To think bad of people that work in slaughterhouses??

[RiverMeadow]

I was reading something earlier and it got me thinking about the members of staff who actually work in slaughterhouses and who see these things first hand.

Regardless of whether you eat meat or not we're all still human and I'd assume it's a job that's a very hard one emotionally... or am I wrong?? Do the colleagues just look at it like a job and not physically killing animals? It would break my heart 😭

To saying that you don’t believe criminal defence lawyers are immoral, you recognise that they’re essential for our justice system, and that you would be grateful for them if you were ever accused of committing a crime.

But even in the post you have copied, I didn't say I personally thought it was immoral. I plucked a job out of my head that had an immoral side to it. I could give examples of more, but I won't because I think that would have you going round in circles again

But no, no back tracking or inconsistency to see here...

Again, no it's not backtracking, because I was asking if the op would also judge someone who worked in a profession seen as respected, but also has an immoral side. I didn't say I thought it was immoral, but going into a profession that you know at some point you will help a criminal go free (because let's face it that's the aim of the game, that's what they are being paid for) surely can be classed as being immoral in itself, especially because it's a choice.

agricultural land keeps being thrown about as if it's all interchangeable, but not all agricultural land is suitable for crop production. Far more land is fine for pastures, but wouldn't not sustain crops. We actually have an issue that arable land that will work for humans long-term is shrinking. It's pretty unethical, I think, to lump them all agricultural lands together when discussing food productions and not divide it out. We can't just replace pastures for fields, it wouldn't work.

Personally, I find some vegans are great at pushing for better working conditions and more local varied protein sources, and some are just odd and act like plant-only diet is automatically free of exploitation and cruelty and that there aren't a lot of other heartless professions (I think giving the green light to anything that's going to kill has gotta have an impact on oneself, but it seems many sleep very well doing so).

All farm labour requires the use of animal bodies - human animal bodies with a concerningly high rate of injury, permanent disability and early death and often disregarded by political and corporate systems that have taken a lot of them over. I just cannot buy the idea that veganism reduces cruelty to animals if the human workers whose labour is being consumed isn't a clear part of the work.

I certainly wouldn't think bad of them!

It's just a job, it needs doing, and someone needs to do it.

If you eat any meat at all, you need to be okay with slaughterhouses existing and people working in them.

Would you rather they were on benefits?

But even in the post you have copied, I didn't say I personally thought it was immoral. I plucked a job out of my head that had an immoral side to it.

What I fundamentally don’t understand is where you’re getting the idea that criminal defence law has an immoral side, if you don’t personally believe it to be immoral? You’re acting as though this ‘immoral side’ is an established fact and not your opinion, but where does that come from? What is the basis for this so-called fact?

What I fundamentally don’t understand is where you’re getting the idea that criminal defence law has an immoral side, if you don’t personally believe it to be immoral? You’re acting as though this ‘immoral side’ is an established fact and not your opinion, but where does that come from? What is the basis for this so-called fact?

And you "are acting as though" the killing of animals for meat is immoral and not your opinion.

You don't think it's wrong so many rapists and peadophiles walk free due to "lack of evidence" or a good lawyer that's able to convince a jury that their client is innocent?

I just cannot buy the idea that veganism reduces cruelty to animals if the human workers whose labour is being consumed isn't a clear part of the work.

I completely agree that it’s absurd to campaign for animal rights and out simultaneously campaign for human rights. I made clear in my earlier post that I just people whom consume meat and don’t care about either the human cost or the animal cost. I similarly judge vegans who are happy to eat chocolate and bananas which don’t come from fair trade producers, or who don’t have any empathy for those exploited by Mexican cartels involved in avocado production.

You don't think it's wrong so many rapists and peadophiles walk free due to "lack of evidence" or a good lawyer that's able to convince a jury that their client is innocent?

I don’t think it’s the fault of criminal defence lawyers if there isn’t enough evidence to convict their client. I think it’s the fault of the police and the prosecution. Or it’s nobody’s fault, and just one of those awful things that happens sometimes in a country which believes in the presumption of innocence until guilt is proven.

And I think the alternatives - not giving people legal representation at all, or lawyers deciding for themselves if a person is guilty - are completely untenable, and likely to undermine the entire concept of criminal justice.

@zingally it's a job that needs doing, is it? Would we die without meat?

And you "are acting as though" the killing of animals for meat is immoral and not your opinion.

Why are you deflecting instead of answering my question? On what basis do you assert that criminal defence law is immoral when this isn’t something you believe yourself?

I have repeatedly asserted my opinion that killing animals is immoral. That is my opinion, and that’s why I am defending it. You’ve said it isn’t your opinion that defence law is immoral - so why are you defending something you don’t believe in or accept yourself?

I think anyone who thinks they have the right to end a life completely immoral. (Not including animals who are put to sleep due to ill health).

I don’t think it’s the fault of criminal defence lawyers if there isn’t enough evidence to convict their client.

I don't think it's the fault of the person in charge of putting the bolt through the cows head that animals are killed for meat.
I don't know why you would draw the conclusion that I think it's the lawyers fault though.

BiBabbles The highest cause of the deforestation of the rainforest is due to soya beans being grown to feed cattle. This has been massively covered up and lives have been lost from those trying to report it. There is no humane way to kill an animal. I simply cannot understand why anyone would not care about eating meat. If every person who ate meat saw how that animal had lived and died I am sure many would think differently. However for most people they buy it packaged, they don’t associate themselves with the process of what’s on their plate.

I don't think it's the fault of the person in charge of putting the bolt through the cows head that animals are killed for meat.

I don’t believe it’s any more they fault that any other person’s who pays for animals to be killed. As I stated earlier, the people I really judge are the ones who happily buy meat despite knowing the human and animal cost it takes to get it to them. They’re the truly immoral ones, in my view - much worse than a slaughterhouse worker who has taken a job out of economic necessity and has to face trauma, PTSD and physical danger for the sake of earning minimum wage.

I don't know why you would draw the conclusion that I think it's the lawyers fault though.

Because you stated that it’s a profession with an immoral side. Immorality means wickedness or wrong-doing. It’s not possible for somebody to be immoral without having responsibility for their actions.

Why are you deflecting instead of answering my question? On what basis do you assert that criminal defence law is immoral when this isn’t something you believe yourself?

I could also say that killing animals for their produce can be classed as immoral, because they are bred solely to be destroyed for the gain of humans and other animals. Doesn't mean I believe it's immoral myself, infact we have definitely established that I don't feel that way. I don't know anyone irl who has expressed that as an opinion to me either, but I can still apply critical thinking, and come to the conclusion that other people have different feelings towards different things, therefore it's entirely possible for other people to feel that criminal defense lawyers are immoral, or that killing animals is immoral. Doesn't mean it's my personal opinion.
I could sit here and list hundreds of things that others might feel are immoral, doesn't mean I think the same.

That should say ‘I don’t believe it’s any more their fault than any other person’s who pays for an animal to be killed’.

I don't know anyone irl who has expressed that as an opinion to me either, but I can still apply critical thinking, and come to the conclusion that other people have different feelings towards different things, therefore it's entirely possible for other people to feel that criminal defense lawyers are immoral, or that killing animals is immoral

So to summarise:

You don’t think criminal defence law is immoral

You don’t know anyone who holds the opinion that criminal defence law is immoral

You decided to use criminal defence law as an example of an immoral profession

Have I got that right?

Because you stated that it’s a profession with an immoral side. Immorality means wickedness or wrong-doing. It’s not possible for somebody to be immoral without having responsibility for their actions.

As you said, it's not the lawyers fault there isn't enough evidence to convict their client, but that's neither here nor there, doesn't change the fact there is a good chance the know full well they are defending a dangerous criminal, and actively trying to lessen their sentence, or have them walk free. That's the part that some may find immoral.

*So to summarise:

You don’t think criminal defence law is immoral

You don’t know anyone who holds the opinion that criminal defence law is immoral

You decided to use criminal defence law as an example of an immoral profession

Have I got that right?*

I also don't personally know anyone who holds the opinion that killing animals for meat is immoral.

Like I said, I could have used many many examples, that was just the first one that popped into my head. I honestly wouldn't dare give another now, because I couldn't possibly stand to have you spend a full day insisting that I must believe it myself if I gave it as an example.

As you said, it's not the lawyers fault there isn't enough evidence to convict their client, but that's neither here nor there, doesn't change the fact there is a good chance the know full well they are defending a dangerous criminal, and actively trying to lessen their sentence, or have them walk free. That's the part that some may find immoral.

Just like the doctors who treat prisoners know there’s a good chance they’re saving the lives of rapists and murderers. That doesn’t make medicine immoral, does it? It just means doctors have a fundamental duty to act in a certain way regardless of the decency or otherwise of their patients. The same is true of criminal defence lawyers.

Maybe some people do find the concept of defending people accused of crimes immoral. But since I don’t, and you don’t, and neither of us know anyone who does, perhaps we can all agree that this extensive conversation on the subject is a highway to nothing...?

I haven’t got time at the moment to read through all the threads but what has criminal defence got to do with the initial question? My answer is yes I think it is immoral but I also think eating meat is immoral.

I also don't personally know anyone who holds the opinion that killing animals for meat is immoral.

But you do, presumably, know that there are thousands of vegans in the world who do believe this, and so it’s not a completely pie in the sky idea that has been pulled from nowhere.

I haven’t got time at the moment to read through all the threads but what has criminal defence got to do with the initial question?

Absolutely nothing, but there have been some impressive mental gymnastics trying to draw a comparison.

I THINK IT IS IMMORAL and talking about defence lawyers is simply a deflection.