The eating meat for pleasure aurgument is flawed.

People need to get off their pedestal pls.


--It's so wrong to eat meat - despite being evolved to do so.

Morals time!!!
😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅


You're wearing makeup in your profile picture.

• Were any of your products tested on animals? Most are. So unless you actually checked all, and I mean ALL (shampoo and other cosmetics, too) - your argument is flawed.

Have you ever taken painkillers such as paracetamol where you had a choice not to? So, perhaps a headache? Period pain?
Well, on the basis that you have done so, YOU ARE A MONSTER. Do you know the pain that the poor little animals went through for that to be available to you?!?! Was your discomfort comparable?? I doubt it. You, my darling have just contributed to an industry built on animal testing.

By this notion of immorality, you should reject all medical drug treatments. Why is your life and wellbeing MORE important than that of a rat?

I think I might join you, and the other animal rights supporters protesting against animal testing for new drugs. It's not like cancer is killing anyone, lol. Tbh, a few hundred/thousand rats is WAY more important than one human life. ** yes** the supporters say. Oh no, but wait.. What if.. (God forbid) it's your mother lying frail and weak from cancer..? How many rats is it okay to use for saving your mother? Is there even a limit?

That's not directed towards you (missmillie) - all I directed towards you was really the makeup & cosmetics things lol.

Anyway - the living conditions for animals in the food industry are mostly awful. So, to curb this issue I buy free range meat (just like with eggs!). At least they have a pleasant life and I get to consume meat with a relatively clear conscience, as humans should (biologically). 🗽


Posted from TSR Mobile

People need to get off their pedestal pls.


--It's so wrong to eat meat - despite being evolved to do so.

Morals time!!!
😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅


You're wearing makeup in your profile picture.

• Were any of your products tested on animals? Most are. So unless you actually checked all, and I mean ALL (shampoo and other cosmetics, too) - your argument is flawed.

Have you ever taken painkillers such as paracetamol where you had a choice not to? So, perhaps a headache? Period pain?
Well, on the basis that you have done so, YOU ARE A MONSTER. Do you know the pain that the poor little animals went through for that to be available to you?!?! Was your discomfort comparable?? I doubt it. You, my darling have just contributed to an industry built on animal testing.

By this notion of immorality, you should reject all medical drug treatments. Why is your life and wellbeing MORE important than that of a rat?

I think I might join you, and the other animal rights supporters protesting against animal testing for new drugs. It's not like cancer is killing anyone, lol. Tbh, a few hundred/thousand rats is WAY more important than one human life. ** yes** the supporters say. Oh no, but wait.. What if.. (God forbid) it's your mother lying frail and weak from cancer..? How many rats is it okay to use for saving your mother? Is there even a limit?

That's not directed towards you (missmillie) - all I directed towards you was really the makeup & cosmetics things lol.

Anyway - the living conditions for animals in the food industry are mostly awful. So, to curb this issue I buy free range meat (just like with eggs!). At least they have a pleasant life and I get to consume meat with a relatively clear conscience, as humans should (biologically). 🗽


Posted from TSR Mobile

Haha, are you saying blind people don't care if they die??

Juichiro, the reason you present for not eating meat is that it causes suffering to animals (despite the fact that you inevitably cause or benefit from animals suffering in other ways, which to most people in itself would reduce your credibility), which in your view is comparable to the suffering humans cause other humans through things like rape and slavery. I think that's bull****. I don't believe eating meat is ideal or that the way it is currently obtained is particularly ethical at all, but I cannot for one second longer entertain the idea that it is comparable to the atrocities humans have committed against each other. If you think that is because I need education, that's fine, but if that's the case I'd rather go without whatever education it is that makes someone think eating meat is equal to raping someone, thank you very much.

In your first point you're saying an animal is "someone". I think you might need this.

Last time I checked, people = humans. Unless you want to refute that too..?


Posted from TSR Mobile

Sentience is the ability to have interests. For example a sheep doesn't want to be killed or to feel pain. They actively avoid it. Plants don't, so they aren't sentient


Posted from TSR Mobile

1. We don't know whether two humans suffer in the same way but since we all have central nervous systems (which are the cause of experiencing suffering) we assume we all suffer and we don't use possible differences in the way we suffer to kill each other for pleasure. Animal suffering is the same thing. Whether the suffering is exact or approximate has no bearing on the question of whether killing someone for pleasure is acceptable.

2. It might be dubious but it is better to assume that all humans have it (and not kill each other for pleasure - see slaves in ancient Rome) than to assume not all have it and allow killing of some humans for pleasure if you believe the human in question cannot experience suffering. This would allow people to kill brain damaged individuals and people in coma for pleasure. The same goes for assumptions of human suffering. It is better to err on the safe side.

3. You can make the same argument for the suffering and worth of the suffering of two humans. I believe this was the reasoning of slavers, wife beaters, rapists and European powers to justify the suffering they produced.

Sentience is the ability to have interests. For example a sheep doesn't want to be killed or to feel pain. They actively avoid it. Plants don't, so they aren't sentient


Posted from TSR Mobile

Juichiro, 1.the reason you present for not eating meat is that it causes suffering to animals (despite the fact that you inevitably cause or benefit from animals suffering in other ways, which to most people in itself would reduce your credibility), which in your view is comparable to the suffering humans cause other humans through things like rape and slavery. I think that's bull****. 2. I don't believe eating meat is ideal or that the way it is currently obtained is particularly ethical at all, but I cannot for one second longer entertain the idea that it is comparable to the atrocities humans have committed against each other. 3.If you think that is because I need education, that's fine, but if that's the case I'd rather go without whatever education it is that makes someone think eating meat is equal to raping someone, thank you very much.

If you justify eating meat by talking about "survival of the fittest" then you should reject many of the excellent human inventions that completely defy "survival of the fittest" like the law, or the welfare state.

Don't plants actively avoid death, and actively perform actions to keep themselves alive (to the best of their physical capability) as well?

Doesn't the Venus Flytrap actively shut it's jaws on the approaching insect, to make sure it gets enough nourishment and doesn't die of starvation? Don't other plants actively point their leaves towards light for the same reason?

Additionally, note that plants have active defences to help them prevent being eaten by herbivores: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_defense_against_herbivory

Why doesn't this indicate that the plant "wants" to remain alive?

Ignoring the historical hysteria, 1. is not the reason we assume other humans have consciousness.

Plants can be remarkably responsive to external stimuli in a way that might seem reflective of situational decision-making. But to exploit this to suggest that plants really "think" or have "feelings" in the vertebrate sense is a different matter altogether. You cant compare a pig and a pumpkin in the same way you can compare pigs and humans

So you're saying that all this stuff is trivial and then proceed to say you buy free range. Which means you know maltreatment of animals is wrong. So I ask you: do you check all your products when you buy them? Do you take paracetamol? Sounds to me that you have a less clear conscience than me. Although I agree that it's near impossible to avoid being involved with the maltreatment of animals in some ways which makes me sad.

Are you scared of my replies that you do not even quote me now?

1. My point is that killing for suffering (I did not mention causing suffering to animals in general) whether to animals or humans is equivalent to rape/murder done for pleasure. If you look into the actual biological response to it is the same whether you are human or animal. That response is suffering.

But you said that: "A sheep doesn't want to be killed or to feel pain. They actively avoid it.", which is what makes them sentient. But the same is also true of plants - they actively avoid death as well.

You also said that: "Plants don't, so they aren't sentient". But again, as I pointed out, in actual fact they do actively avoid death. When faced with situations that are likely to cause their death, to the extent that they are physically capable of it, they respond in a manner that is designed to prevent their death.


So I don't really see what distinction you're making between sheep and plants that proves that one is sentient while the other isn't. Actively clinging to life and avoiding death is a feature of both, so surely that can't be the sole criterion you're using for sentience.

Are you vegan?
And the venus flytrap doesn't seek to avoid pain. They lack the nervous system and brain necessary for this to happen. A plant can respond to stimuli, for example by turning towards the light or closing over a fly, but that is not the same thing.

1. It is not "the" reason but is one of them. It is a big issue in clinical psychology due to obvious consequences (I studied it that is why I know). I love how you only focus on 1 bit of my entire response and ignore the rest.

The pain argument is full of holes, at least for pure vegetarians. Many animals feel close to as little pain as plants do - for example, prawns. Vegetarianism has little to do with pain. Unless you are a very canny vegetarian with a red line as to what marks 'sentient'. Where do you draw the line?

Are you vegan?

And the venus flytrap doesn't seek to avoid pain. They lack the nervous system and brain necessary for this to happen. A plant can respond to stimuli, for example by turning towards the light or closing over a fly, but that is not the same thing.

Unless you're an die-hard hedonist, surely you must realise that what you're saying makes no sense? You're either implying that life isn't worth living without meat, or making a wider point that life isn't worth living without living unethically, both of which are ridiculous arguments. It's completely possible to live a good life whilst remaining altruistic.

I see you did not tackle my points and now resort to name calling. Way to go to support your points.----My previous response:You said:" I eat meat for pleasure" and " A ****ing burger is wonderful". The 'wonderful' implies you find it morally accepting. Same as if you said that you found rape wonderful, I would believe that you find it morally acceptable.1. Rape, domestic violence and murder are also a reality. People rape, people beat their wives and people murder. That is not an excuse. Nor should an exception being made to excuse crimes to animals.2. Why? Slavers said the same things of slavery, men said the same thing of women rights and European powers said the same thing of their colonies. The point is that there are no exceptions to an unethical action. You may do it but you cannot denied it is unethical. Criminals of sort try to make exceptions to themselves. But it does not work that way. Logical reasoning does not work that way.

Sentience is the ability to have interests. For example a sheep doesn't want to be killed or to feel pain. They actively avoid it. Plants don't, so they aren't sentientPosted from TSR Mobile