Did automobiles replacing horses, diminishing horse population, diminishing horse suffering – as a consequence of work forced upon the animals. Is that moral win for horses; less suffering? Although their population is vastly smaller than 130 years ago.
Of course it’s a win for the horses. Their population was unnaturally high and it’s better to not even exist in the first place than to suffer. This goes for farm animals as well but we’re not there yet unfortunately.
This guy PETAs.
This guy wants to be born into slavery and die from exhaustion.
I’d rather be born into slavery than have some arrogant self-aggrandizing narcissistic cunt decide wether my life is worth living.
That escalated quickly
I don’t think he wants to be my friend.
Maybe if you were more overtly pancake? That might help…
How’s that different from the human experience?
You’re implying that literally all horses were abused, always.
That’s incredibly stupid.
He said nothing about abuse, only suffering.
So literally all horses suffer, always?
Have you ever worked with horses? (I’m assuming no, but I have to ask.)
If you believe this, does that give you a moral imperative to start a nuclear war and end the suffering of future human generations?
I never said kill all horses/humans/whatever. The difference is between taking lives away and not forcefully breeding life for the purpose of enslavement.