[amrocha]

Ok, but it might get long. And again, I'm not looking for an adversarial discussion.

1. Animal Rights

Animals don't have rights because rights are a human construct. Absent humans, animal rights don't make any sense. Animals can only have "rights" in their relationship to humans, and humans are the ones enforcing those "rights". Therefore I don't think animal rights as a term makes sense. To me, they're closer to societal rules (or laws) for interacting with animals. This also goes for pets.

I don't know what you're getting at with dog's milk. Sure, I'll drink dog milk. Lots of people eat dog all over the world too.

2. Animal lives

Morality is a concept that applies to humans as they deal with other humans. You can only be judged immoral by another human being. A human being slaughtering a cow isn't judged to be immoral by the cow, because the cow has no concept of morality, only survival.

Therefore, the unprovoked killing of animals is not inherently immoral, like killing humans is. However, the purpose and method can be deemed immoral.

3. Eating animals is not immoral

Killing an animal for food is acceptable to me, and to the vast majority of people, since it is something we are all subject to in nature. Having food preferences is also not immoral. Bears and other animals have food preferences. Therefore choosing to eat meat instead of something else is not immoral.

However, I believe causing undue harm and cruelty are immoral. I don't want to contribute to a system that enables that cruelty.

4. Dominion

I don't know why you linked me this. I've already seen it. I know how fucked up industrial farming is. That doesn't mean eating animals is immoral.

Lastly, I disagree that they don't matter less than me. They do, I think humans are more important than animals.

[drewm1980]

> I know how fucked up industrial farming is. That doesn't mean eating animals is immoral.

These two things are intrinsically tied in practice. The utopia where well cared for animals feed 8 billion people does not exist, and cannot exist without many more earths.

Try going vegan for say... a year. Make it a fun game. You get to try out some new foods and restaurants! You can always start eating meat again if you decide you want to take part in the stuff you saw watching Dominion.

You don't even have to give up pedantic moral discussions and infighting (i.e. the distinction between "fucked up" and "immoral"). Those are deeply entrenched traditions in the vegan community!

[amrocha]

They're not. There are ethical options for animal products. You draw the line at any consumption is unethical so you disagree, and that's ok, but you're not gonna convince me by saying it's unethical because I don't think it is.

[mellavora]

> the cow has no concept of morality, only survival.

Actually, many non-human animals have been shown to have strong view on fairness .

If we assume evolution is mostly correct, then the assumption that "morality" only originated in humans is rather suspect; it should be a component of every social animal.

Cows are herd animals. Thus very likely to have a sense of morality.

[amrocha]

Fairness and morality aren't the same thing. Just because something is fair doesn't mean it's moral e.g.: splitting the baby in half, an eye for an eye, etc.

Morals are a specifically human societal feature.

[myshpa]

> A human being slaughtering a cow isn't judged to be immoral by the cow, because the cow has no concept of morality, only survival

> Therefore, the unprovoked killing of animals is not inherently immoral

So, killing a human newborn is not immoral because it cannot judge its killer?

> Killing an animal for food is acceptable to me, and to the vast majority of people, since it is something we are all subject to in nature. Having food preferences is also not immoral. Bears and other animals have food preferences. Therefore choosing to eat meat instead of something else is not immoral.

https://yourveganfallacyis.com/en/eating-meat-is-personal-ch...

https://yourveganfallacyis.com/en/animals-eat-animals

https://yourveganfallacyis.com/en/ancestors-ate-meat

I would also argue that food preferences / choices leading to the destruction of the environment / ecosystems are not moral.

> I know how fucked up industrial farming is. That doesn't mean eating animals is immoral

> I believe causing undue harm and cruelty are immoral. I don't want to contribute to a system that enables that cruelty.

But you contribute to it ... you vote with your money and purchase animal products. It's nothing else than your choice, it's not a necessity. A life of those animals is full of harm and cruelty. You've seen Dominion, you know.

> I think humans are more important than animals.

That thinking got us here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropocene

[amrocha]

Please stop linking that site. It's wrong in so many ways, starting with the title. They're not fallacies, they're disagreements.

Killing a human newborn is immoral because it has the capacity of moral thought, even if at the moment that capacity isn't developed. But morality is a grey area, it's not like that's always true since I think abortions aren't immoral either.

On your other points, it seems like you really have the industrial farming and meat eating concepts so tightly wound in your brain that you can't possibly understand that they don't have to go together.

And no, prioritizing human lives over animals didn't get us here. Capitalism did. Even if we all stopped eating animal products tomorrow, we're still fucked.