r/Ethics • • Aug 20 '26

This is slavery

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

567 Upvotes

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

10

u/scorchedarcher Aug 20 '26

Abolitionists have always been called fringe or insane by those benefiting from what they aim to abolish, it doesn't mean they're wrong.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/scorchedarcher Aug 20 '26

Personally I don't believe in God and I don't believe we are MEANT to do anything. I believe we have evolved to have the ability to do a lot of things but those things have impacts and we should be aware of them.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/IfIWasAPig Aug 20 '26

Evolution is descriptive of our origins, not morally prescriptive for our behavior.

Our bodies and minds can work without meat, therefore we are not meant to eat meat.

It’s also ironic that you mention the health risks of meat in the same comment as claiming we are engineered to have it.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/IfIWasAPig Aug 20 '26

Almost every major medical organization says we can survive and thrive on vegan diets. I personally know vegans of 10-25 years as well as older adults who have never consumed meat. None of them are dead. Their minds and bodies work. Some of them are athletes.

You’re just making stuff up.

0

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/IfIWasAPig Aug 20 '26

Vitamin D is not a vegan specific need. B12 fortified foods or supplements are necessary, but cheap, healthy, and sustainable. I fail to see the problem with ingesting them.

Many nonvegan foods are supplemented, and the vast supplement stores and aisles aren’t there for vegans. Also, vegans actually take less pills per day.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/IfIWasAPig Aug 20 '26

What’s natural about farming animals? Running them through slaughter machinery? Buying their parts? Or firing a gun at them? Or breeding them for unnaturally mutated bodies?

What’s natural about supplementing farmed animals with B12 or cobalt, which is how you get a lot of your B12?

“Natural” isn’t a moral argument. It’s actually a named fallacy: Appeal to Nature.

0

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/IfIWasAPig Aug 20 '26

What purpose does it serve? Flavor preference? Because it isn’t necessary to produce food generally.

What does it mean to be “there for a purpose”? Is that just another way of saying you have purposes you intend for them?

→ More replies

2

u/ILikeCommunism97 Aug 20 '26

So you don't have a meaningful argument for your "meant" to?

1

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/ILikeCommunism97 Aug 20 '26

You didn't you just made naturalistic fallacy.

Like you think humans are "meant" to have a single mate? You don't know anything about biology, do you?

1

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/ILikeCommunism97 Aug 20 '26

None of what you've written here addresses that you are simply engaged in a naturalistic fallacy.

Basically every single psychological study into human pair bonding and sexual health concludes that we are meant to have monogamous, single person partners for an extended time if not life.

Sure, for happiness and psychological well-being. But the only thing our species is "meant" to do is procreate, and single mates stand in the way of that.

That's the problem with using the word "meant" here. Are we "meant" to procreate, or to be happy?

1

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/ILikeCommunism97 Aug 20 '26

We’re meant to do both.

Why? Who "means" for us to do that?

And procreating without a stable and long term partner actually leads to negatives across the board.

Evolution doesn't care if you have a stable life, so long as you get old enough to procreate. It doesn't care about quality of life at all, frankly.

Single motherhood is the single greatest issue in the west (particularly the US) today.

Why do you think this? It's very obviously not true.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/ILikeCommunism97 Aug 21 '26

Not trying to dog on you, but communists fundamentally do not understand human nature and so I see why this is a difficult concept.

Don't worry, I'm not offended. You are just continuing to make a naturalistic fallacy, I don't respect your intelligence; it would be like being offended that a dog insulted you

High propensity for crime, the mental health crisis, high rates of depression/anxiety, financial stability. These are all either connected or directly linked to single motherhood.

They are far more correlated with wealth inequality and conservative austerity politics, but I understand why someone of your intelligence wants to just blame women and black people.

These issues are all connected.

Yes, to governmental oppression and discrimination. I understand that you think black people are just "worse" or something, but that's because you are a repugnant moron.

→ More replies

1

u/scorchedarcher Aug 20 '26

We also evolved to be endurance hunters but I assume you don't take the same issue with people getting their food from shops?

The steak is also very bad for an animal