Have you ever totally changed your opinion on anything?

[Living Bait]

Homosexuality . . I used to bump a lot of dancehall

Bun down Ch Chi, Boom Bye Bye, etc

Now I'm like whatever . . It's definitely not for me, but as long as you ain't hurting anyone, who am I to judge?

 

[jeh]

Insight and Intention instead of Emotion and Attention

 

[semicko82]

Being a sports fan . Raving and psychedelics helped me not to take shyt so serious. Dunno how you can be a "Die hard " sports fan . I love my teams but some of the fan pages are brainwash

I had a homeboy who was obsessed with sports and sports statistics.
All dude did was play video games and smoke weed plus he couldn’t keep a job for more than a few months.

 

[Easy-E]

Mayo
Nutella
Islam
Asian women
American cars
Skinny women
Baseball
Tennis
In-door plants
Body wash
Fruity beer
Flying
Pan Africanism
Southern Rap
Mexico
How my Steak should be cooked
Flavored coffee creamer
Loud sex
Giving money to the homeless
Amusement Parks
Poetry
Wheat bread

Spoiler

jk

I just wanted to make a Umar joke

I wish I could remember a list like that

 

[spliz]

Yeah

Atheist to agnostic (but it would effectively be atheist to most people)
Carnist to vegan (honestly took one debate to realize my contradictions)
Socialist to SocDem (for practicality reasons)
Pro-abortion to anti-abortion (in line with veganism and applies to when sentience is present, this does not start at conception, and I recognize it's better for abortions to be available as it pertains to mortality and abortion rates, this is just on the morality of the issue)

edit: Poster above me reminded me *pro-prostitution to anti-prostitution (this pertains to how a majority of it is handled, not the privileged prostitutes with a few clients, I'm thinking of people from impoverished nations.)



Those are the major ones can recall on the spot, I have had my mind changed on emerging issues but that is just due to a lack of evidence and being rather reserved on opinions until the story develops.

Explain the bolded.

 

[Vodun]

learning the truth about FEMALE NATURE

learning that my mom is a bird just like the rest of the women out there

 

[Sad Bunny]

Homosexuality.

 

[semicko82]

Homosexuality.

What exactly did you change your stance on

 

[Reflected]

Explain the bolded.

To keep it as simple as possible, because I don't like typing, the reasons for why I extend consideration to other humans and seek to improve overall well-being is because of their ability to suffer, which in the end is based on their sentience, their ability to have a subjective experience. So when confronted with my reasons for not extending the same consideration to animals, I am met with contradiction, because I can not identify a trait that justifies the exploitation of animals that doesn't entail absurdity when extended to humans. And because I don't draw special consideration for the sake of simply being human because that also entails absurdity due to the arbitrary nature of categorization, simply being human has no weight to my decision. So when I consider that my participating in the continual suffering of animals is simply for taste pleasure or items that contain animal products that have alternatives that I can easily do without, I don't see it as valid to continue participating in the unnecessary suffering of other sentient beings that have the capacity for a subjective experience.

It really only took viewing one debate on the topic to change my view on it because of the recognition of all of the blatant contradictions associated with it. I'm honestly not the type to even care for animals nor do I care for pets, I simply made the move because the hypocrisy was associated with a great moral failing on my part, and because I value truth and reason.

 

[spliz]

To keep it as simple as possible, because I don't like typing, the reasons for why I extend consideration to other humans and seek to improve overall well-being is because of their ability to suffer, which in the end is based on their sentience, their ability to have a subjective experience. So when confronted with my reasons for not extending the same consideration to animals, I am met with contradiction, because I can not identify a trait that justifies the exploitation of animals that doesn't entail absurdity when extended to humans. And because I don't draw special consideration for the sake of simply being human because that also entails absurdity due to the arbitrary nature of categorization, simply being human has no weight to my decision. So when I consider that my participating in the continual suffering of animals is simply for taste pleasure or items that contain animal products that have alternatives that I can easily do without, I don't see it as valid to continue participating in the unnecessary suffering of other sentient beings that have the capacity for a subjective experience.

It really only took viewing one debate on the topic to change my view on it because of the recognition of all of the blatant contradictions associated with it. I'm honestly not the type to even care for animals nor do I care for pets, I simply made the move because the hypocrisy was associated with a great moral failing on my part, and because I value truth and reason.

What do u feel about the circle of life? Or wearing leather etc etc? I’ve had so many back n forth in my mental about certain things regarding this. For instance. I have cats. They HAVE to eat meat or they will die. We wouldn’t have survived the world as humans without things such as leather and suede. If I lived in Siberia. This wouldn’t even be a debate. Then I began to feel like this is a 1st world debate and problem. Because plenty people don’t have the luxury to have it.

 

[PaperEnterprise]

Money and friends

 

[Marci-Senpai]

I use to have women on pedestals and shyt but now? I catch sense MOH

 

[Take It In Blood]

Grew up a backpacker who lived and breathed hip-hop


Can't stand modern hip-hop today (autotune melodies, generic drill beats, no artistry in their rhymes) and the only new rap album I listened to this year was Nas's Magic


Used to be a Christian who accepted everything in the Bible as true

Learned more about the world, science and theology as I got older and now I'm no longer a Christian


Used to consider myself far left on the political spectrum back in the day

Realized the left eats itself and is only really concerned with canceling and exposing ppl while standing on soapboxes instead of actually being progressive creating change. Now I'm a moderate whose just left leaning

Used to be an angry millitant who hated white people, blamed them for everything wrong with society and wouldn't even date white women


Realized that being overly emotional isn't healthy for the body (strokes, high blood pressure) and that the government is responsible for 400 years of slavery and not some average white person on the street. Plus pawgs are phenomenal

 

[Reflected]

(1.) What do u feel about the circle of life? (2.)Or wearing leather etc etc? (3.)I’ve had so many back n forth in my mental about certain things regarding this. For instance. I have cats. They HAVE to eat meat or they will die. (Technically 3) We wouldn’t have survived the world as humans without things such as leather and suede. (Also 3) If I lived in Siberia. This wouldn’t even be a debate. (Also 3)Then I began to feel like this is a 1st world debate and problem. Because plenty people don’t have the luxury.

So I'm going to number your points for reference.

I'm a bit pressed for time, so there might be some time before my next reply following this comment:

1. I don't care for the "circle of life" it's just an appeal to nature fallacy, it's fallacious reasoning (Appeal to Nature)

2. Wearing leather is unnecessary for me, so I don't partake in purchasing of it because of the connection to animal suffering.

3. This is very important. Veganism as taken in the formal sense, aka the philosophical sense, pertains to the "UNNECESSARY harm of animals". If it is a necessity, then most philosophical vegans won't have problem, I can't answer for every vegan though. That's why I lumped so many of your points into 3, because they fall under the unnecessary part distinction, I don't know how to feed cats but if they can't live without meat, then it's a necessity and doesn't pertain to veganism. Regarding the survival thing, if it's necessary for you to survive as meat is your only available option, then it doesn't pertain to veganism. And this is definitely not a first world problem, I wouldn't even use that argument tbh, in fact the regions in which plant based eating is most prominent are countries that are underdeveloped (India, Brazil). And if we wanted to make the case for first world/third world, doing away with the animal agricultural industry and replacing it with plant based options both horizontally and vertically, we could easily start working to resolve famine and hunger issues while ending unnecessary animal harm in the process, a significant net good. There are studies on that if you care to look into it.

But if they don't have the "luxury" of plant based options, it doesn't pertain to veganism as it is a necessity for living.

 

[spliz]

So I'm going to number your points for reference.

I'm a bit pressed for time, so there might be some time before my next reply following this comment:

1. I don't care for the "circle of life" it's just an appeal to nature fallacy, it's fallacious reasoning (Appeal to Nature)

2. Wearing leather is unnecessary for me, so I don't partake in purchasing of it because of the connection to animal suffering.

3. This is very important. Veganism as taken in the formal sense, aka the philosophical sense, pertains to the "UNNECESSARY harm of animals". If it is a necessity, then most philosophical vegans won't have problem, I can't answer for every vegan though. That's why I lumped so many of your points into 3, because they fall under the unnecessary part distinction, I don't know how to feed cats but if they can't live without meat, then it's a necessity and doesn't pertain to veganism. Regarding the survival thing, if it's necessary for you to survive as meat is your only available option, then it doesn't pertain to veganism. And this is definitely not a first world problem, I wouldn't even use that argument tbh, in fact the regions in which plant based eating is most prominent are countries that are underdeveloped (India, Brazil). And if we wanted to make the case for first world/third world, doing away with the animal agricultural industry and replacing it with plant based options both horizontally and vertically, we could easily start working to resolve famine and hunger issues while ending unnecessary animal harm in the process, a significant net good. There are studies on that if you care to look into it.

But if they don't have the "luxury" of plant based options, it doesn't pertain to veganism as it is a necessity for living.

The circle of life is real. Which is why things move the way they move in nature. Leather is a byproduct. For instance. Back to the cats. Or pets in general. How many people own cats and dogs in this country? Both need meat to survive healthily. Which means animals need to be used just to feed them. Same way they are used to feed us. Leather is a byproduct. Meaning it uses what’s leftover anyway. Nothing is killed to create leather. In fact that’s an illegal practice. Like I said before. I feel like the philosophy of Veganism is more of a 1st world issue. Also. With veganism even as a human I have to rely on different means just to get everything I need in my body to stay healthy. Which is why so many vegans end up reverting back because of health issues. What I’m saying is. This isn’t clear cut. There’s valid arguments for and against it.