• grahamsz@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think it’s really a difference about whether you approach meat consumption as a moral issue or an environmental and social one.

    I tend to agree with @Melpomene that any improvement is a good thing, maybe a better analogy would be in CO2 emissions. If we can convince 10% of people to bike to work one day a week then that’ll make meaningful difference, and it’s exactly the same from an emissions standpoint as taking X cars off the road.

    Convincing someone, at least in the USA, to do without a car is fundamentally difficult, but convincing them to use it less is a significantly more accessible proposition.

    • NotAPenguin@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I just don’t see reduction as enough or what should be advocated when it comes to something so serious as billions of animals getting needlessly killed.

      • FlowVoid@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Billions of animals are killed wherever crops are grown.

        Even if you are entirely vegan, animals have to die if you want to eat.

        In fact, if your food is grown on a farm then you are probably contributing to more animal deaths than someone who obtains food from hunting or fishing.

        • NotAPenguin@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Source on billions of crop deaths?

          Besides, most plants grown are used for animal feed.

          Killing animals when we don’t have to is inherently cruel, farming can be done without harming animals.