"Pro-Life" Rule
"Pro-Life" Rule
Seriously, where are 99% of the life begins at conception people on the meat industry?
I was just listening yesterday to this episode of Citations Needed
Citations Needed: Episode 80: Animal Rights as Media and Pop Culture Punchline
Episode webpage: https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/traffic.libsyn.com/secure/citationsneeded/CN80_20190619_animal_rights_Gruen_Ko.mp3
One single HUMAN cell, everyone knows humans are above all animals
If you're really being serious, then the answer is that most (or, at least, the vocal majority) of those people don't even really care about living children. I don't see that type of person generally giving any more care to a non-human being than they would a human being, and they already don't care about people other than themselves.
"Pro-life" has always been a misnomer. More honest descriptions would be "anti-choice" or "pro-forced birth."
It's anti-woman.
The real true reason most people are against abortion isn't because they don't believe it's a necessity. It's because they are afraid that some woman won't be punished for having sex. Whether or not the fetus survives isn't the point, it's that someone has to be punished for enjoying life.
Pro-life
In their mind, is still just breeding more cheap disposable labor
Serious in that they should stand up for non-human animals, but in the kind of way where you also know the answer as to why 99% aren't
It's racism. They think human lives are more important than other races.
Speciesism, but yes
The human race thinks they're the supreme race, better than the other races.
It is so prevalent that this type of bigotry actually has its own name: specieism
beat me to it (by only 11h :D)
Yes, exactly. The complexity of the human soul is uncomparable to the basic impulses of any animal.
A single cell
Embryos don't have souls. The soul develops during the third trimester.
If you can play music into your belly and get a kick, that thing has a soul. But there's a lot of time where it's not that developed.
Says what, some ancient text?
Definitely seems the type to make Star Wars analogies
But that's different!
Honestly though, is "but it's different" a proper informal fallacy?
Not quite identical, but there are some that are close
Some of them explain this away with "Humans have souls, animals don't".
And yet many can be up in arms about dogs & cats being eaten in some regions despite that claim
I don't care what species it is
I have three requirements for meat:
- It isn't human flesh
- It isn't rotten
- It's cooked properly
dogs go to dog heaven, duh
of they got souls! /s
Apparently that soul doesn't matter when trying to prevent it from dying from preventable diseases with vaccines and nurturing it with affordable education.
They are pro-birth. They are absolutely not pro-life.
I think they're anti-woman.
Think? We fucking know.
Yeah but if babies were delicious we would eat them too
I'm told humans taste like pork.
Some cultures that actually have cannibalism refer to human flesh as "long pig" or similar because of the resemblance.
I've got a modest proposal for you...
I wanted to say that but wasn't swift enough.
These are two separate problems, and as for "pro-choice" and "pro-life" I wouldn't group people just in these two ways, because if somebody supports abortion, but not in all cases, where does this put them?
Also life beginning at conception has nothing to do whether or not it's a conscious life. But you could debate at what point there's consciousness, what it even is and whether or not animals have the same "type" of consciousness. It's all moral issues, and you can never solve them, because there's no right answer.
Seriously, where are 99% of the life begins at conception people on the meat industry?
hunting and eating steaks, singing
This is necessary, life feeds on life feeds on life...
I think that being vegan/vegetarian is more ethical than eating meat due to the use of resources, treatment of animals etc.
But this kind of dumbass shit doesn't help your cause.
I don't understand your stance. Being vegan is more ethical, but eating meat is necessary? Surely if meat is necessary then an omnivorous diet is most ethical?
the song is meant to be what the conception people think, but...
it is necessary for certain people, and it's easier to achieve certain things by eating meat/animal products. I am an omnivore, but I understand that veganism is more ideal, I just don't have the capability of achieving it (I can't even eat properly on an omnivore diet).
