this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2025
396 points (85.5% liked)

Perry Bible Fellowship

869 readers
79 users here now

This is a community dedicated to the webcomic known as the Perry Bible Fellowship, created by Nicholas Gurewitch.

https://pbfcomics.com/

https://www.patreon.com/perryfellow

New comics posted whenever they're posted to the site (rarer nowadays but still ongoing). Old comics posted every day until we're caught up

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] astutemural@midwest.social 12 points 8 months ago (1 children)

This seems like a lot of work (both practically to do this and mentally to make this argument) when you could just...not eat meat? Seems a lot easier and more ethical.

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 3 points 8 months ago (3 children)

The easiest path is not necessarily the best or right path. Though I do agree that in the context of modern industrial meat production the more ethical thing to do is not consume meat. But that is not the same thing as saying that eating meat is wrong, or immoral. The immoral thing is the way the animals suffer before being killed.

[–] astutemural@midwest.social 2 points 8 months ago

It's also unethical because it destroys the planet, harming everyone and everything on it. That is baked in. Producing meat will always take several times more resources than an equivalent amount of plants. Since our society refuses to limit usage of water, ground nutrients, etc, to sustainable levels, eating meat will harm the environment. Every bite of meat you take steals from future generations.

[–] devnev@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Killing animals that don't need to be killed is also wrong. And in a modern society, there is no requirement for us to eat meat, as we can live full lives on wholly plant-based diets.

[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago

Killing animals that don't need t be killed...

Agreed! That's why I'd only kill an animal when I'm hungry.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

The immoral thing is the way the animals suffer before being killed.

What is the difference between a human an an animal that means in one case there's nothing wrong with killing a vulnerable individual who doesn't want to die as long as they don't experience physical pain, but a big problem in the other case?

I will leave this notification on so I can answer later. The reason I can’t answer now is that I want to publish the full framework first, because it does answer that question but it is extensive.

The short answer is that in absolute terms there is no difference, but because everyone says says it is worse then it is worse.