• Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    They just did.

    Eating meat = a neutral action that has no moral dilemma.

    How we produce meat products = a large and complex question that does pose an ethical/moral dilemma centered around methods of production.

    How is that so hard to understand?

    • bthest@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Because something is ‘natural’ does not mean that its moral.

      • Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Never said it was moral. I said it was specifically amoral, as in “has nothing to do with your arbitrary sense of morality”. Try reading again.

        • quips@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I have trouble understanding how it could be amoral. Every time you eat meat you are making the choice to contribute to crimes than the holocaust? Who, without your contribution, would have a reduced capacity to commit suffering.