this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2025
725 points (99.1% liked)

World News

51419 readers
3064 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Boiling lobsters while they are alive and conscious will be banned as part of a government strategy to improve animal welfare in England.

Government ministers say that “live boiling is not an acceptable killing method” for crustaceans and alternative guidance will be published.

The practice is already illegal in Switzerland, Norway and New Zealand. Animal welfare charities say that stunning lobsters with an electric gun or chilling them in cold air or ice before boiling them is more humane.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

To be very crass, animals also rape other animals, and I hope to god that you will not use "but we are animals" as an argument there as well.

We are different from other animals in that we are moral agents. We can know the difference between good and bad. That makes us responsible to act upon that difference, too.

[–] kami@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

You think very lowly of other animals if you think they have no morals, or no discerning of good and bad.

Or are you valuing your specific moral more than theirs? Because that's a very classic specist reasoning, with no basis whatsoever except human arrogance.

Also, humans rape other humans too, so how do you justify this? Are rapists not moral agents? You consider them beasts, different animals than yourself?

Then what makes a human a human, what makes them the moral agent you talk about? Is it the respect of the law? Is it a particular neurological state?

More importantly, do you really need this sort of validation to be "good"? Do you need to believe that you are different? That you have a responsibility? That you are "better" than other animals?

Are you not capable of being equally "good" even knowing that morals are relative? That there is no actual universal good? That you have nothing more than other animals?

[–] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I don't know what sort of gotcha you're trying to make. Yes those humans are immoral moral actors.

And also, no, I do not adhere to moral relativism, that is a position I outright reject. I definitively think that there are moral positions more "correct" than others. That is your position. Not mine.

Does that make me "better" than other animals? "Better" in what sense, though? Better in terms of discerning right from wrong and able to think about these abstract concepts? Yes. Abstract thinking is something that humans are quite uniquely better at, as far as we know. Better as in having more moral value, though? No I would not say so. If an animal has capacity for suffering, then that animal has a moral worth. And we should avoid causing it suffering if possible.

[–] kami@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 3 hours ago

The gotcha here is the same as the meme of Obama giving a medal to himself.

Unfortunately not everyone can think abstractly enough to understand this.