this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2025
395 points (98.5% liked)

Political Memes

11163 readers
1985 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

1) Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

2) No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

3) Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

4) No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

5) No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NeilBru@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

And that’s why I think it’s fine I ate my neighbors’s dog, Your Honor.

That isn't a reply; it's a desperate failure of reading comprehension packaged as a lazy joke.

What you typed is a Slippery Slope fallacy, arguing that acknowledging biological reality (that humans are omnivorous predators) somehow forces me into committing a criminal act: eating a neighbor's dog. You deliberately ignore the obvious distinction upon which the entire debate rests: the line between livestock and pets.

Me: Consume ethically raised livestock (the "prey" for omnivorous), but reject the immorality and environmental risks of factory farms.

You: if you eat any meat, you must logically be fine with pet theft and consumption.

The difference between a cow, pig, chicken, etc. and your neighbor's dog is precisely where human law, morality, and social norms have been drawn for centuries. Some cultures even find it normal to consume dogs. To pretend that acknowledging our predatory nature invalidates all those distinctions is not as clever as you think it is—it's just a transparent attempt to substitute emotional shock value for actual logical engagement.

You're also using Reductio ad Absurdum, just like other losers on this thread, because you can't defeat the core premise of what I said. You have to drag this into absurdity to make it seem like I'm advocating for social collapse, rather than just advocating for better ethical sourcing. If your only move is hypothetical "Your Honor" theatrics about a pet dog that's kidnapped and eaten, you've admitted you have no genuine counter-argument.

You suck at advocating for veganism.

[–] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Waiter, I didn't ask for the sophist word salad, can you take this back, please?

[–] NeilBru@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Sure sir, here's a steak. You need protein.

[–] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It better be one of those ethics steaks the bears eat

[–] NeilBru@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago

Ethics steaks. That the bears eat.