this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2024
757 points (97.9% liked)

The Onion

4564 readers
407 users here now

The Onion

A place to share and discuss stories from The Onion, Clickhole, and other satire.

Great Satire Writing:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Let's say that plants do have some kind of sentience, which is probably very limited due to the evidence we do have. Animals still have more advanced sentience that is closer to our own so it would still be the lesser evil to eat plants. Like why would you eat other people or chimps when there are other options available?

It takes a lot of mental gymnastics to be able to say that plants suffer the same way as animals. I know you're not saying this, but you do hear stuff like this based on this premise.

[–] psud -4 points 10 months ago (3 children)

You can't eat anything in the modern world without killing animals. A combine harvester harvests wheat and mice. A hundred meat eaters are responsible for a single cow death, and the cow lived on marginal land, drinking from streams - you couldn't grow other food on the land (sure some are grown on perfect fertile land, they don't need to be)

Not saying I'm a meat eater, I don't care about mice, but there's blood on all our hands

[–] chetradley 6 points 10 months ago

Statistically, that cow had a short and miserable life in a factory farm before being killed at a small fraction of their potential lifespan. They were fed a grain-based diet that caused far more mice deaths than it would have to use the land to grow crops to feed humans directly.

Even in the situation you've presented, which again is an exceedingly small percentage (<10% globally, <1% in the US), land is being used which could be rewilded to promote biodiversity. The cow in question is still contributing to GHG emissions and will again be killed around 16 months of age.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

A quick google gave me

livestock farming is 2.5 billion hectares, about 50% of the world's agricultural area and about 20% of the total land on Earth.

So maybe you should revisit the idea of 'marginal land' that 'couldn't grow other food'

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

Of course, but livestock require even more agriculture to maintain than the same caloric/protein intake of plant based. So if the choice is 50 animals or 100 animals then the choice is easy.