yeah. Also hamfisting not eating meat and that a plantbased diet is so much more ethical and sooouls and shit.
They have no connection to nature at all. Bird Chicks are the kitkat bars of nature, ffs.
And I bet they have no problems with the fact that their "vegan" food likely resulted in a lot of insect deaths, pesticides, harvesting machines, nature destruction for fields... I cannot be a vegan simply because I know so much of those variables, that finding anything edible would require my complete attention
Personally i have no issue with moral vegans that don't eat meat because the animal suffers. Their choice don't do things you don't like. But generally morality of such things is hard to measure, animals are not moral creatures. Most animals will not kill you but will start eating you alive when you stop resisting. Bears Love fatty salmon skin so in times of abundance they will basically skin them alive and leave huge chunks uneaten.
I would be for keeping animals in decent living conditions and killing them quickly. Hunting as an example would be morally perfectly fine, considering you use the animal.
As for environmental reasons I'm unsure of how harmful it actually is. Husbandry is a part of harmful emissions. The claims of how much less space agriculture would require to feed the same amount doesn't tell the full picture, since from what i've understood the current method is the most efficient way for farmers.
Keeping vacant farmland for husbandry fertilizes the soil, in some parts farming is not possible but sheep herding is, you get milk, cheese, hides, fur and stuff from the animals. So i'm unsure if stopping husbandry would even be viable.
Maybe in the future we all start eating lab grown meat or something.
I think when a more economically & environmentally efficient option does come people will gravitate to it naturally.
If you guys have good sources about any of this i'd like to read them.