Please don't post flamebait to Hacker News. The last thing we need is an argument about "equating chicken lives and human lives". Not to mention cannibalism.

I wasn't equating them, I was just saying that they are both lives. The headline mentions "lives" and then only one form of life. I was doing a picky critique of the headline, not debating the business.

Are you kidding? Given the opportunity, chickens eat lots of bugs. Wouldn't surprise me if some shady bug collective provided the seed money for these guys.

the real loss here is that we have government which spends billions to incarcerate people and little to support them when out. worse it puts up barriers to any chance of success with an over abundance of occupational license requirements that specifically exclude those who have been jailed. top it off with scarlet letter treatment for some offenses and many of these people have no opportunity to turn their lives around. Hell you cannot be a dog catcher is the majority of this country if you have a conviction.

Charitable organizations, family, and private businesses are the few chances they have. We should support all of them and work to get the government out of the way where possible. A felon/former addict/etc stands a much better chance of moving to better jobs if they can land any job and hold it a few months.

Yeah, I wasn't criticizing the business, just the headline.

I find it pretty disturbing that you equate chicken lives and human lives.

Are you trying you imply chicken lives are as valuable as human lives? You are failing at doing so, if that is the case. What you are actually doing is saying human lives are as valuable as chicken lives, i.e., not very valuable.

And that's quite disturbing. The value of human life is the cornerstone of human civilization, take that away, as you are trying to do, and you have only devastation left.

> Are you trying you imply chicken lives are as valuable as human lives? You are failing at doing so, if that is the case. What you are actually doing is saying human lives are as valuable as chicken lives, i.e., not very valuable.

Your argument doesn't prove your point.

FTR, I eat meat and I yet think that chicken lives are as valuable as human. I choose to eat them nonetheless.

This comment would suggest you would be equally OK with eating a human. Is that the case?

No. The sad thing of life is that I think all lives have the same value but it doesn't prevent me from eating chicken.

It's not what I do to a thing that express the value I put in it, it's what I think of it.

However, my cultural upbringing (and eating habits) favors eating chicken over dead humans. This is conditioning. And an easy position to maintain, I am aware of it but I won't pretend chicken lives have less value than human lives because I eat chicken.

It sounds like he is merely paying lip service and doublespeak to ethics, rather than actuakly behaving as if he feels their lives are equal.

Put a chicken and a human in front of him. Tell him he has to slaughter whichever one he wants for dinner.

His real preference will be exposed. I would rather starve.

You changed the proposition from `eating chicken` to `killing chicken`.

As if these propositions aren't directly linked.

Ok, imagine theres a plate of cooked chicken breast next to a plate of grilled human forearm.

Suddenly, you would say, "yes these two pieces of meat are both equally delicious!"

> Suddenly, you would say, "yes these two pieces of meat are both equally delicious!"

What ? I don't put values on things based on how they taste.

That's why I'd pick up the breast chicken. I still think the chicken lives matter as much as human. I am sad we are causing them unnecessary sufferings (most of the time) but I am still going to eat them over a humane forearm (unless I am trapped in the Andes after a plane crash or something).

In a purely ethical world, the correct answer is to eat neither the chicken breast nor the human forearm if you value both lives equally and believe that neither organism should ever been slaughtered and eaten.

I don't live in a purely ethical world.

I insist: I value both lives and yet I eat chicken. Deal with it.

For the record:

Parent puts A and B on the same point of his value™ scale (his scale, his choice)[0].

But you put A on top of your scale and B a little lower (your scale, your choice).

But now you are saying that since parent equals A and B it means parent equals his A to your lower B ? That's where your argument is weak. It's your scale, not parent's.

[0] I assume it's near the top but the demonstration works the same if it's on the bottom.

The actual value. Not the relative comparison.

He thinks he is raising chickens to the level of humans, but his actions would actually lower humans to the level of chickens.

How do you know I am "he"? But anyway, I neither raised chickens to the level of humans nor thought I was doing so.

And my "actions"? What actions? I literally don't know what you are saying. I didn't take any actions or describe any.

The pure quantity of lives built here is negative. I wasn't making a judgment about the quality or significance of the lives. If there has to be a conflict (I don't think that's inevitable), I support the human lives over chicken ones. I'm just not so dense that I completely disregard the notion of chicken lives (as the headline does, not that the business is doing that).

>I find it pretty disturbing that you equate chicken lives and human lives.

I've met people that said all people should commit suicide to save the planet, and they were serious, but also hypocrites.

I recently met someone who gave up meat but was planning to eat some again only if she killed the animal herself.

I haven't given it enough thoughts yet but it seems closer to a guilty trip than a concern for the environment or animal suffering.

> was planning to eat some again only if she killed the animal.

Or if the animal fell out of the sky. (2 points for being old enough to know the reference).

I didn't equate chicken and human lives.

Yeah, obviously my comment fails to imply that since it wasn't trying to.

Before submitting comments you really should stop and ask ... "Is this HN worthy?"

No, it is not.