An Oxford University nutjob, ergh, I mean “Academic,” says that it is ethical to let someone die if they eat meat.
Dr. Michael Plant who is – get this, a “Philosopher of HAPPINESS” apparently didn’t get the joyful memo. He claims that if a stranger was in a life or death situation, that it would be okay for someone to let them die if they eat meat, because of the pain that they have inflicted on animals.
“It seems universally accepted that doing or allowing a harm is permissible – and may even be required – when it is the lesser evil,’ he wrote in the Journal of Controversial Ideas.
“I argue that, if meat eating is wrong on animal suffering grounds then, once we consider how much suffering might occur, it starts to seem plausible that saving strangers would be the greater evil than not rescuing them and is, therefore, not required after all.”
If you’re thinking of going to Plant’s house for dinner, RUN AWAY NOW.
PLANT WOULD RATHER LET SOMEONE DROWN IF THEY EAT MEAT
In his article, Plant uses an example of coming across someone that was drowning in a pond. Would the human cause more harm by being saved than if they died? He argues that if the person eats meat, then yes, because of the “negative wellbeing” that they bring by being alive. He claims that a person who eats one year of meat, is roughly equivalent to five years of chickens suffering in factory farms.
What’s even crazier about Plant’s argument, is that he eats meat himself. Yes, he’s not even a vegan, but instead he described himself as a “Welfatarian.”
What the hell is that you might ask?
Plant will only eat animals if the creature in question has experienced a happy life prior to his death.
Ya know, by having a conversation with them and asking them how their life has been before killing them. Oh wait, you can’t because they aren’t a human!
CULTIST-LIKE MENTALITY FURTHER DIVIDING SOCIETY
Plant’s preposterous argument shows just how absurd and frankly dangerous some of these “intellectuals” can be. What’s worse is that he is actively promoting these batshit thoughts at such a “prestigious” and holier-than-thou place such as Oxford.
Imagine being in a life-or-death situation and someone comes along and the first thing they ask you is, “Do you eat meat?” Like what kind of question is that? And the fact that people like Plant have these thoughts at that very life-determining moment is just wild to me. And to argue it on some high moral grounds as if humans aren’t more important than animals? Crazy.
It’s the same people that got mad at killing Harambe (RIP Harambe!) and blamed the parent for not watching their three-year-old child and allowing him to crawl into the Cincinnati Zoo. These people would rather a human die than an animal. I’m sorry, although Harambe seemed cool and all, I’m always going to choose a living and breathing human, over a gorilla or a chicken.
ACTIVISTS WANT TO DISRUPT YOUR LIFE
People like Plant think they are better than the rest of us. They judge, blacklist, condemn and apparently will even LET YOU DIE if you don’t agree with what they say.
It’s like those protestors that constantly disrupt sporting events. They have no problem ruining other people’s lives, all in the name of their activism. Whereas the rest of us meat-eating people just go about our lives and don’t bother any other humans, these people actively want to ruin our lives.
They get off on always thinking they are right and are just absolutely insufferable.
He probably doesn’t have any friends which is why he has all this time to sit alone and push out asinine “moral arguments” like this. I have no doubt that he’ll soon be talking to trees and asking them about their history and what they’ve seen throughout their lives.
Now excuse me as I go eat some KFC.