• Maple Engineer
      link
      -25 months ago

      Murder is the killing of a human. You can’t murder a non-human.

        • Maple Engineer
          link
          35 months ago

          It’s in the definition. Murder is the killing of one human being by another. Vegan fanatics try to shame everyone else by calling it murder but it just makes me laugh. They try so very hard but just sound silly.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            15 months ago

            pedantry is an incredible argumentative strategy. Truly unstoppable. Why think critically when you can read a dictionary instead?

            • Maple Engineer
              link
              15 months ago

              Dismissing the truth as pedantry doesn’t change the fact that it’s the truth. Your beliefs don’t change reality.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                15 months ago

                Using linguistic prescriptivism to shut down an argument and calling it “the truth” and “reality” to avoid thinking about what somebody means when they say a word is… certainly something

                • Maple Engineer
                  link
                  15 months ago

                  Fanatics try to expand the meanings of words to make their message more inflammatory in an attempt to bully and shame people who don’t agree with them into doing what they want. It’s a standard play from the extremist playbook.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    15 months ago

                    People use words in varied ways to make rhetorical points and get people to consider things they might not have otherwise. Oh no! I’m sorry that cognitive dissonance is stressful

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -3
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      If you like: pretending that killing an animal is morally equivalent to killing a human

      You should try: growing a brain

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        35 months ago

        When did I say that? My statement points out that rituals to make yourself feel better about killing an animal do not change that animal’s experience of being killed or the moral weight of that action

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -3
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          You said they were morally equivalent when you called it murder, and you said it again just now. Why does killing an animal for food carry any moral weight? Cheetahs don’t get any flak for hunting caribou.

          • Dyskolos
            link
            fedilink
            2
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            A human is an animal too, so i might kill it for food with no moral weight to it. Great.

            But if you compare yourself to a cheetah, I get that your intellect and morals are just… Primal 😁

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              15 months ago

              So to be clear you are officially saying that killing an animal is morally equivalent to killing a human?

              • Dyskolos
                link
                fedilink
                15 months ago

                I actually didn’t say anything and just followed this dude’s logic. But actually I’d say it’s not equivalent. The non-human animals are always innocent. Man is rarely.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  Oh, I disagree. Ant colonies go to war with each other all the time. Basically all mammal species see every male in a 5-mile radius fight to the death over a single female. I’m curious what exactly it is the animals are supposed to be innocent of.

                  • Dyskolos
                    link
                    fedilink
                    15 months ago

                    They don’t act on intellect. They just do without knowing what they’re actually do. If a dog kicks over your vase, do you see malignant intent? Is the ant-colony going to war for survival acting on greed or lust or the desire to spill blood?

                    Do they rape because they despise women? Do they kill because they love the control? Do they build political systems made to opress the dumb and/or weak? Do they actually have crab-mentality like we do? Do they actually destroy the planet for their own desires to own as much stuff as possible?

                    I probably could go on for ages but you get the picture. We do most things while knowing better. We do horrible things, even though we know what others feel. We do most things with intent and knowledge.

                    We might be innocent as long as we’re a toddler crawling around the world, knowing nothing. But now we buy cheap shit made in china, knowing very well that we keep horrible slavery running this way. We know and we ignore. Examples are legion, but you live on this planet too, so you know.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            15 months ago

            You said they were morally equivalent when you called it murder

            I didn’t, actually

            and you said it again just now

            I didn’t, actually

            Why does killing an animal for food carry any moral weight?

            Because humans aren’t special unique beings with souls that make us the only ones with moral worth. Many animals are capable of suffering and emotion.

            Cheetahs don’t get any flak for hunting caribou.

            We are the ones with the social system allowing for moral frameworks to guide our decisionmaking. Cheetahs aren’t moral agents. And if they are, they follow cheetah morality. Plus, they are obligate carnivores anyway (which is why your cat should not be deprived of meat)

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              You said they were morally equivalent when you called it murder

              I didn’t, actually

              Yes you did, that’s what the word “murder” means

              your cat shouldn’t be deprived of meat

              All right then. Do you believe that owning a cat is immoral, since in order for the cat to thrive, creatures with souls must die?

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                15 months ago

                There are no creatures with souls. But no, I wouldn’t say keeping a cat in general is immoral. There are definitely ethical concerns around things like kitten breeding mills and letting cats roam around outdoors, though

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    15 months ago

                    We are the ones with the social system allowing for moral frameworks to guide our decisionmaking. Cheetahs aren’t moral agents … Plus, they are obligate carnivores anyway (which is why your cat should not be deprived of meat)

                    please act in good faith or let me know that you’re not interested in doing so