4d ago

Animal Rights vs Pro-Life

168 comments

As thought emporium pointed out, egg based artificial meat is a pretty good idea.

All right I'm convinced, we should be eating fetuses
- Tastes like chimken
- Atheist here, we apparently love to eat babies. tune in Tuesday for recipes.
- Why did they forget to put in the bullet of them both being delicious?
- Ye an unborn chick and an unfertilised egg is practically the same thing nutrition-wise anyway
  /s?

Laws preventing all forms of chick culling exist in Germany, France, and Luxembourg. Switzerland and Austria forbid shredding but allowing gasing male chicks (Austrians really love their gas chambers). There are ongoing discussions about forbidding the practice in most of Western Europe (AFAIK only the UK doesn't have ongoing discussions).
- Is that really a good thing for the animals though? Instead of being killed right away, they will suffer a short miserable life, then be killed.
  
  In Germany the eggs are tested early on the incubation period and if they are male, they are never hatched.
  
  Ideally, these male chicks could be taken to an animal sanctuaries. With the scale of the industry and the rarity of farmed animal sanctuaries, it wouldn't be possible for all of them. For the ones that can be rescued, life on a sanctuary is much better than in the wild or on a farm in a dark shed.
- Austrians really love their gas chambers
  They're like Alabama, Arizona, California, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Wyoming in that aspect.
  Technically, California hasn't used that method of execution since 1993, but that's still a lot more recent than your Austrian with the funny moustache 🤷

Yeah, but the fetus can eventually be used for slave labor, including the production of more slaves. The male chicks are more useful being shredded for cheap slave fodder. If we generate enough value for our masters in this way, they'll let us join them. Blessed be the fruit.
- be used for slave labor, including the production of more slaves.
  That's the theory they had. Turns out humans don't breed that well in captivity. In practice the birth rate keeps dropping and is now way below replacement rates.
  
  I know you're going for the joke, but it's way to close to why a lot of these people want to outlaw reproductive healthcare.
  In reality, humans have more children in bad circumstances, and less when we're educated, have life options, don't need children to work as labor for the family, don't need them to provide for us when we get old, and have confidence that they'll survive.
  In bad times we have a lot of children for better odds and more hands to do work, and in good times we have fewer to concentrate our resources on.
  It's why they want to ban reproductive healthcare and tank the economy: in 20 years there'll be a wave of economic demand and labor supply. That the individual will be broke, have no future, and no education is irrelevant.
  
  Turns out humans don't breed that well in captivity.
  Depends on how broad your definition of captivity is 🤷

While I absolutely agree with the sentiment here, I doubt it'd convince anyone remotely "pro-life" - because one's "just a chicken", and the other's human.
I mean Christ, if you can't get them to sympathise with the life carrying the fetus, you're not gonna succeed with a random chicken's.
- Memes like these exist not to change anyone's mind, but for pseudo intellectuals to stroke each other over.
- Yeah, I get the impression that the thing that drives most pro-lifers is religion (or their twisted interpretation thereof), not compassion. And as far as I'm aware, their religion doesn't consider animals to even have souls but rather sees them as tools for humankind to use, provided to us.
- Unless you account for them thinking of the carrier as just that. A means to an end.
  
  Which is what it’s about. It’s 100% about controlling and punishing women. Everyone’s posting that Satre quote about anti-semites, but not understanding that it’s always applied to this debate too. A pro-life position motivated by tender feelings about embryos is rare; it is that pregnancy gives men power over women. (Weren’t some of the Southern states suing the government due to falling birth rates because teenage mothers are becoming rare? Teenage pregnancy is the way to control the entire course of a women’s life.)

I think there is a thing to only create female chicken now so they won't have to kill 50 percent of them.

It's funny the amount of downvotes every single comment on this thread has.
- There are still religious folks on Lemmy, I imagine.

iTs A pErSoN!

Shredding alive for... Eggs? 🤔
Edit: appreciate the replies! I actually already knew that, I think the verbage just threw me off. Poor chickies
- Basically, male chicks are worthless on egg farms. They all get put into a macerator to be disposed of. The rate at which they do this is unfathomable at a single farm alone.
  
  And that's how mcnuggets are made
- Male chicks are largely considered a waste-product of the poultry industry, you don't need many males to maintain the population. It's cheaper and easier to identify them once they hatch, at which point they have no economic value and so are killed.
- Male chicks get shredded because they do not lay eggs.
- Yes. Half the eggs you get in the supermarket actually come from splitting open the males rather than waiting for them to grow old enough to lay them.
- Is true I think. Overstated a bit possibly?
  IDK I don't work on a farm etc
  
  Overstated how? Worldwide, around 7 billion male chicks are culled each year in the egg industry.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chick_culling
  
  Quick tip for everyone: if you have no idea, don't present something as fact!

Excuse me what? Chicken take 21 days to hatch?
- They mean a day old chicken that has hatched. They are comparing a human embryo to a live chick.
  If it is a male chicken that is not going to lay eggs, it will get shredded
  To my knowledge they do not have an inexpensive way, let's be honest any way that costs any money is probably not going to be used unlessed forced, to find the sex of the chicken before it is hatched.
  It's called chick culling if your interested in reading about how 7 billion male chick's get shredded each year worldwide.
  
  Yup. Though if you’ve ever seen the shredders, it’s just about the most humane way to die. It’s absolutely brutal, but they’re dead before they even know the shredder has been turned on. It’s so startlingly fast that an onlooker wouldn’t even have time to react.
- *21 day old chick
- Came here to say the same thing, but you got it covered. 🫡

animals kant have rights
I don't personally believe in rights at all. they're absolutely unnecessary for right behavior or a just society.
- Are you absolutely nuts?
- What's a just society?
  
  A fantasy apparently.
  
  I define it as one where everyone is equal and free. opinions may vary though.
- How do you define a "just society" without having any concept of rights?
  
  equality and freedom
- How should people guide their behavior in society?
  
  there's a whole field of ethics that tries to answer this question.

oh my god this is why we lose all the goddamn time. why do pro choice people have to make the fucking worst arguments? this comparison is dumb for multiple reasons. viability is arbitrary and irrelevant, and most importantly could be subject to change. some people talk about the fetus technically being a parasite; that makes you sound psychotic.
there's one argument here: freedom over your own body. you shouldn't be legally forced to undergo an operation for someone else's benefit. yes even if the fetus is a person, it's viable, can feel pain, whatever. there's literally no other situation where that is even remotely legal. you can't be forced to donate an organ or blood to your own child. the only reason one is forced and one isn't is because of the general idea that men will be in one of those situations.
there's no reason to accept their framing on any of this and try to beat them in some sort of logical trap. they'll move the goalpost. they're not serious about any of this. this is and has always been about controlling the woman, and the counter therefore should be about the woman.
everything about the fetus is just bullshit. if they cared about the fetus they'd argue for its wellbeing literally at any point after the first moment of its birth but they don't. THEY DON'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT ANY BABY. why would they care about a goddamn chick? no it's always only about women. the baby stuff is a smokescreen to get you to argue mind numbingly stupid shit like this.
oh my god if I were arguing with an anti choice moron and someone "on my side" would butt in with "but we kill chicks though" I would smack them across the face. stop being weird.
- why do pro choice people have to make the fucking worst arguments?
  It's an ongoing struggle and essentially everybody hates you when you point out just how many pro-choice arguments are either just fucking dumb and ineffective or try to argue for being pro-choice as an application of a broader principle that doesn't get treated as half as important in most other cases where it's application would be controversial.
  It's even worse when you yourself are pro-choice and it's just pointing out that bad or inconsistent arguments are bad or inconsistent.
  there’s one argument here: freedom over your own body. you shouldn’t be legally forced to undergo an operation for someone else’s benefit. yes even if the fetus is a person, it’s viable, can feel pain, whatever. there’s literally no other situation where that is even remotely legal.
  Freedom over your own body is really only sold as some kind of highest principle specifically in pro-choice arguments and blood and tissue donations. Usually the counter arguments rely on the notion that there's a point where you've agreed to the thing and can't demand it be undone (you can't for example donate a kidney and then demand it back), which for pregnancy brings it back around to things like whether or not a human being in the earliest stages of its life counts as a person that you've presumably consented to create by engaging in the reproductive act.
  Also, by all appearances the line for when the bodily autonomy argument is seen as acceptable is specifically when the process involved is wholly biological - the moment it can be abstracted from that even a little bit suddenly bodily autonomy no longer applies.
  A fun hypothetical to throw out there is this - artificial wombs are currently in development for agricultural use because they could potentially increase yields and reduce emissions (once the tech is mature, it's hypothetically cheaper and cleaner to run an artificial womb than maintain a whole cow per head of beef per season). This tech could probably be adapted for human use. So, in a hypothetical where artificial wombs are perfected for human use, would you support banning abortion in favor of transplanting to an artificial womb if the prognosis for the woman was the same, knowing that she will of course be responsible for the resulting child? If no, are you really arguing from bodily autonomy since the part involving the woman's body has been removed from the equation?
  
  it's fine; I was expecting dumb fucks who make dumb arguments all the time to not read into all that. most of the downvotes probably assume I'm pro life despite the fact that I'm pro choice. not only that but I support abortion without restrictions. don't care about viability as I think it's a weak basis, I don't care if it's the tenth month.
  I don't think your example removes the woman from the equation. the transfer is still related to bodily autonomy. the fetus is part of the mother, and forcing someone to transfer it and keep it alive is still against that. you can't force me to ejaculate into a cup, what makes it ok to force someone to transfer their fetus anywhere?
  nah maybe if you'd have the baby conceived inside the artificial womb from the start...?
  then you'd have other questions like is it ok to force a baby to be born without any parents in their life... whole other can of worms which is about the baby's welfare, which is why this hypothetical will never be discussed by anti choice people because they don't give a shit about the baby and aren't the least bit interested in what would happen to them if you remove the woman from the equation.

Chickens are not even a millionth the value of a human life. Im pro choice but chill out.
- Idk about that, with even just a few chickens you could feed a family of humans reliably. A creature's "value" ist not based on whether or not they're as smart or capable as humans. When I was growing up we had some chickens and they fed us with eggs for my entire childhood. That's some value right there.
  On the other hand, we humans are devaluing their lives by mass-producing and mass-killing them before they're even grown up and able to show their value.
  Meanwhile, I'm pretty sure my value is negative. I don't contribute anything to society, I simply consume and pollute.
  It's all relative.
  
  If you say chickens are only valuable because they feed humans, you are admitting they do not have any intrinsic value.
  You are misunderstanding the meaning of the word "value" in this context, you almost use it like monetary value, but this is not accurate.
  Also, we are not talking about value for someone, but value for itself. A human is valuable not because he is useful, but for himself. Even Aristotle said that the difference between a free man and a slave is that a free man exists for himself while a slave exists for others. By that rationale, not recognising intrinsic value within oneself but instead viewing ones value in terms of your worth to society is slave mentality.
  
  What's the value of a human to a chicken? Perhaps mankind should just take one small step back for once. Would be about time by now.
- Says a human. Precius.

Every vegan meme I see on here just further convinces me it's an elaborate joke.
- I'm not a vegan but you've lost me. Explain your thought process.
  
  The vast majority of aborted fetuses are not sentient. Sentience is the ability to know oneself exists through feeling. Yet in the US, there are laws protecting insensate biological material but not sentient male chicks ground up alive in the egg industry. I see the moral value of a day old chick as far more than a 14 week fetus since the male chick has sentience and can feel pain while a 14 week old fetus cannot.
  
  The idea that animals are on the same level as humans is laughable.