Do a little dance, he said.

Get down tonight, he said.

What he didn’t say, was an electron has both mass and spin yet has no definite location.

  • 1 Post
  • 144 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: December 16th, 2024

help-circle
  • So, real question, where do you draw the ethical line? Are crickets or ants subject to this discussion? Like, is eating crickets supporting their genocide? Arguably, owning and using any kind of plastic material contributes to the depopulation of species world-wide, as does modern agriculture. Is eating corn or soybeans contributing to the genocide of insects or birds? Where is the line for you?














  • Omnipitaph@reddthat.comtoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world"Being vegan is unnatural"
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    26 days ago

    Life eats life. I’m not going to try to convince a lion to not eat a gazelle, and I’m not going to try and convince a human not to eat the thing its been hunting and eating for 10 thousand years.

    I agree that factory farming is terrible. If we are going to eat an animal, its best if we raise it and kill it ourself in the quickest and most painless way possible, to ensure happiness and health during its life and mitigate as much suffering. It also forces us to face the act of death itself, and hopefully be grateful of the animal for the meals it provides.

    All things die. As someone who went through “dying”, I can say with some confidence that dying sucks, and you will suffer when you go through it. Whether its being shot, stabbed, strangled, poisoned, or dying of the complications of old age. You are going to suffer unless you’re doped to high heaven on morphine or something similar.

    Are vegans going about using opioids to euthanize factory farmed cows in mass? No? Then I guess they’re going to suffer, and I’m not letting them suffer in vain.

    THAT would be unethical.

    /s




  • Yes, Monarchy describes the method of passing rulership. Authoritarian deacribes the style of ruling.

    Monarchy describes a type of government in which the leadership generally rests in one person, and that person is generally chosen based on heredity.

    Authoritarian describes a style of governing in which the ruler and ruling class have little regard for human rights and freedoms, often employing a type of police state with high levels of control on individual behavior.

    A monarchy could be authoritarian, or a monarchy could be fairly liberal and allow a lot of personal freedoms and self rule.

    An authoritarian government could be a monarchy, or it could be a dictatorship, oligarchy, or even a type of democracy. Typically individuals don’t like living under authoritarian systems so typically they don’t last long under truly free democracy. But since authoritarians often crack down on opposition, the press, and freedom of assembly it is possible for them sometimes to maintain power across elections.



  • …A profit driven government that consolidates power and resources under a single figure-head and their keys to power at the expense of the common people, is an authoritarian state. Or if you’d rather the super simple watered down version: A government that serves itself, and not the people it is supposedly established to govern.

    If you have a King who puts into place policy that creates wealth, safety, and comforts for his people; that’s a king, not an authoritarian dictator.

    If you have a King who puts into place policy that takes away wealth, safety, and comfort for his people for his own agenda; that’s tyranny, a tyrant, and an authoritarian dictatorship.

    This is just how I understand it. Though I am super excited to see your argument otherwise!