this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2026
189 points (67.4% liked)
memes
22478 readers
3461 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
As much as I find chickens, and all avians in general, cute and I find it sickening the way they are treated... I do love eggs, they're tasty, versatile, easy to cook, and unbelievably healthy.
I think the differential we have to identify is one thing, and that is scale.
I am not a vegan, I do not believe it is wrong to consume animals or animal-sourced products, however I do support animal welfare and believe that if we are to raise livestock for consumption they should be treated as the sentient, thinking, feeling creatures that they are and cared for accordingly.
Imagine instead of human and animal rights we just had "sentient rights", for example.
Being able to test for sentience is a topic in and of itself, and out of scope for my argument.
I think there is no harm done in, a hypothetical world where people had the space to do such a thing, raising our own livestock, limited to individual homesteads or the immediate settlement (a local town market, for example).
The line where it becomes unethical is quite obvious really, are the animals treated as living things, or machines to simply fuel and feed to grow them for slaughter and harvest? Yes, in my example of fair treatment the goal may be to raise them for eventual slaughter, but its their lifelong treatment where this applies, not the overall objective.
Yes, slaves are super convenient. No one ever said that slaves aren't nice to have, dude. YOUR experience is not the fucking point.
There is no way to create a creature for the express purpose of exploitation that is okay. There is no way to create a creature with the intention of forcing it into a state of total dependence that is not actually evil.
comparing slaves to animals is what slavers do
Slavers do that because they think other Animals are worth nothing and want to say Human Slaves are also worth nothing.
Here quite the opposite is done. All Animals have a Worth. Every living being has the same worth. Modern Science says that Humans are also Animals.
If you still think its something only a Slaver would say then in your head other animals probably have no worth at all. So you think someone else wants to degrade humans with that comparison. Even tho its not degrading at all. You just think less of other animals, and you probably deny the science that Humans are Animals. Which is the reason why @Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.org says you sound like a "human supremacist"
if this were true then harvesting grain or chopping down a tree or using hand sanitizer would be murder.
value is subjective. this is not an objective fact.
But that we can't objectively say what kind of worth something has is pretty much the point.
How can you say that only humans have worth but other animals do not? What gives you the right to say that you're better than a pig, a cat, or any other animal? Some humans even do the same with their own kind and say that women have less worth or that someone with another skin color has less worth. I hope you agree with me that a white person has no right to decide if someone else has more or less worth than them. So why does a human have this right over other animals? What gave humans this right?
This is not about personal worth in something like a friendship. Obviously your best friend is more worth to you then a stranger. Obviously your own cat is more worth to you then a stranger cat. But in general worth, you would probably also be angry if millions of stranger humans would be slaughtered, right? You are probably against Genocide, right? Even tho you don't know these humans.
Just trying to find a baseline. If you're not even against these things when talking about Humans, then you probably have other problems.
none of this has to do with "worth". i can be opposed to genocide and mass slaughter without trying to quantify the value of people.
Stop Spamming me and respond in one single Comment man. Is this your first time on a social media platform. How old are you. Maybe you're way to young to even argue to.
this is just rhetoric, now. you're complaining about my form, and following up with an ad hominem.
what i've said is true.
No you are spamming me. This makes it really hard to communicate with you. You make a own comment for every half thought. This way a discussion on this platform is really stupid.
And the follow up was a actual question. Not tried to insult. I actually think you are probably a child the way you comment, not an insult, it just actually looks like that. So I'm sorry, I will not communicate with you anymore. This is really weird how you write.
I ignored the point you made, no matter if its correct or not, because I don't discuss someone who is probably to young to even understand. Have a nice day.
if a child says something taht is true, their age doesn't change the truth.
1/10
i am breaking up your gish-gallop of a reply into its specific parts and showing why you're wrong.
2/10 was been trolled better in the past.
i didn't
i didn't
Well I concluded that because you didn't deny that in the previous comment. I tried to make clear why you were called a "human supremacist". I tried to understand why you think that comparing slaves to animals is only something slave owners do.
First, this is denying of Science. Humans are in fact also Animals. So I thought, if you think only Slave owners say that, you probably deny that and think your self that animals are much less worth then humans, because you see it a comparison as degrading. This way it would make sense why you think only slave owners would say that. And you didn't deny it, so went with it in the next comment.
If you actually do not think that you are more worthy then other animals, then you need to explain your first comment. From what viewpoint are you looking that you thought this comparison is something only slavers are doing. Maybe we just have a misunderstanding.
you have a reading comprehension problem. if you just read what i've written, you'll see i'm not saying the same things you are saying i've written.
ok, ragebait child
Edit: Ok the "child" was not needed. Sorry, for acctually using that as an insult. I did that because in the other comment you thought its one, where it was acctually still not one. This was not right.
But:
Me: Maybe we have a missunderstanding. Lets clear things up
Him: you have a problem
How more clear wants a ragebaiter and troll to be, that he is not at all interested in a talk.
so, I'm still out. Bye
i don't believe in rights, at all. they're a european fiction.