Why? Is it because they could consent? In that case it’s a poor argument because it could be argued that anyone who did consent was not in a state of mind where they could do so legitimately.
Yeah, it’s a consent thing. Not really for you to decide that, eh? I for one would be totally down to eat some leg if it got amputated because of an accident or something, and I would absolutely ask to keep my own leg for that purpose (not that I would tell the doctor) if one of mine were ever amputated.
More on topic, I would absolutely donate blood to vampires if they were real
Vampires are actually real though, there are some companies in the US that sell young peoples’ blood they bought from blood banks to rich people as blood transfusions.
Now it makes sense why most classic depictions of vampires present them as rich people in their own castles.
One of my friends in my college days explained it to me. They specifically choose poor people to feed off of, rarely ever high society, and that’s how royalty and feudal lords would act back in the day too. Some of the IRL ruling class would even bathe in young women’s blood.
And vampires are almost always rich in fiction.
And we all know how the rich treat the poor in real life.
Okay but arguing that doesn’t prove anything other than that you can’t imagine a situation where someone of sound mind would want to be eaten. It’s one of them catch 182s. Dammit!
Safely, you can donate about 400ml of whole blood at a time with six weeks between donations. I could donate a liter of plasma (the goop between the cells) every four weeks, but that was done via apheresis.
surely cultivated meat is vegan? like if you consider taking a tissue sample from an animal to be enough of a violation to make it not be vegan you’re not really doing it for the sake of animals are you?
That’s a popular discussion among vegans. Strictly speaking, it isn’t vegan, since it’s still sourced from an animal without its consent. The vast, vast majority of vegans agree, though, that even if they wouldn’t personally partake in it (and some of them would), it would be a wonderful thing for omnivores to be able to eat meat without furthering animal exploitation and suffering.
Has there been a consensus on how many samples would be needed to sustain the production? I had heard that, theoretically, a single sample would suffice, but I’ve heard of other sources claiming that a handful of animals would be needed to meet the demand.
That’s an interesting question. There are ways to gather DNA from animals without violating their rights–if a llama spits on you, it decided to give you that spit. If a dog bites you, same deal.
But then, exploiting that DNA for profit. Is that vegan? My inner pirate says it’s fine, copying isn’t theft
Fun fact! Human is the only meat that can be vegan!
And uhh, there are plenty of people that would consent to a vampire sucking their blood
I think you are legally obliged to consent if the vampire is cute. Personally I like to make lewd noises to make them uncomfortable.
“Legally obliged” is a lack of consent.
i feel my astarion kink being called out
Yeah! Like me! Cute vampire girls are always welcome to suck my blood~
Why? Is it because they could consent? In that case it’s a poor argument because it could be argued that anyone who did consent was not in a state of mind where they could do so legitimately.
Yeah, it’s a consent thing. Not really for you to decide that, eh? I for one would be totally down to eat some leg if it got amputated because of an accident or something, and I would absolutely ask to keep my own leg for that purpose (not that I would tell the doctor) if one of mine were ever amputated.
More on topic, I would absolutely donate blood to vampires if they were real
Vampires are actually real though, there are some companies in the US that sell young peoples’ blood they bought from blood banks to rich people as blood transfusions.
Now it makes sense why most classic depictions of vampires present them as rich people in their own castles.
That’s because vampires have always been a metaphor for the rich exploiting and leeching off of the poor.
Somehow this had never occurred to me…
One of my friends in my college days explained it to me. They specifically choose poor people to feed off of, rarely ever high society, and that’s how royalty and feudal lords would act back in the day too. Some of the IRL ruling class would even bathe in young women’s blood.
And vampires are almost always rich in fiction.
And we all know how the rich treat the poor in real life.
Well … plus if you’re alive that long and can’t manage to get rich via compound interest you deserve to be staked.
Okay but arguing that doesn’t prove anything other than that you can’t imagine a situation where someone of sound mind would want to be eaten. It’s one of them catch 182s. Dammit!
The dinner meat at Milliways might beg to differ.
Yeah but the cow isn’t being entranced by magic, it’s just self aware
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/dec/04/germany.lukeharding
deleted by creator
I’d probably donate a couple of liters if a vampire asked for it.
Safely, you can donate about 400ml of whole blood at a time with six weeks between donations. I could donate a liter of plasma (the goop between the cells) every four weeks, but that was done via apheresis.
Yeah I know. I’m open for
repertoirerepeat appointments :DYeah that vampire can have my micro plastic riddled PFAS tainted blood.
surely cultivated meat is vegan? like if you consider taking a tissue sample from an animal to be enough of a violation to make it not be vegan you’re not really doing it for the sake of animals are you?
That’s a popular discussion among vegans. Strictly speaking, it isn’t vegan, since it’s still sourced from an animal without its consent. The vast, vast majority of vegans agree, though, that even if they wouldn’t personally partake in it (and some of them would), it would be a wonderful thing for omnivores to be able to eat meat without furthering animal exploitation and suffering.
Has there been a consensus on how many samples would be needed to sustain the production? I had heard that, theoretically, a single sample would suffice, but I’ve heard of other sources claiming that a handful of animals would be needed to meet the demand.
If a llama spits on me and its spit contains DNA has it given me permission to use that spit, and therefore that DNA?
That’s an interesting question. There are ways to gather DNA from animals without violating their rights–if a llama spits on you, it decided to give you that spit. If a dog bites you, same deal.
But then, exploiting that DNA for profit. Is that vegan? My inner pirate says it’s fine, copying isn’t theft
deleted by creator
https://youtu.be/KHGPixsRWBw?si=mbmuPmcA9v2awZIj
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/KHGPixsRWBw?si=mbmuPmcA9v2awZIj
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
You mean voluntarily vegan? Plenty of obligate herbivores out there that aren’t eating butter.
I meant in a human sense. Non-human obligate herbivores are generally not necessarily vegans, because veganism isn’t just a dietary restriction