Azek

Mirroring this, I have ADHD and experienced a lot of harsh judgment as a kid for my behavior at home, and in school. And the resulting shame from that judgement stuck with me for a long time, I was even diagnosed early but didn't accept the label until adulthood, and didn't work through the reality of my differences, and remedy the shame until recently. The label of ADHD helped me immensely, to connect with others and to understand and be sympathetic to myself.

If labels make you uncomfortable maybe that aversion itself is something worth holding and looking at.

So 3,079,600 ha per annum for Animal Ag vs 760,400 ha for everything else.

That's roughly 75:25

The 'Tic Tac' is another interesting and unexplained UFO sighting:

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/12/tic-tac-ufo-video-q-...

The commanding officer in this indicent, David Fravor, who saw the objects first-hand did a podcast episode with Lex Fridman:

https://lexfridman.com/david-fravor/

Are you suggesting we should measure how 'evolved' a species is by the mutation rate in their lineage, or by 'successful' adaption through mutation?

I'm not sure but I think the above poster was making the point that saying 'more' or 'less' evolved implies the possibility of a generalised qualitative measuring of mutations.

https://caley.dev/

Tried to build something that reflected my personality. Had the most fun with the contact page 'copied' popup.

Built from scratch with React-create-app and no other libraries

Kicking my dog would also not affect human society, does that mean I can kick my dog without justification? For fun?

My point here to be more clear is that we simply don't need to consume animals, and that the taste pleasure of eating them doesn't justify their death. Humans are animals too, and the success of our species doesn't require intense suffering of another.

I wish I could still believe that.

If you have the time and stomach I'd recommend search up slaughterhouse footage. I'll let you judge for yourself what they're feeling in those moment.

Interesting, could you share your sources showing plants are capable of suffering and can indicate preference?

I eat many things, but nothing from animals :)

Is eating them 'necessary' if we can sustain ourselves without killing them?

At risk of getting tedious here, the even-more accurate comparison would be "I'm gonna limit paying someone else to kick a dog from Tuesday to Sunday".

Since there actually exists real-life animal abuse in the case of paying for meat or any animal product ( including dairy ).

So just because we're omnivorous and capable of eating animals, that justifies it?

Most humans are also fully capable and arguably evolved to do things like steal and murder each other, are those also justified simply because we're capable? And on the second point, the existence of OPs article and the comments around this one indicate that some people do care.

A non-obvious issue here is that often these animals are sent to slaughter around 12-24 months when they can live happily up to 25 years.

Is your point that the majority of people don't consider their own actions as moral agents so we shouldn't either? If you're browsing this website from a phone or computer you are beyond the clamber of mere survival. You have time for ethical reflection.

How long do your cows live before they are sent to slaughter?

If you're asking a personal question like I think you are: for me the courtesy of non-violence extends to all beings capable of suffering and with a preference to live. For a good read on the ethics of eating animals I'd recommend Peter Singer's 'Animal Liberation'

My take is that they're related because a being's ability to experience sentience, and especially suffering are ethical grounds to not breed them and inflict unnecessary suffering through harsh captivity and slaughter.

Harder to digest in the climate of how we treat them, but pigs have personalities too.