I'd say it's unethical to breed them, but not to adopt them if that's in their best interest.
Link
joined 2 years ago
Although KDE is windows like out of the box, it is really customizable without the need of addons, which I like. The Gnome addons can be really cool, but in my experience they can make the desktop less stable and often get abandoned.
Yeah, the biggest seems to be €110 per month if they don´t get a discount for committing to a longer contract duration.
Right. And if they have a bad argument, regardless whether you agree with it or not, it's worth a downvote. But if it is an opinion without an argument, I think it is fine to up- or downvote depending on whether you agree or disagree.
I don't really get why. A well reasoned position I disagree with might discourage me to downvote, because I would like the reasoning itself. But why would downvoting something you disagree with be bad?
It isn't quite there yet, but I think it does have the potential to become a solid app.
It would need to be forked, because I believe Slide was abandoned.
It is in theory possible to obtain animal products without violating their rights. Like someone else mentioned, picking up a feather from the ground is totally vegan for example.
Wool however is a bit more complicated. The reason sheep produce massive amounts of wool in the first place is because we selectively bred them to do so. Shearing a sheep can be beneficial for the sheep, but it is a problem we should not have created (or continue to create) in the first place.
I think we should stop breeding animals that have all sorts of genetic problems we created. That includes sheep that don't shed and need shearing to not overheat in the summer, it includes chickens that lay so many eggs their bones break due to calcium deficiency, etc.
It is not a great definition in my opinion. The sentence "as far as is possible and practicable" is too vague. It makes people claim that when it is merely very inconvenient to get a vegan meal, it is vegan to eat something with animal products.
In my opinion veganism should be the extention of human rights to animals. That would mean that even killing a pig for a heart valve to safe a human would not be vegan. After all, we wouldn't even kill one human to safe multiple others in a similar scenario because that would violate the rights of the to be killed individual. You could argue that it is better to safe more lives, sure. But it wouldn't be the 'pro-human rights' thing to do.
I believe that is more in line with the philosophy the vegan society was founded to promote than their own current definition.
I'm not your friend, guy!
They can even track you with browser fingerprints these days, and that is quite hard to prevent
Me too, although I think adoption can be okay