this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2024
695 points (92.5% liked)

Vegan

2964 readers
54 users here now

An online space for the vegans of Lemmy.

Rules and miscellaneous:

  1. We take for granted that if you engage in this community, you understand that veganism is about the animals. You either are vegan for the animals, or you are not (this is not to say that discussions about climate/environment/health are not allowed, of course)
  2. No omni/carnist apologists. This is not a place where to ask to be hand-holded into veganims. Omnis coddling/backpatting is not tolerated, nor are /r/DebateAVegan-like threads
  3. Use content warnings and NSFW tags for triggering content
  4. Circlejerking belongs to /c/vegancirclejerk
  5. All posts should abide by Lemmy's Code of Conduct

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If you have to choose between killing a crying child or killing an adult deer, which would you think is the more moral choice?

But of course nobody will apply the logic consistently because of how cruel it would be.

Unfortunately, you're not using logic.

Why don't we implement more humane population control measures for deer, like spaying/neutering?

Why don't we spay entire wild populations of deer? :DD

See earlier sentence, it applies here as well:

Unfortunately, you're not using logic.

Thanks for the laughs though, young city dweller, but if you really value nature and animals, I suggest actually visiting it and reading about it.

[–] DarthFrodo@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

If you have to choose between killing a crying child or killing an adult deer, which would you think is the more moral choice?

What does that have to do with anything? Of course killing a human is worse, but that doesn't mean that killing a deer isn't cruel.

Why don't we spay entire wild populations of deer? :DD

Well, we do this with hundreds of millions of pets and BILLIONS of livestock animals just to improve taste, and hunters already go around shooting them, surely there would be a practical way to tranquilize them and do a snip or something. This is an issue we're responsible for after all, as you said. But yeah, there's no profit and no tasty corpses to be gained so it's not an option, I get it.

Thanks for the laughs though, young city dweller

I'm not sure why you felt the need to be a condescending prick by the way. Maybe basic decency and manners aren't valued in your culture, so I'll try not to judge your character based on that. Have a nice day anyways.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Well, we do this with hundreds of millions of pets and BILLIONS of livestock animals just to improve taste

And hmm, might there be some sort of a difference in how practical it is to spay DOMESTICATED animals versus ONES IN THE WILD?

"Surely there would be a practical way to tranquilize them and do a snip or something"

You can't be serious :D

Tell me you've never been outside a city without telling me you've never been outside a city. You don't seem to have any idea how big the outdoors is. It would be as easy to spay every deer as it would be to empty a lake of fish. Of every single fish. And then put them back alive. And then not understand that you still need to leave a breeding population, or you're genociding said animal and removing it from the ecological niche it's in, meaning the environment will be unbalanced and die. Congratulations, you've destroyed nature because you wish to pretend that predation isn't something that is necessary.

I’m not sure why you felt the need to be a condescending prick by the way.

It's not my fault that you have an inferiority complex. You can probably help that by actually informing yourself of things, so that doesn't trigger so easily.___

[–] DarthFrodo@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You wouldn't need to sterilize more deer for population control than with hunting, obviously. You'd need to sterilize less in total because they'd still compete for food and habitat, just have no offspring. How is that unfeasible? I never said that you'd have to sterilize every single one lol, just enough to impact the fertility of their population in regions where its necessary due to human influence.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

You wouldn’t need to sterilize more deer for population control than with hunting, obviously.

So you're sterilising deer for literally nothing, as a sterilised deer still has to eat, deary.

https://wildscapedeermanagement.co.uk/pages/ecological-impact-of-deer-overpopulation

"How is that unfeasible"

Because the non-spayed deer will just procreate more. You're not doing population control at all with your approach, even if it was possible. I ask you, do you think you can take a fishing pole and fish a lake empty? No, ofc not, that is ridiculous. What your proposing is equally if not more ridiculous. You're thinking about nature as if it was a fenced area that you are in charge of. Very arrogant of you, tbh.

You're the type of person who gives veganism a bad name, imo. You're probably one of those people who think "Thanos was right", huh?