- I called a corpse a corpse (post contains multiple pictures of chests of multiple animals)
- Get called loud, obnoxious and ridiculous
- User types 380+ words on why my view is ridiculous (see linked post for more of their comments, my only two comments are in the image)
- I replied in an annoyed tone but did not use insults
- I am banned for “rule 1, be kind”
Post (TW: animal corpses): https://lemmy.world/post/45494863/23173926
Note: “the rules of this site” in my comment refer to rule 6 of lemmy.world which states:
No visual content depicting executions, murder, suicide, dismemberment, visible innards, excessive gore, or charred bodies. No content depicting, promoting or enabling animal abuse.
Omnivory is completely natural. You seem to have a problem with nature.
It’s natural to shit in the forest. But more on topic; there’s loads of immoral things happening in nature (eg rape and infanticide) yet we’d never use that as a justification in those cases.
I appreciate your choices. I really do. I won’t stop eating meat, but you are welcome to your own choices. Just don’t try pushing them on me.
You’re pushing your choices onto innocent animals who do not have a voice they can use to protest your violence.
https://yourveganfallacyis.com/en/humans-are-omnivores
Yup. Biologically we evolved for that shit. However, we have proceeded to a place where we can substitute and manufacture alternatives
Veganism is an ethical and moral choice. And you need to realise that none of those are absolutes.
Failure to do so is what makes you obnoxious
Yeah that’s the argument my link makes, that not being vegan is the unethical and immoral choice.
You need to realise that the choice is taking the life of an animal that had at least a mom that loved it, that probably had friends and most likely siblings it played with or you having a nice little treat. That’s the choice you’re making.
This is major anthropomorphization. Shit, some animals literally eat their young.
Some animals, in stress situations, but the animals that grow up on farms have very nurturing caring behaviour. The bellows of the cow moms when seperated from their young are haunting.
https://onanimals.co.uk/2021/06/04/stress-responses-to-seperation-broken-cow-calf-bond/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PemBURyBlyk
But it’s more likely an evolutionary response, not the human concept of “love”. But I guess one could get into a long argument as to what “love” actually is, and I’ve got no interest in participating in that argument
as if the humans caring and nurturing behavior is less of an “evolutionary response”? Also what difference does it make? Is the pain response not to be taken seriously if it’s “just an evolutionary response”? At what point did our pain response make the jump from “just evolutionary” to “ensouled” (or whatever term you want to use) and therefore more precious?
Also you’re the one to bring up that there is supposedly a distinction to be made and immediately through up your hands that you don’t wanna argue this claim?
I said I didn’t want to get into it about what “love” specifically means as that’s a completely different can of worms.
It matters because it’s an appeal to emotion. It’s an attempt to evoke an emotional response by attributing the human concept of parental love to animals that are not sapient. It’s a bad argument.