So I take it you're pro-life? Or is that only for chickens?
Are you pro-animal-life? Or do only human (fetuses) deserve life?
Correct, only humans deserve life. Animals are resources for us to use as we need.
The anti-human reveals itself.
>anti-human-supremacy == anti-human
This is the kind of "logic" woketards use when they say that white people should feel constantly ashamed and flagellate themselves because slavery etc
And the kind of "logic" far-rightoid whites use when they promote atrocities against nonwhites while simultaneously whining about anti-white racism
Animal wellfare & Human Rights
How was I doing that? Or do you mean gentoobro's interpretation of the OP?
@Hyolobrika@social.fbxl.net
I didn't think you were, but one could take a strong "anti-human-supremacy" stance that absolutely blurs into anti-human directions. I was just outlining where I see the boundaries.
@gabriel
Because the wording in your original response could've been better: humans aren't bred on industrial scale that is why they should be treated differently — this is what you mean, at least that's the way I see it.
There are ways to go from here: one might say that animals should not be bred on industrial scale either — and you might agree noting that this should not be done at the cost of sacrificing human lives, that's reasonable IMO.
@Hyolobrika
@Hyolobrika @gabriel
In Russia there is nothing to conserve, the number of abortions in USSR was simply mind-boggling: about a dozen per woman IIRC. Throughout their lifetime, but that is still a lot. It's average, in big cities it was much lower, in rural areas they had no access to contraception and it was high, most were illegal and performed not by qualified medical personnel, which posed serious health risks to women — taking abortions out of this gray area at least eliminated that.
@Hyolobrika @gabriel
That is what a lot of US conservatives do not seem to realise: by banning abortions they aren't eliminating them, but pushing women towards doing it illegally. Russian authorities aren't conservative in this regard, they are just parroting US conservatives to win their support.
@Hyolobrika @gabriel
I think that state control over reproductive function, stimulating childbirth not by improving quality of life and providing broader access to education, but by forcing childbirth isn't pro-human, it places humans on the same level as those poor chickens as it is human breeding on industrial scale.
Mind you, I'm not attributing any of that to Gabe, that is why I use "a lot of conservatives" — such an opinion exists and it is widespread.
@Hyolobrika @gabriel
As for chickens, breeding them like that is horrible, but this is being done as they serve as source of food for humans. I am not vegan or vegetarian myself, so I think that we should move away from it, but not not at all costs — not at the expense of human lives, but by looking for other sources of proper nutrition.
@Hyolobrika @gabriel
Gabriel might've not liked the words I've used, but I agree with him — we're not "agreeing to disagree", when he presented his position in expanded form, it only confirmed that I did get him right.
If we dig deeper, I'm sure we'll find points we disagree upon, but on current level I just agree with him.
@Hyolobrika @gabriel
My remark about people not being able to come to an agreement wasn't about us, it's a separate topic. I think it it would be easier to find common ground if words like "anti-human" and "human supremacy" weren't thrown around like that.
humans aren't bred on industrial scale that is why they should be treated differently
You've misunderstood my point entirely, I also brought up animal testing. I'm not pro animal-suffering. The point is that we agree that a great deal of animal mistreatment is for economic reasons. This is why I felt like responding because as I said, merely treating living beings as a resource to be extracted is a problem to be resolved.I'm just reasserting that humans and animals are different and have different ethical considerations. I don't see why this is controversial at all, except for the fact that a great deal of people are immersed in anti-human propaganda. Which is why I also felt the need to expand on the other side of the discussion, because many people are letting their own self-hatred bleed into their policy decisions.
@Hyolobrika@social.fbxl.net
@gabriel
I don't think that I misunderstood you at all. And I think that different groups of people could even come to agreement here, or at least find an acceptable middle ground — but society is so radicalised that they only go for extreme opinions opinions, I think you agree with me on this one.
@Hyolobrika
"I'm going to restate your position in an uncharitable way and if you disagree we're just going to have to agree to disagree".
That's a rude and awful pattern, which is exactly what creates these communication barriers/division.I'll reserve the right to assign positions to you in the future.
@Hyolobrika@social.fbxl.net
@gabriel
Except I did not assign you any position:
> this is what you mean, at least that's the way I see it
> at least that's the way I see it
It was right there all the time. But have it your way if you wish 🤷
@Hyolobrika
@gabriel
But what a lot of conservatives want, at least it seems so from the sidelines, is humans to be also bred on industrial scale with disregard for everything else. Want to give you future kid proper education, don't want you living conditions to degrade drastically with childbirth? Don't care! Make babies — we need cheaper workforce, we need more taxpayers! That is why it's met with opposition, not because "Killing babies is cool, let's do it!!!"
@Hyolobrika