• ComradePenguin@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    What he did was wrong, a bit because of the animal and a lot because of the spectators. It did not suffer, it was quick. It does however feel a bit like cognitive dissonance to strongly disapprove of his actions, while we systematically without any good reason eat animals and have them in small confined areas for optimal meat production per sqm. Vegans and vegetarians however, they can judge him all they want 😉 I am not one of them

    • Dicska@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Let’s think about it cold. Kill seagull -> no witnesses, and the next seagull might do the same. I mean, let’s get on his level of apeshit crazy, and let’s assume seagulls actually understand stuff like humans, morals, and above all, human morals, and on top of that, they even care about those and want to comply. You didn’t give it a lesson, because it died before it could learn from it, or before it could let the other seagulls know it’s not cool to steal chips.

      Hell, even when I’m trying to get on his level, it’s still primitively dumb.

      • ComradePenguin@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        It’s not about morals that the seagulls can understand. It is not about teaching something. He acted like a moron and completely disproportionately. However it’s not that much unethical than killing for meat, when we don’t need to eat meat.

    • dogs0n@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      You don’t know it didn’t suffer and he didn’t kill it so that he could eat it (I’m disagreeing with you on the “cognitive dissonance” thing).

      Also im not sure if you are saying that you dont judge him for what he did or just saying youre not vegan, but doing as he did is judge worthy.

      • ComradePenguin@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Of course he should not have done this. What I am saying is that eating meat when we clearly don’t need to is also unnecessary killing. So he killed an animal for no good reason, and we kinda do the same. We have more ethical foods available for us, but we like the taste of meat, and don’t care enough about their suffering. Except for those that abstain from meat.

    • chatokun@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      It shows anger issues and a proloclivity towards disproportionate retribution. Most people wouldn’t kill an animal for a simple chip/fry heist.

      • ComradePenguin@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        He should not have. But we kill animals all the time simply for eating meat, because we think that tastes a bit better. We don’t need to inflict suffering on animals for years, we can abstain from meat. How are we more moral? Just because we outsource the killing? I so not condone his actions, just point out that we are not better.

      • ComradePenguin@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I know what you mean, it’s disproportionate as hell. I am just saying that we aren’t much better morally than him. Unless we abstain from meat.