You seem to think being vegan would be some positive alternative to eating animals. The fact though is that it would simply be another path leading to this same result (though perhaps of a more arguably indirect route). Let me put this another way: what do animals eat? Do they eat vegetables, maybe? Plant-grown foods? So hm if 7 billion+ people turn to sustain themselves solely on this type of consumption (which only an exceedingly small percentage of them presently do), would it be fair to say animals would be facing some competition? Would it be reasonable to guess the rates of starvation, not to mention of wildlife environments destroyed to grow crops, would increase? It seems to me we'd simply be offering animals a new flavor of death.
Allow me to acquaint you with a fact of life: resources have limits to their production. Every resource you use is at the expense of another living thing. And yes this even includes your dainty fucking perfume and vewy pwetty nail polish that you look so motherfucking fabulous in. So if you really want to help animals, you'll do them a dandy little favor and remove yourself from worldly existence. Unless perhaps you think you are as entitled to existence as they are. In which case you'll do whatever the **** you please. After all that's exactly what animals do. 🙂
and just in case u missed this obvious fact here, clearing land for agriculture, whether "animal agrictulture", as u so peculiarly term it, or the actual definition for agriculture, is known to hurt animals for a plethora of reasons. So, if we did this on a larger scale, as is proposed here, it would mathematically speaking just cause a larger scale of animal endangerment.
but hey thanks for educating me in this discussion. You have taught me that a person can set up debate against even the most fundamental straightforward truths of a concept, breaking free of all those burdensome constraints known as logic and rational thought. this has been a most enlightening experience
You seem to think being vegan would be some positive alternative to eating animals. The fact though is that it would simply be another path leading to this same result (though perhaps of a more arguably indirect route). Let me put this another way: what do animals eat? Do they eat vegetables, maybe? Plant-grown foods? So hm if 7 billion+ people turn to sustain themselves solely on this type of consumption (which only an exceedingly small percentage of them presently do), would it be fair to say animals would be facing some competition? Would it be reasonable to guess the rates of starvation, not to mention of wildlife environments destroyed to grow crops, would increase? It seems to me we'd simply be offering animals a new flavor of death.
Allow me to acquaint you with a fact of life: resources have limits to their production. Every resource you use is at the expense of another living thing. And yes this even includes your dainty fucking perfume and vewy pwetty nail polish that you look so motherfucking fabulous in. So if you really want to help animals, you'll do them a dandy little favor and remove yourself from worldly existence. Unless perhaps you think you are as entitled to existence as they are. In which case you'll do whatever the **** you please. After all that's exactly what animals do. 🙂