Is there any moral way for modern people to use animals for food? Factory farming is so inhumane its sickening

Is there any moral way for modern people to use animals for food?

Factory farming is so inhumane it’s sickening

UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68

DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68

UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >behold
    >the milkshaker

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Everyone should spend at least one month working in a slaughterhouse or stockyard. I still eat meat so I’m a hypocrite but holy frick is it sickening.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I don't need to wade through shit in the sewer to know there's a disgusting side to things that make my life better.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        An abstract knowledge on a subject does not compare to firsthand experience, you should be forced to engage with the beast if you take from it

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >you
          >should be
          and who will enforce this law?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I worked at a sewer plant, it was way more disgusting than when I deal with animals hunting, obviously the industrialization of something makes it worse, it's really just scale that boggles the mind. I've never been knee deep in guts, but I don't see it being much different than being knee deep in shit, which I've been in.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Being knee deep in shit is just a gross factor, there is also no argument against it because a sewage system is necessary in cities and no one is suffering for it. I imagine in a meat industry it's a lot worse because you're seeing actual living things suffer under horrible conditions while you also know that it doesn't have to be that way, there are alternative diets or alternative methods of producing meat.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The alternative is raising livestock yourself or buying meat from someone who does. Otherwise, you can never be sure.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            They are both gross factor, that's it. To adopt alternative diets, you require insecticides and rodent poisons, killing untold millions of living creatures. And dont talj to me sbout labs, power genetation, chemicals, processes proteins, all require the death of animals somewhere. Everyone could shit in a hole in the ground out back, which means we wouldn't have to have the sewer infrastructure which requires people standing in poop, to say nothing of the deaths to animals and destruction of habitat infrastructure construction. Gross factor is all that's here, justification follows later.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >To adopt alternative diets, you require insecticides and rodent poisons, killing untold millions of living creatures
            Yes, but humans have a way easier time empathizing with other mammals, especially ones we find cute. Nobody mourns when a bacteria or spider is killed, but a dog's death is a tragedy, at least if you're a westerner who cares about dogs.
            >Everyone could shit in a hole in the ground out back, which means we wouldn't have to have the sewer infrastructure which requires people standing in poop, to say nothing of the deaths to animals and destruction of habitat infrastructure construction.
            No living thing that we actually care about is hurt in that process though. I get what you mean but seeing a few trees get cut down doesn't invoke the same emotional response in humans as seeing a cow flailing around in pain after its throat was slit, even if more living things die and more of the ecosystem is destroyed in the first example. There's a reason why eating meat is first and foremost discussed as a moral problem, not an environmental one.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Vegans often use environmental justifications to argue an to end meat consumption, but we can ignore that for the moment. My moral issue is, somewhere a line is drawn where people stop caring about animal life. I care a lot about birds, probably more than your average dog, so knocking down trees can and will hurt animals I care about, but that has to happen. I despise this idea that we only care about the 'cute' animals, which so much of anti-meat advertising comes across as. They don't stand on not killing anything, on stopping suffering, but really stand on just not knowing about it. If animal suffering is on the level of human suffering, then farming should be stopped at once, running over a mouse with a tiller is the same as killing a cow. Of course, that would cause untold human suffering, so there's clearly some sort of 'acceptable loses' to eat. Because of that, I don't think there's a moral leg to stand on, at least for 99% of people arguing for anti-meat practices. So long as they don't see a YouTube video about it, or the animal being killed looks cuddly, they don't care about animal suffering. Thus, they don't stand on principle, only on subjectivity, no one cares when 10 million cicadas get killed digging a trench for a sewer, but a single dead cow is the end of the world.
            >No living thing that we actually care about is hurt in that process though.
            Basically, who decides what we care about?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            As a lighthearted followup, clearly we should eat babies, as many people care less about human life than animal life lol.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            eating babies is moronic. Babies turn into workers who provide more for society alive than dead. Not to mention a pig is ready to eat and is 250 lbs in 6 months, which is less time than it takes for a human to fully gestate.

            Not to mention humans can only really birth a couple babies at a time unless you do some weird invetro shit and even then getting an octomom isn't a surefire guarantee like how hogs are.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            So if humans didnt empathize with livestock so much you wouldnt have a problem with it? It was okay 200 years ago because people just werent as estranged from the rural lifestyle?
            So instead of preaching veganism, maybe we should be preaching a rural lifestyle instead.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Most people don't have an issue of eating meat or the fact that we raise livestock just to kill them, it's the conditions that they live in up until they are slaughtered. A rural lifestyle wouldn't fix it because people would be more desensitized to animals dying, it would fix it because almost nobody would have an issue with eating a cow if it lived a 'good' life and got to roam around in a pasture instead of being injected with steroids and antibiotics standing in a pile of its own shit, packed like sardines.
            >Thus, they don't stand on principle, only on subjectivity, no one cares when 10 million cicadas get killed digging a trench for a sewer, but a single dead cow is the end of the world.
            I agree completely, I'm more or less just stating how I think the world (and people) work in practice, not that it's a good thing. People inherently care more about cute animals, they don't have an attachment to life in general if that life only comes in the form of insects and moss.
            >Basically, who decides what we care about?
            Society as a whole. In two hundred years our descendants will look back at us the same way we look back at people who practiced slavery.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Why do people have such a problem with antibiotics? In the first place, it's necessary for them to be treated because otherwise they would fricking die, their meat would also be tainted and unsafe for eating. They are absolutely indispensable from both an ethical and sanitary point of view.

            The practice of blanket treatment of cattle is what should be abolished, and it's only done like that because of how industrialized the practice of raising and slaughtering has become.

            I would absolutely not mind eating less meat. I would not mind paying more for it. The only people who disagree with these are the ones who will see their numbers go down in terms of profit. There should be a limit to how much wealth you can get from slaughtering animals, a base requirement for expenses and conditions as well.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah the antibiotic shit was always weird to me. People take antibiotics directly when they are sick, but for some reason if a cow gets medical treatment suddenly its abhorrent.

            I raise livestock and in the summer months I actually only eat a few ounces of meat per month. People dont understand that animals can be raised for things other than meat.

            I think more awareness needs to be spread about the forced consolidation of agriculture over the last century, especially after the 1970s where Earl Butz had the go big or get out philosophy of agriculture.
            There's so many fees and regulations that only make sense for large scale farms but get pushed on small farms making it difficult for them to break even on their sales.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Why do people have such a problem with antibiotics?
            I think the implication is that antibiotics are only necessary because the living conditions are so filthy, it'd be like putting a bullet proof vest of your kid before sending them to school - it's a preventative measure but the idea that it is even required makes people feel iffy. I'm just guessing though.
            >I would absolutely not mind eating less meat. I would not mind paying more for it.
            I have a coworker who became vegetarian, primarily for environmental reasons IIRC but also for the sake of animals, we argue a bit back and forth every now and then. I don't like the idea of simply taxing meat more or making it prohibitively expensive because then you turn it into a class issue where the elites continue to eat meat while the rest eat substitutes, but if society as a whole was ready to give up meat or severely limit their consumption then I'm there 100%. It's just that in the current situation I would give up a delicious and nutritious source of food for no noticeable moral or environmental impact because my consumption is irrelevant to society as a whole. I have to go to bed now, good talking to you.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I will tell you what the real problem is. People are stupid and lazy, and doing your own research takes effort, so they just regurgitate whatever makes them feel uncomfortable.

            It's the same shit as "environmentalists" suddenly ripping their shirts over Carbon emissions while backing practices that gets rid of vast swathes of wildlands and completely fricks over biodiversity. Such people preach about putting a shit ton of moronic windmills that frick up bird migrations and perpetuate the use of land exclusively for agriculture and simply shit up the visual appeal of the landscape, or they promote the widespread use of electric cars not giving a frick about digging a mile wide borehole to extract the lithium, or setting up nuclear plants that end up boiling the river needed to cool them off (and genociding the whole animals in the area once the morons shit up and the reactor explodes every 50 years).

            All of these problems can be easily solved by drastically reducing the population. Ideally reducing consumption would help, but that depends on the supplier, not on the consumer. You have zero influence on the consumer. The big problem here is that the ideologies of the XVIII century no longer are viable. The era of abundance is over, equality has never existed in the first place. This idealism will be the end for us and the only legacy humans will leave for the future are a bunch of human faced rats roaming maize grasslands.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah, there's all sorts of people here in Tennessee that run little farms and sell crops they've grown and cows/pigs they raise on their land. If there's the land for it, like there is here, it's the best solution overall. Unfortunately we won't see what it'll be like in 200 years, but I'm sure it'll be interesting.
            >I agree completely, I'm more or less just stating how I think the world (and people) work in practice, not that it's a good thing.
            I got ya, I feel very similar, I was just attacking a vegan strawman I built.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I live in a farm of a poor state in Brazil, so I know the scream pigs make when they have their head bashed repeatedly with a large stick before having their throat sliced to fill the floor with gore. I guess it must be not so different than a human screaming in agony. Nevertheless, in my case, the reason I don't eat pork is another: I prefer bovine meat.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        hello brazil anon. If they beat the pig how do they kill the cow? It seems like beating a cow with a stick might be kind of dangrous

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Generally they are sent to proper slaughterhouses. My father only called me to watch goats and pigs being killed.

          Why with a stick? My dad and I used a bolt gun on my farm, bashing their heads in sounds like an easy way to contaminate the meat.

          I don't know why. It even makes the meat hard. I hate it.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Why with a stick? My dad and I used a bolt gun on my farm, bashing their heads in sounds like an easy way to contaminate the meat.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I figured the thirdies cant afford a bolt gun. The gun and the cartridges cost money. They might even also have laws against them who knows.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I've bashed a pigs head in with a large stick until it had a seizure and died, and I still eat pork (it was a boar some morons had hit with a car and needed to be put down and we only had a big iron spit used to dig out rocks from my moms garden). People who accept animal suffering aren't weird, what's weird is elevating animals to the level of human and being completely oblivious to the level of suffering in nature.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >elevating animals to the level of human
          people pretend that Black folk are human lol
          you will pay for this demonic bullshit christcuck btw
          your children will be raped by Black folk

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            shut the frick up, moron

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            dolphins, orangutans, elephants are all above your precious Black folk
            god will not let you get away with this

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >rape is okay but putting an animal out of its misery is unforgivable
            moron who thinks with emotions.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            you're the one who thinks with emotions
            I'm not out here pretending Black folk are the exact same """""people""""" as me

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Problem of resource consolidation. As such, it's not my problem.

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Idk I do a lot of it myself.
    I started raising some poultry for eggs and I soon realized you really have to kill off most of the males because they are far from innocent like the vegans say.
    Chopping their heads off isn't fun, but they die quickly and as far as I can tell, painlessly.
    Far more painless than what the males will do to a "favorite" female.

    Most livestock is barbaric as frick. I mean most animals are fricked up but vegans never want to think about how their precious vegan cats will have no issues slowly torturing their prey to death because it gets their rocks off

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No in the human population needs to be drastically culled. Which is why any population that is declining in numbers is a good thing. Even though israelites and their media tell you it's a bad thing and how we need to bring in third worlders to replace them.

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    what the frick even is that device op? I figured a slaughter statnion wouldn't rotate the animal

    I mean the building interior looks like a slaughterhouse but idk. That is weird

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      see

      >behold
      >the milkshaker

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >what the frick even is that device op?
      Halal convenience device

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >the entire nightmare chamber is stained with blood
        Incredible

        So you agree a cow crying about going to the slaughterhouse is irrelevant then.

        Yes, just as you among many others crying about getting beheaded is irrelevant

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Yes, just as you among many others crying about getting beheaded is irrelevant
          What?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Are you a moron? Nevermind, the scenario presupposes it.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You are the one bringing up irrelevant scenerios

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Why should a superior human care about your suffering?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >superior human
            Lol lmao. No such thing.

            I did not say I would eat them, I will just barbecue them.

            So you say murder is okay? Interesting.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Lol lmao. No such thing.
            Why would there not be?
            >So you say murder is okay? Interesting.
            Yes, as an inferior being's suffering is irrelevant.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Why would there not be?
            Show me your detailed reports and reasoning then.
            >inferior being's suffering is irrelevant
            Yes. Humans>everything other living thing.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Show me your detailed reports and reasoning then.
            Humans have variable intelligence, so there exist humans with superior intelligence to others, sometimes significantly due to various disorders. This is within common knowledge.
            >Yes. Humans>everything other living thing.
            Indeed, and differences exist within humans as well.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            And thanks to western culture and philosophy all humans are still seen as equal thanks to their potential. A paraplegic is still superior to the smartest dog or gorrila and due to them being a human their life is still greater and deserves respect. Don't agree? You go against western culture thought and philosophy

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >all humans are still seen as equal
            Then all living beings must be seen as equal.
            >thanks to their potential
            Humans do not have the same potential; a downie can never be my equal.
            >A paraplegic is still superior to the smartest dog
            Paraplegia is physical disability, which seems irrelevant, since many animals are physically superior to humans to begin with. Intellectual disabilities are far more relevant.
            >Don't agree? You go against western culture thought and philosophy
            Western culture considers halal butchering to be immoral, and Westerners try to avoid subjecting animals to unnecessary suffering.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Then all living beings must be seen as equal.
            Because...reasons? Humans are superior to animals. Period. Why do you think a cow or dog is equal to a human?

            you're the one who thinks with emotions
            I'm not out here pretending Black folk are the exact same """""people""""" as me

            >You go against western culture thought and philosophy

            https://i.imgur.com/HW1poa8.png

            >Lol lmao. No such thing.

            >Look Black folk!!!!
            Not an argument. There are educated and civilized black people and there are trashy and shitty white people.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Because...reasons?
            Because that is the logic you have established.
            >Humans are superior to animals. Period.
            I am superior to every downie. Period.
            >Why do you think a cow or dog is equal to a human?
            I do not.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >because that is the logic
            Yes. Between humans. Animals are entirely irrelevant so it is strange you keep putting them up as an equal when you say they aren't.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Yes. Between humans.
            Humans are inequal, so any rationale used to equalise them arbitrarily can be arbitrarily applied to any other group.
            >it is strange you keep putting them up as an equal
            I do not, the existence of equal animals must follow from equal humans.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >any rationale used to equalise them arbitrarily can be arbitrarily applied to any other group.
            Yes, any other group but not equating the groups. All dogs are equal same as cats, but this doesn't make their group equal to humans

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >All dogs are equal
            Are you sure this is what you want to go with?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Can any dog write or speak? Can any dog cook or plant a garden? Can you show me any music written by dogs? No? Yes they are all equal.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous
          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            .

            ,,

            ..

            .

            Even though they scare the shit out of me I love great apes so much

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            .

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            ,,

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            ..

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            .

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous
          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Can any inanimate object run or jump? Can any inanimate object metabolise or reproduce? Can you show me any communication between inanimate objects? No? Yes all living beings are equal.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Can any inanimate object run or jump?
            Robots
            >Can any inanimate object reproduce?
            Robots build other robots.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Robots are not inanimate, but even then the conclusion with that is that all entities are equal

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Equal based on what specifically or in general

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The other anon's logic was no more than "if beings that are in general inferior to group X exist, all members of group X are equal"

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Would it be incorrect to say a human is superior to a dog or cow?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            No. Would it be incorrect to say an engineer is superior to a mentally disabled person?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Superior intellectually? No. Superior by metric saying the Engineer in an entirely different genus or species? Yes.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >There are educated and civilized black people and there are trashy and shitty white people.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            why do Black folk kill even more now?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            because they didn't exist before
            highest homicide rate country in the world is probably the highest HDI black majority country in the world

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            He's asking why the homocide rate is so much higher in 86-95 than in 66-75, not about 2000 years ago.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >You go against western culture thought and philosophy

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Potential? Not all humans have the same potential. He already brought up neurological diseases, and you can weight in socioeconomic factors too. No abo will become as rich as George Soros, ever. Any israelite can become like him instead. Western philosophy is obsolete, only a thing that remains out of political convenience.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Anon you don't murder a cow in the same way you don't murder a fly. You kill them. Murder is a legal term reserved for humans.
            I know a homosexual like you will run to dogs, but if you kill someone else's dog that is a crime. The issue doesn't arise from you killing the dog, rather you are destroying someone else's property. Like if you go and kill your own dog it's not a crime. Therefore its not murder.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Never said killing a dog is murder. You are the one saying you will "BBQ Hatians"

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I never said I will bbq Haitians

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Lol lmao. No such thing.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I had no idea you could even function with an iq below 70, let alone have a nation with an AVERAGE iq below 50.
            Like I figured someone who was illiterate and cognitively unable to read still would have an iq around 90.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            90 isn't even far from the white average, millions of whites that are doing fine in society have 90 IQ.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I thought you couldn't survive with an IQ so low either, but then someone pointed out that bugs and bacteria survive.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >You go against western culture thought and philosophy

            https://i.imgur.com/0NGWzkZ.png

            >There are educated and civilized black people and there are trashy and shitty white people.

            https://i.imgur.com/DYts4Yo.png

            because they didn't exist before
            highest homicide rate country in the world is probably the highest HDI black majority country in the world

            Nice blogpost

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >crying about getting beheaded is irrelevant
          Strange projection. Well whatever I'm going to go kill a chicken and have a nice dinner

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Bon appetit, I'm going to barbecue some Haitians in a couple hours as well

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Cannibalism is wrong while there is nothing morally wrong with eating animals.
            Also you won't do shit to Hatians.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I did not say I would eat them, I will just barbecue them.

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    That is a Muslim machine for preparation of "halal" beef. Non-Halal slaughter is far more humane, they are led into a pen then die instantly with the use of a bolt gun.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Oh weird. Do they have the cow at an angle so it bleeds out faster or what?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It seems to be to restrain the cow then tip it into a container. The Koran doesn't actually give a specific method, only prohibitions.

        https://myislam.org/surah-maidah/ayat-3/

        >Prohibited to you are dead animals, blood, the flesh of swine, and that which has been dedicated to other than Allah, and [those animals] killed by strangling or by a violent blow or by a head-long fall or by the goring of horns, and those from which a wild animal has eaten, except what you [are able to] slaughter [before its death], and those which are sacrificed on stone altars, and [prohibited is] that you seek decision through divining arrows.

        Because "violent blows" are not permitted, the modern bolt gun is not permitted, though in some cases they use the bolt gun then bleed the cow.

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yeah
    You have animals on a field
    You drive up to an animal, fire a captive bolt gun into the animals skull and then cut it's throat

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Gone off farmed meat.
    Would still hunt, kill & butcher if I ever needed to (I don't).

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's tied to capitalism for one thing.
    But, even with that said, there is the alternative of plant based meat. There's also the possibility of lab grown meat.
    If you can find meat that is locally sourced then, that's one way.

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Is there any moral way for modern people to use animals for food?
    Yes, a natural, pastoralist setting. Cows free to roam, and graze on grass.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Schizoidberg

      Not if you're trying to feed all 8 billion of us, mostly living in crowded cities

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Humans are superior to animals in every conceivable way. Their suffering is irrelevant

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I am superior to you in every conceivable way. Your suffering is irrelevant

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        and?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Acceptable

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Not an argument. Do you seriously think a dog or cow is equal to a human? Are you a moron?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          No, I don't see how that was implied at all

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            So you agree a cow crying about going to the slaughterhouse is irrelevant then.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >inhumane
      >talking about animals
      u silly, bruh

      only intelligent rely so far..

      Why should a superior human care about your suffering?

      You dumb vegan moron. Your argument inherently agrees with his argument's logic.

      >Because...reasons?
      Because that is the logic you have established.
      >Humans are superior to animals. Period.
      I am superior to every downie. Period.
      >Why do you think a cow or dog is equal to a human?
      I do not.

      kek. You're right. You're not superior to a downie.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yes, I agree with his logic. It is moral to halal slaughter or boil alive many humans.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Why are you using muslim words?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The OP image depicts halal slaughter, or rather its setup.

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Once lab-grown meat is perfected and gets to the point where it is cheaper and even better than normal meat, then most ordinary people will transition over to it, and only at that point, everyone will admit that killing animals for food was obviously wrong.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      lab grown meat will never work. There's a reason they are speaking about it less. The reason being is that even with all the money research and development is getting to make a paltry 1 ounce of "meat", they will never be able to recreate the complex immune system of an animal. One little germ gets in, and an entire vat is completely ruined. Not to mention the immense amount of infrastructure needed to have and maintain such a massive, sterile environment. A cow literally doesn't need any infrastructure. Just some grass and some trees for shade and a water source and you have yourself a beef/dairy setup. Everything else is built within the cow.

      Animals are just way more efficient.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >they will never be able to recreate the complex immune system of an animal
        why not

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Radiochan

    organic farming I guess. humans are omnivorous creatures and unless you're just subsisting on pills and plants we're still going to have to have some kind of meat in our diets.

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I eat meat every day and dont have a bad conscience about it at all.
    I think most of the hysteria about how evil killing animals is comes from people who have never been confronted with killing animals themselves and are projecting their weird guilt they have about letting other people do it onto the rest of us.

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I only eat judas goats because they are complicit in the killing of animals. This makes it morally acceptable to eat them.

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Is there any moral way for modern people to use animals for food?
    Yes, move away from factory farming (making meat and many animal products prohibitively expensive for a lot of people) or take the stance that animals are not humans and therefore they are not worthy of the same moral consideration and therefore factory farming is alright.

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The moral responsibility for factory farming is on the government for forcing people to live out of alignment with nature. Not on people. But feel free to keep falling for psyops like a dumb cattle moron.

    I buy meat because they made living on the land impossible, they made hunting prohibitive, it's an expensive hobby and a luxury exclusively for rich c**ts. It's no longer accessible to the average person. You need to be a millionaire to become a farmer in Europe.

    The same leftist whiners who bellyache about factory farming are the same ones pushing for more taxation and more regulation which makes it harder and harder for anyone to escape industrialized food production. Congratulations useful idiots.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The problem is that when you just say "it's not peoples fault! it's the gubmint!" You have zero resources to enforce your suggestion. It's the same as complaining about why is God letting people die. You don't have a single say on the matter, large sectors of people will keep voting whoever gives more conveniences without placing responsibility on anyone. The same carousel of elites will keep running to defend their interests. At this point the only way to make a statement that can be heard is through terrorism.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        had a semi knee-jerk reaction to call you a glowie, however it seems you have a made a fair point— however what if I asked you to;
        One, prove that hypothetically this terrorism would have an impact that was a net positive and Two, would permit generally morally prohibited action(ie intended/unintended injury and death of uninvolved persons) be justified in this case by the ends justify the means morality?
        It’s not an effective argument if it’s simply
        “Terrorism would garner government attention more than voting” when there may be better alternatives and voting is effectively the lowest bar to have set if not counterproductive.

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    There is no humane way to kill someone who does not want to die.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Sometimes capital punishment benefits the greater good more than the individual, anon chan.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        And how many of the animals you eat are dangerous murderers? (Though as far as I know, the evidence that capital punishment actually serves as a greater deterrent isn't great.)

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >capital punishment doesn't deter crime
          lmao yeah just like not punishing shoplifters has been so great on big cities.

          But yes, actually, the animals I slaughter are actually a detriment to the others. The males will rape the females so badly they will rip out their eye sockets, if you think they wont rape a female to death you watch too many disney movies

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Capital punishment is not as effective a deterrent as mutilation is.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            How should we mutiliate criminals? Obviously sex offenders should be castrated

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Murder, arm above the elbow.

            Organized crime, two hands, vocal cords.

            Assault, one hand

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            How should we mutiliate criminals? Obviously sex offenders should be castrated

            Two wrongs don't make a right.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Its not wrong to kill a sex offender or a murderer. It's just the best way to keep Black folk from acting like Black folk

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Wrongs? In all honesty the matter of punishment is not an issue of morality, it's an issue of policy. The morality part ends where your entire society is falling apart from exploits. If you don't fix those there won't be any society to apply morality into.

            People tend to forget that humans are still animals, social subcultures are still subject to natural selection, in the sense that whatever trait is successful will keep reproducing. People will keep comitting crime as long as they can get away with it, as long as they reckon an acceptable loss for the risk. The same thing goes for any kind of morality issue, they will circunvent it as long as it's convenient and are permitted to do so.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >People tend to forget that humans are still animals
            I disagree with your assertion

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            in the religion of peace, supposedly they use that reasoning for illicit sex— punishment as a deterrent— however,

            do you really believe it’s fair to lash people just for being visually seen having sex? (premarital penetrative sex)

            or stone someone to death if the person caught is married and cheating on his or her spouse?

            doesn’t that seem unreasonably inhumane no matter what a person has done?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I never used sex as a case in those arguments, even the one using them for sexual crimes is another anon.

            >no matter what a person has done
            A person can do very gruesome things anon. For many even the risk of death is a bargain for committing those heinous crimes, eg. school shooters, suicide bombers. Drug traffickers provoke wars, warlords doom populations. Those are not things you can prevent with just jail or death.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            in the religion of peace, supposedly they use that reasoning for illicit sex— punishment as a deterrent— however,

            do you really believe it’s fair to lash people just for being visually seen having sex? (premarital penetrative sex)

            or stone someone to death if the person caught is married and cheating on his or her spouse?

            doesn’t that seem unreasonably inhumane no matter what a person has done?

            I never used sex as a case in those arguments, even the one using them for sexual crimes is another anon.

            >no matter what a person has done
            A person can do very gruesome things anon. For many even the risk of death is a bargain for committing those heinous crimes, eg. school shooters, suicide bombers. Drug traffickers provoke wars, warlords doom populations. Those are not things you can prevent with just jail or death.

            So uhh not all animals go to heaven?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I am not god to imagine what is above in the heavens or beneath the earth down in hell. And no human is or ever was.

  19. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What does the bible have to say about slaughter houses?

  20. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    There's a program underway to genetically modify animals so that they're incapable of experiencing physical or psychological suffering, based on a gene that causes that effect in a woman who was discovered with it. That way you'd be able to factory farm animals at the level required for human consumption, without causing any of the suffering that factory farming usually entails. If the reason factory farming is bad is because of the massive amount of animal suffering it causes, then this would allow truly ethical factory farming to be possible.
    https://faroutinitiative.com/

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Born to be a burger.

      grim.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      That's pretty interesting

  21. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Factory farming is so inhumane it’s sickening
    You should see how grizzly bears eat black bear cubs. I'm sure the cubs would much much prefer being killed by a human.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      bear not nice?

      ):

  22. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    you could just eat shellfish, just eat dairy/eggs from animals you keep yourself, both
    you could eat invasive/overpopulated species like kangatarians. in the US it'd be wild hogs and Asian carp.

  23. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >ctrl + F
    >"roadkill"
    >Phrase not found
    This board is dumb.

  24. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Soon the israelites will be using machines like this to forcefully implant chips into goycattle.

  25. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Is there any moral way for modern people to use animals for food
    There is. There aren't any viable alternatives yet and that's why we will keep eating meat. Honestly I'm hoping soon we will be able to ditch slaughter houses and eat lab grown meat that has almost zero difference in taste and texture but that day is still ways off.

  26. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Factory farming is so inhumane it’s sickening
    that's why we don't use it for humans, moron

  27. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    If murdering or killing something is the highest degree of taking you can do to someone then "animals" having rights is a joke. You'd rather lose or have someone "take" an arm than die and be consumed by them for example. If you can concede to animals being humanely killed for human consumption you concede that they can tossed and mutilated, and killed for any reason as long as in the end its for eating that animal.

  28. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Untermensch thread

  29. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >is there any moral way to cause suffering to other beings?
    Use your brain.

  30. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Only the results matter

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *