debate

@momoichi Hmm, that is an interesting proposition you have. (҂⌣̀_⌣́) If it is purely out of taste, Tom is a fool and can be called immoral for his purchase. It appears to be a cycle however, in that purchase from the meat industry leads to inevitably to the meat industry continuing. However, it is also because the meat industry exists that people have access to meat and continue to buy it. I believe if the meat industry collapse, such as what is happening to pork in the People's Republic of China, and it is replaced with an alternative, people will willingly switch to that alternative quite easily. So sure, Tom is immoral for purchasing meat from a store, but I think he could have his mind changed if the opportunity arises. It is like when I was hosted by a vegetarian who showed me how you can still achieve the tastiness of a meat sandwich with the use of variable vegetation. However, letting the meat in stores go to waste would be a bigger immorality to me, as then that means food has totally gone to waste. The solution perhaps could to gradually restock all current meat supplies with cloned meat or other "more ethical" foods that can achieve a similar taste. Disposing of the current stock however, would be an immoral thing I think. o7

@mountain_tiger why is tom immoral? can you explain the reason? you mean stock of meat or animals?

@momoichi it's not that i dislike screaming and trashing, i just don't wanna put up with it. PS: i really want those thigh pics

@kyros96 what about a human that thrashed and screamed in fear? nothing/ PS: no >w>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcAHHKY3Y0I no thighs no debates.

@momoichi The stock of meat in the store, it shouldn't be thrown away or left to waste. Tom could be called immoral because he is supporting the meat industry out of taste, a vanity, which is condemned for inefficient use of land that could be used for feeding more people. In essence, I believe more importantly that wasting food is the main issue. I think we should reduce wasting food as much as possible. Because we need to eat, we shouldn't waste our efforts of obtaining it out of vanity. I understand that in some way, that enjoyment is also a factor for human psychological need, but I think it is better to prioritize reducing waste before enjoyment. Hierarchy of needs and all... On a side note: Smashing an animal's head in with a rock so you can eat it is not immoral, even if it does cause the suffering of the animal. It is only a personal preference I have regarding "suffering", that it should be minimized if possible. Additionally, the animals killed or displaced as a result of farming and agriculture suffer too, but I think this is tolerable because there is less "waste" of food involved. Humans have to eat something, so even if it causes the suffering of an animal through displacement or slaughter, I believe humans ought to prioritize their own needs first. I don't think it is immoral for a human or animal to prioritize it's own need to eat over another species. If you were to ask how I would feel if humans were hunted by animals for food, I would state that both are morally excusable to kill one another to eat or to defend their own life. Not to ruin your fun, but I have grown pretty tired of talking at this rate and would prefer to end this chain of discussions already, as I was actually expecting it to end with my other post. It feels we are beginning to run away into another discussion or debate and I'd rather not. This humble ronin doesn't have *that* much energy to spare. (´～`) If you have any major lessons give that I should take away from you, then please state it and I will try to ponder upon myself later. o7