I don’t like the focus on the culling of male chicks, sure it’s terrible, but how we raise and exploit the hens is such a larger moral travesty that that should be the focus. We also shouldn’t hope for hens to live for a decade. Currently existing hens who can be rescued sure, but the modern egg laying hen should not exist the same way certain dog breeds shouldn’t exist, we have selected them for our pleasure rather than their own health and livelihood.

Reflection by 아버지, listening to it is like having your mind defragged.

My previous two phones were from OP and they were both great. I was tempted to get the OP13, mostly because of the battery, just couldn’t justify spending that much on a smartphone at the moment when I already have one that works.

It can be useful to get worked up about things. Rather than dwell on something it can be cathartic to play into your emotions in the moment and let them release themselves, and practicing this allows you to do it internally with a straight face.

If you forgot something you were just thinking about a few minutes ago try thinking about what you were thinking about before that, it might activate the same train of thought. It’s like thinking about what you were doing before you set your keys down rather than where you put your keys.

What about the acidity though? Personally I love the taste of highly acidic beverages, but I’m worried if I drink them too often they could fuck up my teeth.

This is the second time in this thread that I’ve seen Nazi comparisons. Stop whitewashing Nazism by making absurd comparisons.

Have you read either of those works?

Veganism is already healthy, affordable, and tasty. Ever heard of a bean? And only doing the ethical thing when it is also the easiest thing to do is just extreme egotism. I’m not saying anyone has to be a saint, but they should at least put more consideration into their actions than “How does this affect me personally?”

I use my phone as a mobile computer, I almost never make calls with it. No way am I switching back.

I always use less detergent and add some vinegar.

That’s tautological thinking and similar to a no true scotsman, language doesn’t contain facts like that.

Sourdough with chunky peanut butter, ground mustard, and aioli.

Lord Kill The Pain

I’m not really sure what point you are trying to make.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perverse_incentive

I never really made an argument, only said that I found the OPs argument strange without further context. I was probing OPs argument because they gave some reasoning for what they found different about killing a bear and killing a deer, but didn’t really elucidate the moral differences. Even if you take it for granted that OP is correct that people hunt deer specifically for food and bears specifically for sport, they didn’t really clarify why one was such an awful thing and the other was not.

Instead of clarifying things they just repeated themselves and hit me with the same irrelevant false dichotomy. Since I took for granted their theory of why people hunt certain animals it was irrelevant if I knew anything about hunting because I was not contesting anything about the practice of hunting. And whether I kill bears would also not be relevant to the discussion. This is why to me it doesn’t feel like they are having a good faith discussion.

I know the term speciesism but am not read up enough about it to say whether I would fit that perspective. Personally I don’t believe a human and a bear and a deer are equal, or even two humans are equal, just equal in certain ways that matter when discussing things like the right to their life.

And taking a life can be justified. But I personally would not take a life for food as there are other things to eat. Even if OP believes that neither deer nor bears have the right to life though, I’m curious what line of reasoning would bring someone to think the act of taking one’s life is monstrous and taking another’s noble. Surely to believe such a thing there must at least be some kind of great cost attributed to at the very least killing that bear, and I am curious why that cost would not be also an attribute of killing the deer or be neutralized by the boon of deer meat vs a trophy or the satisfaction of hunting (which the OP claims to be the only reasons someone would hunt a predator, but I can come up with more).

The morality of the situation is certainly an emotional subject for me. But in conversations like these I’m mostly approaching it out of curiosity as I acknowledge that most people find these things normal and am more interested about why they find these things normal or what justifications they come up with on the spot. I believe most people don’t really know why they find these things normal, I’m not sure I really knew why I found them normal before I was myself questioned.

That’s because your question doesn’t progress any argument. Unlike the question I asked you which was meant to probe your reasoning. it’s the kind of thing a troll would ask. It’s also a false dichotomy. I’m perfectly fine with you discontinuing as I frankly didn’t expect to get a reply that continued the discussion in good faith after your first reply.

Everything you say is based on convention and nature and opinion. You never addressed what I said and in your own words “rearticulated” (more like regurgitated) the same points that you have yet to give merit to.

Katana Zero
Celeste
Cuphead
Opus Magnum