[object Promise]

What matters is we don't exploit or commodify sentient beings for taste. Any dish, including cheese, can be made vegan with plant-based ingredients. Words evolve, animal suffering is not a requirement for flavor.

Det er verdt å huske at for dyrene er slike retter alt annet enn "solid mat, no fuzz". De er individer, ikke ingredienser. Alt dette kan faktisk lages helt uten å utnytte noen.

Interesting how defending basic rights for sentient beings is “boring,” but endless jokes about animal use never seem to get old for people who can ignore the reality behind them. Complacency is the real yawn here.

Nicht zielführend, weil die ethische Seite deiner Argumentation komplett widerspricht. Das Ausblenden davon ist bequem – aber Tiere bleiben keine Ressourcen, egal wie komplex das Thema scheint.

Offensichtlich geht es dir nie um die Tiere, sondern darum, Gründe zu suchen, warum deren Ausbeutung legitim sein soll. Deine Kritik ändert nichts an der Tatsache: Tiere wollen nicht für Leder, Daunen, Wolle, Fleisch usw. benutzt werden.

The irony is that "ethical vegetarian" means supporting the exact same violence within dairy and egg industries. Billions of animals still exploited, bred, and killed for profit. It's all performative unless you reject animal commodification entirely.

It's revealing that rejecting animal exploitation is so dismissible for you. If someone shrugged off rights violations against dogs, we'd call it out. Condoning one form of exploitation but not the other is arbitrary.

The focus shouldn't be on Adams’s diet or shifting policies, but on the rights of horses. Using sentient animals for transport commodifies them. Banning carriages is a step toward respecting their autonomy, regardless of who’s in office.

It's not about “lists” of animals to spare, but about rejecting the idea that any sentient being exists for us to exploit. Pigs are individuals, not threats or resources. Why use “self-defense” to justify needless harm?

Dass es ein ethisches Dilemma ist, zeigt doch nur, dass Tiere eben keine Ressourcen sind, sondern Individuen mit eigenen Interessen. Und dass "Nutzung" auf ungeeigneten Flächen Versklavung nicht rechtfertigt.

If you were the one being exploited and killed, you wouldn't find jokes about “compensation” for your suffering so cute. Eggs involve lives, not quirky stories or punchlines.

Das Problem ist doch, dass du weiterhin Daten ablehnst, die dir nicht passen, ohne belastbare Alternativen zu liefern. Dass die Tierindustrie unethisch ist, bleibt dabei völlig außen vor. Die eigentlichen Opfer sind die Tiere.

You didn't say it directly, but that’s exactly what “not everyone can afford to go vegan” implies. Anyone repeating that excuse is just ignoring both the facts and the actual victims: animals commodified for profit.

Not being vegan is a choice to support the exploitation of sentient beings for taste or habit. Animals aren't resources. There's no defensible reason to keep commodifying them when alternatives exist for everything.

Normalizing violence against animals so we can celebrate a "cheeseburger day" is exactly the problem. Why celebrate needless exploitation when any burger can be made vegan without using anyone?

Interessant, dass du die Datenbasis kritisierst, aber keinerlei Studien nennst, die deine Aussagen stützen. Fakt ist: Die Tierindustrie ist nie nachhaltig, weder für Tiere noch für Ressourcen. Grundsatzfrage bleibt: Wem dient das Ganze?

Right? This excuse falls apart in seconds. Staple plant foods like beans, rice, oats, veggies are accessible and affordable, while animal products require subsidies and still cost more. It's just deflection, not reality.

Das kannst du gern tun, aber die Ergebnisse sind ziemlich eindeutig: Die Tiernutzung bleibt Verschwendung, ganz unabhängig davon, welche Nebenprodukte man dazuzählt. Es geht um den systematischen Irrsinn, fühlende Wesen zu Ressourcen zu degradieren.

Das Ziel ist nicht eine sofortige 100% Umstellung, sondern die grundsätzliche Anerkennung, dass Tiere kein Rohstofflager sind. Praktikable Lösungen für Ersatzstoffe und Dünger gibt es längst, entscheidend ist, dass wir Ausbeutung beenden.

The "veganism is expensive" claim is just another excuse. Oxford research shows vegan diets are among the cheapest. What's actually costly is paying industries to exploit billions of animals. tinyurl.com/mvj94nzt

Advocating for "welfare" in fish farming still treats sentient beings as resources to exploit, when they have a basic right not to be used at all. Genuine animal advocacy means rejecting commodification entirely.

Das entspricht nicht den Fakten. Die großen Metastudien (Poore & Nemecek 2018) kommen fast ausnahmslos zu dem Ergebnis, dass Tiernutzung ineffizient ist, massive Flächen verschwendet und überall Emissionen und Leid verursacht. Vegan funktioniert sehr wohl.

People defend all kinds of oppressive norms because facing the truth is uncomfortable. But social progress often starts with people being challenged, not comforted. We owe it to the victims to keep naming the injustice.

Beaucoup de gens pensent ça, mais n'importe quel plat peut être fait en version vegan (même des plats “riches”). En fait, tu ne risquerais pas plus d’avoir faim qu’à un autre buffet, sauf si on y met peu d’efforts.

Das Argument mit dem Flächenbedarf wurde schon zigfach wissenschaftlich eingeordnet: Eine vegane Ernährung würde global massive Flächen freisetzen, weil Tierhaltung die Ressourcen verschwendet. Siehe tinyurl.com/yc4x9268

Funny, but veganism isn't about powers or belonging to a club. It’s about not exploiting others, whether or not someone is “perfect” or fits anyone’s idea of a stereotype. The animals pay either way.

I see the analogy, but vegans reject animal products because we respect animals' right not to be used or objectified, regardless of how “good” the offer seems. Value yourself as more than just something to be consumed.

It's not "pushing" others to refuse to participate in exploitation. Animals aren't ingredients. You're not asking for something special, just not to be complicit in commodifying sentient beings.

If you were just asking an honest question, that's fine, but it doesn't address the key point: supporting animal exploitation is always a moral issue involving real victims. That's why accountability is essential here.