I have no hate for vegans. But I am also intolerant of bigotry. There’s more than enough of it coming from the religious right. I don’t need any more of it from the zealous left.

Assuming the desktop takes the same power saving techniques from their laptops, there is no real reason to turn it off.

A nice concept for art, but I feel bad for the person after which it’s named. It was maybe funny at first but this poor dude can’t catch a break. So yeah maybe a new name, just hyper art? No need to bully this baseball player and his family for being useless.

I’m quite sincere. I used to drive my car in a hurry for years. It’s no way to live. I caused myself a lot of unnecessary stress. At the time of course I blamed my stress on all the slow, distracted shitheads. But they’re infinite, and out of my control. But one thing is in my control: how I react. I made a decision one day that I would never drive in a hurry. That it would take how long it takes. It’s been a lot better since then.

Just like the shitheads on the road, you will find no short supply of people who don’t share your world view. If they upset you, it’s a rough road ahead. I hope you find peace. ☮︎

They don’t require rebuttal because they weren’t related to the original statement, and actually only serve to reinforce it along with the rest of this brigade.

The question is why do people hate media pirates and I made a comparison to vegans hating omnivores. That it’s a moral high road and those on the high road spew shit down to those who aren’t on it. The only logical rebuttal to that point would be a bunch of vegans saying “whoa hey that’s not fair, I don’t hate anybody else for their choices”. And I’m sure those people are out there and to them I apologize for the generalization.

Whoosh. Clearly I lack the reading comprehension to understand. I just need to look at the facts harder and then I’ll become vegan.

And, it seems from the response that it was a spot on analogy.

Thank you for the very detailed response. This is a discussion about piracy. It’s interesting to speak of coping and projection. You know a lot of the most hateful homophobes keep coming out of the closet as gay? I think this kind of hate is very prevalent in our society. Basically you hate that somebody who doesn’t share your moral restrictions, who is out there enjoying life without a care in the world. A kind of moral jealousy. “I have to live with this burden and it’s unfair for somebody else to live without it”. I said it in my original comment and now I will emphasize it in response to your wall of text. Your contempt for me is the same as closet gay homophobes. In this analogy my love for cheese is gay sex, and you think you hate it because your religion (your moral code) is correct, but you actually hate it because you are deprived of it, and it’s unfair that I can enjoy it without guilt. This brings us full circle to the original question about why I think some people view piracy negatively.

It seems you think that all non-vegans must be ignorant. “If only 90% of the population would read the scientific literature or if they were aware of how their animal products came to market, they’d all be vegan”. I am aware of the indirect consequences of my actions and I carry on so I must be some kind of monster. Clearly I am not your brother in Christ, rather a spawn of Satan or perhaps worse. Perhaps I’m just a creature of this earth. A natural consequence of everything up until now.

It is absolutely futile. Being a vegan is like recycling. If it makes you feel better about your life, good. But anybody with the privilege to debate such things, with the worldwide industrial grocery selection to even contemplate veganism, has a huge wake of environmental destruction associated with existing. All the fuel that’s been burned, all of the lumber, loss of habitat for your dwelling. Every time you bathe a freshwater fish or amphibian dries up. Don’t worry about it. I forgive you. It’s not your fault. It’s not your burden. You are a worthy allocation of this planets resources. Thank you for your insight.

I am sorry your world view is causing you anguish.

Insects, crustaceans, and mollusks do not have any form of consciousness. They are just as aware and alive as fungi and plants. Otherwise we would feel great remorse when examining all the slaughtered insects on the front of our motor vehicles. Fish, are slightly more aware, but I don’t attach much emotional weight to their very tiny brains. Birds and mammals are on a higher level of consciousness than a lot of the animal kingdom. But not all death is painful. Many humans seek a dignified and painless death.

Domesticated animals for the most part have the ability to escape, if they wanted to express their consciousness and free will. The process of domestication is an evolutionary choice. Chickens and other livestock are suffering today because their ancestors gave away their freedom for security.

Actually I think dogs collectively suffer more than most of our livestock. For them, death is out of reach. Their suffering is prolonged. Their mutations and genetic deficiencies are cruel. Many dogs are born with such horrible genes and behaviors they have no hope of a quality life with humans. Very sad.

Anyway, there is no objective truth on this matter. But I know you care so much about suffering, I just want to reassure you, that I feel no sorrow for livestock. Everything we eat and purchase impacts the animals on this planet. To exist is to impose suffering on the Earth. And I’m okay with that. My opinion, is that vegans are drawing a line in sand so feint that it is erased by the slightest breeze.

There’s no projection. I feel no guilt for eating the diet of every single one of my ancestors. Zero. I do not believe animals to be sentient, and I do not equate death or servitude with suffering. It’s not that I don’t understand vegans. I do. But it’s like a religion - you have a fundamental belief, not in god, but in the consciousness of animals. Because we differ on that fundamental belief, we can reach no understanding about the ethics beyond that.

And I think it is a fair comparison. People who pay for media may also see it as an ethical baseline to pay for what you consume. And in both the case of vegans, and those who pay for streaming, the perceived benefit of that choice is in my opinion fundamentally flawed. But it’s really not a big deal to me. I was just trying to answer OPs question. I think your response only validates my analogy. Thank you.

It’s because they are paying money for something and you’re getting a better deal. See that’s not fair. Same reason vegans hate on omnivores - they’ve taken the high road and the benefits are small while the cost is high. They tell themselves that their money is going to the artists. And if you believe that, then piracy is harming artists in a very direct way.

Those animals didn’t suffer though. Presumably.

True story bro

https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/10/19/448960760/monkeys-pick-coconuts-in-thailand-are-they-abused-or-working-animals

It’s a shower thought not a thesis.

Vegans reject wool and feathers because of animal servitude. The alternative is synthetic polyester fiber.

Vegans reject draft animals and horse riding in favor of internal combustion.

Vegans reject natural local animal trans fats for coconut and palm oil shipped around the world by burning oil, and sometimes harvested by monkey slaves anyway.

Not talking about eating meat, that’s vegetarianism. Many animals eat grass or waste products, like chickens and pigs.

Veganism as a rejection of all animal products and services, is a full embrace of petroleum.

Often imitated but never duplicated.

It’s simply a service problem. NFL offers great streaming for those abroad because they don’t have exclusive deals with networks. If you want to watch NFL you need numerous subscriptions, and hope you don’t live in the wrong area.

The root cause is economic. Wealth is being transferred to the billionaires at a growing rate. This causes difficulty for most people. If we were smart we would unify and tax obscene wealth, and everybody would be happy. But instead, those billionaires spend hundreds of millions of dollars stoking the flames of a culture war. They amplify every emotional issue to motivate emotional (outrage/anger/fear) voting. Now instead of liberals pushing progressive tax policy, they just vote for moderate democrats because the only other choice is a fascist. And if it wasn’t that, they’d stoke liberals into a Green Party socialism craziness and vilify it, so that again the sensible choice is moderates.

The real question you should ask is why are most representatives on both sides millionaires? There’s really only a handful of congress members who don’t already have millions in assets. I’ll answer it for you - it’s almost impossible to get elected without a major campaign donation. Rich people fear poor people rising up, so they throw money at measly millionaires to do their bidding and keep their power.

In summary: the rich control 90% of who gets elected on both sides. The rich get whatever they want, because everybody else thinks they need to vote based on a couple issues they saw on TV. The actual candidate doesn’t matter. They’re all billionare’s puppets, who vote on party lines in order to get re-elected. Stir the pot and lose your position.

I’m a gifted atheist. It has nothing to do with god. It means I didn’t have to work for it - I was born with the genetics for it. Some people are gifted aesthetically. Others with intelligence. Others athletically. Some are gifted musically. Genetics is real. If you are given something at birth, it’s a gift. A gift from your ancestors and parents.