Deplorable Yankee
Diamond Member
Oct262022
According to leftists, the carbon dioxide that plants require to live is bad.
Progressive social engineers don’t want us to have children because they regard human reproduction as environmental vandalism. Why would they let us have dogs and cats? But at least the weather won’t mind if we keep a pet rat, at least for now. I’m going to name mine “Al Gore.”
On a tip from Varla.
All links are highlighted
Usmb should really add an EnvironMentally Ill category to the forums
What a good boy
Cats and Dogs as Climate Crimes
Bad news for our beloved canine and feline companions. They have no place in the plans our liberal overlords have for our lives. First Bloomberg told us that we need to adjust to the inflation caused by Democrats’ grotesquely extravagant wasteful spending by denying our pets veterinary care. Now CNN suggests that even the healthy ones ought to be sacrificed to the climate:It doesn’t matter that pet food consists largely of byproducts of human food production, because that too must be limited in favor of eating insects.Their meat-heavy diet is the biggest contributor to their carbon pawprints, which requires an abundance of energy, land and water to produce. And the production of pet food emits huge amounts of planet-warming gases.
According to leftists, the carbon dioxide that plants require to live is bad.
The want us to eat bugs because meat is also bad.According to a 2017 study, feeding dogs and cats creates the equivalent of around 64 million tons of carbon dioxide in the US each year.
CNN admits pets do a lot for us:And, if our furry friends formed a separate country, it would rank 5th in global meat consumption behind China, the US, Brazil and Russia, according to UCLA professor and author of that study Gregory Okin.
You can mitigate the climate crime of pet ownership by withholding meat, making them eat insect-based pet foods, buying recyclable toys and leashes, forsaking effective clay cat litter for inferior products made out of old newspapers, flushing pet poop down the toilet, not buying anything for your pet that isn’t necessary so as not to indulge in environmentally offensive consumerism, and trading in your large dog for smaller model. But in the end, the existence of higher animals is never going to fit into the liberal agenda.Having a pet in the family is associated with lower stress, fewer heart attacks, lower rates of depression and increased self-esteem.
Even if you are able to love rodents and reptiles, they won’t love you back. But the climate will love you — or at least, it won’t hate you as much.“Small rodents and birds are great options,” Okin said. “Snakes, turtles and reptiles can have a really low impact, too, for those that are into it.”
Progressive social engineers don’t want us to have children because they regard human reproduction as environmental vandalism. Why would they let us have dogs and cats? But at least the weather won’t mind if we keep a pet rat, at least for now. I’m going to name mine “Al Gore.”
On a tip from Varla.
All links are highlighted
Usmb should really add an EnvironMentally Ill category to the forums
What a good boy