• ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Well “yes,” but “that is because to the ideological vegans, it is a religion,” so not “nah” but “yes and-.”

        • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          No it makes perfect sense, let me break it down for you.

          nah, this is how vegan treat others

          See, here he denies that this is how the religious treat people with “nah,” offering up vegans as the “true” exhibitors of this behavior. Now to break down my response piece by piece.

          Well “yes,”

          He is correct, that is how ideological vegans, the ones who feel you should be vegan for moral reasons and as a result are very preachy and evangelistic, operate.

          but “that is because to the ideological vegans, it is a religion,”

          but the ideological vegans behave this way due to the fact that ideological veganism is tantamount to a religion

          so not “nah” but “yes and-.”

          So, with this in mind, the “nah” isn’t accurate, as both ideological vegans and the religious both act with the same vitriolic fervor due to them considering themselves morally superior to their respective “out” groups, so instead of

          nah, this is how vegan treat others

          It is

          Yes (this is how the religious treat others), and this is how vegan treat others, as well.

          To further explain the “yes and-” joke, Here is a youtube video from some random guy about the rules of improv. #2- “yes and-” is of particular import to this discussion, as it may be key to understanding the reference.

          I hope that helped you understand my complex comment, no need to glitch about it.

          (Just preemptively, to explain, see, “glitch” rhymes with “bitch,” and so you see a pun was made in which you said I’m glitching and I said “no need to glitch about it,” you see. I hope this one was not similarly misunderstood.)

      • force@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        car-centric infrastructure destroys cities and residential areas, you’re stupid if you think r/fuckcars is relevant to this meme. most people on r/fuckcars have a car

          • force@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            Generally when tires are deflated it’s people who are in ultra expensive and dangerous SUVs which are basically just killing machines and nothing else. But people deflating tires is a very small amount in the community regardless, although I could see people deflating the tires of those who endanger others very realistic.

            Yank tanks (unreasonably gigantic and dangerous SUVs which are almost always American, named so because other countries have started being infected by them and now the rest of the world is mad at us) are just bad. Owning one is bad, using one is especially bad, they only exist to be the bigger vehicle so they can “win” car crashes and crush pedestrians like a tank (and because they cna bypass emissions regulations). It isn’t a matter of “I want to live this way so you have to live this way”, it’s “you’re endangering the lives of everyone around you beyond a tolerable amount”. So no, it’s not relevant at all.

            Honestly your argument kind of sounds like someone against no-smoking zones because “let people smoke, just because you don’t want to doesn’t mean they can’t”. Second hand smoke endangers the health of a lot of people around you, it has nothing to do with other peoples’ not wanting to smoke – same goes with SUVs, they’re one of the largest causes of death that isn’t a chronic health problem, they are a danger. If smoking at, say, a middle school were legal, and someone did it with kids around, I’d have no issue with stealing their smokes and chucking them into a trash can, even if what they were doing wasn’t illegal it’s still immoral. Even if it caused them serious issues and withdrawal and stuff, what they’re doing endangers others and I’m fine if someone takes it into their own hands to put a stop to it. You can apply that same logic to SUVs.

            • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              Funny you justify these actions on this post by arguing morality.

              To a religious person, the threat of creating an immoral society is worse then say smoking or polluting. The soul is eternal and corruption would result in greater then a lifetime of consequence whereas your examples do not.

              Point I’m arguing isn’t to say one is right or wring but can you understand your arguing from the same concern as the person in the meme above.

              • force@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                Religious beliefs aren’t real, they’re delusions, and being gay or some other random “sin” isn’t at all comparable to what I’m speaking of. Cars are the #1 cause of death in the US other than health complications, most of those SUVs, they are demonstratably extremely harmful to society even if you don’t consider how their dominance destroys our infrastructure design, increases stress, and how they pollute the Earth a ton.

                It’s silly to cater to people who believe in Christianity or something similar when we have actual problems that we have proven solutions for, like getting rid of car-dependent infrastructure. Compared to say, being gay or uttering the words “oh my God”, which according to Christian belief are equally as bad as murder, slavery, and rape or even worse than it on the sin scale. If a religion believes in a hell, especially when believing in an omniscient and omnipotent future-seeing God, it’s worth immediately disregarding everything from.

                Even entertaining the idea that the Christian ideas of morality have any basis in reality, especially putting it on the same level as actual science, is unbelievable.

                • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Religious beliefs aren’t real

                  That is your opinion and not shared by others.

                  The point isn’t that you have to do anything. You theme here is that you live your life and respect others living their own life. You have argued as if its a zero sum situation where you can force your belief on others and you refuse to accept that allows others to do the same.

                  Religion is very real to some people and not respecting that can absolutely lead to the same attitudes being presented in the above. It leads to one group initializing the other and acting like they know better.

                  • current@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    7 months ago

                    It is not an “opinion”. It is fact.

                    Either way, religion has no real life basis, it’s not scientific. You can, however, use science to observe the mass murdering of children, destruction of cities, plowing down thousands of neighbourhoods to build highways, caused by SUVs and dependence on cars. The point is that SUV drivers do not respect life because SUVs exist to, and are popular solely to, be the bigger tank in car crashes, have a high hood so you kill pedestrians when you run them over, and endanger the lives of others for your own perceived (and fake) safety, while also blasting out a ton of pollution while you’re at it.

                    If religion is real to someone, they are crazy. Just as we shouldn’t entertain the delusions of a schizophrenic as real, we shouldn’t entertain the delusions of religious people as real. What matters is the actual observable scientific facts we have available to us, which supports things like ending car-centric infrastructure and not using SUVs and trucks if you don’t need them and are just doing errands the city in them like a loser. Civilization’s completely fucked by car emissions and SUVs have a higher pedestrian killcount than a hundred 9/11s but hey man gotta drive my kids to soccer practice in a tank, and besides the pastor said the rapture was imminent or something anyways.

                    Going to an atheism community or science-based community and saying “but religion might be real though, their bigotry is equally as valid as actual facts/science” and expecting anyone to take that seriously at all is crazy.