potential suffering that might happen in the future

WILL happen in the future. Is guaranteed to happen in the future.

Theory vs reality

Actual history would like a word.

Following the Russian Revolution, Council of People’s Commissars issued a December 10, 1918 decree requiring ordinary citizens to completely surrender private weapons and ammunition under penalty of long prison terms

At the very least only people who can afford them would have them but then that’s not a right

You can build an AR-15 for about $500 if you are patient with sales.

Or, 20 second search on gunbroker https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1197958046

Relevance? We are talking about “far enough left”, just a reminder.

Only until the revolution though. Then they get taken away again.

How’s that?

deciding to kill something, because you think it is best for them

My argument is that from a utilitarian viewpoint it’s not just best for them, but it prevents future suffering for all their offspring. Not just the suffering of one, but of untold millions.

Obviously I don’t think a utilitarian approach like this is the right way to proceed.

It’s two sides of the same coin manipulating the populace for a common goal. Controlled by the same puppeteers.

Political manipulation on Lemmy. How fitting for Lemmings.

If only we always voted for the other party of our entrenched two party system, everything would be fine. Amirite?

🤡

Extending human ethics toward non-humans is a questionable endeavor at best. That being said, I personally don’t like extra unnecessary suffering, which is why I prefer eating humanely raised and killed animals.

Taking the minimization of suffering to its logical conclusion, however, animals suffer in the wild without human intervention, so the most humane thing to do would be to exterminate them all. This would prevent any future suffering entirely.

Surely you see a problem with such a utilitarian approach?

I got downvotes for mentioning I’m planning on taking some of our overpopulated deer.

Maybe we should reintroduce wolves instead, eh?

What was the jury m/f ratio?

A very biased jury, save for one dude.

That’s not what happened. She committed premeditated murder, with advance planning.

That’s why I prefer New Zealand or Australian lamb. Just lamb living their best lamb lives out on pastures.

Can’t wait for deer season this year so I can restock on venison.

Brushing aside moral considerations, cannibalism leads to things like kuru, so that’s a no go either way.

I have no qualms eating animals, provided they weren’t factory farmed.

How’s that messed up? This is literally how the natural world works. Predators eat prey. We are the apex predator species.

Since i couldn’t fathom ever being able to finish my homework

But… why? Was it really so onerous?