Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

4

Random_Revolutionary wrote

Imo not having pets is the most ethical.

Dogs can be vegan if done properly. It's ethical because it's animal friendly but also good for the environment. I don't know much I don't have animals at home. Bite-sized vegan the youtuber has a dog and talks about how she fed him.

Cats are much harder to be fed vegan: they have a specific enzyme that you need to feed them with theire food for them to digest plants.

3

Pop wrote

what do we do about all the already-existing domesticated animals though

2

Random_Revolutionary wrote

Good question lol

Sterilize them and wait 1 generation. Feed them vegan food if possible

2

GaldraChevaliere wrote

That sounds horrific. If you wanna be vegan, more power to you. But don't be so pretentious to try to fit completely different species to your ideology. That's utterly abhorrent.

1

Random_Revolutionary wrote

What do you mean? My first or second sentence?

3

GaldraChevaliere wrote

I'm not keen on either. I can see the need for spaying a significant portion to deal with the overpopulation inherent in factory farming, but the idea of extinguishing entire species to 'correct' the mistake we've made in domesticating them isn't something I could ever support, any more than I could support being shortsighted enough to release testing and fur farm animals into the environment unattended. We should be taking care of and rehabilitating these victims instead of playing God like that. Establish sanctuaries, bring them to good homes and places where they can be taken care of in sustainable quantities. It's not any better towards the communities that rely on livestock either. I've spent a fair bit of time raising goats and fowl for their milk and eggs. The only ones to be dispatched are the fowl on their way out by age or illness, done as quickly and cleanly as possible, and with every part thereafter used. The proceeds from these goods barely let us break even and are entirely to fund our religious community. Now imagine how hard that would be on communities that fully depend on livestock to survive. You'd be condemning them to starvation for not adopting your dietary practices that may not even be environmentally viable for them.

1

Random_Revolutionary wrote

I dont believe in god or in playing god, but wouldn't artificially keeping species out of the natural selection cycle be as horrific as artificially ending theire life spport 10 000 years later?

What do you think of pugs and other small dogs? They were artificially created only for theire looks and their arthritis makes theire life a torture. They aren't able to survive in the wilderness, and suffer even by walking around. Wouldn't not being born be better for them? Same for farm animals, afaik cows make too much milk for the calf to drink it all, and theire udders hurt, I dont even know if they can reproduce naturally.

Setting free the abominations we have created is not possible. Zoos and sanctuaries are possible but not in big scale for environmental reasons.

pets don't have our moral compass so we can't really force ideologies on them. As long as they're fed the right amount of nutrients and live good lives, I believe you should be able to choose their food for them.

1

GaldraChevaliere wrote (edited )

Rewriting because I could have stated my position way more coherently and I'm tired as fuck.

"I dont believe in god or in playing god, but wouldn't artificially keeping species out of the natural selection cycle be as horrific as artificially ending theire life spport 10 000 years later?"

I'm still unsure what you mean by this. Can you elaborate or clarify because it sounds like you're contradicting your own point and it threw me through a loop.

"What do you think of pugs and other small dogs? They were artificially created only for theire looks and their arthritis makes theire life a torture. They aren't able to survive in the wilderness, and suffer even by walking around. Wouldn't not being born be better for them? Same for farm animals, afaik cows make too much milk for the calf to drink it all, and theire udders hurt, I dont even know if they can reproduce naturally."

I think what we've done is awful and morally indefensible, but that we can get them out of the mess we've put them in. Horse-breeding is set apart from most other kinds of husbandry in that it mixes bloodlines to strengthen breeds with the traits of others. 'Fancy' breeding of housepets instead selects for aesthetic or behavioral traits that neotenize and threaten the health of the animal. Crossing dogs for their best traits should eventually breed out these negative traits or at least make them recessive, likewise for kine and other herd animals or fowl. Where I think it crosses into playing God is in arbitrarily wiping out entire species because we're afraid to look our mistakes in the eyes.

"Setting free the abominations we have created is not possible. Zoos and sanctuaries are possible but not in big scale for environmental reasons."

Nice word choice there. Not what I would've chosen, but hey. 'Abominations'. That's always a good way to refer to a living, breathing thing that we're morally responsible for. Zoos and sanctuaries actually do a hell of a lot environmentally by promoting conservation and reintroduction efforts. And what use would we have for these huge industrial pastures now that we've hypothetically dismantled the slaughterhouses? Rehabilitate the land and keep some aside, spread out the herds to ease the burden on it they pose. Let them live life out and continue breeding programs until they can stand on their own, and slowly reintroduce them to the world when they're ready. Artificial selection is not a slow process, comparatively. What we've done in a millenium before, we could surely do in centuries or decades now.

"pets don't have our moral compass so we can't really force ideologies on them. As long as they're fed the right amount of nutrients and live good lives, I believe you should be able to choose their food for them."

Children don't share our moral compasses either. They're incapable until a certain age of rejecting our ideologies whether we try to shelter them from them or not, because of their dependence on us. Likewise with domestic beasts. There is no choice for them, no say of their own or a way for it to be meaningfully communicated to us. They are as children, and like children we're responsible for their wellbeing. The least that should mean is feeding them the correct diet.

e: formatting

3

Pop wrote

you got a specific type of animal in mind?

4

ziq_neutral wrote

well plant eaters are easy, you can just give rabbits greens and bananas.

So dogs and cats.

5

manicatorman wrote

You can do vegan dog food successfully with no health risks, but cats really should eat meat. I say that as a staunch vegan. Cats are carnivorous animals and they really aren't supposed to subsist on only plant-based foods. But dogs are omnivores so it can more easily be done.

Here is a good guide for vegan dog food

2

GaldraChevaliere wrote

Feed them scraps. You'll waste less and they like it more than dry food anyway. Just make sure you understand their dietary restrictions. Nothing with garlic, grape or chocolate in it for dogs, no plant matter for cats.