# Save Male Chicks From Death



## Folsom (Jun 20, 2018)

The red spirit said:


> It's important how OP communicated about his issue. He's going way too extreme and should calm down. It's not going to help anything, if his potential audience thinks that he's crazy in a bad way.


This post doesn't seem too extreme and he just seems enthusiastic. I'm not sure what it was like before OP edited it though?
The title doesn't seem like clickbait either? If you support this technology you would literally be 'saving male chicks from death.'


----------



## The red spirit (Sep 29, 2015)

Folsom said:


> The title doesn't seem like clickbait either? If you support this technology you would literally be 'saving male chicks from death.'


Have you read data from links? There's nothing you can do, forget about it. Also their moral stand is dodgy as fuck. "We can save chicks, if they aren't born". Does it remind you of something? It reminds me of this:


----------



## Folsom (Jun 20, 2018)

The red spirit said:


> Have you read data from links? There's nothing you can do, forget about it. Also their moral stand is dodgy as fuck. "We can save chicks, if they aren't born". Does it remind you of something? It reminds me of this:


I don't understand your moral outrage.

You are looking at two options:

1. Male chicks are born, deemed mostly useless, and killed in painful ways to be used in other products.
2. Eggs are determined to either be male or female and the male ones are aborted and used in other products.

Option 2 is obviously the more ethically sound option of those two.

Obviously there are more ethically sound options than both of these, but those are the two on topic.

They aren't claiming that they are going to be saving lives. They are claiming to be able to save male chicks from a horrible death once they are born. 
That meme is right, these chicks can't suffer horrible deaths if they are never born. What's the problem?

Are you arguing that this is never going to be implemented on a large enough scale to make a difference so there's no point in supporting it?


----------



## DAVIE (Mar 16, 2018)

Folsom said:


> You are looking at two options:
> 
> 1. Male chicks are born, deemed mostly useless, and killed in painful ways to be used in other products.
> 2. Eggs are determined to either be male or female and the male ones are aborted and used in other products.



Ah. Someone else gets it! Thanks, Folsom.


----------



## The red spirit (Sep 29, 2015)

Folsom said:


> I don't understand your moral outrage.


There's no outrage, I just don't see a point.

You are looking at two options:



Folsom said:


> 1. Male chicks are born, deemed mostly useless, and killed in painful ways to be used in other products.
> 2. Eggs are determined to either be male or female and the male ones are aborted and used in other products.
> 
> Option 2 is obviously the more ethically sound option of those two.
> ...


Eh maybe, but still the problem isn't that they are born, the problem is that humans do shit like that. It's a band aid solution. Once they stop doing this, they will do something similar. You know there are people doing this for living, but try to imagine how they are thinking about doing this. Probably they aren't most morally sound individuals.

By the way, I doubt it's really okay to do something like that in long term and have way more female chickens than males. Sure, it should be controlled, but nothing is said about that. 

And if somebody gave you dilemma and asked you if you wanted to never be born or live shortly which you would pick? Both answers aren't anything close to what I would say is satisfactory, just a choice between lesser of two evils. It could be understood just as much amoral as killing them. 




Folsom said:


> They aren't claiming that they are going to be saving lives. They are claiming to be able to save male chicks from a horrible death once they are born.


Well, no shit. I was trying to answer you to "The title doesn't seem like clickbait either?". Look at the title. It's pretty clickbaity or at least misleading.




Folsom said:


> That meme is right, these chicks can't suffer horrible deaths if they are never born. What's the problem?
> 
> Are you arguing that this is never going to be implemented on a large enough scale to make a difference so there's no point in supporting it?


My point is that there's no reasonable way to participate in this stuff, if you care about it and you fully believe that it's going to do something. And if you can't really participate, then how is it going to grow? You know, money doesn't grow on trees. It looks like something that governments should think about and implement, which again means that you as individual can't really do anything.

The most plausible thing is that you somehow going to import those eggs into your own country. Obviously it's a financial burden and waste of time. Also you have about month to consume eggs before they go bad, so it's not something that stays a long time. One month is relatively long for food, but after shipping there won't be month left, also shipping conditions may not be suitable for eggs. 

You can't donate money or volunteer for them either. And let's get back to title of thread. It clearly says that you should be helping and then OP says that it's wrong to not do anything. Yet the only solution to problem given is clearly unviable for 99.9% of perC'ers. Do you see a problem here?


----------



## Folsom (Jun 20, 2018)

The red spirit said:


> There's no outrage, I just don't see a point.
> 
> You are looking at two options:
> 
> ...


I can see how the title of the thread is clickbaity, you're right there, and OP seems to agree to some extent.

When I first read the thread I wasn't thinking of it in terms of what individual PerC members can do about it. 
I think OP might have meant 'support' in more of a general, "That's a good idea!" way, maybe send a letter to their local council explaining this, rather than saying everyone should switch to using these eggs else they are moral monsters.

I know you aren't making this argument but I don't agree that aborting these eggs early could be successfully argued to be equally immoral as letting them hatch and grinding them up while they are alive. It is the lesser of two evils, absolutely.

I agree that the people who would be implementing this system probably aren't the most morally sound, but they have to react to what consumers are consuming. If consumers begin switching to using these eggs and stop buying other types of eggs then it would be economically advantageous for them to switch to using this method. 

Is it not analogous to voting? Individually it doesn't make much of a difference, but in a collective it can have a huge impact, but you won't get a collective here unless people know about the product.

My main gripe is that, apart from the clickbaity title, I didn't see OP as being overzealous on this topic until he had to defend himself.

I guess that 'the point' from OPs perspective is probably that if even one person sees this thread and decides to switch to using these eggs then that is a good thing.


----------



## VinnieBob (Mar 24, 2014)

Hexigoon said:


> And?
> 
> As is everyone else who does. Hypocrisy doesn't nullify the evil of the act.
> Thus, if we have developed the means to ultimately avoid that which makes us guilty we should use that instead.


Like what?
Plato states that morals/ethics are universals [ subjective ]
What makes this evil? Evil is a metaphysical term and can only be applied by theists
If you are a theist than you should know in genesis God gave the world [ planet Earth] to man to rule over
If terminating the egg of a chicken is evil than anybody who ever ate a egg would be evil
Or consumed a product that had egg as a ingredient 
Also the O.P. Is only using male chicks as the topic
Why not all livestock as well
One cannot pick and choose their battles
ALL LIFE IS SACRED
The life of a common house fly is no different than the life of a rational being


----------



## The red spirit (Sep 29, 2015)

Folsom said:


> I can see how the title of the thread is clickbaity, you're right there, and OP seems to agree to some extent.


And that comes down to my previous post on this thread, where I said that OP should be a bit calmer and communicate better. But never mind that. It's generally a good advice to force yourself to not be impulsive after you hear something horrible for 20 minutes. Some people say it helps them.



Folsom said:


> When I first read the thread I wasn't thinking of it in terms of what individual PerC members can do about it.
> I think OP might have meant 'support' in more of a general, "That's a good idea!" way, maybe send a letter to their local council explaining this, rather than saying everyone should switch to using these eggs else they are moral monsters.


I can agree with this method, but we have coronavirus now. Like people said timing for that is awful and I think that "heads" of cities or states are now overloaded with coronavirus related problems. Even if problem is apparent, such delicate issues require calmer times and general high living standards, but if you raise such problems during crisis, well...




Folsom said:


> I know you aren't making this argument but I don't agree that aborting these eggs early could be successfully argued to be equally immoral as letting them hatch and grinding them up while they are alive. It is the lesser of two evils, absolutely.


Or you can think that getting grinding material is fine and is more efficient use of biological resources. Immoral, but just laying some perspectives.




Folsom said:


> I agree that the people who would be implementing this system probably aren't the most morally sound, but they have to react to what consumers are consuming. If consumers begin switching to using these eggs and stop buying other types of eggs then it would be economically advantageous for them to switch to using this method.
> 
> Is it not analogous to voting? Individually it doesn't make much of a difference, but in a collective it can have a huge impact, but you won't get a collective here unless people know about the product.


That's the idea, but implementation sucks. Only people from Germany, Netherlands and France have some choice, granted that those egg availability is good. That's a tiny fraction of people, who have any kind of "voting" right. Rest of us don't. And then you look at perC's demographics and you see that practically no one here is from those countries. In general, perC mostly has people from native English speaking countries. The rest are a bit more unusual cases. It certainly wasn't the wisest choice to promote such thing here and be somewhat pushy about it.

I would like to mention some psychological dynamics about those killings. The problem is that boss, who manages butchers might not even feel anything about it, because it's possible that he doesn't ever see what is going on there. The butchers may say that they can't do a thing about and they are just executing their orders. But the thing is what is going on is by many understood as immoral and those two groups can try to simply brush off the blame to others. And its possible that someone there doesn't have the best mental health there, yet without investigations it wouldn't be clear who is responsible for all this and if they have problems. It's also possible that everyone is okay here and they just perceive this specific situation as nothing out of ordinary and nothing immoral. It goes without saying, but people might not even agree if this is moral or not, making this whole thing a gray area. After all, many animals are slaughtered everyday for food and this isn't really out of ordinary of that. It's normal for humans to eat meat and use natural resources for their own wellbeing. 

It's a complicated issue and mostly based on subjective morals. There might not be any objective measures that it would make some sense to continue this project, thus it's just choosing what is more acceptable for you, yet not necessarily good or bad. The only objective good thing here is that "biological waste" could be stopped and thus making their jobs more efficient and maybe even cheaper.

I don't think that this project is suitable for someone just looking to volunteer and do something actually good. Thus you may create more perceptable benefits for society by just doing something else. Perhaps, just simple volunteering to help elders now could be more effective for society.




Folsom said:


> My main gripe is that, apart from the clickbaity title, I didn't see OP as being overzealous on this topic until he had to defend himself.
> 
> I guess that 'the point' from OPs perspective is probably that if even one person sees this thread and decides to switch to using these eggs then that is a good thing.


Perhaps, but I think that he should have been more neutral about this and more thoroughly explained the problem with many of existing complications. It just doesn't look like buy eggs and you are doing something good.


----------



## Shrodingers drink (Nov 30, 2018)

Seems like a cool tech, obviously it may not meet cost to benefit ratio without ethical consideration, however offspring sexing would be especially useful to the dairy industry that has similar issues. 

As for the title though, unless you are an immortal HELA cancer cell line your going to die!


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

@DAVIE I am happy to say I think this forum is far from dead! It is the most welcoming, thoughtful, and vibrant online community I have been a part of, actually. I also personally prefer the pace here to the lightning speed and overwhelming volume of very large forums, where it seems like individual voices more often get drowned out. 

Regarding issues at the moment, certainly the novel coronavirus is our global priority currently, but I am in concordance that there is time and space to focus on more than just that - and thank goodness, too, because my mental health would be in the wastebasket otherwise. We can (and, perhaps, should!) have other positive goals to move towards in addition to alleviation of the pandemic.

I think actually that one of the Achilles heels of the animal rights movement has been its extremism. That is true to some extent with every protest group, and of course the fringes help scoot the mainstream towards acceptance and there is something to be said for that. At the same time, I think sometimes the animal rights movement misses the forest for the trees. Happily, I notice that the cause you are discussing is actually quite low-key for consumers. Just like many people now opt to buy "free range" eggs, this isn't actually a call to end egg farming or to end the egg industry much less animal product industry at all. I am a huge fan of smaller movements like this that allow low-effort choices which minimize impact for humans while maximizing the remediation of an ethical concern. Thanks for sharing about this particular group and its actions. 

I actually happened to be watching a whole bunch of Natalie Portman videos yesterday trying to scout out her type, and in a few of them she mentioned that she's vegan and that she has released a documentary on factory farming. But I thought she was really great when she was asked about how she felt about other people's decisions to eat meat and animal by-products. She explained that her documentary was designed to show the ethical and environmental concerns in factory farming, but went on to say that she doesn't like to actively judge others' food choices and that basically all she is asking people to consider is cutting out meat and/or dairy for one day a week or one meal a day, which would in aggregate have an enormous impact. I can really get on board with that myself and I think it's a more effective way of addressing the complex nexus of ethical concerns and food choice than alienating people who aren't ready to even consider migrating to an animal product or even meat-free diet. I am really excited about so many new meat alternatives entering the market and the recent plant-based cafes and restaurants I have seen out and about. 

If anyone wants to give some really great vegetarian and/or vegan choices a shot during quarantine, here are some of my favorites!
Grocery Store Freezer Section: 
- MorningStar Farms Grillers (veggie burger)
- Boca Burger Flame Grilled (veggie burger)
- MorningStar Farms Buffalo Chik Patties (spicy coated "chicken")
- MorningStar Parmesan Garlic Wings (also "chicken", super garlicky!)
- MorningStar corn dogs or mini corn dogs (_so good_)
Fast Food:
- Burger King's veggie burger (the old one that sometimes is and sometimes isn't on the menu)
- Burger King's Impossible Whopper (new and actually pretty great)
- Taco Bell anything, just sub in beans 



Shrodingers drink said:


> unless you are an immortal HELA cancer cell line your going to die


Also alternatively some jellyfish, hydra, and worms! Biology is nuts.


----------



## Hexigoon (Mar 12, 2018)

VinnieBob said:


> Like what?
> Plato states that morals/ethics are universals [ subjective ]
> What makes this evil? Evil is a metaphysical term and can only be applied by theists
> If you are a theist than you should know in genesis God gave the world [ planet Earth] to man to rule over
> ...



Well, if all life is sacred as you say, that's why most of us would consider it evil to kill. You don't need to be a theist to have a sense of right and wrong. 
It's especially worse if we actually do have the means to make such evils unnecessary and yet the inhumane approach is continued.
Hence why the sooner science like this makes these practices obsolete the better. 

I don't think putting a bit of light on this specifically is the same as trying to invalidate the rest. 
Sure enough in fairness the immorality of killing does apply to all livestock.


----------



## Convex (Jan 5, 2015)

lol!


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

We can make this about the coronavirus if there's criticism that it isn't.

Trying to save the economy also prolongs the lives of hens. With the supply chain all messed up due to lockdown on business, they're getting euthanized before their time too.

https://www.startribune.com/egg-dem...pc7bNexx1B0d-7j-Gt8qIKInlpsc9QKM3J3jptyA88rwc

Though if chickens are dead, they can't produce eggs, and then we can't kill chicks, so there's that.


----------



## VinnieBob (Mar 24, 2014)

Hexigoon said:


> Well, if all life is sacred as you say, that's why most of us would consider it evil to kill. You don't need to be a theist to have a sense of right and wrong.
> It's especially worse if we actually do have the means to make such evils unnecessary and yet the inhumane approach is continued.
> Hence why the sooner science like this makes these practices obsolete the better.
> 
> ...


:spam::do_not_feed_the_tro:do_not_feed_the_tro:do_not_feed_the_tro


----------



## Amine (Feb 23, 2014)

I love how shit like this happens yet so many people have a positive view of existence. Like it wasn't already enough, ya know. I could almost handle the world just being completely awful, but then there's people who worship it. Fuckin inescapable nightmare. Used to think I'd wake up and everything would be okay. The only thing I woke up to was that I never would.


----------

