Rule

Persona3Reload@lemmy.blahaj.zone to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone – 633 points –
218

You are viewing a single comment

Not everywhere. Many places its much more sustainable to make clothes from the animals you are eating and it makes sure that you aren't wasting any of the life you've taken that you need to survive.

Wool is one of those natural fibers that can be harvested without harming the animal. Even if you end up eating the goat/sheep, it can provide a few coats of wool before hand.

Yes this is true but a lot of places can't mantain a sheep herd, because it is too cold or to dry for grasses and food for the sheep

In Ireland where there are a lot of sheep theyre an ecological disaster (if you think having biologically diverse forests is a good thing)

My fiance has a skin allergy to wool

You also don't need to eat the animals to survive.

True...and you don't need to live in a house, or use the Internet, or have a bank account, or have a computer/mobile...all things that have caused catastrophic damage to the environment and killed countless animals.

One has to draw a line somewhere- perhaps you shouldn't be holier than though just because you draw the line at "I don't want to see the evidence of the death"

I mean I just said a fact, sorry if I upset you.

Just a very common case of leftists being anti-exploitation until it involves reconsidering what goes on their plates.

Maybe YOU don't have to eat animals to survive. What a privilege u you have that you live in a place where vegetation can be grown in your area or more likely shipped there cheaply(not free of harm to the environment or people\animals). But your experience is not universal there are places on earth that people live where that is not an option. And some of those people have been living there sustainably for 10s of thousands of years. Not to speak of people who's body needs meat to live because of some other reason. You can not eat animals and that's fine but it doesn't replace the science of how to stop environmental damage.

Obviously if someone needs to eat meat to live I'm not going to object. And people living sustainably and not just supporting the animal ag industry are also off the hook in my books.

But in regards to your weird vegetation stuff, I hope you're aware that the livestock are raised on vegetation and will typically consume more calories of feed than they provide with meat? This is a large part of why the Amazon is being deforested, it's to feed livestock, not vegans. The science on how to stop environmental damage is pretty clear on that one.

Vegans in western cultures have access to dietary supplements derived from non-animal sources. That's basically impossible without access to modern industrial food processes.

If we're talking about cultures without ready access to plant fibers for clothes, then they're not going to have vegan supplements, either.

Let me guess, you're a westerner with access to plant-based dietary supplements? I suppose you're vegan then? If not, you must be part of some indigenous people.

Let me guess [...] I suppose [...] if not you must be

Do you really think that is how logic is supposed to work?

I'm privileged enough to have a choice in that regard, haven't eaten any animals in months. Sometimes I'm a naughty boi and eat some chicken tho.

Chicken coat get