• ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Thousands of animals are killed in every field of vegetables. Rodents, birds, insects. It’s a fucking bloodbath. Don’t pretend you are innocent.

    • BonfireOvDreams@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Zero sum game that requires my own death to achieve - seems a reasonable request compared to a request to not participate in the forcible birthing of billions of animals into exploitative confinement until they are killed at our convenience for eternity, or the unecessary trawling of trillions of them.

      Or we can seek to achieve what is possible, and work out what isn’t over time. You describe a technical problem. That aside can you even empirically prove that more animals die in agricultural fields than in nature? I’m all in favor of reducing those deaths but is it actually any worse than if we let the existing fields reforest? I don’t see your point as analogous to my own concerns.

    • DarthFrodo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      And 1.3 million people are killed by cars every year. It’s a fucking bloodbath. So driving a car is similar to intentionally murdering people, of course. Don’t pretend you are innocent if you drive a car.

      • ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No. That’s not what I was saying. I’m saying that when a cow dies it’s one death. When a field of the same volume in terms of nutrition is harvested it’s many deaths.

        Beef is worse in the long run for the water and energy use, but not in terms of slaughter.