Hunting still purposefully kills individuals who don't want to die. "Population control" wouldn't be necessary if hunting organisations didn't purposefully increase populations in order to have more to hunt. And eating their flesh is necessary in what way? Why not leave it to the wild animals then?
Had some random leftovers to throw in a pot 🙂
It's a group of probably mostly teenagers and upwards, mocking anti-vegan and pro-animal-abuse positions. It is very online tho, for sure.
Are you aware how this community works? It's for satire of meatheadded talking points for vegans to enjoy and make fun of and everyone here is usually sarcastic. The point of this post is most likely to humorously showcase the flawed logic of people arguing that the abolishment of breeding animals would constitute a genocide.
My most genuine wish would be to see the people caring about mutilation, consent and bodily autonomy to take a look at what we do to non-humans in animal agriculture, apply their convictions consistently and go vegan.
The alternative is not breeding living beings just to imprison and exploit them. Going extinct isn't "bad", especially when the alternative is what we currently inflict on them. That said, you can always support sanctuaries. You know those places taking in animals that specifically don't have a literal "meat-program"?
"Our meat program" Literal support for the corpseflesh industry isn't "vegan". If you want to keep animals away from slaughter, support actual sanctuaries that aren't threatening to kill anyone, or take a bolt cutter and break the cages and fences yourself.
Growing your own vegetables, nice 💚
It does! You should go vegan and adopt a diet that doesn't rely on harm against animals though 🙂
As an avid corpseflesh-enthusiast I love nothing more than rationalising my own bad choices by hiding behind the third world countries that my society made destitute in the first place. It reassures me so much in my own taking of innocent life, everyone should try it.
Pescetarian is code for 'picky carnist'. Pro-animal-abuse attitudes and silly rationalisations are par for the course.
You could try and reintroduce the predators that were hunted instead of hunting more. And that doesn't address the point of killing innocents for what, the environment? If environmental damage is a reason to kill someone wouldn't humans be top of the list?