@[email protected] to [email protected]English • 2 months agoAntinatalism Rulelemmy.blahaj.zoneimagemessage-square295fedilinkarrow-up1405arrow-down176
arrow-up1329arrow-down1imageAntinatalism Rulelemmy.blahaj.zone@[email protected] to [email protected]English • 2 months agomessage-square295fedilink
minus-square@Laglink6•2 months agoIf one animal species is harming an ecosystem then I don’t see how it’s morally wrong to limit their reproduction.
minus-squareCassalinkfedilink4•2 months agoUsually, a better way to help an ecosystem balance itself is to reintroduce predators or similarly. the deer population in yellowstone was destroying the soil, this was solved by reintroducing wolves. there’s a big difference between this, and f.ex castrating a lot of the deer, or going on a shooting spree. It also goes with the assumption that the ecosystem is either outside the moral spectrum, or morally good.
minus-square@I_Has_A_Hatlink3•2 months agoSo you think instead of just restricting births, the better method is a mass culling of the human population? I mean, I’m down for population control any way we can get it, just wasn’t expecting that option to be on the table.
If one animal species is harming an ecosystem then I don’t see how it’s morally wrong to limit their reproduction.
Usually, a better way to help an ecosystem balance itself is to reintroduce predators or similarly.
the deer population in yellowstone was destroying the soil, this was solved by reintroducing wolves.
there’s a big difference between this, and f.ex castrating a lot of the deer, or going on a shooting spree.
It also goes with the assumption that the ecosystem is either outside the moral spectrum, or morally good.
So you think instead of just restricting births, the better method is a mass culling of the human population? I mean, I’m down for population control any way we can get it, just wasn’t expecting that option to be on the table.