Comment on "Being vegan is unnatural"

• Dojan@pawb.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Raping a dog is bad, yes.

  So a dog is someone and that’s what makes it rape? Where do you draw the line for someone? Is it the act of rape itself that’s bad, or is it the perpetrator getting sexual satisfaction from it? What if they don’t do it for that purpose, but some other more abstract reason? Is it okay then?

  source

  • theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    You thought you had me. Your argument is invalid and includes logical fallacies, because you’ve swapped the original situation, which was artificial insemination of livestock, for having sex with a pet. These are not comparable.

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence

    Whether a dog is “someone” is irrelevant. Forcibly impregnating someone is rape. Artificially inseminating livestock is not rape. Having sex with a pet animal is rape. Having sex with a consenting adult is not rape. Different things actually are, in fact, different.

    source

    • Dojan@pawb.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      So it is the societal and cultural context that dictates whether it is okay or not, and not something actually tangible and measurable? Then I hope we may shift that context a bit to perhaps treat animals a bit less like robots overall, and individual living creatures with their own emotional lives and complexities.

      Tradition, and personal satisfaction is a poor excuse to continue something abusive.

      source

      • theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        So it is the societal and cultural context that dictates whether it is okay or not, and not something actually tangible and measurable?

        Yes, of course. This is quite literally what defines morality itself. There is no universal, tangible, or measurable morality.

        Then I hope we may shift that context a bit to perhaps treat animals a bit less like robots overall, and individual living creatures with their own emotional lives and complexities.

        Okay.

        Tradition, and personal satisfaction is a poor excuse to continue something abusive.

        Yes, which is why it is good that we aren’t doing anything abusive by artificially inseminating livestock.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Pet animals and other animals are no different in and of themselves, objectively. A pet dog is no different than a stray dog. A pet cow is no different than a domesticated cow.

      The difference you ascribe to these organisms is how much meaning they demonstrate for you, subjectively.

      And since your morals and world view depend on subjectivity rather than objectivity, this opens so many doors into unethical situations that I’m not sure you wanted.

      P.S. You’re giving off big psychopath vibes, I hope you know that.

      source

      • theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Pet animals and other animals are no different in and of themselves, objectively. A pet dog is no different than a stray dog. A pet cow is no different than a domesticated cow.

        Agreed. This is completely irrelevant though.

        The difference in these scenarios is one scenario was artificial insemination of an animal and the other scenario was a person having sex with an animal. These are not the same actions.

        I guess the vast majority of people on the planet are “psychopaths” because the can tell the difference between these 2 obvious things?

        source

        • -> View More Comments