this post was submitted on 12 Apr 2025
124 points (94.9% liked)

Asklemmy

47615 readers
844 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ByGourou@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Read more than the first sentence please

"Some of those are useless calories, we can't eat grass and on some lands where only grass grows so cows are a way of using that grass, but that's not the majority."

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

most people don't want to eat soy cake, or crop seconds, or spoilage. feeding that to livestock is a conservation of resources, not a waste.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Even if this were true, it does not address the moral argument that is at the root of this discussion. It's a way that you distract yourself from the moral component of your choices. It doesn't matter if it's true or not, it doesn't even matter if you believe it or not. It just has to distract you long enough that you get past the point where you might accidentally engage your empathy, and have a feeling you don't want to have.

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 week ago

Even if this were true

it is

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 week ago

it does not address the moral argument that is at the root of this discussion.

the moral argument in this thread is about allocation of resources. if you want to make a separate moral argument, you're free to do so.