HOME | DD
Pupaveg β VV74: Disconnected (3)
by-nc-nd
#abuse #animal #animals #artbook #cruelty #love #stop #vegan #vegventures
Published: 2016-08-20 10:13:05 +0000 UTC; Views: 1315; Favourites: 19; Downloads: 2
Redirect to original
Description
Because some people are acting as if kicking an victim is worse than killing an unwilling victim. Abuse is abuse, no matter how convenient certain abuse is for you. Sorry, that's just the way it is.Killing animals for no reason is wrong, but if you have a reason it's fine
The reason for killing animals in modern society is for the enjoyment of eating their dead body. That surely is not a justification for taking life. If somebody killed your companion animal, I doubt that you'd say "It's fine as long as you eat them".
More on the "paying someone to kill them is love" argument:
If you only love white people, but think it's ok to kill blacks, asians and other people for your enjoyment, does that make you a human lover? No, it doesn't. It makes you a white people lover and racist.
If you like German Shepherds, but think it's ok to kill other dog species for your enjoyment, does that make you a dog lover? No, it doesn't. It makes you a German shepherd lover and speciesist.
If you think heterosexuals are awesome, but think that gays should be killed, does that mean you love humans? No, it doesn't. You only love straight humans and it makes you a homophobe.
If you love your own children, but are ok with killing other peoples' children, does that mean that you love children? No, you don't. You only love your own, but by (being ok with) killing other children, you can't claim you love children.
If you only love dogs and cats, but think it's ok to kill pigs, cows, chickens, turkeys, sheep, fish etc. for your enjoyment, does that make you an animal lover? No, it doesn't. It makes you a dog/cat lover and a speciesist.
Killing is not love. Slavery is not love. Objectification is not love. Paying someone to kill others is not love. You can't be someone's friend and tormenter at the same time. Being nice to someone before killing them is not love. Killing an unwilling victim is not love. What happens inside a slaughterhouse is something you wouldn't even wish upon your worst enemy, nevermind upon someone you claim to "love". If the aforementioned things are your definiton of love, then I'm glad you don't love me, or I'd be dead now.Think about this.
Related content
Comments: 16
π: 0 β©: 0
Humans have weird morals: some random artist considers any animal exploitation cruel. Meanwhile, the whole doctrine of Catholic Church, who claims to be the best moral compass for humans, and which is kinda strict in controlling any life aspect, considers killing animals for food totally fine. (Bible doesn't even say a word about treating animals, and Jesus definitely for whatever reason did not object against killing fish here and there.)
Who's right on this issue? "The only true, the purest, and the best" morally-caring religion or some random artist? I'll never know.
π: 0 β©: 2
A religion that supports senseless violence is not pure. People hide behind the God excuse all the time to justify violence. But it's ridiculous to claim so, IF their god is truly a god of love and not some violent psychopath.
π: 0 β©: 1
Too bad that all the old scriptures were written when killing and using animals was indeed either necessary for survival or commanded by God. Moral issue doesn't worry me. I don't believe that animals have souls and are worthy of that respect, therefore using them is justifies as long as it's not too painful to them, and human can gain long-lasting benefit from it (which is food as well). I would only change my mind for ecological reasons because the environment affects me. But I'm not ready. My interpretation of religious issues: kill animals if you really like to eat them, and use them if you can't live otherwise but don't make them suffer without a good reason, and respect them for feeding you. Also, don't buy consciously from those who make animals suffer beyond minimum.
π: 0 β©: 1
People often seem to forget that humans are animals, too. And what makes us animals is the capacity to feel pain, to have emotions like fear, joy, anger, happiness, love etc. Being a living, sentient being is not exclusive to humans. There is countless of scientific evidence on that, and people who still deny that in 2019 and ignore all evidence and cling on willful ignorance are clearly just seeking anΒ excuse to enslave and kill animals. It was once believed that people of color didn't have souls and feeling as well, and even when science proved otherwise, people (especially religious people) also clinged to willful ignorance by ignoring all that and hide behind the "God" excuse, because enslaving and killing them was convenient for them.
However, oppression is not justified by saying that the perpetrator doesn't care about their victims, or doesn't believe that their victims have feelings, even though scientific evidence (and honestly: even logic) states otherwise.Β Oppression is also not justified by saying that your religion approves of it. Slavery, homophobia and the oppression of women have all been defended in the past by using the religion excuse (and sadly some people still do this). Religion is no moral justification to enslave or kill others. There are religions that approve of killing certain groups of people. I don't think you would agree to give them a free pass just because their religion states they can.
That being said, you say that you believe that other animals don't have souls, but I don't think you actually believe that. Because if they didn't have feelings/souls anyway, why would you worry about whether they suffer or not? The capacity to feel pain requires a soul after all.
but don't make them suffer without a good reason, and respect them for feeding you.
The reason for killing animals in modern society is for the enjoyment of eating their dead body. That surely is not a justification for taking life. If somebody killed your companion animal, I doubt that you'd say "It's fine as long as you eat them". Also, killing an unwilling victim for a piece of cheese is not respecting them. If you want to respect them, you should leave them alone and let them live out their lives in peace.
π: 0 β©: 1
TBH, I'm confused myself about what I think. In my ideal world, people would use only those animals which are farmed for food in Europe, and the rest of the animals should live in the wild (I think that police animals should not exist). However, the only other people I heard claim that animals have souls are zoophiles. Maybe we should also legalise zoophilia because soul= ability to consent, why don't we?
π: 0 β©: 1
Maybe you've just never given the subject much thought? Most people haven't. That's why my page exists.Β
<---- I have a comic about non-human animal sentience which includes sources, so if you feel like it, feel free to check it out.
π: 0 β©: 0
It seems that the Catholic Church authorities think like the red girl.
π: 0 β©: 0
And even IF it wasn't abuse to kill, most are abused before they're killed.
Plus, here is the definition of abuse
It is the misuse of animals, therefore abuse, because people are eating them which is detrimental to their health.
It is violent treatment, because killing is violent.
π: 0 β©: 1
But of course, people think vegans are the idiots because we go by dictionary definitions.
π: 0 β©: 1
I've also seen "killing them is OK because I don't hate them." WTF! O_OΒ
Oh, and there is "I don't eat meat that was produced that way." At first, I thought the person saying that was at least vegetarian and maybe would consider vegan, but she was not at all. Automobiles are produced. Tires are produced. Boxes are produced. Chopping up body parts is not "production," is is violence, death, and dismemberment.
Some try to get around thinking about the animals they are harming with euphemisms, such as "turning the animals into food" and "harvesting." Butterflies turn into caterpillars; animals do not turn into chopped up body parts without some violent process happening. Strawberries are harvested; animals are dismembered.Β Naming an animal one claims to love, such as calling a pet a "production hen" is also tragic. The bird exists for who she is, her life is her purpose, her eggs are for her family, she is not a production machine. Dairy is not dairy, it is cow's milk, as in possessive that it belongs to the cow and her baby, not to agribiz.
π: 0 β©: 1
Killing animals for our enjoyment (meat, dairy, eggs, leather, fur, bullfighting etc.)Β can only be called "harvesting", "humane", "cruelty-free", "producing" or "ethical" in a state of wild delusion.
π: 0 β©: 1
And, how sick and sad is killing for so-called enjoyment, which only results in disconnect and further unhappiness for all. There are millions of nonviolent things to occupy our time on this beautiful world, many of them free.
π: 0 β©: 1