Not sure why this is getting down voted?
Like, we can agree that genocide and antisemitism are both bad at the same time, right?
Like, just because Israel's actions against Palestine are evil, does that necessarily require someone to embrace the Holocaust? Clearly not, right?
And I realize that Zionist =/= Jewish, but it's dancing a fine line, no? At the very least it's a call to violence against a Jewish adjacent group that I think feels pretty deeply uncomfortable.
I feel like you're taking a bit of a dissonant position here, no?
If it would be a moral tragedy to kill a cat and eat it, why is that not true for a cow? If life eats life, it's not murder for me to kill and eat the cat, correct? So why is it a moral evil if killing and eating the cow is not?
I think you're saying that this is just one of the "fucked up" stances that society has taken? But then why participate in it?
I'm fine with either answer. Either "eating meat is fine because animal life is less valuable than people's dietary needs/preferences," or "vegetarianism is the only moral option, as all life is equally valuable," but it seems to me like any answer in the middle is hypocrisy, no?
Haha, we responded at like the same time lol. Wild.
And fair on all counts, but it does seem at odds to an "a life is a life" position, no?
Like, I'd assume you would be more upset if they were farming humans for meat than you are that they raise chickens and cows for meat, no?
And are you against all farming, or just factory farming? If an old school farmer raises a cow in a field, and then kills and eats it, is that acceptable?
And are fish's lives not valuable? Less valuable than a chicken's or a cow's? It's still a life, no?
I'm truly not trying to be combative. I'm actively trying to understand how to jive these two positions.
Fair. I'd be curious how you square that with the idea that "a life is a life"?
I don't mean that in an accusatory way. It just seems like an inherent contradictions to me.
And to be clear, not that you'd save your cat over a stranger or enemy. Like, I know people who would save inanimate objects before either because the emotional connection is that strong
I mean more in the abstract that human and animal life are of equal value.
Like, would you support the farming of people to sell their meat at the grocery store? I'd assume not, but then it feels like a contradiction to me, and I'd be genuinely interested to hear how you square that circle.
Yeah, I didn't mean it as a jab. I just thought it was an interesting assertion that "a life is a life" in this context. Seemed a strong stance, and I wondered how far they carried it.
I feel like a weak hand break and cracked hoses can be pretty catastrophic in the wrong circumstance. And it's not like the cyber truck is anything other than first gen, so like, accelerator pedal defects seem on par with a fuel leak to me.
And that's kinda my point, right? There was no news story when the Pinto had fuel leak problems right?
I get that the cyber truck has more visibility, but like, it would almost be bizarre if it didn't have a recall. I doubt any car on the market hasn't had at least one big recall in its production run.
I've had a Mercury, a Ford, and a Toyota. All three have had at least one recall.
The Toyota's was a pretty minor one, tbf, and I suppose that Ford/Mercury could be argued to be a crappy manufacturer. I wouldn't buy from them again anyway.
Maybe I've just had super crappy luck, but none were crappy cars on the surface. All 2-3 yrs old on purchase.
Like, out of curiosity, what car do you drive that doesn't have any recalls? I'd be curious to know what it is.
People have gotten weird about animals over the years. I adore my cat, don't get me wrong, and would do everything in my power to save them, but like, it is still an animal at the end of the day.
In scenario one I can see saying cat if you actually wanted your worst enemy to die. Like, if you were fine with killing them without the cat in the balance, then yeah, of course.
But otherwise it's the person, right? Animals have lower moral value than people, right? I mean, I'd be curious what percentage of people saying that they'd save their cat are vegetarian/vegan?
I feel like this has always been the case? There's not a lot of precedence to be sure, but people have been operating under that assumption for a long time.
That's why, if you need to keep the cops from looking in your phone, you should use a password. Can't be compelled to give a password.
The classic example is a safe. There's tons of court precedence that you can be compelled to give the cops a physical key to unlock it if there is one, but you can't be compelled to tell them the combo if it's a dial lock.
You know, that definition of flee where you stay put and don't go anywhere. I like that definition of the word too. ;)