Votes were always political BS, they ban a bunch of very legitimate things like the pride flag and Palestine flag, yet they don't mind having a country in the process of committing genocide in it.
Look, the 7.10 was terrible, Israel had every right to fight back. But genocide is genocide and it is not self defense.
Your sink pipes are smaller than your toilet pipes (by ALOT) which means that they clog easily
In some places your sink pipes and your toilet pipes go to different places. For example in some places the greywater (water from the sink) is let out in the open (which is fine as it is mostly just dirty soapy water) while wastewater (poopy) goes to the sewer.
Poop is usually not sticky and fatty while foods can be (imagine if you poured flour down the drain, it will become a sticky dough that will clog it)
I powered on my computer, my app started, which started my main app, which started my essential apps, which started my app that I use to open my other app, which I use to go to my other app that I use to watch other apps being used by otgher people.
You will get an invisible candy if you can correctly decode this.
Farmed chickens live short lives so they are less important.
To that I will say that I too have more important things to care about, there are so many important things in my life that absolutely demand my attention. Yet I wash my dishes, spend time on Lemmy, play video games, sit in the toilet longer than I should, etc. The argument that this isn't your #1 priority and so it doesn't matter is illogical because we all do a thousand unimportant things every day. Rather I suspect that you have a different reason, maybe you consider this issue completely worthless? Maybe you just don't want to face the consequences of caring about it? Idk.
As for the shortness and "purpose" of their lives. By your logic children that were born in concentration camps in the Holocaust are just as worthless. They would probably die just as fast and their "owners" only let them exist as part of the final solution.
As for the second paragraph. The thing is, that it's not actually a matter of opinion, but rather a matter of logical consistency. You see, people care about their pets. People care about animal welfare. And if you ask the average person, is it okay to eat dog meat? Is it okay to grow puppies and slaughter them because you like puppy steak? Most people would easily tell you that it's not okay. But if you ask them what's the difference between a dog and a cow, they tend to not give any logical reasons. They say that dogs can understand better, or have more emotional connections, and all kinds of things that are scientifically and anecdotally proven false. You could say, I don't care about animals. Or you could say, I care about animals. But when you start picking and choosing based on historical farming practices, you are missing logic and instead applying personal beliefs. As for ethics, it actually does relate to it a lot. When we're talking about ethics, we're talking about all kinds of things, not just humans. But even if we focus on humans, as humans our ability to empathize with other humans is also inherent to our ability to empathize with other animals. A very clear example of it is the historical abuse of black people. They were often compared to animals, and they even had black people zoos. And that's not zoos where black people go to visit it, but rather zoos where white people go to see black people in cages. Historically, comparing humans to animals has been a very common strategy to de-humanize certain races or religions in order to abuse or murder and commit genocide towards them. You can see it with black people, you can see it with Jewish people, you can see it with so many different races and religions across the world and across many, many different periods of history. So because throughout all of our human history, animals have always been, in society's eye, inferior beings meant to serve our purposes. We could always just say"this person is an animal" and essentially do to them what ever we want as they "server a purpose" or are a "pest"
And as for your last point, I find it a bit insulting that you consider me to be someone so delusional that I would ignore basic facts about the world. As someone who's been a vegan for a very long time, I am very much aware of the fact that people can be aware of what's going on and even sometimes face it for a while before giving up and going back. The sad thing is that people are not as strong-willed as they think they are sometimes, and ethics are not the thing that drives most people. And I know that a lot of people know how the sausage is made and still find it delicious. It doesn't make the sausage ethical.
True but kind of removing the context of my message. The context is that the average person in a developed country does not need to consume any animal products to live a healthy life. This is factual based on our best scientific understanding of nutrition and the options present for the average person in a developed country.
Wrong word again. You mean extinction. A complete genocide of a species is a subset of extinction but extinction is not equal to or a subset of genocide.
Poor will, never getting that number 1