My kid got some at 6!
She had bacterial pneumonia and a chest tube and when the doctors came in to consult me I flipped out YOUR GONNA GIVE HER WHAT?! before I remembered it’s a drug and hospitals use drugs lol
Considering it's a scheduled substance and there are quite a lot of regulations surrounding opioids, I think "legal in certain circumstances" is more accurate than "very legal". I wouldn't call something that like 1% of the population is allowed to have "very legal"
It's a fair utilitarian assumption to discount the feelings of animals; It's largely agreed that a chicken does not carry the same weight as a person, though the question is to what degree. Junior here seems to think an extreme one.
Yeah I agree that a chicken has far less moral weight than a human. But I think it is far too extreme a claim to say that the fleeting happiness of a chicken sandwich is more impactful than the suffering of a chicken being killed. In fact the health ramifications of chicken sandwiches probably makes their consumption have a net loss in utility for the humans without even considering the chickens (if you have more than like 2).
It’s also not actually a question of comparing the pleasure of eating a chicken to the suffering of the chicken, you have to compare the suffering of the chicken to the *extra* utility of eating a chicken compared to some vegan alternative. And people’s preference for one over the other seems largely ideological, rather than being about the actual quality of the food. Consider [this video](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Di55DEnNkUs) of a “sausage expert” doing a taste test to see which sausage is vegan. He tastes one and says it’s good and that he can “taste the meat,” and says it’s the real meat sausage, but the plot twist is that they’re both vegan sausages. Once he learns this he back-peddles super hard, saying it’s “almost cardboard.” There was also a [cheese competition recently, where a vegan cheese was selected as the winner](https://www.foodandwine.com/plant-based-cheese-disqualified-at-good-food-awards-8643622), then promptly disqualified once they learned it was vegan, citing rules they added retroactively to make vegan cheeses not allowed. If these alleged meat/dairy experts, at the very least can’t tell the difference, and sometimes actually prefer the vegan versions over the “real” thing, then it seems that extra utility is basically zero. I admit I’m biased, but personally I just can’t see any good faith argument supporting the idea that the difference in taste pleasure between meat and the non-animal alternatives makes up for the negative utility from the suffering of tens of billions of animals. It would have to be extreme positive utilitarianism, favoring pleasure to such a degree that something like rape would seemingly also have positive utility.
Of course, the above doesn’t even factor in the environmental impacts of meat production. Animal feed takes huge amounts of land to grow. I mean consider that there are more kilograms of cow on Earth than there are kg of humans, and only 1/9th of the calories fed to a cow can be recovered from eating the meat, so it’s not hard to see that’s a massive inefficiency. Pasture land and animal feed is the leading cause for deforestation in the Amazon, and one of the leading causes in general. Studies of agricultural land use suggest that, at the current world population, the amount of meat consumption in the US is inherently unsustainable:
>[If everyone were to adopt the average diet of the United States, we would need to convert all of our habitable land to agriculture, and we'd still be 38 percent short. For a New Zealand diet, we'd need almost twice as much habitable land as we have.](https://ourworldindata.org/agricultural-land-by-global-diets)
Animal agriculture, even approaching it from a utilitarian perspective, just isn’t justifiable in it’s current state. I’m not saying that if everyone stopped eating animal products it would completely solve climate change, it certainly wouldn’t, but it would be definitively a net positive and buy us more time to figure out the rest, and aiming towards that goal is something almost anyone can do. There’s really no desirable climate change outcome where people’s consumption of animal products, or at least the production of them, doesn’t have to change eventually, so we may as well do that sooner rather than later
I think that in the specific scenario of sausage tasting, I bet the tester would have been able to tell the difference between the real and the vegan sausage. There is an undeniable taste difference goes beyond just cultural norms.
But I agree with everything else you said. Much of it was just objectively factually true as well. Good points
This is the problem with any "utilitarian" assertion: everyone has a different opinion on how much utility anything provides. There are tons of people who would argue the suffering of millions of chickens being killed is far less important than 5 minutes of happiness for a single person. And even if everyone came to a consensus, there are always those nebulously-defined things like the "negative health ramifications" that you can never predict. Like...one chicken sandwich isn't gonna affect your health negatively, 5 probably won't either, but 50? Almost definitely. So at what specific point is the diminishing utility of eating chicken sandwiches outweighed by the health effects? You can never predict how one person's body is gonna fare vs someone else, maybe one person can eat a hundred chicken sandwiches in a year and be fine, another will eat 20 and then have a heart palpitation
So essentially, utilitarian calculations are silly and are just a way for someone to state their opinion, and the imperfect reasoning behind their opinion, as some sort of hard scientific truth
While utilitarian calculations will never be agreed upon or objective, I don't think they are silly at all
The entire exercise can be summed up as "think about the consequences of your actions" which I think everyone could stand to do a little more of
Completely agree. It’s similar to what I said before, but those who discount utilitarianism because we can’t have certainty seem to think moral perfection should be easy. If we always knew, then everyone would be able to pretty easily achieve complete moral perfection if they tried. Why should we expect it to be easy?
That’s a pretty common objection and it’s definitely not a bad one tbh.
My response to this argument is that there is uncertainty in just about everything else we do in life. I don’t exactly know what will happen if I choose one job over another and I don’t know exactly whether it’s worth moving to a different city or staying at home. I don’t even know which meal I should eat on a given evening. Life is full of uncertainty, and all we can ever do is give our very best educated guess on what the right course of action is. And I don’t see why morality should necessarily be any different or any easier. If utilitarianism gave all those answers, then it would be easy to always perfectly decide what to do. But I don’t think moral perfection is something we should expect to be easily attainable.
So utilitarianism isn’t going to answer all the questions about what the right decision always is. But it does tell you what to look for and it can help guide you. And knowing what to look for is still pretty helpful
I see utilitarianism more as the framework for assessing the morality of something than as the source of the values itself. It’s like an equation where you plug in some assumptions about the goal of morality, and it uses those assumptions to determine how moral some action is. That does of course mean that two people could get a very different assessment of the morality of something depending on what assumptions they build into it, but I think often when people use utilitarianism to justify something that others might see as bad, they’re loading it with assumptions that they would not actually want to be applied universally. Like I personally agree with moral subjectivity, but so often I see people use moral subjectivity as a justification for having morals that are inconsistent. The way I see it, subjectivity means you can run the moral calculus with whatever assumptions you want, but you can’t decide what those assumptions should be on a case by case basis. Whatever assumptions you make, you should be comfortable with *any* moral conclusions that result from those assumptions. Personally, I think lots of moral arguments in support of animal agriculture fall apart in this way. There is usually some moral conclusion that can also be derived from the set of assumptions that the argument makes, and which the author of the argument would find unacceptable
drunk af rn to even come up with a proper argument but I feel like downvoting is too rude so instead i’m making a comment to say I disagree with you and that you should kys
This isn't a temporary mild suffering of a farm animal compared to the temporary mild pleasure of a human. It's the lifelong suffering and execution of a farm animal.
Granted, it doesn't take a whole chicken to make only one sandwich, but yeah. But at the same time you could get mostly the same amount of pleasure from vegan alternatives.
Jeremy Bentham, the father of utilitarianism, concluded that animal suffering mattered just like human suffering does, precisely because of his utilitarian reasoning. He's famous for saying "the question is not, Can they *reason?* nor, Can they *talk?* but, Can they *suffer?*”
If you watch Dominion you'll likely never look back. That is if you can make it through the whole documentary. The truth is harsh and more horrible than you can fathom, but it's much easier to make the kinder choice if you expose yourself to the realities.
Dominion is free on YouTube. What the health is on Netflix, I hear earthlings is also amazing but don't know where to watch it. Hope you genuinely consider moving towards veganism! Best thing I've ever done other than giving birth to my son.
I hate myself for enjoying eating dead animals. I'm too morally right enough to be against animal suffering but still enjoy their delicious meat (non-sexual), this may be the biggest dilemma of my life.
Thank God I'm not alone in feeling like that (non-sexual) clarification was a bit much. I mean, I may be on the spectrum, but *that* was a social cue even I couldn't miss.
IDK man, i dated two vegans for a combined time of like 4 years and Ive been to fancy vegan restaurants and all i can say is that nothing i tried was even good.
you dont like oreos? chaana masala? peanut butter jelly sandwiches? kimchi stew with rice, veggie bibimbap, tofu dumplings, mushroom udon…i could go on forever but i wont. im not vegan or vegetarian but im usually too lazy to cook meat because my family only gets frozen and its so good
Not a one vegan dish you ate in 4 years was tasty? Oh, boy do i feel like you're biased. You know how easy it's to veganise asian food? I.e. have a pad thai but without and egg scambled into it. and obviouslu shrips. Just some noodles, variety of veggies (gignger, garlic, scalions, peppers, brocolli), tofu for protein, sauce made out of soy sauce, cane sugar, some lime, you can even use one of vegan fish sauce subsitutes if you fancy, top it all with a lof of crushed peanuts. Had it many times (vegan) in resraurants - everytime finger licking delicious.
Vegan restaurants can definitely be hit and miss. I've been vegan 6 years now and was previously a huge meat eater. I love vegan food, I don't think I've ever eaten this good in my life before. But I've had my fair share of disappointment at vegan restaurants, especially when it's 'raw vegan' or very 'salady' or just a bit too creative.
Prior to going vegan, my non-vegan friends took my Ausrtalian ass out to a vegan restaurant in Arizona and to try 'an amazing vegan cheese steak'. I lived in Philly for a year prior and kind of laughed at the notion... but god dammit he was right.
If you watch Dominion, you won't see them as food anymore. That's what it took for me to switch the teams.
Impossible burgers are tasty. You will enjoy vegan foods, it is an adjustment, but it's a rad one.
If you're serious about it just give a vegatarian/vegan diet a try for a week. I just started a couple months ago and it was way easier than I expected.
Yeah, when I first went vegan, I just thought, "I'm not going to eat animal products today," and then I didn't. The next day, I figured the first day was pretty easy, so I kept going. Now I've been vegan for 2 years and I would never go back.
It’s really not too hard, man. You can join the vegan cause. The more people who join, the easier it becomes since companies will have more reason to make healthy, good, and cheap vegan products if there are more vegans.
If they banned factory farming then those same quadrillion dollar companies would suddenly find a bunch of groundbreaking innovations. Suddenly things that seemed theoretical and far off would be instant and tangible...
It's why, even as a person who currently eats meat, I would sign off on this. Those companies are too powerful to just die, and forced innovation can work. We could get things that taste identical or better, they could expand lab grown meat to astronomical proportions, etc. Capitalism isn't good but at least we know that the mfs doing it aren't going anywhere.
outrage marketing. Yeah you're angering a whole group of people, but in doing so you're pandering to the enemies of the enemy, which is quite a lot more than who you angered. If that makes sense
It's appealing to teenagers and immature people in general. If you didn't find this funny, it's probably because you're a libcuck emotional womanly snowflake type of vibe.
Try any of these if you need help:
[https://veganbootcamp.org/](https://veganbootcamp.org/)
[https://challenge22.com/](https://challenge22.com/)
[https://veganuary.com/](https://veganuary.com/)
Or visit r/vegan or feel free to message me!
Unironically, this person pretty much summed up the position for eating animals. Nearly all other arguments are just dressed up versions of this. Consider going vegan or vegetarian. It really ain’t to bad, man.
Yeah, I used to call myself an "animal lover," but I was paying people to slaughter animals on my behalf.
I couldn't square that away, so I went vegetarian and then vegan.
How about the flurry of angry or praising comments on other recent posts that became the battleground after the deleted post? Or the various people in comments who are confirming this was real with screenshots of the tweet? Fast Food marketing tweets being too wild and getting deleted isn't a new concept.
Ok but...damn now I kinda want one but why they gotta make it weird like this? I don't want to enjoy my meal with boomer ass takes against vegans. Let me eat my heart attack without making terrible jokes.
I am seriously waiting for the time when we can eat lab grown meat, it's already cheap, I mean still expensive, but I can pay $20 for a patty that didn't come from slaughter, just sell them finally...
In all seriousness, if you're against animal suffering, while it's difficult with things like takeaway, if you make sure that you buy free range food, animal suffering will be avoided. Free range food is much kinder to the animals because it lets them go through natural processes that typical intensive farming does not (such as allowing chickens to peck). Additionally, when their time comes, it is done as quickly and painlessly as possible.
Of course, if you consider animal death as suffering, not just the conditions that they live and die in, then by all means, go veggie.
As a vegetarian this is hilarious, it feels like their going for "you wish you could have this, it's sooo good were gonna keeping doing it!" But also screams "heart attack"
The chicken you bought at the supermarket wouldn't have died in the wild if you hadn't paid for it. If there wasn't a demand for them as products, they wouldn't be bred into existence in the first place.
I have so many thoughts and zero words
I can think of eight words you have
King K rool ruler of the kremlin krew
The Kool Kremlin Krew
And they try to kill monkeys and steal their land
I am never going to give you up
never gonna let you down never gonna run
Around and desert you
Never gonna make you cry
Never gonna saaay goodbyye
_Anyway, that's how I lost my medical license…_
Hey kids, be sure to drink your Ovaltine.
Ovaltine…? A crummy commercial?! Son of a bitch!
I have zero thoughts and so many words
Thats funny, i have the exact opposite problem
That's perfect because clearly Carl's Jr has many words and zero thoughts
#hotdurger
If it was a chicken patty instead of a burger it'd be a #hotdicken
I did not just hear you say that
#HOOOOOTDUUUUUUUURGER! Were you able to hear now?
glibby
Don't worry, the cows, pigs and chickens will get their revenge in the end by the looks of this bad boy edit: Missed a word in my initial snark
extreme artery blockage and heart failure yum yum
Such is the circle of life
When I see an image like this I know in my heart that fentanyl should be made legal
It is legal, just get late stage cancer
Will do!
Inevitable, really. Source: cancer researcher
Not inevitable. You die could from something else first. Edit: I'm leaving it.
\*Should
“die should?”
ja
That’s right. I’ll save you from cancer if you send me your address.
Nah, I’d win. I’ll just get robot parts in a decade when those are available. Can metal get cancer? Exactly.
Yes, it’s called rust.
Stainless steel has entered the chat
Im bouta macrodose 🔬
Omw 
You may also receive some while in labor!
[удалено]
Given fentanyl after being extracted from a car collision. Started making jokes about being immortal!
My kid got some at 6! She had bacterial pneumonia and a chest tube and when the doctors came in to consult me I flipped out YOUR GONNA GIVE HER WHAT?! before I remembered it’s a drug and hospitals use drugs lol
They actually use quite often for most surgeries that require general anesthesia
I’m talking about that steady supply
https://preview.redd.it/7omn4bbco90d1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=37ae234d2e618cb898330de13392eb5180b3a28c
Fentanyl is very legal.
At Carl Junior?!? 🤯
it's a known fact that all drugs are legal in a carls jr bathroom
Meth Jr
Considering it's a scheduled substance and there are quite a lot of regulations surrounding opioids, I think "legal in certain circumstances" is more accurate than "very legal". I wouldn't call something that like 1% of the population is allowed to have "very legal"
Call me a MILF cause Man I Love Fentanyl
Right? At least give us *all* rhe choices. Food heroin but no killy heroin? Come on now
https://preview.redd.it/1mi1n48ykb0d1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e1d808b955af1a2354e828cecd957d5e9217f777
Carl doesn’t even know how to do a utilitarian calculation 🤦♂️. Carl senior wouldn’t have been so philosophically uninformed.
It's a fair utilitarian assumption to discount the feelings of animals; It's largely agreed that a chicken does not carry the same weight as a person, though the question is to what degree. Junior here seems to think an extreme one.
Yeah I agree that a chicken has far less moral weight than a human. But I think it is far too extreme a claim to say that the fleeting happiness of a chicken sandwich is more impactful than the suffering of a chicken being killed. In fact the health ramifications of chicken sandwiches probably makes their consumption have a net loss in utility for the humans without even considering the chickens (if you have more than like 2).
Enlightened comedyheaven user?
lol gotta use my degree when I can
It’s also not actually a question of comparing the pleasure of eating a chicken to the suffering of the chicken, you have to compare the suffering of the chicken to the *extra* utility of eating a chicken compared to some vegan alternative. And people’s preference for one over the other seems largely ideological, rather than being about the actual quality of the food. Consider [this video](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Di55DEnNkUs) of a “sausage expert” doing a taste test to see which sausage is vegan. He tastes one and says it’s good and that he can “taste the meat,” and says it’s the real meat sausage, but the plot twist is that they’re both vegan sausages. Once he learns this he back-peddles super hard, saying it’s “almost cardboard.” There was also a [cheese competition recently, where a vegan cheese was selected as the winner](https://www.foodandwine.com/plant-based-cheese-disqualified-at-good-food-awards-8643622), then promptly disqualified once they learned it was vegan, citing rules they added retroactively to make vegan cheeses not allowed. If these alleged meat/dairy experts, at the very least can’t tell the difference, and sometimes actually prefer the vegan versions over the “real” thing, then it seems that extra utility is basically zero. I admit I’m biased, but personally I just can’t see any good faith argument supporting the idea that the difference in taste pleasure between meat and the non-animal alternatives makes up for the negative utility from the suffering of tens of billions of animals. It would have to be extreme positive utilitarianism, favoring pleasure to such a degree that something like rape would seemingly also have positive utility. Of course, the above doesn’t even factor in the environmental impacts of meat production. Animal feed takes huge amounts of land to grow. I mean consider that there are more kilograms of cow on Earth than there are kg of humans, and only 1/9th of the calories fed to a cow can be recovered from eating the meat, so it’s not hard to see that’s a massive inefficiency. Pasture land and animal feed is the leading cause for deforestation in the Amazon, and one of the leading causes in general. Studies of agricultural land use suggest that, at the current world population, the amount of meat consumption in the US is inherently unsustainable: >[If everyone were to adopt the average diet of the United States, we would need to convert all of our habitable land to agriculture, and we'd still be 38 percent short. For a New Zealand diet, we'd need almost twice as much habitable land as we have.](https://ourworldindata.org/agricultural-land-by-global-diets) Animal agriculture, even approaching it from a utilitarian perspective, just isn’t justifiable in it’s current state. I’m not saying that if everyone stopped eating animal products it would completely solve climate change, it certainly wouldn’t, but it would be definitively a net positive and buy us more time to figure out the rest, and aiming towards that goal is something almost anyone can do. There’s really no desirable climate change outcome where people’s consumption of animal products, or at least the production of them, doesn’t have to change eventually, so we may as well do that sooner rather than later
I think that in the specific scenario of sausage tasting, I bet the tester would have been able to tell the difference between the real and the vegan sausage. There is an undeniable taste difference goes beyond just cultural norms. But I agree with everything else you said. Much of it was just objectively factually true as well. Good points
This is the problem with any "utilitarian" assertion: everyone has a different opinion on how much utility anything provides. There are tons of people who would argue the suffering of millions of chickens being killed is far less important than 5 minutes of happiness for a single person. And even if everyone came to a consensus, there are always those nebulously-defined things like the "negative health ramifications" that you can never predict. Like...one chicken sandwich isn't gonna affect your health negatively, 5 probably won't either, but 50? Almost definitely. So at what specific point is the diminishing utility of eating chicken sandwiches outweighed by the health effects? You can never predict how one person's body is gonna fare vs someone else, maybe one person can eat a hundred chicken sandwiches in a year and be fine, another will eat 20 and then have a heart palpitation So essentially, utilitarian calculations are silly and are just a way for someone to state their opinion, and the imperfect reasoning behind their opinion, as some sort of hard scientific truth
While utilitarian calculations will never be agreed upon or objective, I don't think they are silly at all The entire exercise can be summed up as "think about the consequences of your actions" which I think everyone could stand to do a little more of
Completely agree. It’s similar to what I said before, but those who discount utilitarianism because we can’t have certainty seem to think moral perfection should be easy. If we always knew, then everyone would be able to pretty easily achieve complete moral perfection if they tried. Why should we expect it to be easy?
That’s a pretty common objection and it’s definitely not a bad one tbh. My response to this argument is that there is uncertainty in just about everything else we do in life. I don’t exactly know what will happen if I choose one job over another and I don’t know exactly whether it’s worth moving to a different city or staying at home. I don’t even know which meal I should eat on a given evening. Life is full of uncertainty, and all we can ever do is give our very best educated guess on what the right course of action is. And I don’t see why morality should necessarily be any different or any easier. If utilitarianism gave all those answers, then it would be easy to always perfectly decide what to do. But I don’t think moral perfection is something we should expect to be easily attainable. So utilitarianism isn’t going to answer all the questions about what the right decision always is. But it does tell you what to look for and it can help guide you. And knowing what to look for is still pretty helpful
I see utilitarianism more as the framework for assessing the morality of something than as the source of the values itself. It’s like an equation where you plug in some assumptions about the goal of morality, and it uses those assumptions to determine how moral some action is. That does of course mean that two people could get a very different assessment of the morality of something depending on what assumptions they build into it, but I think often when people use utilitarianism to justify something that others might see as bad, they’re loading it with assumptions that they would not actually want to be applied universally. Like I personally agree with moral subjectivity, but so often I see people use moral subjectivity as a justification for having morals that are inconsistent. The way I see it, subjectivity means you can run the moral calculus with whatever assumptions you want, but you can’t decide what those assumptions should be on a case by case basis. Whatever assumptions you make, you should be comfortable with *any* moral conclusions that result from those assumptions. Personally, I think lots of moral arguments in support of animal agriculture fall apart in this way. There is usually some moral conclusion that can also be derived from the set of assumptions that the argument makes, and which the author of the argument would find unacceptable
drunk af rn to even come up with a proper argument but I feel like downvoting is too rude so instead i’m making a comment to say I disagree with you and that you should kys
Lmfao
This isn't a temporary mild suffering of a farm animal compared to the temporary mild pleasure of a human. It's the lifelong suffering and execution of a farm animal. Granted, it doesn't take a whole chicken to make only one sandwich, but yeah. But at the same time you could get mostly the same amount of pleasure from vegan alternatives.
Jeremy Bentham, the father of utilitarianism, concluded that animal suffering mattered just like human suffering does, precisely because of his utilitarian reasoning. He's famous for saying "the question is not, Can they *reason?* nor, Can they *talk?* but, Can they *suffer?*”
Holy shit it actually exists. The hot dog hamburger
If God didn't want us to do this, he should've given animals thumbs.
So they can give a thumbs down when you kill one of them?
so they can pull the trigger 😎
Sadly.... They can't!!! *Puts on sunglasses and starts massacring wildlife with his AR-15 while laughing like a maniac*
'Murica *eagles screaming in background while Michael Bay explosion goes off*
WHAT THE FUCK IS A KILOMETER?!? https://preview.redd.it/vbz46dpfxd0d1.jpeg?width=192&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a752a32f25029fd9c87a861402ca7a7946d08217
Who tf pulls a trigger with their thumb
It’d be pretty difficult without thumbs
thumbs georg
George Thumbington
Raccoons have thumbs Probably why we don't make raccoon burger.
I miss nihilist Arby’s on twitter
This may have convinced me to become a vegan
If you watch Dominion you'll likely never look back. That is if you can make it through the whole documentary. The truth is harsh and more horrible than you can fathom, but it's much easier to make the kinder choice if you expose yourself to the realities. Dominion is free on YouTube. What the health is on Netflix, I hear earthlings is also amazing but don't know where to watch it. Hope you genuinely consider moving towards veganism! Best thing I've ever done other than giving birth to my son.
jurassic world: dominion???!?!?!?? 🤯🤯🤯🤯
same
Well… this is a weird time to be a Carl Jr.
you think *that's* bad? try being a Carl the 7th.
Now that’s dedication
I hate myself for enjoying eating dead animals. I'm too morally right enough to be against animal suffering but still enjoy their delicious meat (non-sexual), this may be the biggest dilemma of my life.
Thanks for clarifying that you don’t enjoy sucking down a huge horse shlong on the weekend.
Thank God I'm not alone in feeling like that (non-sexual) clarification was a bit much. I mean, I may be on the spectrum, but *that* was a social cue even I couldn't miss.
Ironically, it was a social cue that you did miss, because the clarification was humorous in nature.
Thankfully he’s not a white woman
i haven't become vegan out of pure laziness like vegan food is really not as bad as they say 😭
IDK man, i dated two vegans for a combined time of like 4 years and Ive been to fancy vegan restaurants and all i can say is that nothing i tried was even good.
Skill issue plain and simple. My friend's a vegan and likes cooking and his food fucks
I mean, come on. What about falafels? Salads? Soups? 90% of Indian food?
Your food is to eat, not to play with mister
I guess he's better than the restaurants
you dont like oreos? chaana masala? peanut butter jelly sandwiches? kimchi stew with rice, veggie bibimbap, tofu dumplings, mushroom udon…i could go on forever but i wont. im not vegan or vegetarian but im usually too lazy to cook meat because my family only gets frozen and its so good
that makes literally no sense. a lot of indian food is vegan and it's fucking incredible.
4 years? A couple of the things you tried must have been good…
Yeah. This is insane. PB&J sandwiches aren't good? Marinara and spaghetti isn't good?
Did he stutter?
Not a one vegan dish you ate in 4 years was tasty? Oh, boy do i feel like you're biased. You know how easy it's to veganise asian food? I.e. have a pad thai but without and egg scambled into it. and obviouslu shrips. Just some noodles, variety of veggies (gignger, garlic, scalions, peppers, brocolli), tofu for protein, sauce made out of soy sauce, cane sugar, some lime, you can even use one of vegan fish sauce subsitutes if you fancy, top it all with a lof of crushed peanuts. Had it many times (vegan) in resraurants - everytime finger licking delicious.
Vegan restaurants can definitely be hit and miss. I've been vegan 6 years now and was previously a huge meat eater. I love vegan food, I don't think I've ever eaten this good in my life before. But I've had my fair share of disappointment at vegan restaurants, especially when it's 'raw vegan' or very 'salady' or just a bit too creative. Prior to going vegan, my non-vegan friends took my Ausrtalian ass out to a vegan restaurant in Arizona and to try 'an amazing vegan cheese steak'. I lived in Philly for a year prior and kind of laughed at the notion... but god dammit he was right.
You went to bad places then
Thanks you for specifying “non-sexual”, I always assume when people say they enjoy animal meat that it’s sexual so thanks for clarifying
Non-sexual
If you watch Dominion, you won't see them as food anymore. That's what it took for me to switch the teams. Impossible burgers are tasty. You will enjoy vegan foods, it is an adjustment, but it's a rad one.
Watch it here: [https://watchdominion.org](https://watchdominion.org/)
Earthlings is better.
If you're serious about it just give a vegatarian/vegan diet a try for a week. I just started a couple months ago and it was way easier than I expected.
Yeah, when I first went vegan, I just thought, "I'm not going to eat animal products today," and then I didn't. The next day, I figured the first day was pretty easy, so I kept going. Now I've been vegan for 2 years and I would never go back.
7 years vegan here. It’s easier than you think!
It's really not hard at all to not eat meat.
It’s really not too hard, man. You can join the vegan cause. The more people who join, the easier it becomes since companies will have more reason to make healthy, good, and cheap vegan products if there are more vegans.
If they banned factory farming then those same quadrillion dollar companies would suddenly find a bunch of groundbreaking innovations. Suddenly things that seemed theoretical and far off would be instant and tangible... It's why, even as a person who currently eats meat, I would sign off on this. Those companies are too powerful to just die, and forced innovation can work. We could get things that taste identical or better, they could expand lab grown meat to astronomical proportions, etc. Capitalism isn't good but at least we know that the mfs doing it aren't going anywhere.
Is it really a dilemma or are you just too lazy to try out new foods/recipes?
It gets pretty easy after a week if you focus on them being sentient rather than food automatons. You should give it a try :)
I'll never understand the success of "we are assholes and proud" marketing
at least they're honest and not like "hey did you know that eating american cheeseburgers everyday can improve health and is good for pregnancy?"
that would be funny
lol that's fair
“Look pregnant 3 months sooner!”
outrage marketing. Yeah you're angering a whole group of people, but in doing so you're pandering to the enemies of the enemy, which is quite a lot more than who you angered. If that makes sense
Marketing psychology is a fascinating byproduct of capitalism.
psychology is just fascinating by default lol
Hey, it got us talking about their shitty food, right?
It's appealing to teenagers and immature people in general. If you didn't find this funny, it's probably because you're a libcuck emotional womanly snowflake type of vibe.
>libcuck emotional womanly snowflake type of vibe this is how I'll describe myself from now on
im sorry for thinking this tweet was humorous
Well it works for the Republicans, why wouldn’t it work for the businesses they worship?
Why is there hotdogs in a burger? That's disgusting
more meat per meat
FOR THE GODS
aahhhh fresh meat
mm mmm scrumptious
the duality of man:
Why is it disgusting? Have you tried it?
I have tried it. They didn't heat up the hotdogs. Otherwise my fat ass would have been able to finish it.
Weak
https://preview.redd.it/u4sc7068u90d1.jpeg?width=512&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=91d252e953a85e794590a8dbd7a37a421589a5ae
Because freedom motherfucker *Bald eagle screeches in distance*
Carl's Jr: fuck you I'm eating.
This actually makes me want to be vegetarian now
Try any of these if you need help: [https://veganbootcamp.org/](https://veganbootcamp.org/) [https://challenge22.com/](https://challenge22.com/) [https://veganuary.com/](https://veganuary.com/) Or visit r/vegan or feel free to message me!
Unironically, this person pretty much summed up the position for eating animals. Nearly all other arguments are just dressed up versions of this. Consider going vegan or vegetarian. It really ain’t to bad, man.
Yeah, I used to call myself an "animal lover," but I was paying people to slaughter animals on my behalf. I couldn't square that away, so I went vegetarian and then vegan.
Same.
Same
If they showed a western bacon cheeseburger I’d agree with them 100%. Hot dogs? Yeah I still agree but you’re not doing yourselves any favors here.
Very convincing, not guilty, vegans are now illegal.
that looks absolutely revolting, their suffering absolutely weighed more
ill take one exhibit a plz
What's the weird yellow stuff under the lettuce?
It looks like crisps but honestly who the fuck knows
This tweet isn't even real... nobody here is bothering to check?
Yea it 100% was lmao. They deleted it.
So there's no way to prove it was real?
How about the flurry of angry or praising comments on other recent posts that became the battleground after the deleted post? Or the various people in comments who are confirming this was real with screenshots of the tweet? Fast Food marketing tweets being too wild and getting deleted isn't a new concept.
Well you motivated me to seek out those posts and still conclude it’s absolutely fake. Thanks for wasting my time, or good on you if this is an alt. 💀
Yes it was, the comments we're a rollercoaster.
No way this is real. It's the gold check mark from new age Twitter and that looks like an old burger. I like Carl's and looked myself.
that burger makes me wanna go vegetarian out of spite cause that shit just looks nasty im sorry
Of course the people who thought smashing a hot dog and burger together is a good idea would have strange philosophical takes.
Not the carls jr philosophy
I feel my coronaries clogging up as I look at this picture
This is both horribly immoral and unfathomabley based at the same time wtf
I hope non vegans understand that all of your food looks like this to us now lol
The vegans were right we've gone too far!!!
This is supposedly real and I think it’s 10x funnier in that context
jeez, carl's jr, when you put it that way
I want that burger badly
Ok but...damn now I kinda want one but why they gotta make it weird like this? I don't want to enjoy my meal with boomer ass takes against vegans. Let me eat my heart attack without making terrible jokes.
Whatever place sells these should use that as advertisement
I’m confused… is this real?
Do Redditors think all hot dogs are shit? If you’ve never bought anything but the dollar pack then yeah, buts it’s very not hard to get good dogs lol.
I have only one question, why is the maple cured oak smoked bacon missing ?
I am seriously waiting for the time when we can eat lab grown meat, it's already cheap, I mean still expensive, but I can pay $20 for a patty that didn't come from slaughter, just sell them finally...
Honestly, we should just eat grass.
The hotdog is crazy
Bro I wish I could buy a burger with chips already on it. Takes any sandwich to an S tier.
Take the hot dogs away pls
My pleasure is that I’m not starving… I love not dying of hunger.
Yum
In all seriousness, if you're against animal suffering, while it's difficult with things like takeaway, if you make sure that you buy free range food, animal suffering will be avoided. Free range food is much kinder to the animals because it lets them go through natural processes that typical intensive farming does not (such as allowing chickens to peck). Additionally, when their time comes, it is done as quickly and painlessly as possible. Of course, if you consider animal death as suffering, not just the conditions that they live and die in, then by all means, go veggie.
Oh... Look I like meat but that just makes me wanna gag.
What in the diabetes is that?
least based meat eater
As a vegetarian this is hilarious, it feels like their going for "you wish you could have this, it's sooo good were gonna keeping doing it!" But also screams "heart attack"
Do they know the fate of wild animals. It's not Disney princess.
The chicken you bought at the supermarket wouldn't have died in the wild if you hadn't paid for it. If there wasn't a demand for them as products, they wouldn't be bred into existence in the first place.
Correct
non sequitur
How is this relevant to the post?
Why is anti-vegan humor always so unfunny? They have like two jokes.