cubesmarching

When people choose not to be vaccinated, they endanger those who are unable to be vaccinated. Foregoing vaccination harms others.

The normalized consumption of animal products endangers all people due to the impact it has on the environment in which we live. We are currently living through yet another pandemic caused by the consumption of animals. We are currently dealing with the effects of climate collapse worldwide, helped along by inefficient resource usage for things like animal agriculture.

Consuming plants instead of animals is a trivial change to make both at the individual and societal level and does not harm others.

70 billion farm animals are the small minority, and 8 billion people are the majority?

Is it ok to cause suffering to humans who are minorities because they are minorities?

To those downvoting: do you believe that dogs are able to mourn when their companions die? There are myriad examples of this occurring. If so, do you believe that dogs are the only animal capable of this?

Where, exactly, did I argue for the eradication of an entire population? Ending the exploitation of animals does not require eradicating them.

Murdering animals also brings significant distress to humans. Just not all humans.

Given that plants aren't conscious and do not feel pain, any line of reasoning that is predicated on the assumption that plants are conscious and feel pain is irrelevant.

The vast majority of animals raised to be killed and eaten are fowls, pigs, cattle, sheep, and goats. No, humans do not feel pain differently than these animals any more than they feel pain differently from cats or dogs.

The leading causes of death are diseases, cancers, dementia, road injuries, etc. These are inarguably more "horrifying" deaths than how we could kill people with methods such as those used for euthanasia, which is the point the original comment was making.

If a human has no friends, and their death would not bring great and lasting sadness to other humans, is it ok to murder them?

If a human is mentally or physically incapable of improving the lot of other people, and is in fact a burden on society, is it ok to murder them?

Humans are animals. Humans do not feel pain differently from other animals. Humans do not suffer differently from other animals. This is why intentionally causing animals like cats and dogs to suffer is illegal and viewed as abhorrent. The only reason this is not extended to other animals like cows and pigs is convenience.

Plants are not conscious and do not feel pain. But even if your argument is in good faith and you genuinely believe that the plight of plants is equivalent to the suffering of animals, then that is still an argument for veganism, as producing a kilo of animal flesh requires several kilos of plant matter, thus increasing the total amount of suffering relative to simply eating plants directly.

All humans eventually die, and most natural deaths are far more horrifying than how we would be able to murder other humans, especially in modern times (though even traditional slaughter is nothing compared to dying of cancer, stroke, being murdered in a car crash, etc.)

So, I think that it is important how the humans are grown (prisons are absolutely horrible, unacceptable places to live in, and should ideally become illegal sooner rather than later, regardless of the consequences on the price of labor). But I really don't think there is any reason to feel bad about the murder of 25 year old people who have led a decent life, even if it may be shorter than they would expect in nature (the huge proliferation of the human species is kind of payment for that, in a way).

I was naturalized about a decade ago and nothing of the sort happened for me either, or for the other two people I know who were naturalized around that time.

The reason is that you are only required to renounce "allegiance" to other countries during the naturalization ceremony. This has nothing to do with citizenship.