are kept. But that's another topic. And a wide one because it varies a lot depending on where you're from.
I don't think most vegans think so, either. It isn't the eating in and of itself, but the suffering that occurs on the path to being food. Gas (petroleum) is widely considered vegan because, even though it's made from dead animals (dinosaurs), they didn't suffer and weren't exploited to create it; they died of natural causes. Vegans (typically, I believe) don't consider eating meat to be cruel if the animal dies of natural causes. Steer, aka castrated bulls, get their balls chopped off because it helps produce more meat (ironically steer are more muscular than bulls, TIL). I'm a guy (albeit not a vegan), and it isn't hard for me to see that's unnecessarily cruel and inhumane treatment.
It's not a separate topic at all. Vegans primarily care about animal suffering, which is a direct result of how the industry largely operates. Not all vegans are opposed to simply killing an animal to survive; that isn't the core issue for most. Yes, killing an animal for food can be avoided, but as long as it's a quick/clean kill, like an arrow to a major artery, it's fine from a survivalist perspective because it's humane and not unnecessarily cruel.
The meat industry is accountable for the undeniable mistreatment of animals in the course of producing food for the masses.
It is two different topics.
I know for fact plenty of vegans think it's morally wrong to eat another living being. Regardless of how the animal is kept.
You seem to be speaking on behalf of a lot of vegans. I don't believe "most vegans" believe what you think they do. Certainly not the ones I've interacted with.
The almighty "the" meat industry. As if everything is the same everywhere with the same framework, rules, and regulations.
"quick/clean kill, like an arrow to a major artery"
Holy shit, you think getting shot with an arrow produces a "quick/clean" kill? I can't take anything you say seriously when your idea of a clean kill is a fucking arrow to an artery.
Treatment of animals is very much a part of the moral issue. Causing suffering is clearly a moral issue. Also there are the environmental impacts to consider.
And again . That varies quite a lot depending on where the meat comes from.
To do what you do and just drag a giant blanket over everything is incredibly ignorant.
And I'm just really over the incredible hypocrisy. Eating meat is wrong cause an animal suffered, but wearing clothes made in a Vietnamese,chineese or Bangladesh sweatshop is ok. Because that only includes human suffering and slave like conditions.
It varies yes, but it doesn't change the fact that there is more animal suffering and environmental damage getting protein from animal sources than plants. Also talking about ssweatshops is changing the topic and moving the goalposts as you did previously with eggs. That's not a good faith discussion
Depends on who is farming the plants don't you think? Not like there hasn't been scandals about exploitation of workers in agriculture.
Not to mention environmental damage from over fertilizing and pesticides, and dumping of waste.
Not really. If you look at the data, ā pound of protein via meat is orders of magnitude worse in terms of environmental impacts. And that's ignoring suffering.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652622043542
Maybe you should actually read the studies you link.
There's 100s like it if you actually care. Also I don't see why that matters
Yeah, that's the problem. You can't even bother to read and understand the studies you link. You see the title and thinks "ah yes, that agrees with my agenda"
No. I read the fucking study. Your objection doesn't alter the results. And it's not like there isn't a tonne of information about this topic. You are choosing to ignore the science by quibbling about an irrelevant detail in one study
Not at all. But the question I raised from the start was that it matters where the meat is from.
Just like it matters where the plants are from.
Farmers have been using pesticides that kill bees in the millions. That will factually do more harm to the ecosystem than "the meat industry" ever could.
But maybe you want to focus on agriculture that doesn't use pesticides that are known to kill bees. Maybe then you think it matters. You know, when it suits you.
So the whole point of "but it matters where" is very relevant. A lunch resturant business in London. Isn't exactly representative of a normal every day person in the slightest.
Oh FFS. Theres bad agriculture and there's meat raising which is bad agriculture with worse bits tracked on. Your point isn't wrong is just irrelevant
That's the funny part. If you think my point is irrelevant, so is yours.
I don't think you understand the point I just made but I'm done with this conversion it's clearly not a good faith discussion. Good luck to you