For information regarding veganism health (e.g. nutrients etc), see www.vegan.org.nz.
[Veganism] Fucking humanity
Forum Index > Closed |
Tony Campolo
New Zealand364 Posts
For information regarding veganism health (e.g. nutrients etc), see www.vegan.org.nz. | ||
Kakera
United States419 Posts
| ||
FrostyTreats
United States355 Posts
| ||
tok
United States691 Posts
| ||
babyface
United States40 Posts
| ||
Herper
501 Posts
| ||
Disquiet
Australia628 Posts
| ||
Loser777
1931 Posts
| ||
TwoToneTerran
United States8841 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:17 Disquiet wrote: Well I'm happy you to be a vegan, the more the merrier, drives down meat prices for me. That's actually the opposite of how it works. ![]() | ||
Zealotdriver
United States1557 Posts
| ||
Megaliskuu
United States5123 Posts
| ||
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:19 TwoToneTerran wrote: That's actually the opposite of how it works. ![]() changing tastes and preferences shifts the demand curve entirely, you're thinking of movement on the demand curve due to changing prices. | ||
darklordjac
Canada2231 Posts
| ||
VorcePA
United States1102 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:20 Megaliskuu wrote: Yummy! Yeah. I could go for a steak right now. :D + Show Spoiler + Since our bodies are designed to eat meat, I actually think veganism for "ethical" reasons is a bit laughable. We're at the top of the food chain. All other creatures are on this planet because we allow them to be, either for our benefit (meat + dairy), or because we have no way or desire to gut the land they live on for our own purposes | ||
vOdToasT
Sweden2870 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + Hehe | ||
Firereaver
India1701 Posts
I hate this cruelty porn tactic that people use to emotionally trap. So you'd have no problem in eating non-veg if the animals weren't brutally killed and slaughtered more ethically! This has zero to do with veganism and everything to do with improper food laws. And please don't even start that "if there was no demand then wud not be any need for___" stuff. Man, some of you just have to realise that there are bigger issues than what we eat thats wrong with todays world. + Show Spoiler + P.S: Anyway, I appreciate you taking an effort and making a stand for something you feel strongly about, as THAT is definitely an admirable quality. GG GL! On February 09 2011 13:20 jalstar wrote: changing tastes and preferences shifts the demand curve entirely, you're thinking of movement on the demand curve due to changing prices. Shifting the demand curve cannot be predicted as accurately as short term movements on a supply-demand curve can... In the long term, maybe... | ||
Disquiet
Australia628 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:19 TwoToneTerran wrote: That's actually the opposite of how it works. ![]() What do you mean, vegetarians make meat more expensive? I don't understand, surely less demand for meat = good, with the emerging middle class in China and India now demanding meat instead of basic staples, meat prices are set to soar in the coming decades. If some westerners want to stop eating meat because it offends their sensibilities it might be a good thing. | ||
Tdelamay
Canada548 Posts
| ||
Disquiet
Australia628 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:24 Tdelamay wrote: Take in mind that they take the worst example possible and that some of the things they generalize are not true to all farms. Also, killing by CO2 is not excruciatingly painful, it is quite the opposite. Indeed its like falling asleep in a stuffy room only you never wake up. | ||
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
And I don't eat meat or poultry often because it's too expensive to get stuff that isn't processed garbage, so if anything I'm closer to vegetarian than carnivore. | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
Okay I know its not Martin Sheen but its a sound alike for sure. Go vege! Here's an even better video that had a big impact on me going vegetarian 2 years ago. ![]() | ||
Kyhol
Canada2574 Posts
Organisms need to die for us to be able to live, no matter how graphic, this is reality. I hope that no one gets too emotionally attached watching videos like this, it will only cause needless pain. If you don't want this to happen then tough luck, but if you want to do something about it then become a vegan. I don't see this being much different then any animal being brutally murdered in the wild. Any organism that exists needs to consume, as heartbreaking as it is we're all indirectly/directly involved. Edit: Yeah I do agree that they are all being treated really badly, they deserve better lives before we kill them. I'd rather eat a happy cow then a sad cow. ![]() | ||
HotKimchi
United States64 Posts
| ||
Firereaver
India1701 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:22 Disquiet wrote: What do you mean, vegetarians make meat more expensive? I don't understand, surely less demand for meat = good, with the emerging middle class in China and India now demanding meat instead of basic staples, meat prices are set to soar in the coming decades. If some westerners want to stop eating meat because it offends their sensibilities it might be a good thing. Lol. If you wanted to sell 100 pieces of meat to 100 people to make 100 dollars itd be 1$/piece... Now if you wanted to make the same profit with just 10 people each piece would be 10$/piece. Thats how it works over the short term... Over the long term though,Supply and difficulty in easy profit will fix the price at approx higher than the starting price. But that can never be predicted with absolute certainty. So, in your best short-term interest, you shud hope that Non-vegetarians increase in number as long as supply can cope. | ||
Haemonculus
United States6980 Posts
That being said, I fucking adore a good steak, and just like the 30,000 children who starve to death on a daily basis, I don't have to see the animals killed first hand. So I live in my little blissful world of ignorance where I buy steaks at the super market, and ignore what happens to the cow. One of the best arguments for lowering our meat intake is that the food that feeds that cow could feed something like 7 times the people if we just ate the plants. A lot of energy is lost in converting that plant matter into meat. | ||
roadrunner_sc
United States1220 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:19 Zealotdriver wrote: Lulz, failure by the OP to exercise simple logic. It may shock you to learn this, but refusing to eat animal products does not stop cruelty to animals. Where did he say veganism = end to animal cruelty? Seriously, where does he say that? What if, by some infinitesimal chance, someone so lacking in logic could be suggesting a simple way NOT TO TAKE PART IN ANIMAL CRUELTY? Could it possibly be? Why certainly not, if you say so. | ||
thehitman
1105 Posts
Since time people have killed animals to feed and other animals kill other animals to feed, its just the way it is. And there are so many people on this planet that you can't just go in the wild and kill 1000 pigs to feed a small city (30.000 population), so we have to raise them in a farm and then kill them. Its a bit brutal, but what options do we have? - Be vegan and be unhealthy, be vegetarian and forbit yourself the pleasures of eating meat or starve to death. I'm more concerned about people killing wild animals for fur and ivory(equals money) rather than us raising animals to feed ourselves. I'm more worried about all the trees we are cutting down and how many animals that kills, rather than raising animals to feed ourselves. | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:25 jalstar wrote: I drive through fields of cows all the time in SoCal so I refuse to believe that all cows are locked up inside in tiny pens. And I don't eat meat or poultry often because it's too expensive to get stuff that isn't processed garbage, so if anything I'm closer to vegetarian than carnivore. That makes no sense. Closer to a vegetarian? Its not like being a vegetarian makes you a better human being: ascends you to a higher plane or something. Being a vegetarian just means that less animals die in the grand scheme. Being "more a vegetarian than a carnivore" doesn't mean shit. You're an omnivore. Being a carnivore doesn't make you lawful evil or any shit like that, and vegetarians aren't neutral good or anything. Your comment pisses me off. | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:33 thehitman wrote: Its been scientifically proven numerous times (just google it) that humans need meat. If you don't consume any meat and not to mention even animal products(vegans) you are going to have some health problems since you are not in taking all the nutrients your body needs. Since time people have killed animals to feed and other animals kill other animals to feed, its just the way it is. And there are so many people on this planet that you can't just go in the wild and kill 1000 pigs to feed a small city (30.000 population), so we have to raise them in a farm and then kill them. Its a bit brutal, but what options do we have? - Be vegan and be unhealthy, be vegetarian and forbit yourself the pleasures of eating meat or starve to death. I'm more concerned about people killing wild animals for fur and ivory(equals money) rather than us raising animals to feed ourselves. I'm more worried about all the trees we are cutting down and how many animals that kills, rather than raising animals to feed ourselves. I'm not going to research your argument. That makes no sense within the scheme of a debate. Why should I work to prove you right? If you want to make a point (that's fundamentally wrong in the first place), at least attempt support it. I've not heard of a single study that "proves" that human beings need meat". Every nutrient, vitamin, fat, and protein that is found in livestock can be found in plants. Prove me wrong? | ||
sikyon
Canada1045 Posts
I would kill a hundred thousand cows to save 1 human life, but farming a hundred thousand cows kills many people around the world, if only from starvation. | ||
DONTPANIC
United States340 Posts
| ||
Brad
2754 Posts
| ||
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:31 Firereaver wrote: Lol. If you wanted to sell 100 pieces of meat to 100 people to make 100 dollars itd be 1$/piece... Now if you wanted to make the same profit with just 10 people each piece would be 10$/piece. Thats how it works over the short term... Over the long term though,Supply and difficulty in easy profit will fix the price at approx higher than the starting price. But that can never be predicted with absolute certainty. So, in your best short-term interest, you shud hope that Non-vegetarians increase in number as long as supply can cope. That's not how economics works at all, you'd be lucky to get even one of those people to buy meat for 10 times the price. (depends on demand elasticity of course) The price goes down in the long run. If I remember my econ class right, the industry shrinks from supplying less, and is able to produce more efficiently for less cost, and thus it becomes optimal to charge less. | ||
orgolove
Vatican City State1650 Posts
| ||
acker
United States2958 Posts
Plus they do drive the price of meat down, assuming perfect competition. A decrease in demand leads to a reduction in quantity and price to meet the new equilibrium. Which means that they do lower the amount of meat on the market, but make the meat cheaper for non-vegans. So it's a win-win situation. | ||
Babaganoush
United States626 Posts
Edit: And do you know that vegetarians will not have an effect on the meat prices? Especially good ol meat-lovin' America? The only effect I can find vegetarians causing is more ethical treatment of animals grown for food. ...Which I'm afraid will be very, very minimal with lobbyists. | ||
radialis
726 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:21 vOdToasT wrote: I'm a vegetarian, pushin' up the prices for you guys. Problem, meat eaters? Where the hell did you get the idea that vegetarians push up the prices on meat? | ||
blitzkrieger
United States512 Posts
User was temp banned for this post. | ||
Disquiet
Australia628 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:31 Firereaver wrote: Lol. If you wanted to sell 100 pieces of meat to 100 people to make 100 dollars itd be 1$/piece... Now if you wanted to make the same profit with just 10 people each piece would be 10$/piece. Thats how it works over the short term... Over the long term though,Supply and difficulty in easy profit will fix the price at approx higher than the starting price. But that can never be predicted with absolute certainty. So, in your best short-term interest, you shud hope that Non-vegetarians increase in number as long as supply can cope. But the meat market is not a monopoly. | ||
Cirn9
1117 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
This just in... Documentary about Animal Rights to shift eating habits of the population is using shock-valued footage and exaggeratory deep and profound narration to sway its curious and easily provoked viewers. Shocking news, I know! If you need a reason to be a vegetarian, you follow and believe that reasoning! But you can stop trying to sway me about something I'm already aware of. Does that makes me ignorant? I tend to shrug and say no, but thankfully an opinion of me is equal to any other opinion: it doesn't matter. I'm still going to eat meat and enjoy it medium-rare, thanks. As for my views of this sort of treatment, I reserve it. Just like I reserve my views about many other sensitive topics. | ||
Blyadischa
419 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:33 Lexpar wrote: That makes no sense. Closer to a vegetarian? Its not like being a vegetarian makes you a better human being: ascends you to a higher plane or something. Being a vegetarian just means that less animals die in the grand scheme. Being "more a vegetarian than a carnivore" doesn't mean shit. You're an omnivore. Being a carnivore doesn't make you lawful evil or any shit like that, and vegetarians aren't neutral good or anything. Your comment pisses me off. Being a vegetarian doesn't mean less animals die in the grand scheme of things. | ||
Firereaver
India1701 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:33 roadrunner_sc wrote: Where did he say veganism = end to animal cruelty? Seriously, where does he say that? What if, by some infinitesimal chance, someone so lacking in logic could be suggesting a simple way NOT TO TAKE PART IN ANIMAL CRUELTY? Could it possibly be? Why certainly not, if you say so. Sigh... "Not taking part in animal cruelty"... Between you going out to the department store and buying a steak or buying a can of baked beans, none of those acts has anything to do with animal cruelty. Infact I would argue that only when larger volumes of product is moved commercially, will the FDA(or other authorities) sit up and make more efforts to regulate any improper, unethical slaughterhouses and farms. So yeah! Being a vegan unintentionally does your part to ensure that the system remains as it is... Zzzz. Actually my point is that buying a steak from a restaurant or store in no way indemnifies as someone who is cruel to animals. All this is ofc under the premise that you find:- eating of animals=Not cruel Unnecessary torture to save money=cruel ...which is my personal basic premise. ![]() | ||
Rhythm.102
United States56 Posts
No one is shoving meat down your throat... No one wants to hear someone else complain about it. You have your reasons for eating what you choose to eat... Would an animal lover have any reason to be offended at vegetarians? Aren't they eating only foods that the mass population of animals need to survive? I know if i was a deer i would be pretty pissed that your eating all my carrots and corn... | ||
SecondChance
Australia603 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:30 HotKimchi wrote: Think about the fruits and veggies. They have rights to. Here is my video to show you what kind of agony our poor organics go through. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5mInR21lAA Shits real: ![]() | ||
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
To each their own I suppose. But I say if you make the step to alter your habits to save animals, why not do it for your own species? | ||
McDonalds
Liechtenstein2244 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:15 tok wrote: I just watched the PETA episode of Penn and Teller's Bullshit. So my opinion is you're wrong. Just in case you're not kidding, that show was the most egregious form of misleading-the-viewer-and-pretending-it's-comedy television. They were so irresponsible that episodes are basically used as examples of propaganda in university classes now. | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:48 Blyadischa wrote: Being a vegetarian doesn't mean less animals die in the grand scheme of things. You're wrong. Supply and demand. Sure 1 person not buying meat might mean that there is no change in the amount of animals tortured and killed. But if 1% of the population doesn't buy meat? That's millions of animals being saved in a generation. 5% of the population could mean billions of animals that aren't raised solely to be tortured and killed. Do I have to explain to you that as a company meat producers will not make significantly more product than they can sell? It doesn't make business sense. It's wasted money. It puzzles me how you could blindly deny this logic. | ||
x-Catalyst
United States921 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:33 Lexpar wrote: That makes no sense. Closer to a vegetarian? Its not like being a vegetarian makes you a better human being: ascends you to a higher plane or something. Being a vegetarian just means that less animals die in the grand scheme. Being "more a vegetarian than a carnivore" doesn't mean shit. You're an omnivore. Being a carnivore doesn't make you lawful evil or any shit like that, and vegetarians aren't neutral good or anything. Your comment pisses me off. He didn't say anything about because being closer to vegetarian meant he was "above meat eaters". He CLEARLY stated that he's closer to a vegetarian diet because he can't afford quality meat. So I think your response is closer to a comprehension fail to an actual refute towards something that doesn't need refuting. Or unless I'm just not getting your point. And on a completely unrelated note: I've been vegan for 4 years, and no, I'm not with PETA, no I don't think I'm above everyone else, no I don't hate meat eaters, and no I don't push my life style on other people. These are common misconceptions that I deal with all the time, and I don't see where people get them from. I guess it's just pushy organizations that give other vegetarians/vegans a bad name. People chose what to eat for different reasons. Lifestyle, beliefs, religion, health, diets and whatnot. Just thought I should put that out there before people start flaming people for what they chose to eat. Not everyone is a pushy all-up-in-your-face asshole. | ||
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:52 Lexpar wrote: You're wrong. Supply and demand. Sure 1 person not buying meat might mean that there is no change in the amount of animals tortured and killed. But if 1% of the population doesn't buy meat? That's millions of animals being saved in a generation. 5% of the population could mean billions of animals that aren't raised solely to be tortured and killed. Do I have to explain to you that as a company meat producers will not make significantly more product than they can sell? It doesn't make business sense. It's wasted money. It puzzles me how you could blindly deny this logic. The pigs are alive and born way before the effect of any stand of vegetarianism is made. So if all of us stop eating meat and cause the meat market to plummet, a lot of pigs die either way, just that no one consumes them. In the long-run, it's a good idea, but with only a fraction eating meat, it just means pigs die, are not used and they don't produce as many pigs. The market doesn't shift its policies or values. | ||
acker
United States2958 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:50 Torte de Lini wrote: I always enjoy how people claim to be of something for the greater good or to show that they won't stand for XYZ, but when it comes to another aspect that involves human beings more (buying clothes made by child-laborers, low-wager countries like China or Taiwan) they don't change their habits. To each their own I suppose. But I say if you make the step to alter your habits to save animals, why not do it for your own species? No one can do everything, not even Bill Gates. And there are many more environmental problems associated with eating meat than there are associated with, say, eating broccoli*.** And environmental problems are human problems. Of course, there are ways to reduce or even mitigate environmental problems associated with meat-eating without going vegan. It's somewhat harder, sure, but it's definitely possible. *Even agribusiness-style broccoli. **This, of course, depends on the country. It's certainly true in America, but I'm not sure if it holds in, say, India or something. | ||
Jonoman92
United States9103 Posts
| ||
Yushike
United States44 Posts
In my opinion, vegans are dicks. | ||
Quasimoto3000
United States471 Posts
| ||
gosuRob
United States319 Posts
| ||
eshlow
United States5210 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:36 Lexpar wrote: I'm not going to research your argument. That makes no sense within the scheme of a debate. Why should I work to prove you right? If you want to make a point (that's fundamentally wrong in the first place), at least attempt support it. I've not heard of a single study that "proves" that human beings need meat". Every nutrient, vitamin, fat, and protein that is found in livestock can be found in plants. Prove me wrong? Well, it's up to you to prove it wrong because you're claiming that everything is in things when they aren't. Anyway, vegetarian/veganism is devoid of vitamin B12 / omega fatty acids are critical for metabolism and brain function/development. Vegetarian/vegan mother's literally are mentally retarding their kids by eating like that http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17729202 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11787236 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9028851 | ||
HotKimchi
United States64 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:57 Quasimoto3000 wrote: Vegetarian for 20 years now. Never been healthier in my life. More power to you man! Omnivore for 22 years now. Never been healthier in my life. More power to you man! | ||
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:55 acker wrote: No one can do everything, not even Bill Gates. And there are many more environmental problems associated with eating meat than there are associated with, say, eating broccoli*. And environmental problems are human problems. Of course, there are ways to reduce or even mitigate environmental problems associated with meat-eating. But it's more difficult. *Even agribusiness-style broccoli. Of course not, asking someone to do everything is insane (speaking of Bill Gates, you should his foundation he created, truly amazing!). What I'm saying is that if you're going to be passionate about rights of animals, why not be passionate about the rights of people, the very things/creatures you live, interact and cooperate with? Sure, animals are senselessly being killed. But why not change your eating habits to solely eating from Fair-Traded products? Or simply buying more expensive clothing made from well-paid employees? You're saving a lot of money by not eating meat, a good way to compensate that dose of extra funds by helping your own kind. In the end of everything, no matter how much good you do, the worse always strikes harder. I'm not saying to give up, but to consider what hits home more. | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:54 Torte de Lini wrote: The pigs are alive and born way before the effect of any stand of vegetarianism is made. So if all of us stop eating meat and cause the meat market to plummet, a lot of pigs die either way, just that no one consumes them. In the long-run, it's a good idea, but with only a fraction eating meat, it just means pigs die, are not used and they don't produce as many pigs. The market doesn't shift its policies or values. Can you expand on this? You're saying that the market takes so long to shift, that even if a significant portion of the population decided not to buy meat it would take so long for the market to adjust that it doesn't really matter pigs die anyway? I don't understand. If we can agree that killing animals is fundamentally a bad thing, and we kill X animals per day as a species, as long as X becomes a smaller number over time, we're doing a good thing. So 50% of the population stops eating meat NOW. Sure X animals will continue to die for weeks, months, but then of course companies will have to halve their production or else go out of business. A good thing is done. So what are you saying? The fact that X won't change for a month means being vegetarian isn't worth it? | ||
Karliath
United States2214 Posts
Okay fine, I do, but I'm not giving up my meat. > ![]() | ||
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:58 RobbybabyDTF wrote: Vegans, from what I've seen, are just attention whores(no offence). On par with the most flamboyant gay people to be honest.(no offence again.) I wish they would quit wasting their time preaching about this stuff. No offense, but that's fairly narrow-minded. Do you mean to tell me that activists and groups who feel strongly about certain evils are attention-seekers? How does that make any sense? | ||
mytent
United States156 Posts
[Humanity] Fucking Veganism. Seriously. There are HUMAN BEINGS being treated worse than this around the world in 3rd world countries. And you're worried about some cows? Fuck you. User was warned for this post | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:57 senichi wrote: Not gonna lie, that is inhumane and cruel, but not all meat producing plants do that. We're not herbivores, it's insanely unhealthy to go about not eating meat/dairy, and all those glorious foodstuffs. Not eating it is only harming yourself, which in turn not only makes yourself suffer (Isn't that what you're fighting against, suffering animals? Guess what, humans are animals, too) and when you suffer, it makes your friends and families suffer. Not eating meat isn't going to stop ANY of this at all. In fact, it's disrespectful to the animals themselves. Native Americans, you know those people known for how in tune they were to the planet and animals that walk upon it, they not only ate meat, but they wore leather, and they made weapons and tools made out of bones. Why did they do this? Because when an animal dies, they want to make sure that it doesn't die for no reason. If you stop eating animals, all that's going to happen is the meat that's produced has a higher chance of going bad, and the lives you're trying to protect are going to be wasted because you're too blind to see any of this. In my opinion, vegans are dicks. Ban me now. I don't want to browse this forum anymore. The fact that this much stupidity could be contained in such a small paragraph has caused me to lose all faith in this forum. | ||
Roe
Canada6002 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:58 HotKimchi wrote: Omnivore for 22 years now. Never been healthier in my life. More power to you man! Carnivore for 22 years now. I take about 3 hours in the bathroom on a better day. Life's great | ||
0mar
United States567 Posts
Secondly, eating meat is a very basic human behavior. Mankind evolved to eat meat. We have canines for tearing flesh and a relatively small digestive tract which can digest meat and flesh easily but struggles to digest tough, plant material. We cannot produce many amino acids or vitamins because of our reliance on obtaining them from animal food sources. Sure, in today's world you can supplement or import exotic plants for consumption, but for human beings living on the Serengeti, we relied on meat to meet our biochemical inadequacy. | ||
Slaughter
United States20254 Posts
| ||
hamy710
Australia160 Posts
| ||
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:59 Lexpar wrote: Can you expand on this? You're saying that the market takes so long to shift, that even if a significant portion of the population decided not to buy meat it would take so long for the market to adjust that it doesn't really matter pigs die anyway? I don't understand. If we can agree that killing animals is fundamentally a bad thing, and we kill X animals per day as a species, as long as X becomes a smaller number over time, we're doing a good thing. So 50% of the population stops eating meat NOW. Sure X animals will continue to die for weeks, months, but then of course companies will have to halve their production or else go out of business. A good thing is done. So what are you saying? The fact that X won't change for a month means being vegetarian isn't worth it? You are presuming so many things that reexplaining what I'm saying is daunting and almost too irritating to do so. Reread the post and try to refrain from making so many implications. There's only one Waldo to find my statements. | ||
BlindSC2
United Kingdom435 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:36 Lexpar wrote: I'm not going to research your argument. That makes no sense within the scheme of a debate. Why should I work to prove you right? If you want to make a point (that's fundamentally wrong in the first place), at least attempt support it. I've not heard of a single study that "proves" that human beings need meat". Every nutrient, vitamin, fat, and protein that is found in livestock can be found in plants. Prove me wrong? Thats the most moronic post Ive ever heard. You wont research his side of the argument since its 'obviously' wrong, then you demand that he proves you wrong. 'I've not heard of a single study that.....' THEN FUCKING RESEARCH FOR ONE YOU RETARD. Whether youre right or not atleast make yourself appear slightly better than an outright douche Jesus Now thats over, I enjoy meat and dairy but I always buy products where I know the animals have been treated well and have lived and been killed in a humane way. Not because I feel guilty or anything, just respect for another organism Humans on a mass scale need and want variety in their diet, including meat. Since humans are on the top of the food chain, largely due to our relative intelligence, we have the luxury of choosing our meat But we should also employ our intelligence and evolved ethics and philosophy to atleast show restraint and not go back to just being barbaric eaters in the wild but on a mass scale. We can have infinate and strangling political correctness to enforce 'respect' and 'tolerance' on a human society but we still just stab animals in the neck with a knife? Come on And yea I know humans seem to be split into various groups, namely the mentally backward and the mentally forward, but thats just how it is. Freak cases of individual animal cruelty like punching a calf isnt normal, the guy that did it should be in a mental hospital IMO | ||
FuDDx
![]()
United States5008 Posts
eat what you want ... I also work in a Vegan Kitchen (I hate the food love the pay) And most of our clients are people trying to loss weight by getting french fries, deep fried fake chicken nuggets and fake tuna melt. silly fools. | ||
Ridiculisk
Australia191 Posts
![]() | ||
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
You do realize that swaying one person of your views isn't going to change much and even then, I'm sure the video would do a better job and either hardening his views or shocking him to your logic. These topics always drag out aggressiveness. It's like religion all over again. | ||
GreEny K
Germany7312 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:19 TwoToneTerran wrote: That's actually the opposite of how it works. ![]() Supply and demand, the less people want something the cheaper it is... How is that the opposite? | ||
Render
United States249 Posts
| ||
stepover12
United States175 Posts
"Farm animals feel pain just like your puppy does"!?! Well duh! Pain is the main signal helping animals identify things that are not good for their survival. What's your point you silly video? Seriously, this video probably aims to evoke emotional reaction instead of rational reaction. That doesn't help viewers see the real problem. Unnecessarily violence and sadism is not good. I'm also concerned about the skin diseases, since it's not healthy to eat sick animals. | ||
HotKimchi
United States64 Posts
As she pounces on her prey and grasps along the neck to drag the beast down to the ground. She holds the throat of the animal bleeding and suffocating it to death. Sometimes when the animal is not dead the pack still eats the still breathing animals body causing it agonizing pain. The lions then leave the carcass that still has meat, bone, fat, hide and other usable products. Only some of which is picked clean by scavengers. The bones then deteriorate into the ground to fuel the earth with more elements. Fucking majestic and deep. Humans kill animals and use the meat, hide, bones, and fat in products to feed and clothe humans. The rest is either burned or dumped to return to the earth. Fucking monsters. See the point im trying to make here? | ||
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
| ||
Kakera
United States419 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:04 BlindGamer wrote: Thats the most moronic post Ive ever heard. You wont research his side of the argument since its 'obviously' wrong, then you demand that he proves you wrong. 'I've not heard of a single study that.....' THEN FUCKING RESEARCH FOR ONE YOU RETARD. Whether youre right or not atleast make yourself appear slightly better than an outright douche Jesus Sarcasm, you just don't get it. | ||
Ezekyle
Australia607 Posts
| ||
Frobert
Canada113 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:21 Firereaver wrote: Seriously....-_- I hate this cruelty porn tactic that people use to emotionally trap. So you'd have no problem in eating non-veg if the animals weren't brutally killed and slaughtered more ethically! Yes, I would have no problem with eating animals that were raised sustainably and treated properly. Humans are meant to eat meat. The problem for me is attitude that animals are a mass of cells to be expoited versus something to be respected, revered even, for being our food. And please don't even start that "if there was no demand then wud not be any need for___" stuff. Man, some of you just have to realise that there are bigger issues than what we eat thats wrong with todays world. . Most of the issues with todays world have an enormous impact on our food. Most of our food production has an enormous impact on the issues with todays world. Everyone eats, and therefore everyone contributes a hell of a lot to the problems we have. | ||
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:08 HotKimchi wrote: Let us look at the majestic lion. As she pounces on her prey and grasps along the neck to drag the beast down to the ground. She holds the throat of the animal bleeding and suffocating it to death. Sometimes when the animal is not dead the pack still eats the still breathing animals body causing it agonizing pain. The lions then leave the carcass that still has meat, bone, fat, hide and other usable products. Only some of which is picked clean by scavengers. The bones then deteriorate into the ground to fuel the earth with more elements. Fucking majestic and deep. Humans kill animals and use the meat, hide, bones, and fat in products to feed and clothe humans. The rest is either burned or dumped to return to the earth. Fucking monsters. See the point im trying to make here? Nice try. I, too, can beautifully illustrate the slaughtering of animals from a human's side. It was a cool and beautiful day. Father Donald awoke before even the sun could rise. As he steps outside, he notices his beautiful farm animals have taken a stroll onto his pasture. The irony of his breakfast resembling the very animals he hears cooing their preschooled-taught sounds is comedic, yet... poetic. Today is a day of death for these animals and perhaps they know this, but as they naively sip their water from that half-barrel, grab another handful of grass from the hills, they realize their life is simple and is for the greater good of their human-bearer. | ||
Slaughter
United States20254 Posts
| ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:58 eshlow wrote: Well, it's up to you to prove it wrong because you're claiming that everything is in things when they aren't. Anyway, vegetarian/veganism is devoid of vitamin B12 / omega fatty acids are critical for metabolism and brain function/development. Vegetarian/vegan mother's literally are mentally retarding their kids by eating like that http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17729202 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11787236 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9028851 Vegans can get B12 through fortified grains, soy products, and vitamin supplements. Flax seeds have a high concentration of omega fatty acids. The argument that "lots of vegans don't know how to eat a healthy diet" doesn't hold water. Lots of omnivores don't consume the vitamins they need, but no one could possibly argue that an omnivorous diet is unhealthy. It's a blanket statement to suggest that all vegans are missing out on the foods their body needs. I take seaweed derived omega fatty acid pills and a multivitamin daily. I eat 2 heaping tablespoons of flax seeds every day at breakfast. Vegans CAN get everything their body needs from their diet. Saying that lots don't dosen't mean much really. | ||
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:10 PrinceXizor wrote: Just so you guys know, anyone claiming i have health issues is wrong. I've never eaten meat in my life. and i'm healthier than most of my friends who do. Now i also don't go out an try to "convert" or anything. just let me eat my tofu in peace and don't wave a steak in front of me, it's not funny, you are just being insensitive and stupid. If you were allergic to peanuts i won't smear your body in peanut butter and roll you in chopped nuts. don't try to throw meat on me. it's gross. How do you know you're more healthy than your friends. How do you know the differences of your healths is due to one eating meat and the other not. I'm pretty sure allergy to peanuts is a physical insensitivity than the emotional-reaction of meat. Apples and Oranges, very, very bias view. | ||
snow2.0
Germany2073 Posts
The tasty ones are commonly ripped from their mothers wombs by homeless bums with scissorhands 2 weeks before birth to keep the flesh tender. ______ What? Seriously. Buy quality meat. You get what you pay, if it's steak at 5$/kg its probably not something you would wish to support. And most likely poisoned with medication that will affect your body. | ||
Kakera
United States419 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:13 Lexpar wrote: Vegans can get B12 through fortified grains, soy products, and vitamin supplements. Flax seeds have a high concentration of omega fatty acids. The argument that "lots of vegans don't know how to eat a healthy diet" doesn't hold water. Lots of omnivores don't consume the vitamins they need, but no one could possibly argue that an omnivorous diet is unhealthy. It's a blanket statement to suggest that all vegans are missing out on the foods their body needs. I take seaweed derived omega fatty acid pills and a multivitamin daily. I eat 2 heaping tablespoons of flax seeds every day at breakfast. Vegans CAN get everything their body needs from their diet. Saying that lots don't dosen't mean much really. I threw up in my mouth a little bit. Where are your eggs!!! precious precious egg omelet with ham chunks... *slobbers* | ||
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
Oh, by the way: I'm switching to Fruit. I just saw a carrot ripped from the ground from its very hairs ): | ||
Meta
United States6225 Posts
| ||
HotKimchi
United States64 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:12 Torte de Lini wrote: Nice try. I, too, can beautifully illustrate the slaughtering of animals from a human's side. It was a cool and beautiful day. Father Donald awoke before even the sun could rise. As he steps outside, he notices his beautiful farm animals have taken a stroll onto his pasture. The irony of his breakfast resembling the very animals he hears cooing their preschooled-taught sounds is comedic, yet... poetic. Today is a day of death for these animals and perhaps they know this, but as they naively sip their water from that half-barrel, grab another handful of grass from the hills, they realize their life is simple and is for the greater good of their human-bearer. Then little suzy ran outside and said "no daddy please!" Father Donald heard the sound through his cell phone, It was the market. Market: Donald you must kill the farm animals. So Donald got his shotgun and shooted at the animals. He then slipped on excrement and the animals were caught in the mud. He screamed "No I must kill the barn animal!" Suzy chimes in and says "no dad, you are the barn animal." Then Donald was sheep. | ||
LaSt)ChAnCe
United States2179 Posts
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=sponsor | ||
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:16 HotKimchi wrote: Then little suzy ran outside and said "no daddy please!" Father Donald heard the sound through his cell phone, It was the market. Market: Donald you must kill the farm animals. So Donald got his shotgun and shooted at the animals. He then slipped on excrement and the animals were caught in the mud. He screamed "No I must kill the barn animal!" Suzy chimes in and says "no dad, you are the barn animal." Then Donald was sheep. Who names their child Suzy? That story is so fake bro! It's shot by the way, but that's beside the point. Let's fix that. Little Suzie dashed outside in her overalls. She wished Daddy didn't have to kill the animals, but Father Donald taught her the ways of life and how we, people, must rely on animals to feed and fend for ourselves. A reminder of this was echoed from his cellular phone, it was the market urging for help from Farmer Donald: "Please, you and many farmers like you who are trying to make a living for many centuries, are our supplies to meat and the growth of our children! I'm sorry, but you must slaughter those animals to feed and clothe us and perpetuate the lopsidedness of capitalism!" Farmer Donald, despite how corporate-America has basically backslapped the agriculture sector (and thus perhaps why so many animals are so cruelly treated), did what was necessary. The methodology resulted in the same way, yet... the reasoning for those methods are ignored. Farmer Donald delivered the meat, but gets all the blame. | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:15 Kakera wrote: I threw up in my mouth a little bit. Where are your eggs!!! precious precious egg omelet with ham chunks... *slobbers* Well I take them in a fruit shake, so it's not so bad ![]() Flax seeds are actually super gross. I do: 1 cup soy milk 1/3 cup rasperies 1/3 cup blueberries 1/3 cup blackberries 1 banana 2 tsp flax seeds. Really important to brush teeth AFTER breakfast. :p | ||
HotKimchi
United States64 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:20 Torte de Lini wrote: Who names their child Suzy? That story is so fake bro! It's shot by the way, but that's beside the point. Let's fix that. Little Suzie dashed outside in her overalls. She wished Daddy didn't have to kill the animals, but Father Donald taught her the ways of life and how we, people, must rely on animals to feed and fend for ourselves. A reminder of this was echoed from his cellular phone, it was the market urging for help from Farmer Donald: "Please, you and many farmers like you who are trying to make a living for many centuries, are our supplies to meat and the growth of our children! I'm sorry, but you must slaughter those animals to feed and clothe us and perpetuate the lopsidedness of capitalism!" Farmer Donald, despite how corporate-America has basically backslapped the agriculture sector (and thus perhaps why so many animals are so cruelly treated), did what was necessary. The methodology resulted in the same way, yet... the reasoning for those methods are ignored. Farmer Donald delivered the meat, but gets all the blame. I think you totally missed the joke. | ||
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:14 Torte de Lini wrote: How do you know you're more healthy than your friends. How do you know the differences of your healths is due to one eating meat and the other not. I'm pretty sure allergy to peanuts is a physical insensitivity than the emotional-reaction of meat. Apples and Oranges, very, very bias view. I'm the proper weight for my height, i have the proper amount of body fat, i am as muscular. they tend to be slightly heavier or way lighter, have more fat as a %, and have much higher cholesterol. also people who don't eat something for a long period of time develop a negative physical response to it, humans aren't meant to drink milk, and if you go without it for a long period of time, your body stops producing the enzyme that is needed to digest it, and you become lactose intolerant. some whole cultures can't digest cows milk. But anyway, don't claim my view of live and let live don't harrass me about my lack of meat eating and i won't harrass you about eating it is very very bias'd and that it's wrong, because seriously it's the most moderate anyone can get on the damn issue. | ||
eshlow
United States5210 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:13 Lexpar wrote: Vegans can get B12 through fortified grains, soy products, and vitamin supplements. Flax seeds have a high concentration of omega fatty acids. The argument that "lots of vegans don't know how to eat a healthy diet" doesn't hold water. Lots of omnivores don't consume the vitamins they need, but no one could possibly argue that an omnivorous diet is unhealthy. It's a blanket statement to suggest that all vegans are missing out on the foods their body needs. I take seaweed derived omega fatty acid pills and a multivitamin daily. I eat 2 heaping tablespoons of flax seeds every day at breakfast. Vegans CAN get everything their body needs from their diet. Saying that lots don't dosen't mean much really. Ah yes, the old fortified/supplement argument. So if I was in the 1800s I could get all these fortified foods to get vitamin B12 without eating meat, yeah? Vegetarian/veganism were manufactured in the 1950s or whenever general mills started throwing vitamins and minerals into their garbage cereals. Before then everyone ate meat because it was necessary to eat meat to you know.. actually stay alive and not get anemia.. because meat is a great source of omegas and B12. Just because you can do it... and humans can do a lot of stuff... doesn't make it healthy. ----------------- This is neither here nor there though I would suggest reading "the vegetarian myth" as well. People are so set in their ways that they won't change even when presented with convincing arguments otherwise. Shrug. Good luck. | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:03 Torte de Lini wrote: You are presuming so many things that reexplaining what I'm saying is daunting and almost too irritating to do so. Reread the post and try to refrain from making so many implications. There's only one Waldo to find my statements. I don't mean to presume! I was trying to illustrate how I understand your post. All I meant was to show how I was interpreting it so you could point out whatever the flaw in my understanding was, because the way I understand your post makes no sense at all to me. | ||
Horst
338 Posts
Nature is inherently cruel. There's nothing that can be done about it. In the end, animals are going to have to die, so I can have my steak. Do the animals have to suffer beforehand? No, they don't. Give me an option to buy more humanely treated and killed animals, and I'll pay a little extra for it. But I'm not about to stop eating meat, something that the apex predators of this planet have done for millions of years. | ||
Yushike
United States44 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:02 Lexpar wrote: Ban me now. I don't want to browse this forum anymore. The fact that this much stupidity could be contained in such a small paragraph has caused me to lose all faith in this forum. I'm fine with that, reading your previous posts here, I don't agree with you either. All I've actually done in this neat little paragraph is sum up everything you've tried to argue against. Gee, I wonder if we have a point? | ||
Vorrenus
Afghanistan94 Posts
| ||
x-Catalyst
United States921 Posts
| ||
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:23 Horst wrote: Eh. I'm not overly saddened by this. People have done just as worse to each other throughout history. Nature is inherently cruel. There's nothing that can be done about it. In the end, animals are going to have to die, so I can have my steak. Do the animals have to suffer beforehand? No, they don't. Give me an option to buy more humanely treated and killed animals, and I'll pay a little extra for it. But I'm not about to stop eating meat, something that the apex predators of this planet have done for millions of years. then buy kosher or organic, both have standards on how you have to raise and treat the animal. | ||
x-Catalyst
United States921 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:24 Vorrenus wrote: God I hate vegans, they think they're so better then the rest of us just because they don't eat meat, they can eat tree bark and it wont change anything. Cruelty like this is no news and by "being vegan" you don't stop it. Refer to my post on page 3. | ||
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:22 PrinceXizor wrote: I'm the proper weight for my height, i have the proper amount of body fat, i am as muscular. they tend to be slightly heavier or way lighter, have more fat as a %, and have much higher cholesterol. also people who don't eat something for a long period of time develop a negative physical response to it, humans aren't meant to drink milk, and if you go without it for a long period of time, your body stops producing the enzyme that is needed to digest it, and you become lactose intolerant. some whole cultures can't digest cows milk. But anyway, don't claim my view of live and let live don't harrass me about my lack of meat eating and i won't harrass you about eating it is very very bias'd and that it's wrong, because seriously it's the most moderate anyone can get on the damn issue. Cool. You're apparently the average male which could be due to everything but the absence of meat and additionally, you never said a thing about the friends you compared yourself with... That's out the window. The negative response refute is almost irrelevant. If I shove peanuts to someone who is allergic and may potentially die from it, they will die. If I shove meat into you and you have no allergies or physical problem with it, but just don't like it because it's "insensitive" and "gross", then you can't compare the two or make an analogy. No one's harassing you and you can harass me about my eating habits. The morals of my eating habits is this: eat food that I like and keep my healthy and strong. I like meat, it gives me protein, I'll eat it. There are alternatives and I'll eat those too. | ||
Horst
338 Posts
Also, I tried to post my comment on that youtube video... its "pending approval". I have ZERO respect for ANY organization that would put a muzzle on free speech, just because it doesn't agree with their ideals. | ||
GreEny K
Germany7312 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:11 Tony Campolo wrote: One of my 'likes' on Facebook is Animal Rights. This video was posted this morning. Some of the footage is from previous documentaries (such as Earthlings and The Cove). As someone who has been actively involved in the animal rights community for the past three years, it still makes me throw up to see it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THIODWTqx5E&feature=player_embedded#at=688 For information regarding veganism health (e.g. nutrients etc), see www.vegan.org.nz. Btw, whats your point in posting this... I'm almost positive that everyone knows how animals are treated before we get to eat them. Sure it is horrible and cruel but the majority of people will not stop eating meat... Myself included. | ||
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:23 Lexpar wrote: I don't mean to presume! I was trying to illustrate how I understand your post. All I meant was to show how I was interpreting it so you could point out whatever the flaw in my understanding was, because the way I understand your post makes no sense at all to me. Your entire understand of my point is flawed, so I think I'm just going to wash my hands, yell "I give up" and let us go our separate ways ;P | ||
Jayve
155 Posts
Animal cruelty is the one and only topic of any importance god has ever given man on this planet. (I threw in god for the lulz) We need to make sure that NO ONE feeds the starving people around the world before they've learned what to eat and why. And just because something like killing and eating animals has been part of human culture for thousands of years, that doesn't mean it shouldn't stop. This is just like sex, another thing that we as humans have been doing for thousands of years, it needs to end NOW. I could make a topic and post some pr0n to convince you of how wrong it is to have sex by showing you how it's done, but I won't. [ end sarcasm ] In all seriousness though, anyone fighting for animal rights before all humans are on a "somewhat" equal footing needs to get their priorities straight. It goes like this: - Human Rights - Globalize eSports - World Peace - End World Hunger - Colonize Space and find our nearest Mass Relay Notice how Animal Rights is not even on the list. | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:22 eshlow wrote: Ah yes, the old fortified/supplement argument. So if I was in the 1800s I could get all these fortified foods to get vitamin B12 without eating meat, yeah? Vegetarian/veganism were manufactured in the 1950s or whenever general mills started throwing vitamins and minerals into their garbage cereals. Before then everyone ate meat because it was necessary to eat meat to you know.. actually stay alive and not get anemia.. because meat is a great source of omegas and B12. Just because you can do it... and humans can do a lot of stuff... doesn't make it healthy. ----------------- This is neither here nor there though I would suggest reading "the vegetarian myth" as well. People are so set in their ways that they won't change even when presented with convincing arguments otherwise. Shrug. Good luck. You're right! Technology has taken us to an age were we don't need to kill animals in order for ourselves to survive. The way I see it, why should I eat meat that I don't need and causes suffering? That's my logic though. I actually totally get your approach that we should eat the same things our ancestors ate, because we evolved in the direction of the things we ate. If that is what you're implying. I hear I presume a lot. I think that's a completely rational way to think. All I'm trying to argue in this thread is that I think in an equally rational way. Most (if not all, its been a lot now) of the comments I've responded to have been those trying to refute what I believe is firm logic. | ||
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:27 Horst wrote: Prince, I rarely buy actual meat in a grocery store.... being a college student, the VAST majority of things I buy are frozen, pre-prepared foods. I'm not sure how tyson prepares their chicken patties, but if they want to charge a little extra for humane treatment, i'll pay it. Also, I tried to post my comment on that youtube video... its "pending approval". I have ZERO respect for ANY organization that would put a muzzle on free speech, just because it doesn't agree with their ideals. Then look for kosher a few frozen food brands at target and wal mart ect have kosher on them somewhere, it's typically about 5 cents more expensive and usually also comes with a bit less calories too (for some reason, likely just prepared healthier). | ||
Kurr
Canada2338 Posts
Edit : To add a little content I guess... shock videos such as these and organizations such as PETA and other terrorist organizations (yes, you read that right) that try to stop things like animal research and think everyone could survive on their vegetarian diets sicken me and are one of the reasons that I'd never even consider being a vegetarian. There are even organizations that go one step further and oppose genetically modified crops (you know, because it's not like we can't feed the entire world right now and such progress would help humanity greatly...) as well beyond just trying to get people to stop eating animals. If you want to be a vegetarian to lose weight, fine. But don't say it's healthier (it isn't) than a balanced diet and don't try to shock people into following your ideology. Don't support the starvation of billions by opposing progress in agriculture (and if people stopped eating meat the problem would be 10 fold) and don't support a lower quality of life by opposing medical research that is crucial to advancements. | ||
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:32 Kurr wrote: I'll stick with my 90% meat diet thank you very much. Give tips! | ||
Ashera
Canada202 Posts
| ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
"vegans are dicks! why do they think they are so good? they can't change anything. i hate those guys" I would be fucking rich. It's sad that people shit on others who stand up for what they believe in. Some vegans are dicks. Some omnivores are dicks. Nobody in this thread who claims to be vegan has opened with an insult. | ||
MangoTango
United States3670 Posts
| ||
Ezekyle
Australia607 Posts
In all seriousness though, anyone fighting for animal rights before all humans are on a "somewhat" equal footing needs to get their priorities straight. It goes like this: - Human Rights - Globalize eSports - World Peace - End World Hunger - Colonize Space and find our nearest Mass Relay Notice how Animal Rights is not even on the list. Three things: 1. Why are these all mutually exclusive pursuits? Surely we can do more than one thing all at once. 2. Why are animals so unimportant? We didn't evolve to empathise with anyone other than each other, because omnivores that refuse to eat meat aren't going to survive for very long (unless they've reached the point humanity has, of course). So obviously it's difficult for most people to care if an animal is in pain and starving. But if you use logic rather than relying on base instincts and emotion, an animal is just as capable of suffering as a human, and there is little difference between an oppressed human and a caged cow. 3. Since when have human rights been even nearly as important as globalising Starcraft? :p | ||
leperphilliac
United States399 Posts
| ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
Anyways... To each their own, just don't shove your eating habits down each other's throats (haha), and let each live as they wish. Respect my decisions, I'll respect yours. Hell, if I actually knew a vegan/vegetarian I would even share meals with them. :p | ||
Shigy
United States346 Posts
i like the fruit/veggie video. ps. i love meat and laugh at vegetarians. but all you other carnivores, do you really have to ridicule vegans because they care about animals and eat granola? psps. supply and demand isn't as complicated as you clowns on page 1-2 are making it /lols | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
Alexhandr
United States218 Posts
![]() But if you don't like meat or meat products and don't wanna eat 'em, more power to you. But don't criticize and hate on meat eaters. | ||
decafchicken
United States20007 Posts
Till then, i'm still going to eat a shit ton of chicken, beef, eggs, and milk along with my fruits and veggies. Cheers! Basically i see no advantage to becoming a vegan, and certainly cant afford to support animal rights. | ||
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:35 Lexpar wrote:I would be fucking rich. It's sad that people shit on others who stand up for what they believe in. Some vegans are dicks. Some omnivores are dicks. Nobody in this thread who claims to be vegan has opened with an insult. To your standards no, but it's quite funny to see those fine folks claim that they have the moral high ground from behind their "made by a kid in third world country" monitor. It's hard to live without getting criticized by people who have to use shocking videos to get their point across even when the video doesn't completely represent any mainstream practices in that domain. That holier than thou BS is just getting old. If you think you're so much better because you don't eat meat, I suggest that you inspect every aspect of your life and you'll realize that much of your happiness comes from the suffering of someone or something else. Your cheap electronics don't pop from nowhere, for instance. Even vegans would have to severely alter their lifestyle to patch things up. | ||
speakerbox
Canada453 Posts
| ||
forgotten0ne
United States951 Posts
OP, how is it that you think women needed to be treated like nothing but your sex objects, but animals are to be treated with the utmost respect. Seriously man, you need to rethink life. | ||
Shrinky Dink
United States52 Posts
no. some of the methods are cruel, but you cant just say "oh, thats mean dont do that.." it is necessary that we feed the population of the world so we can survive...not everyone wants to eat tofu with some vitamin pills on the side. you dont go out to the lions that slaughter and eat the zebras and complain that it isnt right, do you? we are animals...we eat other animals. what do vegans not understand about that??? lol.. i can understand why vegans do it, and thats fine as long as thats what they feel is personally right, but what annoys me more than anything, is saying its WRONG to eat what we want. boo hoo, we kill some animals, but its in our dna! we have evolved to kill and eat the lesser animals on the food chain. even the title of this thread annoys me..shut up man its your opinion, dont say "fuck humanity" just because you think its wrong. the title should at least be changed.. =/ + Show Spoiler + going to cook up a steak w/ some eggs right now as well ^^ | ||
Kogu
Canada83 Posts
| ||
KingAce
United States471 Posts
I don't eat meat haven't for like 9 years now and even when I did it was just barely. It's a spiritual thing I guess. But for all you meat eaters you should seriously pay attention to what kind of meat you eat, whatever farmers do in attempts to mass produce those animals with chemicals or growth hormones etc; that stuff goes into your system. And you can't know for certain if those chemicals can give you cancer or other medical complications. I mean these days people are born with all kinds of allergies, some people aren't vegan by choice but by genetics. The advantage of vegetarianism according to the energy pyramid; herbivores get more energy than carnivores, because plants have the most amount of energy. | ||
Yushike
United States44 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:35 Lexpar wrote: Nobody in this thread who claims to be vegan has opened with an insult. Funny, you see what happened here? You tried to make a point, you had a thing going, but then this fiiiiinal sentence. BOOM. Point ruined. You were so close! | ||
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:47 forgotten0ne wrote: Sorry to take this off topic a bit, but I feel this has to be said... OP, how is it that you think women needed to be treated like nothing but your sex objects, but animals are to be treated with the utmost respect. Seriously man, you need to rethink life. Where are you getting this from? | ||
Geniuszerg
Canada454 Posts
| ||
mnesthes
5433 Posts
| ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:40 Shigy wrote: smug, psuedo-intellects come one come all, TL has a controversial topic to explore - this time with a graphic video! I can be more smug. I don't like to pull out the big guns, but: Albert Einstein, Nikola Tesla, Adolf Hitler, Mohandas Ghandi, and 3/4 of The Beatles were all vegetarians. So, the two greatest scientists, two of the worlds greatest leaders, and 3/4ths of the most popular/financially successful artistic venture of the 20th century are all vegetarians. Does it mean anything? Not really, but it's absurd logic of vegetarian=greatness seems to fit well within the logic of some of the posters here. | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:51 senichi wrote: Funny, you see what happened here? You tried to make a point, you had a thing going, but then this fiiiiinal sentence. BOOM. Point ruined. You were so close! It's an immature point to point out. But it's also true. Also, you've quoted 1/4 of the post. It takes it out of context. :/ | ||
Meta
United States6225 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:52 Lexpar wrote: I can be more smug. I don't like to pull out the big guns, but: Albert Einstein, Nikola Tesla, Adolf Hitler, Mohandas Ghandi, and 3/4 of The Beatles were all vegetarians. So, the two greatest scientists, two of the worlds greatest leaders, and 3/4ths of the most popular/financially successful artistic venture of the 20th century are all vegetarians. Does it mean anything? Not really. It's absurd logic of vegetarian=greatness seems to fit well within the logic of some of the posters here. For every great vegetarian you can name, I can name 10 great non-vegetarians. So, of course it doesn't mean anything. | ||
Shigy
United States346 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:51 KingAce wrote: If you could actually watch the whole video with a straight face, you very well should eat meat. I don't eat meat haven't for like 9 years now and even when I did it was just barely. It's a spiritual thing I guess. But for all you meat eaters you should seriously pay attention to what kind of meat you eat, whatever farmers do in attempts to mass produce those animals with chemicals or growth hormones etc; that stuff goes into your system. And you can't know for certain if those chemicals can give you cancer or other medical complications. I mean these days people are born with all kinds of allergies, some people aren't vegan by choice but by genetics. The advantage of vegetarianism according to the energy pyramid; herbivores get more energy than carnivores, because plants have the most amount of energy. i couldn't keep a straight face, but i don't think i can make the lifestyle change - or care to sacrifice taste in the name of animals. energy pyramid? link to said pyramid? sounds like some bullshit to me if they're teaching you that plants "have the most amount of energy" although i'm not even sure what you even mean by that. are you referring to energy like calories or something spiritual and beyond me? | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:55 Meta wrote: For every great vegetarian you can name, I can name 10 great non-vegetarians. So, of course it doesn't mean anything. Yeah but my guys were the great-est! :p It means nothing. I agree with you. And I forgot Abraham Lincoln the mutha-fucking emancipating mutha-fucka. | ||
Shigy
United States346 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:56 Lexpar wrote: Yeah but my guys were the great-est! :p It means nothing. I agree with you. they're by far the greatest, bro. i think you have me convinced. gonna go buy some celery | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:57 Shigy wrote: they're by far the greatest, bro. i think you have me convinced. gonna go buy some celery Cool. | ||
Prinny-tai
United States71 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:55 Shigy wrote: i couldn't keep a straight face, but i don't think i can make the lifestyle change - or care to sacrifice taste in the name of animals. energy pyramid? link to said pyramid? sounds like some bullshit to me if they're teaching you that plants "have the most amount of energy" although i'm not even sure what you even mean by that. are you referring to energy like calories or something spiritual and beyond me? It doesn't make much sense to me until i thought about. It's a Biology thing. Basically if you eat something that eats a plant you only get a fraction of the original energy of that plant. At the bottom are plants and other things that produce their own sugars and nutrients, above that are animals that eat plants, above that are animals that eat other animals, and finally are animals that eat dead ones. Some of the energy is lost between each step(used by the previous level).I have no idea how he's connecting that to vegetarianism though. (Vegetarian btw) | ||
TheGreatWhiteHope_
United States335 Posts
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=grill For every animal you don't eat I'll eat three! | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
| ||
Ezekyle
Australia607 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:52 Lexpar wrote: I can be more smug. I don't like to pull out the big guns, but: Albert Einstein, Nikola Tesla, Adolf Hitler, Mohandas Ghandi, and 3/4 of The Beatles were all vegetarians. So, the two greatest scientists, two of the worlds greatest leaders, and 3/4ths of the most popular/financially successful artistic venture of the 20th century are all vegetarians. Does it mean anything? Not really, but it's absurd logic of vegetarian=greatness seems to fit well within the logic of some of the posters here. Hitler wasn't actually vegetarian. Common myth. | ||
Assault_1
Canada1950 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:29 Jayve wrote: [ sarcrasm ] I totally agree with this video. The issue of animals being killed the wrong way or treated bad is WAY more important than human rights, fighting for health care, making sure everyone in the world is fed and world peace all put together. Animal cruelty is the one and only topic of any importance god has ever given man on this planet. (I threw in god for the lulz) We need to make sure that NO ONE feeds the starving people around the world before they've learned what to eat and why. And just because something like killing and eating animals has been part of human culture for thousands of years, that doesn't mean it shouldn't stop. This is just like sex, another thing that we as humans have been doing for thousands of years, it needs to end NOW. I could make a topic and post some pr0n to convince you of how wrong it is to have sex by showing you how it's done, but I won't. [ end sarcasm ] In all seriousness though, anyone fighting for animal rights before all humans are on a "somewhat" equal footing needs to get their priorities straight. It goes like this: - Human Rights - Globalize eSports - World Peace - End World Hunger - Colonize Space and find our nearest Mass Relay Notice how Animal Rights is not even on the list. wow listen to this kid.. | ||
HotKimchi
United States64 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:01 Skeny wrote: For those who seem to think that veganism/vegitarianism makes you unhealthy or weak, what about Carl Lewis. He's Probably the greatest olympian ever and he's a vegan. (He also credis part of his success to veganism). Yeah and Charles Manson was one of the craziest mother fuckers in the world. So does that mean being vegan drives you nuts? Not really. For that one vegan Olympian, there are many many more who eat both "balanced" | ||
Helios.Star
United States548 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:25 x-Catalyst wrote: And to everyone saying that vegetarians/vegans don't get enough nutrients/vitamins, sorry to say, but you're misinformed. Yes there are some vegs out there that don't eat properly and don't know what to eat to stay healthy. But if they did, they would be as well off as anyone else. When a had a blood test taken to make sure I was healthy, my nutritionist was very surprised with my results when I told her I was vegan. I was all up and great with everything I should have been. The only thing I was low on or actually didn't have, was cholesterol. That's was the only thing I lacked. Well its been proven that the human brain evolved the way it did because of the proteins/enzymes found in meat and fish, so I'm pretty sure those people claiming vegans dont have proper nutrition have a point. And if your nutritionist was surprised to learn you were a vegan, what does that say about most other vegans? | ||
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
| ||
Shigy
United States346 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:00 Prinny-tai wrote: It doesn't make much sense to me until i thought about. It's a Biology thing. Basically if you eat something that eats a plant you only get a fraction of the original energy of that plant. At the bottom are plants and other things that produce their own sugars and nutrients, above that are animals that eat plants, above that are animals that eat other animals, and finally are animals that eat dead ones. Some of the energy is lost between each step(used by the previous level).I have no idea how he's connecting that to vegetarianism though. (Vegetarian btw) i hate getting into semantics but he said that plants have the most energy? whatever that means. assuming he's referring to calories, it's still wildly inaccurate. yeah of course energy is lost in between each step, because animals tend to use it when they eat, sleep, fuck, and shit. but since animals eat so many god damn plants (and other animals) they store up fat (energy?!) so that they can live without food for more than a few days. now, because animals eat a bunch of other plants (and animals) they have this accumulation of fat/energy/calories. pound for pound, animals have "more energy than plants' the fuck am i even talking about? you guys are messed up lol | ||
Prinny-tai
United States71 Posts
| ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:04 HotKimchi wrote: Yeah and Charles Manson was one of the craziest mother fuckers in the world. So does that mean being vegan drives you nuts? Not really. For that one vegan Olympian, there are many many more who eat both "balanced" I'm just saying that if Carl Lewis can win 9 olympic golds on the track and be the greatest long jumper of all time, you can be vegan and healthy. | ||
Prinny-tai
United States71 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:05 Shigy wrote: i hate getting into semantics but he said that plants have the most energy? whatever that means. assuming he's referring to calories, it's still wildly inaccurate. yeah of course energy is lost in between each step, because animals tend to use it when they eat, sleep, fuck, and shit. but since animals eat so many god damn plants (and other animals) they store up fat (energy?!) so that they can live without food for more than a few days. now, because animals eat a bunch of other plants (and animals) they have this accumulation of fat/energy/calories. pound for pound, animals have "more energy than plants' the fuck am i even talking about? you guys are messed up lol Yeah I have no idea what he was going on about, kid probably took some freshman bio class or something | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:04 Helios.Star wrote: Well its been proven that the human brain evolved the way it did because of the proteins/enzymes found in meat and fish, so I'm pretty sure those people claiming vegans dont have proper nutrition have a point. And if your nutritionist was surprised to learn you were a vegan, what does that say about most other vegans? That they don't balance their diets properly even though you can be perfeclty healthy and be vegan? Much like how there are plenty of obese people who eat meat. | ||
Shigy
United States346 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:29 Jayve wrote: In all seriousness though, anyone fighting for animal rights before all humans are on a "somewhat" equal footing needs to get their priorities straight. It goes like this: - Human Rights - Globalize eSports - World Peace - End World Hunger - Colonize Space and find our nearest Mass Relay Notice how Animal Rights is not even on the list. colonize space. lolololololololol human rights over world hunger? so its more important that janet can have an abortion than mik mak bok du can have a bowl of rice for the weekend? | ||
AppleTart
United States1261 Posts
Regardless, I'm sure they picked the worst of the worst for this video and not all places are like this. I love meat and try to buy the higher quality meat where the animals are treated better. | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:02 Ezekyle wrote: Hitler wasn't actually vegetarian. Common myth. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler's_vegetarianism This is all I've ever read about it. It's not like I'm really trying to make a point. A lot of great people are vegetarians or vegans. Perhaps even a disproportionally large amount(although there is a lot of misinformation created by us vegetarians.) It doesn't really mean anything though. These great people became vegetarians after they became great in most cases. It's immature to reference, but its a lot less immature and backed up by more fact than a lot of the shitty arguments in this thread. | ||
Blasterion
China10272 Posts
imo It should be -Build/Rebuild Strong Economy -Diplomacy -Globalize eSports -Expand into Space -End World Hunger . . -Human Rights . . . . -Animal Rights | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:29 Jayve wrote: [ sarcrasm ] I totally agree with this video. The issue of animals being killed the wrong way or treated bad is WAY more important than human rights, fighting for health care, making sure everyone in the world is fed and world peace all put together. Animal cruelty is the one and only topic of any importance god has ever given man on this planet. (I threw in god for the lulz) We need to make sure that NO ONE feeds the starving people around the world before they've learned what to eat and why. And just because something like killing and eating animals has been part of human culture for thousands of years, that doesn't mean it shouldn't stop. This is just like sex, another thing that we as humans have been doing for thousands of years, it needs to end NOW. I could make a topic and post some pr0n to convince you of how wrong it is to have sex by showing you how it's done, but I won't. [ end sarcasm ] In all seriousness though, anyone fighting for animal rights before all humans are on a "somewhat" equal footing needs to get their priorities straight. It goes like this: - Human Rights - Globalize eSports - World Peace - End World Hunger - Colonize Space and find our nearest Mass Relay Notice how Animal Rights is not even on the list. I fail to see how these tasks interfere with us giving animals rights. Furthermore given the amount of resources needed to rase cattle compared to vegitarian equivalent products like lentils. If we didn't eat meat there would be more food available to the poor thus helping end world hunger. | ||
HotKimchi
United States64 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:08 Skeny wrote: I'm just saying that if Carl Lewis can win 9 olympic golds on the track and be the greatest long jumper of all time, you can be vegan and healthy. Oh no doubt man. I used to train people in jujitsu and judo. One of the better guys we had was a little spanish dude who was a vegetarian. Much respect to the guy, he had heart. But it isn't easy. You really have to keep an eye out to make sure you aren't getting any deficiencys. Listen between all my smart ass comments and the sweet doom fanfic rip off I respect vegetarians and vegans. However I do not respect propaganda that is based off of emotion to get me to not eat meat. | ||
Delathar
United States16 Posts
| ||
Prinny-tai
United States71 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:13 Delathar wrote: To be honest vegans/vegetarians dont understand the fact that if you do not have enough protein you cannot build muscle as in you will not gain muscle enough to lift 200-340 bls just based on the fact you don't have the protein your body needs to build that kind of muscle but on a lighter note i do not mind vegetarians that eat fish ect im cool with that but eating no meat at all is very bad for your body to gain the necesary muscle to work hard and gain muscle mass but those that say they are healthy from a doctors point of view let me point this out if a person that can lift 200 bls (to the guys because girls we are supposed to protect) tries to kill you/beat the crap out of you/steal your stuff would you have any chance of stopping him? probably not even with your supposedly better health you do not have the muscle nor the physical capabilities of beating him speed,power.agility,and overall being more physically fit will ultimately prove that all those times you chose to not eat meat are retarded cause your now poorer then you were but you know what do i know maybe there is something that will let you gain muscle just like eating meat although tbh i doubt it [citation needed] | ||
HotKimchi
United States64 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:13 Delathar wrote: To be honest vegans/vegetarians dont understand the fact that if you do not have enough protein you cannot build muscle as in you will not gain muscle enough to lift 200-340 bls just based on the fact you don't have the protein your body needs to build that kind of muscle but on a lighter note i do not mind vegetarians that eat fish ect im cool with that but eating no meat at all is very bad for your body to gain the necesary muscle to work hard and gain muscle mass but those that say they are healthy from a doctors point of view let me point this out if a person that can lift 200 bls (to the guys because girls we are supposed to protect) tries to kill you/beat the crap out of you/steal your stuff would you have any chance of stopping him? probably not even with your supposedly better health you do not have the muscle nor the physical capabilities of beating him speed,power.agility,and overall being more physically fit will ultimately prove that all those times you chose to not eat meat are retarded cause your now poorer then you were but you know what do i know maybe there is something that will let you gain muscle just like eating meat although tbh i doubt it I hope you re-read that and realize that you have a serious case of the dumb. | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:12 HotKimchi wrote: Oh no doubt man. I used to train people in jujitsu and judo. One of the better guys we had was a little spanish dude who was a vegetarian. Much respect to the guy, he had heart. But it isn't easy. You really have to keep an eye out to make sure you aren't getting any deficiencys. Listen between all my smart ass comments and the sweet doom fanfic rip off I respect vegetarians and vegans. However I do not respect propaganda that is based off of emotion to get me to not eat meat. Fair enough, and I respect that people want to eat meat, it is tasty afterall. I just cant stand the bigotry that I have to deal with being vegitarian, even if people mean it jokingly. | ||
CyberPitz
United States428 Posts
You don't see lions going vegan whenever they drag a live animal by the neck back to their children for it to live while it watches little guys pull its intestines out. | ||
tbrown47
United States1235 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:45 speakerbox wrote: I worked on a chicken farm ripping chickens out of their cages and throwing them into a grinder thing that killed them. Whatevs shit didnt phase LOL yea but seriously i dont understand how people can so actively promote vegetarianism/veganism when such horrible things are happening to members of their own species in 3rd world countries. oh well edit: not even just 3rd world countries | ||
HotKimchi
United States64 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:16 Skeny wrote: Fair enough, and I respect that people want to eat meat, it is tasty afterall. I just cant stand the bigotry that I have to deal with being vegitarian, even if people mean it jokingly. Me and you are like reznov and mason off of black ops. You can be reznov though. I don't want to die. | ||
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:13 Delathar wrote: To be honest vegans/vegetarians dont understand the fact that if you do not have enough protein you cannot build muscle as in you will not gain muscle enough to lift 200-340 bls just based on the fact you don't have the protein your body needs to build that kind of muscle but on a lighter note i do not mind vegetarians that eat fish ect im cool with that but eating no meat at all is very bad for your body to gain the necesary muscle to work hard and gain muscle mass but those that say they are healthy from a doctors point of view let me point this out if a person that can lift 200 bls (to the guys because girls we are supposed to protect) tries to kill you/beat the crap out of you/steal your stuff would you have any chance of stopping him? probably not even with your supposedly better health you do not have the muscle nor the physical capabilities of beating him speed,power.agility,and overall being more physically fit will ultimately prove that all those times you chose to not eat meat are retarded cause your now poorer then you were but you know what do i know maybe there is something that will let you gain muscle just like eating meat although tbh i doubt it Meat isn't the only source of protein. I'm a vegetarian and I've had 110 grams of protein today. and none of it from meat or even tofu/meat substitutes. all of it is from whey protein, peanut butter, milk ect. | ||
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
| ||
darmousseh
United States3437 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
Delathar
United States16 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:16 HotKimchi wrote: I hope you re-read that and realize that you have a serious case of the dumb. saying that im dumb and explaining why i am dumb is a good idea but you know just saying someone is dumb is like pointing out a triangle has 3 sides it doesn't really prove anything except that you like flaming people grats man i feel really proud of you /sarcasm/ | ||
HotKimchi
United States64 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:18 Chairman Ray wrote: Wow this video really made me lose faith in humanity, how do people even get fooled by this type of material? It would really help if people could learn high school biology before making a stance on animal cruelty. It is propaganda. You show the worst parts of what you are trying to deface. You show the best of yourself. It's almost like a marketing tactic. No ones gonna sell you speakers and say "these are really cheap! but they sound like complete dick!" They will just tell you the good. | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:13 Delathar wrote: To be honest vegans/vegetarians dont understand the fact that if you do not have enough protein you cannot build muscle as in you will not gain muscle enough to lift 200-340 bls just based on the fact you don't have the protein your body needs to build that kind of muscle but on a lighter note i do not mind vegetarians that eat fish ect im cool with that but eating no meat at all is very bad for your body to gain the necesary muscle to work hard and gain muscle mass but those that say they are healthy from a doctors point of view let me point this out if a person that can lift 200 bls (to the guys because girls we are supposed to protect) tries to kill you/beat the crap out of you/steal your stuff would you have any chance of stopping him? probably not even with your supposedly better health you do not have the muscle nor the physical capabilities of beating him speed,power.agility,and overall being more physically fit will ultimately prove that all those times you chose to not eat meat are retarded cause your now poorer then you were but you know what do i know maybe there is something that will let you gain muscle just like eating meat although tbh i doubt it Other guys have got this covered, but let me reiterate: you're pretty wrong. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Lewis Everything you need to know. This guys a vegan. No milk or eggs, or meat. | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:13 Delathar wrote: To be honest vegans/vegetarians dont understand the fact that if you do not have enough protein you cannot build muscle as in you will not gain muscle enough to lift 200-340 bls just based on the fact you don't have the protein your body needs to build that kind of muscle but on a lighter note i do not mind vegetarians that eat fish ect im cool with that but eating no meat at all is very bad for your body to gain the necesary muscle to work hard and gain muscle mass but those that say they are healthy from a doctors point of view let me point this out if a person that can lift 200 bls (to the guys because girls we are supposed to protect) tries to kill you/beat the crap out of you/steal your stuff would you have any chance of stopping him? probably not even with your supposedly better health you do not have the muscle nor the physical capabilities of beating him speed,power.agility,and overall being more physically fit will ultimately prove that all those times you chose to not eat meat are retarded cause your now poorer then you were but you know what do i know maybe there is something that will let you gain muscle just like eating meat although tbh i doubt it If a person tries to beat me up and can lift 340 lbs, I'm 100% sure that my lean vegitarian body will be able to outrun him. Problem solved and violence avoided. | ||
tbrown47
United States1235 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:20 Delathar wrote: saying that im dumb and explaining why i am dumb is a good idea but you know just saying someone is dumb is like pointing out a triangle has 3 sides it doesn't really prove anything except that you like flaming people grats man i feel really proud of you /sarcasm/ i think the main issue was your lack of punctuation : / | ||
Delathar
United States16 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:18 PrinceXizor wrote: Meat isn't the only source of protein. I'm a vegetarian and I've had 110 grams of protein today. and none of it from meat or even tofu/meat substitutes. all of it is from whey protein, peanut butter, milk ect. im talking about gaining muscle mass as in you lift alot of weight and can become extremely strong with what you have and not have serious side affects is what my point is trying to point out | ||
Delathar
United States16 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:21 tbrown47 wrote: i think the main issue was your lack of punctuation : / doesn't mean im dumb, all that means is i hate grammar with a passion but i do know how to do it correctly -_- | ||
peekn
United States1152 Posts
Another serious problem is the lack of government reform. Many ex-executives of beef production companies are now in public office and preventing any sort of reform to help stop things like this. If you really want to get down to why things like this happen (OP's video) you should watch Food.inc it's on netflicks instant play if you want to watch it. Really changes the way that you think about food. It doesn't make you want to stop eating meat but to start buying organic foods, every purchase is a small step in the food reform efforts which are badly needed. You might want to change your topic title, it's a little harsh... | ||
hoshi
Canada14 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:33 roadrunner_sc wrote: Where did he say veganism = end to animal cruelty? Seriously, where does he say that? What if, by some infinitesimal chance, someone so lacking in logic could be suggesting a simple way NOT TO TAKE PART IN ANIMAL CRUELTY? Could it possibly be? Why certainly not, if you say so. Hmmm an animal cruelty video in a self titled vegan thread. IIRC the op opened with The Cove and then went on to mention veganism. He she it may not have said it concretely but the implications are there. OT For all you vegans how many animals such as field mice die when the crops you eat are harvested and when ecosystems are destroyed to become farmland? Not sayn us meat eaters are any better, but at least were not ignorant of this shit. | ||
CyberPitz
United States428 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:19 darmousseh wrote: Dude, Stop making me so hungry. This about sums it up. I feel like ripping into a big thing o' meat right now. Mouth waters for the taste of blood. Did I mention I like my Steak Medium-Rare? User was warned for this post | ||
USK
173 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:21 vOdToasT wrote: I'm a vegetarian, pushin' up the prices for you guys. Problem, meat eaters? ] I don't see how, unless you mean through litigation against the meat producers? | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
| ||
Slaughter
United States20254 Posts
| ||
tbrown47
United States1235 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:21 Lexpar wrote: Other guys have got this covered, but let me reiterate: you're pretty wrong. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Lewis Everything you need to know. This guys a vegan. No milk or eggs, or meat. I didn't really read the whole page... well not at all, actually. But I ctrl+F'd "veg" and found this phrase: "Lewis credits his outstanding 1991 results in part to the vegan diet he adopted in 1990." Then I looked at the top right of the page where it said his achievements, most of which were before 1990. So... not buying it so much. | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:18 Chairman Ray wrote: Wow this video really made me lose faith in humanity, how do people even get fooled by this type of material? It would really help if people could learn high school biology before making a stance on animal cruelty. High school biology doesn't stop me making a stance. The thing that I am truely opposed to is the industrialisation of animal slaughter. Animals eat other animals, that is natural. The way we treat chickens however is totally unnatural and deeply distrubing. Where in the natural world do we see animals selectively breeding other animals, filling them with artificial vitimans and hormones, putting them in tiny cages for their whole life and then brutally slaughtering them? | ||
bumatlarge
United States4567 Posts
Good luck on your vegan struggles! ![]() | ||
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:21 Delathar wrote: im talking about gaining muscle mass as in you lift alot of weight and can become extremely strong with what you have and not have serious side affects is what my point is trying to point out Oh so you mean working out. why can't vegetarians work out? working out doesn't involve meat? | ||
CyberPitz
United States428 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:25 Skeny wrote: Where in the natural world do we see animals selectively breeding other animals, filling them with artificial vitimans and hormones, putting them in tiny cages for their whole life and then brutally slaughtering them? And that's why we are the top species on this planet. | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:25 tbrown47 wrote: I didn't really read the whole page... well not at all, actually. But I ctrl+F'd "veg" and found this phrase: "Lewis credits his outstanding 1991 results in part to the vegan diet he adopted in 1990." Then I looked at the top right of the page where it said his achievements, most of which were before 1990. So... not buying it so much. 1996 Long Jump gold medal, only man to win golds at 4 consecutive olympics 6 years after becoming vegan. "He reached the top of his career aged thirty on a vegan diet which he has claimed is better suited to him because he can eat a larger quantity without affecting his athleticism and he believes that switching to a vegan diet can lead to improved athletic performance" Still not buying it? How many other people over 35 have won a track gold in the professinal era? | ||
HotKimchi
United States64 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:20 Delathar wrote: saying that im dumb and explaining why i am dumb is a good idea but you know just saying someone is dumb is like pointing out a triangle has 3 sides it doesn't really prove anything except that you like flaming people grats man i feel really proud of you /sarcasm/ You really want me to pick this apart? Ok. Lets start with vegans not understanding protein. There are TONS of options for proteins available to vegans. Tofu, Beans, Lentils. and even more options for vegetarians. Cant get enough muscle to lift 340lbs? Dude do you realize how heavy that is? The average person can lift their own body weight. 240-340 Takes a long as time to work up towards. Unless of course you are the incredible hulk or maybe Thor. Your thing about protecting women and being murdered is LOLOLOL. Seriously that is one of the silliest points of argument I have ever seen in my entire life. You worried and not a big person? Buy a taser. Eating meat won't protect you from a thug with a bat or a knife. Also I'm going to college for sports science, focusing in nutrition. I also used to train jujitsu and judo and personally train meat eaters and vegetarians on a regular basis. Lined out for you in something that isn't a giant block of text and with decent spelling and grammar. | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:25 tbrown47 wrote: I didn't really read the whole page... well not at all, actually. But I ctrl+F'd "veg" and found this phrase: "Lewis credits his outstanding 1991 results in part to the vegan diet he adopted in 1990." Then I looked at the top right of the page where it said his achievements, most of which were before 1990. So... not buying it so much. K I'll help you out. In 1991 he was 30 and beat the world record in the 100 m dash. Buying it? | ||
FrozenFlare
Australia103 Posts
The only meat I don't eat is meat of other carnivores. | ||
tbrown47
United States1235 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:29 Lexpar wrote: K I'll help you out. In 1991 he was 30 and beat the world record in the 100 m dash. Buying it? I didn't say that it was impossible to be a vegan and be an amazing athlete, I just highly doubt that the vegan diet was the true cause of him being a good athlete. He was a good athlete long before he became a vegan. I doubt it was him eating meat that held him back*. edit: *from his peak | ||
Delathar
United States16 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:21 Skeny wrote: If a person tries to beat me up and can lift 340 lbs, I'm 100% sure that my lean vegitarian body will be able to outrun him. Problem solved and violence avoided. ummmmm ok i will just point this out cause this is the main reason i brought that fucking up then how the hell will you protect your fucking family? this isn't some nice world and shit like that does happen sure a gun can definitely get it done but it is not always the case and there are people that are good enough to kill you relatively easily with their bare hands even if you have a gun without the muscle/speed you still will most likely die but there are circumstances and sure it works but if i was a vegetarian and unable to protect the people i love i would immediately not be vegetarian but you know some of the fastest people i know can run for miles and eat meat on a regular basis and i guarantee you would have no chance to beat them and for an example my brother runs 3-5 miles a day(military) he lifts around 260-280 bls maxing out and runs faster then any person i know even faster then my friend adam mostly because he is huge but even then he i still faster then me and you have to understand i weigh 140 bls,my brother 153 bls, and my friend adam around 165 ,we are very light and very fast | ||
HotKimchi
United States64 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:30 FrozenFlare wrote: Seriously what's wrong with eating meat, humans are carnivores and predators by nature (our eyes are both located at the front to lock onto prey), so what if some poor animal has to suffer a little before we devour it for survival. The only meat I don't eat is meat of other carnivores. Holy shit. Please tell me you are trolling man. I really am at a loss of words. | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:30 tbrown47 wrote: I didn't say that it was impossible to be a vegan and be an amazing athlete, I just highly doubt that the vegan diet was the true cause of him being a good athlete. He was a good athlete long before he became a vegan. I doubt it was him eating meat that held him back*. edit: *from his peak Just saying. You implied that because he won more medals before going vegan it wasn't too impressive that he won more medals after going vegan. You admitted to not reading the article. I gave you the facts as to why its amazing. He says its from his diet. | ||
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:25 Skeny wrote: High school biology doesn't stop me making a stance. The thing that I am truely opposed to is the industrialisation of animal slaughter. Animals eat other animals, that is natural. The way we treat chickens however is totally unnatural and deeply distrubing. Where in the natural world do we see animals selectively breeding other animals, filling them with artificial vitimans and hormones, putting them in tiny cages for their whole life and then brutally slaughtering them? As I said in the post you quoted, it really helps to understand high school biology before making such a stance. | ||
tbrown47
United States1235 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:32 Lexpar wrote: Just saying. You implied that because he won more medals before going vegan it wasn't too impressive that he won more medals after going vegan. You admitted to not reading the article. I gave you the facts as to why its amazing. He says its from his diet. "Lewis credits his outstanding 1991 results in part to the vegan diet he adopted in 1990." The quote again... it specifically says "in part" : / | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:30 FrozenFlare wrote: Seriously what's wrong with eating meat, humans are carnivores and predators by nature (our eyes are both located at the front to lock onto prey), so what if some poor animal has to suffer a little before we devour it for survival. The only meat I don't eat is meat of other carnivores. What is wrong imo: -We don't like to see others, including animals, suffering. -They don't just suffer a little, they suffer their entire lives (in some cases). -Because we don't have to eat animals to survive or be healthy anymore. -The resources required to rase animals are huge so we could feed a lot more people by adopting vegitarianism. | ||
decafchicken
United States20007 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:18 PrinceXizor wrote: Meat isn't the only source of protein. I'm a vegetarian and I've had 110 grams of protein today. and none of it from meat or even tofu/meat substitutes. all of it is from whey protein, peanut butter, milk ect. 110...Thats almost half of what i need, I think i take that in by 2pm. Not to mention peanut butter is both processed and a lectin, and you cant really defend milk or any dairy if you are a vegetarian for ethical reasons. On February 09 2011 15:21 Skeny wrote: If a person tries to beat me up and can lift 340 lbs, I'm 100% sure that my lean vegitarian body will be able to outrun him. Problem solved and violence avoided. I'm 100% sure my significantly larger and probably leaner ominvore body can chase you down and beat you up after i warm up with a few squat reps at 340. If you havent noticed, there is a significant amount of athletes in this world that eat meat, and are much stronger, faster, and more explosive than your average vegan. Obviously the average bum who sits on his ass eating mcdonalds is probably out of shape, but please acknowledge they are not the only people in the world. Yeah delathar has a lackluster way of conveying his thoughts, probably isn't the brightest, and a complete lack of desired citation, but that doesnt mean he's entirely wrong. | ||
Yushike
United States44 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:30 FrozenFlare wrote: Seriously what's wrong with eating meat, humans are carnivores and predators by nature (our eyes are both located at the front to lock onto prey), so what if some poor animal has to suffer a little before we devour it for survival. The only meat I don't eat is meat of other carnivores. I don't think that most vegetarians/vegans have a problem with people that eat meat, rather than the process that goes into it. Yeah, we're supposed to eat meat, and it's delicious, but as someone who loves his meat, the video on the OP is just wrong. :| Guys, if it was impossible to live without meat/dairy, there wouldn't be so many vegans out there. I would never choose a life without eating meat, but my sister used to be a vegetarian, and although it takes a lot more precautions than someone who can eat whatever they want, it's definitely possible. Think of it like selective allergies. Lactose intolerant people get their intake of what they need, so can vegans. | ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:51 KingAce wrote: The advantage of vegetarianism according to the energy pyramid; herbivores get more energy than carnivores, because plants have the most amount of energy. What the hell, that makes absolutely no sense. | ||
HotKimchi
United States64 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:31 Delathar wrote: ummmmm ok i will just point this out cause this is the main reason i brought that fucking up then how the hell will you protect your fucking family? this isn't some nice world and shit like that does happen sure a gun can definitely get it done but it is not always the case and there are people that are good enough to kill you relatively easily with their bare hands even if you have a gun without the muscle/speed you still will most likely die but there are circumstances and sure it works but if i was a vegetarian and unable to protect the people i love i would immediately not be vegetarian but you know some of the fastest people i know can run for miles and eat meat on a regular basis and i guarantee you would have no chance to beat them and for an example my brother runs 3-5 miles a day(military) he lifts around 260-280 bls maxing out and runs faster then any person i know even faster then my friend adam mostly because he is huge but even then he i still faster then me and you have to understand i weigh 140 bls,my brother 153 bls, and my friend adam around 165 ,we are very light and very fast Oh shit he is faster than Adam? I better step the fuck back. Seriously, stop it. Read my post picking apart yours. Cause I am not doing it again. You are being ridiculous man. Your stories are just that, stories. You argument is "eat meat protect family" That's not how it works, | ||
ScK
United States8 Posts
| ||
tbrown47
United States1235 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:36 HotKimchi wrote: Oh shit he is faster than Adam? I better step the fuck back. Seriously, stop it. Read my post picking apart yours. Cause I am not doing it again. You are being ridiculous man. Your stories are just that, stories. You argument is "eat meat protect family" That's not how it works, but meat make strong use muscle stop enemy | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:33 tbrown47 wrote: "Lewis credits his outstanding 1991 results in part to the vegan diet he adopted in 1990." The quote again... it specifically says "in part" : / It doesn't matter. Its the classic internet argument of neither of us really knowing what we're talking about and just arguing about it cause it sucks being wrong on the internet. I dunno why CL won. Neither do you. I just linked his wiki-page to prove to that one chuckle-knuckle who was saying you cant be a proper athlete without meat derived protein. | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:37 tbrown47 wrote: but meat make strong use muscle stop enemy You're awesome. | ||
Delathar
United States16 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:28 HotKimchi wrote: You really want me to pick this apart? Ok. Lets start with vegans not understanding protein. There are TONS of options for proteins available to vegans. Tofu, Beans, Lentils. and even more options for vegetarians. Cant get enough muscle to lift 340lbs? Dude do you realize how heavy that is? The average person can lift their own body weight. 240-340 Takes a long as time to work up towards. Unless of course you are the incredible hulk or maybe Thor. Your thing about protecting women and being murdered is LOLOLOL. Seriously that is one of the silliest points of argument I have ever seen in my entire life. You worried and not a big person? Buy a taser. Eating meat won't protect you from a thug with a bat or a knife. Also I'm going to college for sports science, focusing in nutrition. I also used to train jujitsu and judo and personally train meat eaters and vegetarians on a regular basis. Lined out for you in something that isn't a giant block of text and with decent spelling and grammar. dude lifting 240-340 bls does not take that long to build up to at most maybe 2 years but not that long. When the best fighters are meat eaters you know for a fact that eating meat helps with fighting and i shall point out ufc for my judgment and from my sources most if not all of them eat meat making my argument here very valid. When someone attacks you without warning especially when your out doing stuff you will most likely not have a tazer/gun with you to help, but the muscle will always be there and it helps with speed/agility(only when youg et into the 320-670 bls of lifting does muscle interfere with speed and i know only running speed but as far as im concerned it does not interfere with punching/reflex speed. next time you criticize someone please realize that most if not all the people on this forum have some form of intelligence | ||
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
i agree, there is no possible argument against that statement. i concede, it is wrong to let others eat meat while i do not myself. | ||
jpditri
United States86 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:35 mcc wrote: What the hell, that makes absolutely no sense. It reminds me of the best argument that I've heard for vegetarianism or veganism, which was entropy-- the energy from the sun is converted to stored energy in plants (via chlorophyll, with some energy lost to entropy) , which is then converted by animals into another form of stored energy (again, further conversion costs energy to entropy), which we then convert into usable energy (further loss of energy via entropy). By cutting out the animal intermediary we reduce the energy lost to entropy. I am, regardless, an omnivore; but the argument is still compelling, regardless of my affinity to cheese and eggs. | ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
| ||
HotKimchi
United States64 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:39 Delathar wrote: dude lifting 240-340 bls does not take that long to build up to at most maybe 2 years but not that long. When the best fighters are meat eaters you know for a fact that eating meat helps with fighting and i shall point out ufc for my judgment and from my sources most if not all of them eat meat making my argument here very valid. When someone attacks you without warning especially when your out doing stuff you will most likely not have a tazer/gun with you to help, but the muscle will always be there and it helps with speed/agility(only when youg et into the 320-670 bls of lifting does muscle interfere with speed and i know only running speed but as far as im concerned it does not interfere with punching/reflex speed. next time you criticize someone please realize that most if not all the people on this forum have some form of intelligence I hope you enjoy making a complete ass of yourself on the interwebs. Cause you are doing a damn good job at it. | ||
decafchicken
United States20007 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:39 Delathar wrote: dude lifting 240-340 bls does not take that long to build up to at most maybe 2 years but not that long. When the best fighters are meat eaters you know for a fact that eating meat helps with fighting and i shall point out ufc for my judgment and from my sources most if not all of them eat meat making my argument here very valid. When someone attacks you without warning especially when your out doing stuff you will most likely not have a tazer/gun with you to help, but the muscle will always be there and it helps with speed/agility(only when youg et into the 320-670 bls of lifting does muscle interfere with speed and i know only running speed but as far as im concerned it does not interfere with punching/reflex speed. next time you criticize someone please realize that most if not all the people on this forum have some form of intelligence You're coming off stupid, using incorrect abbreviations, grossly oversimplying things, and making blanket statements concerning random arguments as well as saying completely incorrect things. As i finished typing this i realized i got trolled T_T | ||
denzelz
United States604 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:35 mcc wrote: What the hell, that makes absolutely no sense. That makes perfect sense if you understand Biology and how energy is lost as it moves up through the food chain. For example, a goat eating grass processes only 10% of the total calories that the grass has. When we eat that goat, we only get 10% of the energy from the goat. So when you eat meat, you are only getting 1% of the energy in the form of calories that is available. However, if you decide to not eat meat or eat less meat and eat more green plants such as lettuce, broccoli, grains, etc, in theory, there will be more food left over to feed the rest of the world. This is especially true in countries like the United States where beef is produced largely from industrialized cow farms where the animals are fed corn rather than allowed to graze sustainably on grass. | ||
tbrown47
United States1235 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:37 Lexpar wrote: It doesn't matter. Its the classic internet argument of neither of us really knowing what we're talking about and just arguing about it cause it sucks being wrong on the internet. I dunno why CL won. Neither do you. I just linked his wiki-page to prove to that one chuckle-knuckle who was saying you cant be a proper athlete without meat derived protein. Yeah... but the problem is you brought up the argument... you have to defend it well... which you aren't really doing. If your argument is that you can be an athlete while being a vegan, obviously that is true. Does being a vegan make you a better athlete? There really isn't any decisive evidence. Does being an omnivore make you a better athlete? Well... yeah I'd have to say so. Considering most athletes eat meat I'd have to say that most likely eating meat is more healthy than not eating meat. It is a guess, obviously, but a guess that I'd conjecture most would side with me on. | ||
Delathar
United States16 Posts
i agree i laughed :D | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:39 PrinceXizor wrote: i agree, there is no possible argument against that statement. i concede, it is wrong to let others eat meat while i do not myself. Wait what? Confused :X | ||
Maaku
United Kingdom142 Posts
| ||
Ack1027
United States7873 Posts
As a wise man once said. Veganism is a first world luxury. - Anthony Bourdain | ||
Delathar
United States16 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:41 decafchicken wrote: You're coming off stupid, using incorrect abbreviations, grossly oversimplying things, and making blanket statements concerning random arguments as well as saying completely incorrect things. As i finished typing this i realized i got trolled T_T u mad ? edit: though i do think eating meat helps build muscle thus helping protect your family but other then that not really User was warned for this post | ||
meegrean
Thailand7699 Posts
But I still eat meat though. So delicious. | ||
HotKimchi
United States64 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:44 Delathar wrote: u mad ? edit: though i do think eating meat helps build muscle thus helping protect your family but other then that not really Google image what a troll really is. All you bro, all you. | ||
nOia.pod
Hungary263 Posts
Don't get me wrong I don't support torturing animals, but we are omnivorous by nature, denying that is just bs. | ||
Delathar
United States16 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:36 ScK wrote: My question for all of you is if a vegan lactates...IS IT SOYMILK!?!??!?!?!? O.O LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
| ||
HotKimchi
United States64 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:46 nOia.pod wrote: I've tried, just for a week to eat like a vegan, just because I was curious and sorry to say, but I cannot understand that philosphy. I was literally starving, however I ate huge amount of food every day. Not to mention my stomach was so fucked up by the end of the week. Don't get me wrong I don't support torturing animals, but we are omnivorous by nature, denying that is just bs. You have to do it right and for more than a week. Your body has to adjust to the sudden change of diet and reshape itself. | ||
Slakter
Sweden1947 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:46 nOia.pod wrote: I've tried, just for a week to eat like a vegan, just because I was curious and sorry to say, but I cannot understand that philosphy. I was literally starving, however I ate huge amount of food every day. Not to mention my stomach was so fucked up by the end of the week. Don't get me wrong I don't support torturing animals, but we are omnivorous by nature, denying that is just bs. The problem isnt veganism, the problem is that youre terrible at making vegan food ^^ | ||
decafchicken
United States20007 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:47 Lexpar wrote: Yo it's not 40k BC you don't need big muscles to protect your family. We have a police force for that. With guns. They're certainly useful for sports and making your everyday life easier, being healthier, living longer, etc. Not saying that they're necessary, but a degree of muscle mass is certainly beneficial and easier to gain an on omnivore diet. ![]() | ||
peekn
United States1152 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:47 HotKimchi wrote: You have to do it right and for more than a week. Your body has to adjust to the sudden change of diet and reshape itself. It's hard to "reshape" millions of years of evolution to an omnivore diet. | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
| ||
tbrown47
United States1235 Posts
Just sayin' if a vegan had to choose between eating a steak and feeding a starving child or eating a non-animal product and letting the child starve, then he better choose the latter. Or he could eat non-animal products and feed starving children... but that still doesn't address the issue for me. Why not feed starving children and work for human rights? Feed starving children and stop animals from being killed for fashion purposes instead of to feed human beings? For me, it is just one of those things that I don't really see how people can be so adamantly for it... although I guess more odd things have been debated rigorously... | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:42 tbrown47 wrote: Yeah... but the problem is you brought up the argument... you have to defend it well... which you aren't really doing. If your argument is that you can be an athlete while being a vegan, obviously that is true. Does being a vegan make you a better athlete? There really isn't any decisive evidence. Does being an omnivore make you a better athlete? Well... yeah I'd have to say so. Considering most athletes eat meat I'd have to say that most likely eating meat is more healthy than not eating meat. It is a guess, obviously, but a guess that I'd conjecture most would side with me on. I'm not so sure that the conclusion you've drawn is correct. Firstly all us vegans/vegitarians here are trying to say is that you can be healty and not eat meat (dispite the bigoted claims of others). Secondly if we consider that meat eaters are more likely to be obese doesn't that mean that vegitarianism is healthier? Honestly I wouldn't draw a conclulsion one way or the other, although from life experience I'd say it is probably easier to be healthy and eat meat. However, I do know that you can get a balanced diet being vegan or vegitarian and that will make you as healthy as you need to be (unless you have some exceptional illness). All I really want to say (and i think I speak for others in doing so) is that you can be vegitarian/vegan and be fit and healthy. | ||
FrozenFlare
Australia103 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:44 Delathar wrote: though i do think eating meat helps build muscle thus helping protect your family but other then that not really LOL stop it man you're killing me hahahaha | ||
HotKimchi
United States64 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:49 peekn wrote: It's hard to "reshape" millions of years of evolution to an omnivore diet. What I meant was you lose weight and then gain it back. Given that you do it correctly. I fully support a balanced omnivore diet but I am not ignorant enough to realize that you can eat either way and still live a healthy life. There is a reason diet and nutrition is a college degree. | ||
tbrown47
United States1235 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:51 Skeny wrote: I'm not so sure that the conclusion you've drawn is correct. Firstly all us vegans/vegitarians here are trying to say is that you can be healty and not eat meat (dispite the bigoted claims of others). Secondly if we consider that meat eaters are more likely to be obese doesn't that mean that vegitarianism is healthier? Honestly I wouldn't draw a conclulsion one way or the other, although from life experience I'd say it is probably easier to be healthy and eat meat. However, I do know that you can get a balanced diet being vegan or vegitarian and that will make you as healthy as you need to be (unless you have some exceptional illness). All I really want to say (and i think I speak for others in doing so) is that you can be vegitarian/vegan and be fit and healthy. I believe that is a good way to say it. It is easier to have a healthy diet as an omnivore. I agree. | ||
peekn
United States1152 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:51 HotKimchi wrote: What I meant was you lose weight and then gain it back. Given that you do it correctly. I fully support a balanced omnivore diet but I am not ignorant enough to realize that you can eat either way and still live a healthy life. There is a reason diet and nutrition is a college degree. Ah agreed, agreed. | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:47 HotKimchi wrote: You have to do it right and for more than a week. Your body has to adjust to the sudden change of diet and reshape itself. So true. Also you have to be very thoughtful when it comes to planning a vegan diet. You need to learn what suits you, which takes time. | ||
TheWestWind
Canada87 Posts
Humans were not designed to eat meat, because they were not designed. This ability evolved in humans because it is advantageous. Along with that, just because you can eat meat, doesn't mean you ought to. Humans have evolved the ability to rape, but that is definitely an 'ought not'. You can eat lettuce or algae, doesn't mean you ought to. Since eating is a requirement of life, it can't be said that the act of eating anything is right or wrong. Human labels of 'dietary regimes' are lol, as the fact of biology is that humans are omnivores. A 'vegan' or a 'carnivore' are just omnivores who eat no meat or only meat respectively. As far as I'm concerned, your body, you choose what to put in it. You are responsible for that choice though, with all the implications. Personally, because I have empathy, I find that killing is distasteful. I don't want to be killed, and when I see that desire expressed by another being, I am not unaffected. I think that is a big part of what makes us human. If you approach your diet with a open mind and you research diligently every dietary choice you make, I can't believe that you wouldn't find yourself to be a healthier and happier person because of it, not to mention more educated about nutrition than 99% of peeps. | ||
HotKimchi
United States64 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:54 Skeny wrote: So true. Also you have to be very thoughtful when it comes to planning a vegan diet. You need to learn what suits you, which takes time. Yeah it's just really difficult to make a full vegan diet. I am going to school for it and when anyone tells me they are vegan I get chills. It is literally scary to make that diet. So easy to forget a vitamin or not add enough protein. The best thing to do is research, talk to other ( smart healthy) vegans, and take a multivitamin to cover any vitamin holes. | ||
decafchicken
United States20007 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:51 Skeny wrote: I'm not so sure that the conclusion you've drawn is correct. Firstly all us vegans/vegitarians here are trying to say is that you can be healty and not eat meat (dispite the bigoted claims of others). Secondly if we consider that meat eaters are more likely to be obese doesn't that mean that vegitarianism is healthier? Honestly I wouldn't draw a conclulsion one way or the other, although from life experience I'd say it is probably easier to be healthy and eat meat. However, I do know that you can get a balanced diet being vegan or vegitarian and that will make you as healthy as you need to be (unless you have some exceptional illness). All I really want to say (and i think I speak for others in doing so) is that you can be vegitarian/vegan and be fit and healthy. Second point is not necessarily true as vegetarians often turn to a lot of processed foods and grains as well as consuming additional calories as the fat/protein in meat satiates the appetite for longer resulting in a fatter vegetarian. | ||
Delathar
United States16 Posts
Eating meat helps build muscle the fastest.On a vegetarian diet considering you can get a decent amount of protein it is possible to build muscle the same way just alot harder to do.When i am saying that you need muscle it is indeed true for men but women i would make an argument can do either.When we as omnivores have no protein in our diet we become very unhealthy.We need a certain amount of protein in order to live a healthy and atheletic life. Meaning this you can be a healthy vegetarian with muscle but will be harder to maintain and get that muscle but it is possible considering you get some decent amount of protein with the diet but overall i would say the best absolute diet for any person is an omnivorous diet to maintain health,function of speed and strength,and overall a better look and lifestyle. edit: Oh, i would like to add that cows eat grass and since they eat grass it would be pretty worthless to state that if we just eat what they eat(humans cannot digest grass) that we would have more energy but it would clean out your system pretty good oh yeah | ||
nOia.pod
Hungary263 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:48 Slakter wrote: The problem isnt veganism, the problem is that youre terrible at making vegan food ^^ Problem is, Sir, that I cannot change my body to be able to be a vegan. Yes I can force myself to deny eating meat, but why on Earth should I do that, just to prevent animals to get slaughtered? If veganism would give me +100 years I would probably do it, but I cannot see any advantage of it right now. | ||
Firereaver
India1701 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:51 KingAce wrote: The advantage of vegetarianism according to the energy pyramid; herbivores get more energy than carnivores, because plants have the most amount of energy. Lol. Roflmao.. This is why half-knowledge is dangerous! The plant-sources have the most energy because they are quantitatively thousands of times larger than animal-sources. Animal sources are however thousands of time more energy dense in comparison to equal weight in general plant matter which consists primarily of undigestible fibre esp. to the human digestive system (not ruminants.) And also animal protein and B12 source is much better than plant... I would suggest that all the vegans keep their children on a diet that atleast contains egg and milk atleast until they are out of puberty. I know some vegan friends of mine who stay away from even these and it is really NOT ideal. On February 09 2011 15:36 HotKimchi wrote: Oh shit he is faster than Adam? I better step the fuck back. Oh shit I rofled so much!!!! | ||
Cyber_Cheese
Australia3615 Posts
| ||
hoshi
Canada14 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:52 Lexpar wrote: You're wrong. Supply and demand. Sure 1 person not buying meat might mean that there is no change in the amount of animals tortured and killed. But if 1% of the population doesn't buy meat? That's millions of animals being saved in a generation. 5% of the population could mean billions of animals that aren't raised solely to be tortured and killed. Ok lets roll with this, x population doesnt eat meat, they must now eat veggies and whatnot. Thus more farmland is needed, that farmland destroys ecosystems and dooms animals to their death. Furthermore upon harvest field mice are killed by the combines and whatnot. So vegetarians get off you high horse and stop believing eating vegitables doesn't cause animals' deaths. | ||
decafchicken
United States20007 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:59 Firereaver wrote: Lol. Roflmao.. This is why half-knowledge is dangerous! The plant-sources have the most energy because they are quantitatively thousands of times larger than animal-sources. Animal sources are however thousands of time more energy dense in comparison to equal weight in general plant matter which consists primarily of undigestible fibre esp. to the human digestive system (not ruminants.) And also animal protein and B12 source is much better than plant... I would suggest that all the vegans keep their children on a diet that atleast contains egg and milk atleast until they are out of puberty. I know some vegan friends of mine who stay away from even these and it is really NOT ideal. Pubescent boy + vegan diet = terrible. Lack of saturated fat and hormone support from milk and meat combined with the potential estrogen effects of soy could be awful T_T | ||
hoshi
Canada14 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:59 Firereaver wrote: Lol. Roflmao.. This is why half-knowledge is dangerous! The plant-sources have the most energy because they are quantitatively thousands of times larger than animal-sources. Animal sources are however thousands of time more energy dense in comparison to equal weight in general plant matter which consists primarily of undigestible fibre esp. to the human digestive system (not ruminants.) And also animal protein and B12 source is much better than plant... I would suggest that all the vegans keep their children on a diet that atleast contains egg and milk atleast until they are out of puberty. I know some vegan friends of mine who stay away from even these and it is really NOT ideal. And humans cant digest cellulose so Kings argument is invalid | ||
teh_longinator
Canada725 Posts
Animals, on a daily basis, on a global scale, hurt, maim, and ruthlessly kill eachother, just to eat another meal. Difference being? Humans take up a greater deal of the world's resources. Should we train ourselves to require less nourishment to survive? Or should we all just switch to veganism, and eventually drain all the vegetables of their nutrients? And to be honest... that video kinda made me wanna go grill up another burger... Maybe even a double burger ![]() | ||
peekn
United States1152 Posts
Don't get me wrong I don't agree with what they are doing in slaughter houses, but I just can't justify cutting meat out of my diet. | ||
deL
Australia5540 Posts
| ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:00 Cyber_Cheese wrote: The problem is that vegans forget the wonderful tastes they are missing out on when they prepare things like 'tofu' Firstly tofu is delicious. Secondly I prefer to forget the taste of meat, makes it easier to stay vegetarian. I didn't turn because i thought meat wasn't tasty. | ||
Delathar
United States16 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:58 nOia.pod wrote: Oh i know what a troll is Problem is, Sir, that I cannot change my body to be able to be a vegan. Yes I can force myself to deny eating meat, but why on Earth should I do that, just to prevent animals to get slaughtered? If veganism would give me +100 years I would probably do it, but I cannot see any advantage of it right now. ![]() | ||
decafchicken
United States20007 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:06 Skeny wrote: Firstly tofu is delicious. Secondly I prefer to forget the taste of meat, makes it easier to stay vegetarian. I didn't turn because i thought meat wasn't tasty. Tofu is not delicious, it's completely flavorless. | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:51 Skeny wrote: I'm not so sure that the conclusion you've drawn is correct. Firstly all us vegans/vegitarians here are trying to say is that you can be healty and not eat meat (dispite the bigoted claims of others). Secondly if we consider that meat eaters are more likely to be obese doesn't that mean that vegitarianism is healthier? Honestly I wouldn't draw a conclulsion one way or the other, although from life experience I'd say it is probably easier to be healthy and eat meat. However, I do know that you can get a balanced diet being vegan or vegitarian and that will make you as healthy as you need to be (unless you have some exceptional illness). All I really want to say (and i think I speak for others in doing so) is that you can be vegitarian/vegan and be fit and healthy. Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand NOW I can go to sleep. Very well said. That's exactly what I've been trying to say. Every time I pulled up some fact to help support what I was saying, like "look you can get those vitamins from plants" or "look so and so was a vegetarian and they did just fine," I'd get pulled into a whirlwind of semantics. Anyway really well said. Listen to this guy. | ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:39 jpditri wrote: It reminds me of the best argument that I've heard for vegetarianism or veganism, which was entropy-- the energy from the sun is converted to stored energy in plants (via chlorophyll, with some energy lost to entropy) , which is then converted by animals into another form of stored energy (again, further conversion costs energy to entropy), which we then convert into usable energy (further loss of energy via entropy). By cutting out the animal intermediary we reduce the energy lost to entropy. I am, regardless, an omnivore; but the argument is still compelling, regardless of my affinity to cheese and eggs. I don't think the argument is so conclusive. Consider that for example cows might have more efficient way of transforming plants into fat,... than humans. If the efficiency difference is big enough eating a cow has actually less lost energy. I am not saying it is so, just that the simple analysis you did is not really foolproof. Regardless of the result I think basing argument on the lost energy is not useful. The best argument for vegetarianism (vegans are just irrational IMHO) I heard is similar, but is based on sustainability as a basis. Basically that meat-rich diet requires more land and other resources to feed the same amount of people. And by feed I mean providing all the necessary stuff (minerals, ....). And since our planet is getting kind of crowded it might be a valid argument. | ||
nOia.pod
Hungary263 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:07 Lexpar wrote: Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand NOW I can go to sleep. Very well said. That's exactly what I've been trying to say. Every time I pulled up some fact to help support what I was saying, like "look you can get those vitamins from plants" or "look so and so was a vegetarian and they did just fine," I'd get pulled into a whirlwind of semantics. Anyway really well said. Listen to this guy. Will do... and now I'm gonna go and make a delicious stew. | ||
teh_longinator
Canada725 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:06 deL wrote: Dickhead remarks like in this thread are why when offered a meat dish by someone who is unaware I am vegetarian, I have to pretend I am just a douchebag who doesn't want to eat their food rather than explain that I am vegetarian. -_____________- Or how about you just do the right thing and TELL THEM you're a vegetarian. I cannot speak for you, but from my own experience, the FOUR vegetarians we have working in our DELI have ZERO ISSUES with telling workers (and customers) that they are vegetarians. It's the type of vegetarians who "pretend to be a douchebag" that usually are douchebags, and choose vegetarianism for the sake of being "above" people who do not share their values... So what? You're a vegetarian? Tell the people offfering you food, and next time they offer it to you, they'll remember that you are and they won't offer! | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:07 decafchicken wrote: Tofu is not delicious, it's completely flavorless. Not if you eat it with stirfry sauces. And it's not like meat tastes that great all by itself, steak it needs mushroom or bbq sauce at the least. | ||
HellRoxYa
Sweden1614 Posts
The video also has one major flaw. It perpetuates the image that every meat producer abuses and kicks his animals. As such, it's more fearmongering and propaganda than anything else. | ||
tbrown47
United States1235 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:09 Skeny wrote: Not if you eat it with stirfry sauces. And it's not like meat tastes that great all by itself, steak it needs mushroom or bbq sauce at the least. No it doesn't >_> char is all you need for a good steak imo ^_^ | ||
![]()
Falling
Canada11328 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:30 HotKimchi wrote: Think about the fruits and veggies. They have rights to. Here is my video to show you what kind of agony our poor organics go through. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5mInR21lAA Dude! How could you post that and NOT post this most excellent song by Arrogant Worms: Carrot Juice Is Murder I don't mind if people want to be vegetarian, vegan, or omnivores. I do think the industrialized slaughterhouses could clean up their act to ensure the killings are done quickly and perhaps not keep them in such confined spaces. I also think the North American diet probably consists of far too much red meat, so backing off on the meat could be a good thing for health and environment reasons. I'm really not into the whole animal rights thing. On the other hand, I'm all for the treating animals well- including killing them quickly to eat. | ||
FrozenFlare
Australia103 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:07 decafchicken wrote: Tofu is not delicious, it's completely flavorless. You obviously have not tried Chinese fried tofu dishes with chilli soy sauce as a dip served with simple boiled jasmine long grain rice. | ||
decafchicken
United States20007 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:07 Lexpar wrote: Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand NOW I can go to sleep. Very well said. That's exactly what I've been trying to say. Every time I pulled up some fact to help support what I was saying, like "look you can get those vitamins from plants" or "look so and so was a vegetarian and they did just fine," I'd get pulled into a whirlwind of semantics. Anyway really well said. Listen to this guy. ... On February 09 2011 15:57 decafchicken wrote: Second point is not necessarily true as vegetarians often turn to a lot of processed foods and grains as well as consuming additional calories as the fat/protein in meat satiates the appetite for longer resulting in a fatter vegetarian. --- On February 09 2011 16:09 Skeny wrote: Not if you eat it with stirfry sauces. And it's not like meat tastes that great all by itself, steak it needs mushroom or bbq sauce at the least. So you're admitting it is in fact not delicious, but that you find the stirfry sauces (i.e. loaded with sodium) to be what is tasty. While you may or may not like steak/meat, it does at least have flavor that many find enjoyable. | ||
Delathar
United States16 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:09 Skeny wrote: Not if you eat it with stirfry sauces. And it's not like meat tastes that great all by itself, steak it needs mushroom or bbq sauce at the least. dude now my mouth is watering from the best steak i have ever eaten and that is salt, pepper some type of seasoning cooked with some juice,lemon juice,cooked medium rare or something like that augh hate fills my soul(im hungry now D: | ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:02 hoshi wrote: Ok lets roll with this, x population doesnt eat meat, they must now eat veggies and whatnot. Thus more farmland is needed, that farmland destroys ecosystems and dooms animals to their death. Furthermore upon harvest field mice are killed by the combines and whatnot. So vegetarians get off you high horse and stop believing eating vegitables doesn't cause animals' deaths. A very large percent of the farmland in the world is grown solely to feed livestock. Your argument sounds really good, but one of it's premises is false. I believe its something close to 50% of farmland.This article claims that supporting a human being's meat based diet requires 7 times as much land as a plant based diet. Factory livestock farming kills many more ecosystems than agriculture thats meant for humans. | ||
0mgVitaminE
United States1278 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:21 darklordjac wrote: Although I like my meat, this made me sick. me too man, sick shit in that video | ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:41 denzelz wrote: That makes perfect sense if you understand Biology and how energy is lost as it moves up through the food chain. For example, a goat eating grass processes only 10% of the total calories that the grass has. When we eat that goat, we only get 10% of the energy from the goat. So when you eat meat, you are only getting 1% of the energy in the form of calories that is available. However, if you decide to not eat meat or eat less meat and eat more green plants such as lettuce, broccoli, grains, etc, in theory, there will be more food left over to feed the rest of the world. This is especially true in countries like the United States where beef is produced largely from industrialized cow farms where the animals are fed corn rather than allowed to graze sustainably on grass. Your statement alone makes sense and I did not argue with that. Read what he wrote, that makes no sense. As for your point I might agree with it's factual truth, but your argument has holes, you assume that me processing the plants has the same efficiency as goat processing the plant, which is of course false. | ||
nOia.pod
Hungary263 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:08 mcc wrote: I don't think the argument is so conclusive. Consider that for example cows might have more efficient way of transforming plants into fat,... than humans. If the efficiency difference is big enough eating a cow has actually less lost energy. I am not saying it is so, just that the simple analysis you did is not really foolproof. Regardless of the result I think basing argument on the lost energy is not useful. The best argument for vegetarianism (vegans are just irrational IMHO) I heard is similar, but is based on sustainability as a basis. Basically that meat-rich diet requires more land and other resources to feed the same amount of people. And by feed I mean providing all the necessary stuff (minerals, ....). And since our planet is getting kind of crowded it might be a valid argument. Considering cows has to eat almost all day long, that would be pretty hard to do as a human. Not to mention they are ruminants. Just go out to fields and die by grazing. | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:09 teh_longinator wrote: Or how about you just do the right thing and TELL THEM you're a vegetarian. I cannot speak for you, but from my own experience, the FOUR vegetarians we have working in our DELI have ZERO ISSUES with telling workers (and customers) that they are vegetarians. It's the type of vegetarians who "pretend to be a douchebag" that usually are douchebags, and choose vegetarianism for the sake of being "above" people who do not share their values... So what? You're a vegetarian? Tell the people offfering you food, and next time they offer it to you, they'll remember that you are and they won't offer! When I became vegetarian my father, who was around me a lot at the time, commented that the amount of abuse I recieved was like I was a homosexual in the 1920s. I know it wasn't anywhere near that bad as that but you have no idea the amount of abuse you recieve from some people (which is always the same abuse you've heard 100 times before). Anyway I feel deL's pain and thank you for not being so nasty to us. | ||
tbrown47
United States1235 Posts
| ||
Wasteweiser
Canada522 Posts
Soon we're going to have people who only drink water because they refuse to give fruits and veggies suffering..... | ||
nOia.pod
Hungary263 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:16 Wasteweiser wrote: Well your video just showed what humans have done to survive since the dawn of our existance. Soon we're going to have people who only drink water because they refuse to give fruits and veggies suffering..... I refuse to drink water too, because it hurts to the river. | ||
teh_longinator
Canada725 Posts
Very sick shit indeed! Epicly sick shit, that made me hungry as shit ![]() However, is this REALLY any different that how people treat other humans? We'll stab eachother and leave them for dead in the street for the sake of money, what do you think we'll do to animals for the ability to sustain ourselves? I can see how this kind of stuff could be kinda offputting, however, I don't think that a 5 minute video portraying a minute percentage of farms should put anyone off of meat... | ||
Delathar
United States16 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:17 nOia.pod wrote: I refuse to drink water too, because it hurts to the river. roflmaoAASADASDTGQDSFAFAFAF i love that post it is amazing bot please dont ban me it was an accident 1 word accident NOOOOOOO | ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:52 tbrown47 wrote: I believe that is a good way to say it. It is easier to have a healthy diet as an omnivore. I agree. I think it is more complicated. In today's rich society it is easiest to have healthy diet as vegetarian just because as omnivore to have healthy diet you reaaaaaally need to go against convenience to achieve it. Well balanced omnivore diet is probably the best, but hard to achieve. As for the vegans, they have the worst diet and hardest to have healthy diet. | ||
Wasteweiser
Canada522 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:17 nOia.pod wrote: I refuse to drink water too, because it hurts to the river. I wonder if they those vegans drive cars. THEY ARE BRUTALLY INCINERATING GASOLINE MOLECULES INTO CARBON DIOXIDE AND WATER. THINK ABOUT THE ATOMS!!! | ||
tbrown47
United States1235 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:19 mcc wrote: I think it is more complicated. In today's rich society it is easiest to have healthy diet as vegetarian just because as omnivore to have healthy diet you reaaaaaally need to go against convenience to achieve it. Well balanced omnivore diet is probably the best, but hard to achieve. As for the vegans, they have the worst diet and hardest to have healthy diet. That is a bit convoluted... you are bringing in something not related to the argument just to complicate things. | ||
Ropid
Germany3557 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:02 hoshi wrote: Ok lets roll with this, x population doesnt eat meat, they must now eat veggies and whatnot. Thus more farmland is needed, that farmland destroys ecosystems and dooms animals to their death. Furthermore upon harvest field mice are killed by the combines and whatnot. So vegetarians get off you high horse and stop believing eating vegitables doesn't cause animals' deaths. Producing meat requires farmland, too. Cattle needs to be fed to get you your steak. | ||
peekn
United States1152 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:16 Wasteweiser wrote: Well your video just showed what humans have done to survive since the dawn of our existance. Soon we're going to have people who only drink water because they refuse to give fruits and veggies suffering..... You don't need to punch a calf in order to survive though. The practices in that video were bad and probably isolated. In our time, you can kill something so easily the guys who were abusing the animals just has some mental problems. | ||
Firereaver
India1701 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:36 HotKimchi wrote: Oh shit he is faster than Adam? I better step the fuck back. Why am I still rofl-ing to this!! LMALOOOOO!! Have I gone mad? | ||
BlackJack
United States10347 Posts
| ||
keioh
France1099 Posts
| ||
zimz
United States510 Posts
| ||
PepperoniPiZZa
Sierra Leone1660 Posts
What about lions, shouldn't we eliminate the lions? They're so cruel when they're hunting their prey, choking on their necks for half an hour. And fucking meteority. They just hit the earth and kill millons, just for the lulz. | ||
teh_longinator
Canada725 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:25 keioh wrote: I'd gladly have to hunt for my meat. With a spear. In the forest. This way prey could stand a chance. But if I meet a vegan, I might hunt him... Why would you hunt a vegan? There won't be any protein in the meat ![]() | ||
Jayme
United States5866 Posts
I eat red meat because it TASTES GOOD and nothing else will really change that. I quite like my quality of life as it is and I frankly don't care about the cow that died to achieve it. Thankfully people such as yourselves take up the fight so I can feel like less of a jackass though, just don't shove it in my face. | ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:16 Wasteweiser wrote: Well your video just showed what humans have done to survive since the dawn of our existance. Soon we're going to have people who only drink water because they refuse to give fruits and veggies suffering..... I kind of dislike PETA to the point of hating them. I dislike vegans, but your argument is such a slippery slope fallacy and misrepresenting their argument. Animals unlike plants can actually suffer in our sense of the word. Unless you have some groundbreaking scientific facts to share. | ||
nOia.pod
Hungary263 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:27 teh_longinator wrote: Why would you hunt a vegan? There won't be any protein in the meat ![]() But more energy! | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:26 zimz wrote: hey guys our ancestors ate animals. if they were so picky, we wouldn't be here. Ancestors did not use the industrialised agricultural system to slaughter animals on mass like we do today. Furthermore they did what was necessary to survive, we can do the same and not eat meat. | ||
Dhalphir
Australia1305 Posts
I also find it remarkably offensive how many vegetarians or vegans seem to equate eating meat with being okay with animal cruelty. I buy free-range eggs where I can. When there is a similar option for meat, I do so. If there isn't an option, thats a shame, but I'm not going to go without meat just because of the lack of option. The animal is already dead and gone. By labelling those who eat meat (the majority of the first world population) as pariahs, you do nothing but hurt your own cause, as evidenced by the large amount of contempt exhibited for vegans/vegetarians in this thread. if you want to be helping your own cause, you need to be shutting up about it, eating the way you want to eat and letting others eat the way they want to eat, and lobbying to find other commercially viable ways of providing meat for a large population. key word there, commercially viable. You can't just say "stop the mass slaughter of cows!" without providing an alternative for how to get mass quantities of beef to the consumer, because all you're basically going to achieve is making a lot of noise, no one listens to you, and you repeat that ad nauseum every few years. | ||
samuraibael
Australia294 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:17 teh_longinator wrote: Very sick shit indeed! Epicly sick shit, that made me hungry as shit ![]() However, is this REALLY any different that how people treat other humans? We'll stab eachother and leave them for dead in the street for the sake of money, what do you think we'll do to animals for the ability to sustain ourselves? I can see how this kind of stuff could be kinda offputting, however, I don't think that a 5 minute video portraying a minute percentage of farms should put anyone off of meat... Yes it is completely different to how we treat other humans. If we do this to other humans we get jailed. Anyway cruelty doesnt justify cruelty. As for minute percentage, do you imagine the other ones are mass slaughtering the animals kindly? It is cruel and unethical to eat meat. You can either accept that you are a selfish immoral person and eat it anyway (as I do), or become vegan. Those who mock vegan/vegetarians make me sick. | ||
Rasva_Pallo
Finland126 Posts
I don't think all meat eaters (including me) are monsters if they can eat meat after watching the video and I don't think highly of people saying "I'm going vegan cause it's better than being meat eater". Tho I have to say I will think twice from now on do I really want that slice of meat on my bread. I'll have to thank you for posting the link to the video, it made me give another thought to some things. | ||
Essentia
1150 Posts
We have teeth that are both for tearing flesh and also crunching a good piece of broccoli. Also our intestines are that of an omnivore. EDIT: I was a vegan for a year and I gained a lot of weight because most of my calories came from heavy carbohydrate foods like breads and pastas since I didn't eat meat. I found as soon as I went back to my normal diet I ate a lot of lean meats and still ate the vegetables and lost a a ton of weight and put on muscle and in general was a lot healthier. | ||
brokenSC
United States84 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:28 Kyhol wrote: Poor bastards. They all pay the price for our mass population. Organisms need to die for us to be able to live, no matter how graphic, this is reality. I hope that no one gets too emotionally attached watching videos like this, it will only cause needless pain. If you don't want this to happen then tough luck, but if you want to do something about it then become a vegan. I don't see this being much different then any animal being brutally murdered in the wild. Any organism that exists needs to consume, as heartbreaking as it is we're all indirectly/directly involved. Edit: Yeah I do agree that they are all being treated really badly, they deserve better lives before we kill them. I'd rather eat a happy cow then a sad cow. ![]() Organisms have to die for others to survive. I'm sorry to inform you that this is how nature works. Would you rather get your face clawed off and throat ripped apart by a tiger or slammed on the head? Just saying. | ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:20 tbrown47 wrote: That is a bit convoluted... you are bringing in something not related to the argument just to complicate things. Maybe, but you are simplifying things too much, so ![]() | ||
Aeropunk
Australia255 Posts
I'm totally against animal cruelty and am 100% for laws and regulations to stop animal cruelty, but I'm also 100% for eating animals that have been killed and prepared in a humane way. Unfortunately most videos and comments from people are very heavily emotionally loading as this is a topic that a lot of people feel strongly about. We just need to get rid of the bastards who abuse animals just for a little bit more money. | ||
LunarC
United States1186 Posts
It's the people that are actively involved in PETA and the people that buy organic meat products that are making a bigger difference. And you don't have to be vegan to do these things. In no way do I advocate animal cruelty. It's just these industry practices are very efficient, so they pursue them for the sake of cutting costs and increasing profits. Regulations should be put into place, imo. Sure, meat prices will go up in effect, but we all consume enough meat as it is. Cutting back a little won't hurt anyone. Bottom line: being vegan and using shock videos isn't going to change anything. It'll just make people more jaded. | ||
peekn
United States1152 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:31 Dhalphir wrote: Humans are not physiologically designed to be vegetarian/vegan. You can't deny that. Its not a matter of opinion. Its just fact. I also find it remarkably offensive how many vegetarians or vegans seem to equate eating meat with being okay with animal cruelty. I buy free-range eggs where I can. When there is a similar option for meat, I do so. If there isn't an option, thats a shame, but I'm not going to go without meat just because of the lack of option. The animal is already dead and gone. By labelling those who eat meat (the majority of the first world population) as pariahs, you do nothing but hurt your own cause, as evidenced by the large amount of contempt exhibited for vegans/vegetarians in this thread. if you want to be helping your own cause, you need to be shutting up about it, eating the way you want to eat and letting others eat the way they want to eat, and lobbying to find other commercially viable ways of providing meat for a large population. key word there, commercially viable. You can't just say "stop the mass slaughter of cows!" without providing an alternative for how to get mass quantities of beef to the consumer, because all you're basically going to achieve is making a lot of noise, no one listens to you, and you repeat that ad nauseum every few years. Wonderfully put Dhalphir if only more people thought this way. I pride you on buying the free-range egges and "organic" beef. | ||
Sotamursu
Finland612 Posts
Going vegan makes you more healthy? You can be an omnivore and stay healthy. If all you eat is 12 hamburgers and 5 pizzas a day, it doesn't matter what diet you start to follow. Of course you will lose weight and be healthier. | ||
forgotten0ne
United States951 Posts
http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=185282¤tpage=2#23 | ||
PlosionCornu
Italy814 Posts
If you want to eat veggies for your entire life just for the sake of it,or because you enjoy them,go on. But eating veggies beliving that this somehow will stop animal slaughter is laughable. It's just like stopping fapping and/or having sex in attempt to stop the porn industry or rapists. There are other ways around. That's what I mean. Meat is a physical necessity ,as a human being you need it,just like sex. That's how you are made. Go have some of both. My 2 cents. P.S. There are people that live in worse conditions than those animals. Think about it. Some kiddo starves to death,and you are here ,in your luxurious house, being picky for animals whose destiny is to be hunted. Nice logic bro. | ||
Crimson
United States311 Posts
| ||
tbrown47
United States1235 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:37 forgotten0ne wrote: http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=185282¤tpage=2#23 L O L Is all I have to say to that. | ||
teh_longinator
Canada725 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:32 samuraibael wrote: Yes it is completely different to how we treat other humans. If we do this to other humans we get jailed. Anyway cruelty doesnt justify cruelty. As for minute percentage, do you imagine the other ones are mass slaughtering the animals kindly? It is cruel and unethical to eat meat. You can either accept that you are a selfish immoral person and eat it anyway (as I do), or become vegan. Those who mock vegan/vegetarians make me sick. I'm sorry sir.... would you like a bicycle for all of your backpeddling? ![]() It is cruel and unethical to eat meat, which makes me a selfish and immoral person to eat it... HOWEVER, people who mock vegetarians sicken you... In order to tell me that it sickens you, you had to mock meat-eaters? Your argument becomes null... | ||
deL
Australia5540 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:09 teh_longinator wrote: Or how about you just do the right thing and TELL THEM you're a vegetarian. I cannot speak for you, but from my own experience, the FOUR vegetarians we have working in our DELI have ZERO ISSUES with telling workers (and customers) that they are vegetarians. It's the type of vegetarians who "pretend to be a douchebag" that usually are douchebags, and choose vegetarianism for the sake of being "above" people who do not share their values... So what? You're a vegetarian? Tell the people offfering you food, and next time they offer it to you, they'll remember that you are and they won't offer! Doesn't really matter how your friends are treated because I was referring to myself specifically. Also I don't know if I could work in a deli, I know a job's a job but if your friends can stand being around that much meat to the point that the smell of it would get in your clothes, etc. then maybe they are not as strict a vegetarian as me or just do it to be different or whatever. And of course I do let people know in advance if, say, they invite me around to dinner. However, I don't go around telling people unless I think they might mistakenly cook something for me or if they are likely to offer me something I don't eat because then I do seem like a douchebag, going around telling everyone I am vegetarian. Also you missed the point a little that Skeny picked up on in that you end up not wanting to tell people because of the stupid remarks or treatment you get, where rather than trying to explain it you'd actually rather seem like an inconsiderate douchebag. | ||
Elegy
United States1629 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:32 samuraibael wrote: Yes it is completely different to how we treat other humans. If we do this to other humans we get jailed. Anyway cruelty doesnt justify cruelty. As for minute percentage, do you imagine the other ones are mass slaughtering the animals kindly? It is cruel and unethical to eat meat. You can either accept that you are a selfish immoral person and eat it anyway (as I do), or become vegan. Those who mock vegan/vegetarians make me sick. There's obviously a difference between killing someone in cold blood and creating an environment where it pays to continue conflict, for example, (African diamonds), but I'm not convinced the real moral difference is all that great. If by buying meat we condemn animals to death (sometimes in brutal ways), is that all that different then buying diamonds that condemns people to death through facilitating an environment where that is the inevitable result? It's a matter of degrees of separation, at least in my eyes. I don't have any qualms about filling up my car with gas produced from oil, some of which has been imported from authoritarian dictatorships. I don't have any qualms about drinking coffee, most of which is produced by an incredibly poor belt of nations in the Americas and Africa (nations kept poor through WTO policies in some cases and who receive only a tiny pathetic slice of the industry they provide) These things, like you said, probably make me an immoral selfish bastard, but I do it anyway. I'm just not convinced people that argue for veganism on the grounds of ethical treatment of animals want to accept the fact that, through many of their other actions, they contribute, both directly and indirectly, to arguably even greater amounts of suffering. It seems to be a...half measure, I suppose. It's almost as if they maintain they are vegan for ethical reasons because it's an action they can take and perceive instant gratification, whereas some of the other examples I listed above are both more complex and further separated from the individual. | ||
Faraday
United States553 Posts
| ||
chaoser
United States5541 Posts
| ||
writer22816
United States5775 Posts
| ||
teh_longinator
Canada725 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:47 deL wrote: Doesn't really matter how your friends are treated because I was referring to myself specifically. Also I don't know if I could work in a deli, I know a job's a job but if your friends can stand being around that much meat to the point that the smell of it would get in your clothes, etc. then maybe they are not as strict a vegetarian as me or just do it to be different or whatever. And of course I do let people know in advance if, say, they invite me around to dinner. However, I don't go around telling people unless I think they might mistakenly cook something for me or if they are likely to offer me something I don't eat because then I do seem like a douchebag, going around telling everyone I am vegetarian. Also you missed the point a little that Skeny picked up on in that you end up not wanting to tell people because of the stupid remarks or treatment you get, where rather than trying to explain it you'd actually rather seem like an inconsiderate douchebag. They seem to be doing a pretty good job of being vegetarians. Havn't eaten a gram of meat in the 6 years I've known them. Just, some people just don't think they're better than everyone, and accept that maybe people have their own opinions. And I don't like your little poke at my work friends... they're vegetarians because thats how they choose to live, regardless of how many times I try tricking them into eating meat... Just because you SERVE meat, doesn't make you any less of a vegetarian than someone who's afraid to look at it (you, apparently)... Just means that THEY are able to live in the real world, where meat-eaters are able to roam free, without hippies harping on us. Just because YOU don't eat meat, for whatever reasons make sense to you, doesn't mean that NO ONE should eat meat. Why should WE suffer for YOUR personal beliefs? | ||
PlosionCornu
Italy814 Posts
Go live in the australian forests. Try telling to that poisonous snake, as he bites you, that he's so cruel and mean ![]() Mercy,cruelty,animosity,anger are purely human dimensions that don't apply to nature. Nature is strictly logic. Cold logic as we humans say. | ||
Belial88
United States5217 Posts
It amazes me how people talk about being vegetarian. It's a luxury you can only have when your point of view is so skewed because you are so wealthy. There's no such thing as vegetarian in the majority of the world. The reason for the mass slaughter of animals is because it is efficient. 'Humane slaughter' (an oxymoron) just contributes to rising prices of meat, and in effect makes it so people in developing countries have a harder time receiving sustenance. You may think McDonald's is evil, but in many places in the world that aren't even that bad, like Northern Africa, McDonald's is a considerably source of sustenance for a populace that lives on pennies a day. In other places, it is considered a restaurant of high quality for a night out. Getting rid of slaughterhouses and corporations like Mcdonalds only hurts the poorest of people in the world. So if you want to be vegan for health reasons (personally, I think being vegetarian is slightly healther, you need very little meat in your diet) that's fine, but being a vegan-activist is something only people with a limited point of view and a position of luxury can afford. And you may think you're poor, but you have no idea what poor is until you leave your rich country. TL;DR Eat meat | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
Vegetarian Statistics show that vegetarians have lower risk of getting cancer, heart disease and high blood pressure. According to vegetarian statistics, the probability of getting hypertension if you're a vegetarian is about ½ to 1/3 to that of a non-vegetarian.22% of Caucasian omnivores have hypertension while its only 7% for vegetarians. For African Americans 44% of omnivores likely has hypertension while only 18% have hypertension. Staying on a vegetarian diet for a whole year lowers your cholesterol by 24.3%, as stated by several vegetarian statistics. So it generally follows that most vegetarians, if not all of them have lower cholesterol levels. If you're not a vegetarian you have 25 to 50% higher chances of getting cancer as opposed to a vegetarian. This 25 to 50% vegetarian statistics is even after you have controlled your smoking, body mass index, and socioeconomic factors. Source | ||
Belial88
United States5217 Posts
| ||
stroggos
New Zealand1543 Posts
| ||
PlosionCornu
Italy814 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:53 Belial88 wrote: As someone who's been to Africa and many other continents... It amazes me how people talk about being vegetarian. It's a luxury you can only have when your point of view is so skewed because you are so wealthy. There's no such thing as vegetarian in the majority of the world. The reason for the mass slaughter of animals is because it is efficient. 'Humane slaughter' (an oxymoron) just contributes to rising prices of meat, and in effect makes it so people in developing countries have a harder time receiving sustenance. You may think McDonald's is evil, but in many places in the world that aren't even that bad, like Northern Africa, McDonald's is a considerably source of sustenance for a populace that lives on pennies a day. In other places, it is considered a restaurant of high quality for a night out. Getting rid of slaughterhouses and corporations like Mcdonalds only hurts the poorest of people in the world. So if you want to be vegan for health reasons (personally, I think being vegetarian is slightly healther, you need very little meat in your diet) that's fine, but being a vegan-activist is something only people with a limited point of view and a position of luxury can afford. And you may think you're poor, but you have no idea what poor is until you leave your rich country. TL;DR Eat meat Qft. | ||
alurlol
England197 Posts
I don't understand the reasons behind vegetarians but it's their choice at the end of the day, if they choose to ruin their diet by refusing to eat meat based products well then that's their problem. | ||
Nycaloth
147 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:16 Wasteweiser wrote: Well your video just showed what humans have done to survive since the dawn of our existance. This is wrong. Humans have probably always eaten meat in one form or another, but the scale on which this is happening today is completely different from olden times. At least to me, the truly sickening thing is not the fact that animals are killed and eaten, but rather the industrial scale on which this is happening. Meat used to be something special, something that would be eaten on sundays or holidays, but with the increased standard of living in the western world, people can afford to have "special" food on a daily basis. It really is this increased demand in meat that is at the source of the animal cruelty shown in the video, since the industrial practices involved in cattle raising today make it easier to treat animals as objects in a production process rather then living animals. As has already been mentioned, increased meat production requires more and more farmland to feed the cattle from and may also play a significant role in climate issues. humans have not always put their environment at risk in order to eat a tasty meal. With the increased demand for meat in developing countries, this problem will only get worse. This has nothing to do with survival of the species anymore. The way that society handles the issue is largely unreflected and irresponsible. It seems that a lot of people just see arguments put forth by vegetarians as an attack on their person and lifestyle choice and discard it on those grounds. But i think that even a person who eats meat has to wonder if a quality product can still be obtained in conditions as outlined in this video. Chicken unable to walk and completely high on chemicals a human would need a doctors prescription for, rolling in their own feces having trouble breathing and with a severe risk of fatal heart attacks - is this a bird that you would really like to eat? In summary, eating meat is not a problem, but eating meat on a daily basis might well be. | ||
LunarC
United States1186 Posts
| ||
Rflcrx
503 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:52 writer22816 wrote: If you don't want to eat meat, fine, don't eat it. But stay the fuck out of my life because I'm eating whatever I want. If you would stay out of mine it would be fine, unfortunately you won't, so it is a rather bad deal for me.. | ||
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
Just eat stuff to survive, like they do in the jungle, but respect your food like we were doing way back in the days where we had no pants on, because yes, civilisation does not equal progress. | ||
PlosionCornu
Italy814 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:53 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Humans have evolved and become omnivores yet Vegetarians seem to have a healthier life... Hm... Interesting to say the least. Source Too many variables. You are putting the average american (oh god awful diet) vs an average vegetarian. The average american is not diet aware or stuff like that,and eats random stuff (yeah your shitty hypercarbohydrated "meat") while the average vegetarian is a LOT more aware of what he eats,and what his body needs in order to survive in the right daily quantities (yeah pills that give "meaty" proteins that's what i'm talking about). | ||
Rawenkeke
Norway350 Posts
| ||
DreamScaR
Canada2127 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:53 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Humans have evolved and become omnivores yet Vegetarians seem to have a healthier life... Hm... Interesting to say the least. Source Garrr, I had a long winded post written but it would totally derail so a big no-no from me. So I shall respond with this, while you may be a healthier as a whole, there's also a reason why humans are designed to be omnivores. More often than not, people I know that try to become vegan or vegetarians that give up and try to go back to eating everything on the buffet table run into the issue of malnutrition and not being able to stomach much of anything. Each side has it's ups and downs, personally I'll pick that side that has a steak, baked potato and a salad. | ||
Rasva_Pallo
Finland126 Posts
Well I'm all about lifestyle freedom I mean. If you want to eat veggies for your entire life just for the sake of it,or because you enjoy them,go on. But eating veggies beliving that this somehow will stop animal slaughter is laughable. It's just like stopping fapping and/or having sex in attempt to stop the porn industry or rapists. There are other ways around. That's what I mean. Meat is a physical necessity ,as a human being you need it,just like sex. That's how you are made. Go have some of both. My 2 cents. P.S. There are people that live in worse conditions than those animals. Think about it. Some kiddo starves to death,and you are here ,in your luxurious house, being picky for animals whose destiny is to be hunted. Nice logic bro. Actually logic of individual responsibility is the most effective way of stopping something. How it works? If enough people for whatever reason stopped eating meat it would be not profitable to have as large as meat industry as today so for financial reasons it would stop animal slaughter. If enough people would stop watching porn it would stop porn industry because of financial reasons. This all starts by your personal choices doing/not doing something, you can not decide for other people so the best way to influence is to do choices in your own life. Some people are worse conditions than those animals mostly because of poverty and not having enough to eat. Live stock (not sure if it's the right term but basically farm animals) produce about 10% of what they eat as meat (that's what we eat) so producing meat is actually taking a lot more energy and space than growing vegetables/fruits which can straight be eaten by humans, meaning there is less food, making the food more expensive, making some peoples condition worse. Ps. I don't think there's any prove that sex or meat is physical necessity. Edit: Bad engrish | ||
Kakera
United States419 Posts
On January 18 2011 09:48 Tony Campolo wrote: He needs to become a real man. He'll be happier in the longterm if he doesn't act like a wussy. He'll be too busy fucking girls in the ass to be caring about anxiety and insecurity and having TL's nerd population encouraging him in it. | ||
barth
Ireland1272 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:53 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Humans have evolved and become omnivores yet Vegetarians seem to have a healthier life... Hm... Interesting to say the least. Source Less protein and less saturated fats = less cancer and less heart disease/hypertension? I don't really know what the fuck I'm talking about, just a guess. | ||
Jayme
United States5866 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:53 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Humans have evolved and become omnivores yet Vegetarians seem to have a healthier life... Hm... Interesting to say the least. Source I don't like those statistics at all. They have no point of real comparison, it's comparing non compatible averages. Most of those stats on top of that say things like 25-50% higher...and we don't know of WHAT number. 50% higher of .0000000343% base percent isn't something to cry home about to be honest. | ||
annul
United States2841 Posts
| ||
teh_longinator
Canada725 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:58 Rflcrx wrote: If you would stay out of mine it would be fine, unfortunately you won't, so it is a rather bad deal for me.. Is it a rule for vegetarians to QQ all day about the "injustices" they face. If you don't wanna eat meat, don't fucking eat meat. No one cares. As a great man once said: "Do you know who cares less about your problems than you do?.... Everybody." | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:53 Belial88 wrote: As someone who's been to Africa and many other continents... It amazes me how people talk about being vegetarian. It's a luxury you can only have when your point of view is so skewed because you are so wealthy. There's no such thing as vegetarian in the majority of the world. The reason for the mass slaughter of animals is because it is efficient. 'Humane slaughter' (an oxymoron) just contributes to rising prices of meat, and in effect makes it so people in developing countries have a harder time receiving sustenance. You may think McDonald's is evil, but in many places in the world that aren't even that bad, like Northern Africa, McDonald's is a considerably source of sustenance for a populace that lives on pennies a day. In other places, it is considered a restaurant of high quality for a night out. Getting rid of slaughterhouses and corporations like Mcdonalds only hurts the poorest of people in the world. So if you want to be vegan for health reasons (personally, I think being vegetarian is slightly healther, you need very little meat in your diet) that's fine, but being a vegan-activist is something only people with a limited point of view and a position of luxury can afford. And you may think you're poor, but you have no idea what poor is until you leave your rich country. TL;DR Eat meat Imo it's ok to eat animals if you have to survive, but saying, "Getting rid of slaughterhouses and corporations like Mcdonalds only hurts the poorest of people in the world." is completely wrong. Meat products require FAR more natural resources than their vegetarian analogues (dam you entropy) and hence if we stop producing meat products there is FAR more food to be sold around the world thus helping prevent starvation. (I'm sorry I can't quote any real figures here but they are there if you look them up). Furthermore cattle is one of the world's leading green house gas emitters so if we stop producing them we lower our total greenhouse emissions. Finally, if you went to India instead of Africa you'd probably think that meat is something only the wealthy can afford, so your claim that vegeterianism is spawned from wealth is totally wrong. EDIT: ps. are u serious when you say "McDonald's is a considerably source of sustenance for a populace that lives on pennies a day" ? | ||
Sotamursu
Finland612 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:53 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Humans have evolved and become omnivores yet Vegetarians seem to have a healthier life... Hm... Interesting to say the least. Source Your source is terrible. "According to vegetarian statistics" what the fuck does that even mean? | ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:37 Sotamursu wrote: To be honest they can torture those animals twice as harder, if the quality of the meat stays good and it ups production. No one still has told me why I should give a flying fuck about farm animals. Just use the most efficient method which maximizes quality, if animals suffer because of it, well tough shit. Going vegan makes you more healthy? You can be an omnivore and stay healthy. If all you eat is 12 hamburgers and 5 pizzas a day, it doesn't matter what diet you start to follow. Of course you will lose weight and be healthier. You should give a fuck because of that thing called empathy. Your reaction indicates that you are either sociopath or playing a tough guy. Hopefully the latter. | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:02 annul wrote: if every human on earth went vegetarian, EVERY ANIMAL WOULD DIE. there would not be enough land for cows to graze on, for example, because it would all be in use growing food for humans. one cow can feed a LOT of people for quite a few meals, and takes up a lot less space and requires a lot less arable land than the same amount of grown food. So the penguins in antarctical would die too? :s Obviously vegetarianism cannot happen overnight, it has to happen progressively if it is going to work. Not that it will ever happen though ![]() | ||
tyCe
Australia2542 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:53 Belial88 wrote: As someone who's been to Africa and many other continents... It amazes me how people talk about being vegetarian. It's a luxury you can only have when your point of view is so skewed because you are so wealthy. There's no such thing as vegetarian in the majority of the world. The reason for the mass slaughter of animals is because it is efficient. 'Humane slaughter' (an oxymoron) just contributes to rising prices of meat, and in effect makes it so people in developing countries have a harder time receiving sustenance. You may think McDonald's is evil, but in many places in the world that aren't even that bad, like Northern Africa, McDonald's is a considerably source of sustenance for a populace that lives on pennies a day. In other places, it is considered a restaurant of high quality for a night out. Getting rid of slaughterhouses and corporations like Mcdonalds only hurts the poorest of people in the world. So if you want to be vegan for health reasons (personally, I think being vegetarian is slightly healther, you need very little meat in your diet) that's fine, but being a vegan-activist is something only people with a limited point of view and a position of luxury can afford. And you may think you're poor, but you have no idea what poor is until you leave your rich country. TL;DR Eat meat Thank you very much and 100% agreed. It is good to have the view of someone who is a realist and not an insular indoor activist. However, I suppose it is another matter whether the regulations for slaughter of animals should be changed in NA/EU to account for changing perspectives. Nonetheless, one shouldn't so quick to judge upon such practices, especially in poorer countries or countries where the nutritional alternatives are not viable in any way. As someone who has studied agriculture during high school, I can almost assure that the footage is significantly exaggerated in relation to the Australian industry. | ||
Kakera
United States419 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:06 mcc wrote: You should give a fuck because of that thing called empathy. Your reaction indicates that you are either sociopath or playing a tough guy. Hopefully the latter. I agree with him not with you, they should rise up like Egypt and throw off their shackles if they think they are truly being so mistreated. Go all Animal Farm and junk. But do they? No, cause they enjoy their situations, no worries, no troubles, just eat poop sleep. The life yo. ya know? doya? | ||
brokenSC
United States84 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:52 writer22816 wrote: If you don't want to eat meat, fine, don't eat it. But stay the fuck out of my life because I'm eating whatever I want. This could imply that you're a cannibal. I'm curious why some meats are taboo (at least in America) You will not find many people eating dogs or cats. I guess it's all just a line in the sand. | ||
Torumfroll
290 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:37 forgotten0ne wrote: http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=185282¤tpage=2#23 lol A bit more on topic, I think showing videos of animal cruelty to support your arguments is ridiculous. Like theres some kind of universal rule that every farmer is some kind of sadistic slaughterer who gets a kick from beating around pigs and cattle, and that everyone who eats meat think its ok. I eat meat and I have no intention to stop eating meat just because someone shows me a video of idiots abusing animals. That does not mean that I support their behavior or think its ok to treat animals like shit. Even if the animals are bred for the purpose of slaughter I think they deserve a bit of respect and better living conditions. Going vegan mode does not change how abusive farmers treat their "products". | ||
stroggos
New Zealand1543 Posts
| ||
nOia.pod
Hungary263 Posts
Have you guys ever were on a rural pig slaughter? That's the shit. | ||
Sumsi
Germany593 Posts
So when you stop farming them you take the risk of extincting a lot of animal races. I guess thats not what animal lovers intended to accomplish in the first place. | ||
PlosionCornu
Italy814 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:01 Huumy wrote: Actually logic of individual responsibility is the most effective way of stopping something. How it works? If enough people for whatever reason stopped eating meat it would be not profitable to have as large as meat industry as today so for financial reasons it would stop animal slaughter. If enough people would stop watching porn it would stop porn industry because of financial reasons. This all starts by your personal choices doing/not doing something, you can not decide for other people so the best way to influence is to do choices in your own life. Some people are worse conditions than those animals mostly because of poverty and not having enough to eat. Live stock (not sure if it's the right term but basically farm animals) produce about 10% of what they eat as meat (that's what we eat) so producing meat is actually taking a lot more energy and space than growing vegetables/fruits which can straight be eaten by humans, meaning there is less food, making the food more expensive, making some peoples condition worse. Ps. I don't think there's any prove that sex or meat is physical necessity. Edit: Bad engrish Yeah I agree with your first statement.If your eradicate it from this discussion that is. That kind of "slaughter" (the video) is something that must dealt with through policies,higher control over "meat producing factories",monitoring you know what I mean? Being a vegetarian for the poor animals does not FIT into this. I am aware of the energy deficit that we encounter when we "produce" meat out of veggies. But guess what,we need those proteins. Even if the energy exchange is not that profitable on the first glance. You can help poor people by donating. You aren't helping animals destined to the slaughter by being vegetarian. That's what I'm sayin. Well, I think your (and mine) own existence proves that sex and meat are a physical necessity. Human race dies without those 2 (and an awful lot of other) things. | ||
teh_longinator
Canada725 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:06 Skeny wrote: So the penguins in antarctical would die too? :s Obviously vegetarianism cannot happen overnight, it has to happen progressively if it is going to work. Not that it will ever happen though ![]() Hey Skeny. Have you ever thrown some shrimp on the barbee? That sad face on your post shows that you have a great deal of ignorance! You expect the entire world to give in, and succumb to your vegetarian lifestyle? You know who else tried to force a different lifestyle on people? I'll give you a hint... it ryhmes with "Hitler"! Once you stop "sharing" your vegetarianist ideals (aka, forcing on), I'm sure people will stop torturing you for your choices. No one likes being forced into things. If they wanna eat the bark off of trees, then they'll come see you... | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:07 tyCe wrote: Thank you very much and 100% agreed. It is good to have the view of someone who is a realist and not an insular indoor activist. However, I suppose it is another matter whether the regulations for slaughter of animals should be changed in NA/EU to account for changing perspectives. Nonetheless, one shouldn't so quick to judge upon such practices, especially in poorer countries or countries where the nutritional alternatives are not viable in any way. As someone who has studied agriculture during high school, I can almost assure that the footage is significantly exaggerated in relation to the Australian industry. Although the Australian meat industry does have very high standards which I congratulate them for, what about halal slaughter? I must confess that I'm not sure if it happens in this country but by it's description it sounds very brutal and totally unnecessary. | ||
Ownos
United States2147 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:53 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Humans have evolved and become omnivores yet Vegetarians seem to have a healthier life... Hm... Interesting to say the least. Source How is it interesting. It's pretty obvious. Mama never said to eat my veggies cause they taste good. | ||
Shelke14
Canada6655 Posts
I think the question is why should I suffer just because there is a large population out there that does not understand moderation? Maybe if people could understand that they should do everything in moderation then maybe we probably wouldn't have the need for places that serve this kind of cruelty... Personally, I eat meat twice a week, sometimes three and it's only a small potion of my entire meal. Sooner or later reality is going to hit the world hard and people are (at some point) going to have to rethink their lives. | ||
PlosionCornu
Italy814 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:11 nOia.pod wrote: Those guys who are qqing here about slaughtering animals would have died in the ages where humans had to hunt. Have you guys ever were on a rural pig slaughter? That's the shit. Been there. That's the real shit. As a Kid (was like 6) I was asked to hold tight the rope that kept the pig upside down, while some other guy stabbed the neck. | ||
teh_longinator
Canada725 Posts
I ask that if you feel the Carnivore thread should be closed, then logic would dictate that this one deserves similar treatment. Also, and this is just my opinion... I think that the video in the OP should be removed, as while I feel that it is a part of life, it is NOT a part of life that a younger team liquid forum-dweller needs to see. (NO thirteen year old needs to see that stuff) This is not a demand, mind you... but I do feel strongly, and have just realized that children DO come to these forums (by children, I do mean 12-13 year olds), and frankly, do NOT need to see this... | ||
Sotamursu
Finland612 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:06 mcc wrote: You should give a fuck because of that thing called empathy. Your reaction indicates that you are either sociopath or playing a tough guy. Hopefully the latter. So you make a massive lifestyle choice based on feeling sorry for some animals you saw in a video? Ok. | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:12 teh_longinator wrote: Hey Skeny. Have you ever thrown some shrimp on the barbee? That sad face on your post shows that you have a great deal of ignorance! You expect the entire world to give in, and succumb to your vegetarian lifestyle? You know who else tried to force a different lifestyle on people? I'll give you a hint... it ryhmes with "Hitler"! Once you stop "sharing" your vegetarianist ideals (aka, forcing on), I'm sure people will stop torturing you for your choices. No one likes being forced into things. If they wanna eat the bark off of trees, then they'll come see you... In responce to your question, Australians don't really throw that much shrimp on the barbee, we mostly do lamb and saussages, common misconception. Secondly why would you accuse me of being like Hitler? Surely you realise that there is a difference between forcing your beliefs upon people and argueing for what you believe in. Just because I would like for it to happen doesn't mean I will force it upon people. The post I responded to is totally wrong is almost every way and now it's only fair to accuse me of being a fashist? | ||
![]()
disciple
9070 Posts
I have a couple of friends that are vegans and we were multiple times near braking our year long relationship - all the youtube videos spammed in facebook or my email, walls of text how venags are better in life, hell, ppl even go down to "vegans fuck better". At some point all this becomes a pub discussion of a manchester united and a liverpool fan about which team is better. You can express whatever opinion you want, its your civil right, but the approach of the vegans in most of the cases is completely wrong and provokes a very protective reaction. | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:11 nOia.pod wrote: Those guys who are qqing here about slaughtering animals would have died in the ages where humans had to hunt. Have you guys ever were on a rural pig slaughter? That's the shit. Not true. I would kill an animal if I had to, it's just now I dont have to so I don't. I think we've moved on a long way from human hunting days, especially because now we raise animals for the slaughter which is totally different to what we evolved to do. | ||
Blobskillz
Germany548 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:17 PlosionCornu wrote: Been there. That's the real shit. As a Kid (was like 6) I was asked to hold tight the rope that kept the pig upside down, while some other guy stabbed the neck. you sure you dont mix that up with some mafia stuff? ^^ on a serious note though I have no problem with people refusing to eat meat but I absolutely dont like it when their missionary fanatism takes them over and they try to convince me to refuse eating meat. | ||
Loanshark
China3094 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:02 annul wrote: if every human on earth went vegetarian, EVERY ANIMAL WOULD DIE. there would not be enough land for cows to graze on, for example, because it would all be in use growing food for humans. one cow can feed a LOT of people for quite a few meals, and takes up a lot less space and requires a lot less arable land than the same amount of grown food. This is stupid. Cows have to eat feed to survive and grow larger. Feed has to grow on arable land. It would be much more efficient to simply grow vegetables/wheat on the land, and eat it directly than to feed everything to a cow, then eat the cow. This is because the cow uses most of its energy intake from the food to move around and keep its body warm, etc. You aren't going to get this energy when you eat the meat. | ||
teh_longinator
Canada725 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:19 Skeny wrote: Not true. I would kill an animal if I had to, it's just now I dont have to so I don't. I think we've moved on a long way from human hunting days, especially because now we raise animals for the slaughter which is totally different to what we evolved to do. Actually... I believe that, as humans, we have evolved PAST having to hunt. We have evolved brain power to create farms, and machinery to prepare foods for us.... We have evolved for the simple act of taking from the land. And I do believe you are forcing beliefs, since you have stated again and again, that eating meat is WRONG, and that veggies are the RIGHT way. You preach an ideal that a large percentage of the population does not believe in, but do not give up arguing. There is a difference between giving up, and giving in. If YOU keep doing what you believe is right, then that is enough. ARGUING with others to conform to what you want sounds a lot like you are throwing freedoms out the window... | ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:53 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Humans have evolved and become omnivores yet Vegetarians seem to have a healthier life... Hm... Interesting to say the least. Source I would say that is because environment(by that in this case I mean what foods are available and in what quantities) is changing faster than our bodies. So having healthy omnivore diet requires effort and sometimes refusal to eat tasty meals and most people being lazy and weak-willed therefore have bad diets. Also they put all non-vegetarians together making it just semi-interesting statistics. | ||
Seam
United States1093 Posts
Keep in mind that in the animal kingdom, creatures higher on the food chain have a habit of eating those lower alive. And then you have cats, which torture and kill for fun. | ||
PlosionCornu
Italy814 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:17 Sotamursu wrote: So you make a massive lifestyle choice based on feeling sorry for some animals you saw in a video? Ok. Humn,I don't necessarily want to play the devil's advocate here(i'm not saying that someone's wrong/someone's right)..but..psst...empathy is a purely human feeling. Oh well bonobos and other monkeys have that,that's an exception. What most sensible people "feel" like a correspondence for a pet, for example, is purely a projection of your human mind,your human feelings,which forcefully bends the animal behavior to answer to a pattern. (I E grin => anger ). If a cat stays near your,near your legs,your link that behavior to affection (human feeling). The cat most probably is just staying there cuz you are the one that feeds him,and keeps him warm,so he's "interested" in keeping thing this way. Empathy itself is just an evolutionary device after all. It keeps human being together to maintain them stronger. Animals factor into this cycle only when our minds antromophizes them. | ||
Taosu
Ukraine1074 Posts
| ||
RoseTempest
Canada196 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:12 Skeny wrote: Although the Australian meat industry does have very high standards which I congratulate them for, what about halal slaughter? I must confess that I'm not sure if it happens in thts country but by it's description it sounds very brutal and totally unnecessary. Misconceptions brought on with the 9/11 anti-muslim scare. Halal slaughter is death by severing of the major neck arteries and windpipe of an animal, or dhabia. This drops the animal's blood pressure to zero instantly, blocking air from the brain and instantly making it lose consciousness as it dies. Humane. | ||
Pro]ChoSen-
United States318 Posts
That being said this was hard to watch, I can't even look at it the whole way through. It's very sad to see a living thing go through this if you have any heart at all. What if we got taken over by aliens or something and this is how we were raised / farmed... can u imagine having to go through that... omg | ||
feaynnewedd
Germany41 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:53 Belial88 wrote: As someone who's been to Africa and many other continents... It amazes me how people talk about being vegetarian. It's a luxury you can only have when your point of view is so skewed because you are so wealthy. There's no such thing as vegetarian in the majority of the world. The reason for the mass slaughter of animals is because it is efficient. 'Humane slaughter' (an oxymoron) just contributes to rising prices of meat, and in effect makes it so people in developing countries have a harder time receiving sustenance. You may think McDonald's is evil, but in many places in the world that aren't even that bad, like Northern Africa, McDonald's is a considerably source of sustenance for a populace that lives on pennies a day. In other places, it is considered a restaurant of high quality for a night out. Getting rid of slaughterhouses and corporations like Mcdonalds only hurts the poorest of people in the world. So if you want to be vegan for health reasons (personally, I think being vegetarian is slightly healther, you need very little meat in your diet) that's fine, but being a vegan-activist is something only people with a limited point of view and a position of luxury can afford. And you may think you're poor, but you have no idea what poor is until you leave your rich country. TL;DR Eat meat From the top to the bottom your arguments are wrong in my opinion. That there is no such thing as vegetarianism in poor countries is because people struggle to get by, and the can't afford to eat meat every day. And the problem as described in this video is the mass caging and mass slaughter in modern slaughterhouses. This crass cruelty that animals are treated worse than anything you would wish your worst enemy. If people eat meat like it's something special, maybe every other week or so... it would just be awesome. Eating less meat does not hurt the poorest - it helps them. Producing meat requires unbelievable amounts of soil (and water, at that) in order to get the amount of forage required. And that drives the prices for staple foods like grain, rice, and vegetables up, up and up. Which hurts the poorest of people. If there wouldn't be such a giant demand for forage, there would also be less ground water poisoning because of less fertilization with poisonous chemicals. And McDonald's is not a sustenance for a populace that lives on pennies a day. Nowhere. That doesn't make any sense. Where the hell did you come up with that? You might say that you will not change your lifestyle and eating habits, but at least give vegetarians credit and don't mock / bash on them. I like meat. I love meat. But by not eating it, I contribute to making this world a better place, for reasons above. + Show Spoiler + By the way, there is a lot of vegetarianism in India and China, the two largest populations in the world.... | ||
Ethic
Canada439 Posts
You WILL try, but you won't succeed. Animal Slaughter is just something that happens, and It will never be stopped whether you or I or anyone else tries. ![]() | ||
mytent
United States156 Posts
There are humans out there who are living under the worst conditions, humans who are suffering a million times worse than these animals do. HUMAN BEINGS, children, parents, brothers, sisters, fathers, mothers... all suffering, dying in God knows how many ways.. and you've decided to... ... take up anti-meat activism? ..are you kidding me???? | ||
Elwar
953 Posts
Oh and the video isn't shocking. These are creatures we raise for the sole purpose of devouring so that we may live and eat well. I generally couldn't care less how the food gets to my plate or what trauma the animal goes through. Of course if there are cheap and efficient methods to reduce the animals suffering then sure go ahead. But the bottom line is the bottom line. | ||
legatus legionis
Netherlands559 Posts
First we hunted and ate lots of animals. We also ate some plants. It was only after we discovered aggriculture and farming that we could settle down. Can you imagine saying you don't want to eat meat back then? You would die and people would think you are crazy. We are meant to eat meat. What I'm getting at is that the way our society has developed to this day, allows people to have choices like these. Which is fine, but it will never become a standard because it goes against nature. Also on the topic of slaughtering, for our own sake it's the best if the way all the stuff surrounding the herding of animals and slaughtering them is done in the best way possible, so we get good control on hygiene and sickness, good quality meat, cost effective production etc. But never forget that we are at the top of the foodchain, we are the dictators of the animal kingdom even though we can disagree amongst ourselves about how we should treat those below us, when it comes to those lower on the foodchain, anything goes, no matter how brutal it can appear to the idea of our current society, survival of the fittest. Laws excluding though, as long we aren't in a free for all society. Edit, think about other foodchains in nature, if a bear suddenly refuses to eat salmon, he will die and there will be so many salmons, they cannot all feed and part of them will also die. Or there is so many salmon and they kill all their food, and then their food cannot repoduce, so the salmon dies out later, and then the bear dies out because there is no salmon etc. Everywhere in the foodchain, those situations are constantly balancing. Now imagine any of them decides not to feed. | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:23 teh_longinator wrote: Actually... I believe that, as humans, we have evolved PAST having to hunt. We have evolved brain power to create farms, and machinery to prepare foods for us.... We have evolved for the simple act of taking from the land. And I do believe you are forcing beliefs, since you have stated again and again, that eating meat is WRONG, and that veggies are the RIGHT way. You preach an ideal that a large percentage of the population does not believe in, but do not give up arguing. There is a difference between giving up, and giving in. If YOU keep doing what you believe is right, then that is enough. ARGUING with others to conform to what you want sounds a lot like you are throwing freedoms out the window... I'm not sure that I've made a right wrong distinction in this thread, I have argued in favour of vegetarianism. I fail to see anything wrong with using facts to argue. I started posing in this thread in decent of something thing that were said, such as vegetarianism being unhealthy. I have never said that eating meat is wrong, infact I think I've been quite accepting of meat eating. Nonetheless you have accused me of trying to take away peoples freedoms which would make a very good arguement in your favour if I had done so. "ARGUING with others to conform to what you want sounds a lot like you are throwing freedoms out the window..." This needs more explanation. | ||
RoseTempest
Canada196 Posts
Wonder what they're for... | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:30 mytent wrote: ... There are humans out there who are living under the worst conditions, humans who are suffering a million times worse than these animals do. HUMAN BEINGS, children, parents, brothers, sisters, fathers, mothers... all suffering, dying in God knows how many ways.. and you've decided to... ... take up anti-meat activism? ..are you kidding me???? There are children suffering and you play starcraft. How could you? Or can you do more than one thing like us? EDIT: and as already explained by me and others going vegan/vegetarian will increase world food production to help feed these suffering people | ||
PlosionCornu
Italy814 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:19 Blobskillz wrote: you sure you dont mix that up with some mafia stuff? ^^ Nah,that's an actual tradition. Every year in january most of the rural southern italian families kill a pig in order to make homemade sausages,ham,pancetta etc. Were I live there are tons of these yearly events,others are like the various reaps,wine,tomatoes,oil,wood etc. We produce 1/4 of what we need to live by paying attention to the land during weekends. The rest of the week is normal university/job :l. The mafia does not kill you that way,if you are curious :D. They have..other..procedures... | ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:17 Sotamursu wrote: So you make a massive lifestyle choice based on feeling sorry for some animals you saw in a video? Ok. Did I say anything about lifestyle choices ? I reacted to you saying you don't give a fuck if animal is tortured or suffers. | ||
nOia.pod
Hungary263 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:19 Skeny wrote: Not true. I would kill an animal if I had to, it's just now I dont have to so I don't. I think we've moved on a long way from human hunting days, especially because now we raise animals for the slaughter which is totally different to what we evolved to do. Next question: do you think you are able to kill an animal? Because telling that you would kill if you had to is not the same. As I said I've been on many pig and cow slaughtering because I was raised in a rural area. Do you think it is that easy to just end something's life even if it's just a pig? No, it's not. So the conclusion is, you would starve to death without somebody doing the dirty job for you. You should have to thankful those who are working in slaughterhouses because you obviously wouldn't have the guts to stab an animal. | ||
Macabre
United States1262 Posts
| ||
snpnx
Germany454 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:52 Lexpar wrote: You're wrong. Supply and demand. Sure 1 person not buying meat might mean that there is no change in the amount of animals tortured and killed. But if 1% of the population doesn't buy meat? That's millions of animals being saved in a generation. 5% of the population could mean billions of animals that aren't raised solely to be tortured and killed. Do I have to explain to you that as a company meat producers will not make significantly more product than they can sell? It doesn't make business sense. It's wasted money. It puzzles me how you could blindly deny this logic. You shouldn't go vegan for a better treatment of animals, you should protest for a better treatment of animals, at least in my opinion. Of course, if you want to go vegan for health reasons, that's a different story, and a reason that I can understand. Anyways, such posts as the op's are not really useful. I didn't watch the video, but I am pretty sure I know what the content is like. | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:38 nOia.pod wrote: Next question: do you think you are able to kill an animal? Because telling that you would kill if you had to is not the same. As I said I've been on many pig and cow slaughtering because I was raised in a rural area. Do you think it is that easy to just end something's life even if it's just a pig? No, it's not. So the conclusion is, you would starve to death without somebody doing the dirty job for you. You should have to thankful those who are working in slaughterhouses because you obviously wouldn't have the guts to stab an animal. I think I gassed about 20 mice when I was on work experience. That was before I turned vegetarian though. | ||
alurlol
England197 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:40 Macabre wrote: Having a nice steak with my beer right now. Let's watch some GSL Team League! I'm envious to say the least, but isn't it a bit late for dinner?! | ||
nOia.pod
Hungary263 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:41 Skeny wrote: I think I gassed about 20 mice when I was on work experience. That was before I turned vegetarian though. Sorry, but I just have to laugh on that :D | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:41 snpnx wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUQG9PhDNnk&feature=player_profilepage I'd say that this is worse than the video in the OP but if I take away my personal bias it's probably more fair to say that it's just as bad. | ||
alurlol
England197 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:41 Skeny wrote: I think I gassed about 20 mice when I was on work experience. That was before I turned vegetarian though. Mice are vermin, that's completely different from killing a large animal, don't kid yourself. | ||
snpnx
Germany454 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:43 Skeny wrote: I'd say that this is worse than the video in the OP but if I take away my personal bias it's probably more fair to say that it's just as bad. Yes, I agree with you. ![]() | ||
Taosu
Ukraine1074 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:44 alurlol wrote: Mice are vermin, that's completely different from killing a large animal, don't kid yourself. Interesting. Where's the boundary between what is killable and what is not? Size? | ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:26 PlosionCornu wrote: Humn,I don't necessarily want to play the devil's advocate here(i'm not saying that someone's wrong/someone's right)..but..psst...empathy is a purely human feeling. Oh well bonobos and other monkeys have that,that's an exception. What most sensible people "feel" like a correspondence for a pet, for example, is purely a projection of your human mind,your human feelings,which forcefully bends the animal behavior to answer to a pattern. (I E grin => anger ). If a cat stays near your,near your legs,your link that behavior to affection (human feeling). The cat most probably is just staying there cuz you are the one that feeds him,and keeps him warm,so he's "interested" in keeping thing this way. Empathy itself is just an evolutionary device after all. It keeps human being together to maintain them stronger. Animals factor into this cycle only when our minds antromophizes them. Since it seems your reply is actually to my post. You limiting empathy to humans and monkeys is very limiting. I would love to see how you would support that statement. Empathy is a feeling and is evolutionary benefit for social species (at least), so why are you limiting it so ? Also saying that cats do not show genuine affection is so naive, you are putting humans on a pedestal where there is none. I would say animal behavior fits pretty well with them having very similar emotions to us, and no I am not talking about misrepresenting "cat's grins" or other facial expressions but more general patterns. Of course there is difference between species, sometimes huge, but saying emotions are human domain is false. | ||
nOia.pod
Hungary263 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:44 alurlol wrote: Mice are vermin, that's completely different from killing a large animal, don't kid yourself. As alurlol said. You vegan babyboys would cry if you would have to stab a huge animal and wait till it bleeds out. | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:44 alurlol wrote: Mice are vermin, that's completely different from killing a large animal, don't kid yourself. There's just no pleasing you is there! 20 mice make up about 1 piglet which is almost a large animal. EDIT: Oh I've also killed fish, are they vermin? | ||
Sotamursu
Finland612 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:35 mcc wrote: Did I say anything about lifestyle choices ? I reacted to you saying you don't give a fuck if animal is tortured or suffers. It's pretty easy to justify veganism, if you can argue that you should care about animals. There's pretty much no other good reason to be a vegan. I assumed you're a vegan and you probably watched some of these vegan propaganda videos which influenced your decision. I'm making generalizations here, so if you aren't a vegan just ignore this. | ||
Rflcrx
503 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:19 disciple wrote: You can live the life you want and be proud and happy about it, but the major thing that causes a conflict is how aggressive the veggies are in their propaganda. Live just a week as a vegetarian and you will notice that it is far worse as a vegetarian. I usually don't tell that I am one at dinner/restaurant/cafeteria because you won't have a peaceful dinner than. Meateaters fucking always want to argue about it. I just want to have my dinner and if somebody knows they always start with bullshit like "you have to eat meat man, or you die!!1". Trust me, meat eater propaganda and aggresiveness is far worse. Unlike you I have seen both sides. | ||
alurlol
England197 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:46 Taosu wrote: Interesting. Where's the boundary between what is killable and what is not? Size? Vermin are a nuisance, it's got nothing to do with size, they are animals yes but small animals which cause a problem, this is why you will find exterminators for places they prove to be a problem. If my cat brings back a dead mouse I'm not going to lose sleep, if it's still alive I'll attempt to put it back in the wild, because that's just what you should do. However, trying to say killing vermin is the same as killing a large farm animal is wrong, as it's not the same thing, especially if they were gassed, there's no physical attribute involved in that. | ||
Elwar
953 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:43 Skeny wrote: I'd say that this is worse than the video in the OP but if I take away my personal bias it's probably more fair to say that it's just as bad. While that video is obnoxious, the presenter raises a good point. Animals we farm are tremendously successful from a classical evolution standpoint (ie. the ultimate goal is reproduction). | ||
PlosionCornu
Italy814 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:46 Taosu wrote: Interesting. Where's the boundary between what is killable and what is not? Size? It depends on how closely the animal in question resembles a human being. In shape and in "antropomorphized" behaviors. I think at least. I mean noone came up to me screaming that killing these dudes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placozoa is CRUEL. (they belong to the animal reign lol,most elementary form of life in that array) | ||
snpnx
Germany454 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:52 alurlol wrote: Vermin are a nuisance, it's got nothing to do with size, they are animals yes but small animals which cause a problem, this is why you will find exterminators for places they prove to be a problem. If my cat brings back a dead mouse I'm not going to lose sleep, if it's still alive I'll attempt to put it back in the wild, because that's just what you should do. However, trying to say killing vermin is the same as killing a large farm animal is wrong, as it's not the same thing, especially if they were gassed, there's no physical attribute involved in that. Then it should be okay to gas farm animals, yeh? Man, hear yourself talk, there's no difference in killing a mice or a pig, both are animals. You preach one thing and in the next turn completely ignore it. I don't think this kind of argument is helping you a lot in fending for your cause.. | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:51 Sotamursu wrote: It's pretty easy to justify veganism, if you can argue that you should care about animals. There's pretty much no other good reason to be a vegan. I assumed you're a vegan and you probably watched some of these vegan propaganda videos which influenced your decision. I'm making generalizations here, so if you aren't a vegan just ignore this. There are also religous, environmental and humanitarian reasons but those are a lot rarer. Just saying ![]() | ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:30 legatus legionis wrote: I don't think that empathy, one of the key characteristics of human beings, applies to anything other than humans, considering we are human. When you see someone bump his toe, you know exactly how that feels, therefor you can actually be compassionate. When you see an animal bump his toe, you have no idea how that feels, registers, works etc. So on that basis, I cannot see how people can actually be empathatic, even if they say so. Could be some social moral norm to be part of "good" people. (there's no good or bad) First we hunted and ate lots of animals. We also ate some plants. It was only after we discovered aggriculture and farming that we could settle down. Can you imagine saying you don't want to eat meat back then? You would die and people would think you are crazy. We are meant to eat meat. What I'm getting at is that the way our society has developed to this day, allows people to have choices like these. Which is fine, but it will never become a standard because it goes against nature. Also on the topic of slaughtering, for our own sake it's the best if the way all the stuff surrounding the herding of animals and slaughtering them is done in the best way possible, so we get good control on hygiene and sickness, good quality meat, cost effective production etc. But never forget that we are at the top of the foodchain, we are the dictators of the animal kingdom even though we can disagree amongst ourselves about how we should treat those below us, when it comes to those lower on the foodchain, anything goes, no matter how brutal it can appear to the idea of our current society, survival of the fittest. Laws excluding though, as long we aren't in a free for all society. Edit, think about other foodchains in nature, if a bear suddenly refuses to eat salmon, he will die and there will be so many salmons, they cannot all feed and part of them will also die. Or there is so many salmon and they kill all their food, and then their food cannot repoduce, so the salmon dies out later, and then the bear dies out because there is no salmon etc. Everywhere in the foodchain, those situations are constantly balancing. Now imagine any of them decides not to feed. You are missing some points. You actually know pretty well thanks to modern biology how animal feels when it hits something. They have the same physiological mechanism as us, there is no reason to think they suffer in any substantially different way. Empathy is a feeling not a rule (although is base of many ethical rules) so its limits are not bound by logic really. Feeling empathy for an animal suffering also does not mean that you do not eat meat. It just means you want to minimize their suffering as much as possible. Of course people who have more empathy with animal than with humans are strange and dangerous, but having no empathy with tortured animals is not a good sign. | ||
nOia.pod
Hungary263 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:54 snpnx wrote: Then it should be okay to gas farm animals, yeh? Man, hear yourself talk, there's no difference in killing a mice or a pig, both are animals. You preach one thing and in the next turn completely ignore it. I don't think this kind of argument is helping you a lot in fending for your cause.. Okay, but it's wrong to slap a fly too. Even if it's annoying as hell on a good summer day, when you are trying to nap and that fkin fly is cruising around your head. | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:52 alurlol wrote: Vermin are a nuisance, it's got nothing to do with size, they are animals yes but small animals which cause a problem, this is why you will find exterminators for places they prove to be a problem. If my cat brings back a dead mouse I'm not going to lose sleep, if it's still alive I'll attempt to put it back in the wild, because that's just what you should do. However, trying to say killing vermin is the same as killing a large farm animal is wrong, as it's not the same thing, especially if they were gassed, there's no physical attribute involved in that. Well would it please you more if I also said that I've killed and gutted fish? | ||
MamiyaOtaru
United States1687 Posts
| ||
PlosionCornu
Italy814 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:57 nOia.pod wrote: Okay, but it's wrong to slap a fly too. Even if it's annoying as hell on a good summer day, when you are trying to nap and that fkin fly is cruising around your head. Goddamn those assholes WOULD NEVER GO AWAY DAMMIT. I hate them more than the average spider who crawls his way inside my home inside some piece of wood. GSL starting up soon,I'm out fellas. Eating everything up I will,down to them stones betcha. Bb. | ||
snpnx
Germany454 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:57 nOia.pod wrote: Okay, but it's wrong to slap a fly too. Even if it's annoying as hell on a good summer day, when you are trying to nap and that fkin fly is cruising around your head. Technically yes. Even though I like the stuff PloisonCornu posted ("It depends on how closely the animal in question resembles a human being. In shape and in "antropomorphized" behaviors.") though I don't think that you can use that as a universal rule. But I'm no vegetarian, and I kill flies when they bother me ![]() | ||
Lythox
Netherlands161 Posts
| ||
Kamais_Ookin
Canada4218 Posts
| ||
nOia.pod
Hungary263 Posts
On February 09 2011 18:00 snpnx wrote: Technically yes. Even though I like the stuff PloisonCornu posted ("It depends on how closely the animal in question resembles a human being. In shape and in "antropomorphized" behaviors.") though I don't think that you can use that as a universal rule. But I'm no vegetarian, and I kill flies when they bother me ![]() And we are killing a pig, when we are hungry ![]() | ||
alurlol
England197 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:54 snpnx wrote: Then it should be okay to gas farm animals, yeh? Man, hear yourself talk, there's no difference in killing a mice or a pig, both are animals. You preach one thing and in the next turn completely ignore it. I don't think this kind of argument is helping you a lot in fending for your cause.. I'm just answering the question as it's been asked, you deny there being a difference but there is, can you really tell me you'd kill a mice as non hesitantly as a cow? And also how am I preaching anything, by that logic everyone in this damn topic is preaching something, I'm just stating my opinion. | ||
Sotamursu
Finland612 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:55 Skeny wrote: There are also religous, environmental and humanitarian reasons but those are a lot rarer. Just saying ![]() Global warming is a another topic entirely, though I'm not convinced on the actions of humans causing it. If you are talking about other enviromental stuff, well you should be protesting for better enviromental care and not boycott every animal product. Doing absolutely anything because of religious reasons if borderline retarded and any intelligent person can see that. Humanitarian reasons are basically just feeling sorry for the animals. | ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:51 Sotamursu wrote: It's pretty easy to justify veganism, if you can argue that you should care about animals. There's pretty much no other good reason to be a vegan. I assumed you're a vegan and you probably watched some of these vegan propaganda videos which influenced your decision. I'm making generalizations here, so if you aren't a vegan just ignore this. I am definitely not ![]() | ||
ganjazerg
82 Posts
wow... sure makes that sandwich taste different. | ||
snpnx
Germany454 Posts
On February 09 2011 18:01 alurlol wrote: I'm just answering the question as it's been asked, you deny there being a difference but there is, can you really tell me you'd kill a mice as non hesitantly as a cow? And also how am I preaching anything, by that logic everyone in this damn topic is preaching something, I'm just stating my opinion. The mice bothers me, so I would kill it. The cow gives me food, so I would kill it. It's the same for me, yes. Edit: It doesn't matter so much which animal it is, as it matters what relationship you have to it. I'd never be able to kill my cat, since I lived together with it for quite some time now. And I'd never be able to kill a cow that I developed a personal bond with, as I wouldn't kill my own pet mouse. As the saying goes, you don't kill something with a name. | ||
nOia.pod
Hungary263 Posts
| ||
Belial88
United States5217 Posts
mo it's ok to eat animals if you have to survive, but saying, "Getting rid of slaughterhouses and corporations like Mcdonalds only hurts the poorest of people in the world." is completely wrong. Meat products require FAR more natural resources than their vegetarian analogues (dam you entropy) and hence if we stop producing meat products there is FAR more food to be sold around the world thus helping prevent starvation. (I'm sorry I can't quote any real figures here but they are there if you look them up). While from a completely rational viewpoint this makes sense, from a logistic standpoint, as well as realistic standpoint, you are wrong. Rich countries in the west like meat, we make a lot of meat, and we like vegetables, and we make a lot of vegetables. We just make a lot of food in general. Now, you aren't complaining about veggies. You are complaining about meat, which we make a lot of. We make so much meat, that we actually export some of this meat to developing countries. By limiting demand, or to be more inclusive and direct, by hurting supply/suppliers, you lessen how much meat we export. Now in a perfect world we wouldn't waste the food on our plates, and mail it to Africa. But there are huge logistic issues, as well as health, issues with that. All in all, we have a surplus, and we can export our meat, made cheap by popular demand, to poor people. Furthermore cattle is one of the world's leading green house gas emitters so if we stop producing them we lower our total greenhouse emissions. If you want to have an argument about the farts of farm animals leading to the destruction of the world, then go for it. But don't derail this argument by changing subjects. I may agree with you on this one, but it's off topic to say the least. Finally, if you went to India instead of Africa you'd probably think that meat is something only the wealthy can afford, so your claim that vegeterianism is spawned from wealth is totally wrong. It's not necessarily meat, or vegetarianism, that I am saying is for the poor/rich. A huge redux of what I am saying is that by limiting economy, you can hurt poor people far away - in essence, globalization, and the narrow viewpoint held by those who think that their actions have no impact on others, particularly when it comes to sectors of the economy. My point of view of extreme veganism like PETA is the same as my point of view against monopolies, and against simple, neighborhood vandals. When your goal is to hurt a sector of the economy, the damage can hurt the livelihood of others, sometimes people who are extremely sensitive to such damages. I would say the same thing if there was a radical meat-only group who's goal was to destroy the crops of international agricultural giants. Many countries don't have the choice to pick and choose between meat and vegetables, and these two goods are often interchangeable in poor societies, so raising the price of one leads to a rise in the price of the other (complementary goods). And while I haven't been to India, I have been to Hindu societies, and poor Hindus eat meat too. I think you are referring to beef, but the poster wasn't saying don't eat beef he was saying don't eat meat. However, I don't expect you to know this and poor people in Hindu countries eat meat, eat vegeatbles, eat whatever they can afford, just like poor people everywhere. EDIT: ps. are u serious when you say "McDonald's is a considerably source of sustenance for a populace that lives on pennies a day" ? From the top to the bottom your arguments are wrong in my opinion. That there is no such thing as vegetarianism in poor countries is because people struggle to get by, and the can't afford to eat meat every day. And the problem as described in this video is the mass caging and mass slaughter in modern slaughterhouses. This crass cruelty that animals are treated worse than anything you would wish your worst enemy. If people eat meat like it's something special, maybe every other week or so... it would just be awesome. To make it clearer, in many countries McDonalds is a luxury. In poor areas in America, it is a major source of sustanence (contributes greatly to health problems but at least they eat, and they do pick it for a reason). I know this because I've traveled (more than once I was told the best restaurant in town was McDonalds). Eating less meat does not hurt the poorest - it helps them. Producing meat requires unbelievable amounts of soil (and water, at that) in order to get the amount of forage required. And that drives the prices for staple foods like grain, rice, and vegetables up, up and up. Which hurts the poorest of people. If there wouldn't be such a giant demand for forage, there would also be less ground water poisoning because of less fertilization with poisonous chemicals. As I mentioned above, it's a logistic issue. Rich countries make a surplus of meat, poor countries benefit from the surplus through international trade. If rich countries stopped eating so much meat, poor countries do not have an import for cheap food. Ideally, the most efficient thing would be for everyone to eat rice/maize (depending on geographical location) but that would not provide enough nutrients, even for vegans. The fact of the matter is life is inefficient, yet running an inefficient system of meats like kobe beef somehow leads to a rise in the standard of living. People need rich, excessive foods, even if to give them more reason to make more money, to be more productive, even if the reason is so stupid to take a girl out for a fancy dinner in a materialistic society. And while materialism may be the cause of a loss of spirituality in our world today, that man driving a lamborghini in my city who just made national news by beating up his famous pop-star singer girlfriend is driving many in my country to spend more money, to work longer hours, and to make better things, sometimes unnecessary, and sometimes very necessary. And McDonald's is not a sustenance for a populace that lives on pennies a day. Nowhere. That doesn't make any sense. Where the hell did you come up with that? Take a drive through the ghetto, actually, but many people rely on mcdonalds. Maybe a bit dramatic what I said - to be clear, in poor countries it is a luxurious place to eat where luxury does not exist, and for rich countries it may be a way for the kids to be fed when they cant do so otherwise, as easily, so they have more time, and a better standard of living if there were no mcdonalds. You might say that you will not change your lifestyle and eating habits, but at least give vegetarians credit and don't mock / bash on them. I like meat. I love meat. But by not eating it, I contribute to making this world a better place, for reasons above. I don't mind vegetarians, or vegans, and I actually believe they live a much healthier lifestyle than I do (nevermind I'm a smoker). But I don't eat to be healthy (I'm quite healthy as it is, and I don't eat unhealthiy, ie no fast food, snacks, or junk food, but I do drink a lot of milk and eat a lot of meat), and I do realize the importance of overconsumption in western societies. I'm an economist (with a degree to prove it) and I've traveled much of the world, and have seen what the excess in our country has done for other countries - great things. Our unending thirst for oil props up entire continents, our love of junk food gives luxury where none exists, and our fast cars are a means for transnational transportation where horseback dominated. Being vegan is fine, but groups like PETA turn a lifestyle choice into an aggressive campaign that's blind to whom it hurts. | ||
KingAce
United States471 Posts
On February 09 2011 15:05 Shigy wrote: i hate getting into semantics but he said that plants have the most energy? whatever that means. assuming he's referring to calories, it's still wildly inaccurate. yeah of course energy is lost in between each step, because animals tend to use it when they eat, sleep, fuck, and shit. but since animals eat so many god damn plants (and other animals) they store up fat (energy?!) so that they can live without food for more than a few days. now, because animals eat a bunch of other plants (and animals) they have this accumulation of fat/energy/calories. pound for pound, animals have "more energy than plants' the fuck am i even talking about? you guys are messed up lol It's called google, look up Energy Pyramid. It's not that complicated, trees, plants receive energy from the sun in the process making their own food. Herbivores that eat the plants, gains the energy within them. They use some of it storing the rest of it, and whatever eats herbivores replays the situation. Point is at the top of the food chain they're is less energy than at the bottom. So because vegetarians eat plants at the bottom of the food chain they get more energy than they would from eating animal that eats plants. Herbivores although usually prey because they lack tools to defend themselves, are usually stronger and more powerful or durable. Whales eat plankton for example. | ||
Belial88
United States5217 Posts
Now if american shuttled dolphins into a bay, that would be odd. But the Japanese have been doing this for a long time, and it is a part of their cultural identity. To say that it's stupid, is to say your culture is superior to theirs, which is just the most arrogant thing I have ever heard in my life. | ||
Zlasher
United States9129 Posts
Man this threads all over the place though, I'm seeing posts about veganism, vegetarianism, animal rights, global warming? o.o whats going on | ||
MiraMax
Germany532 Posts
On February 09 2011 18:03 Sotamursu wrote: Global warming is a another topic entirely, though I'm not convinced on the actions of humans causing it. If you are talking about other enviromental stuff, well you should be protesting for better enviromental care and not boycott every animal product. Doing absolutely anything because of religious reasons if borderline retarded and any intelligent person can see that. Humanitarian reasons are basically just feeling sorry for the animals. I think you are taking a bit the easy way out here. Do you think that a moral system should be equally valid for any moral agent? If, to take an exotic example, an advanced alien race would fly to planet earth, imprison all of mankind and begin to eat one after the other, do you think that they would be doing something "wrong", in any meaningful sense of the term? | ||
SerpentFlame
415 Posts
On February 09 2011 18:05 snpnx wrote: The mice bothers me, so I would kill it. The cow gives me food, so I would kill it. It's the same for me, yes. Edit: It doesn't matter so much which animal it is, as it matters what relationship you have to it. I'd never be able to kill my cat, since I lived together with it for quite some time now. And I'd never be able to kill a cow that I developed a personal bond with, as I wouldn't kill my own pet mouse. As the saying goes, you don't kill something with a name. Your cat isn't special among animals, and by owning one you've certainly seen how they have feelings albeit different from human ones. I'm sure you'll think about animal feelings and empathy in life when s/he dies. I know I did when my cat died. Additionally, I really hope that people who eat meat (myself included) stop trying to act so high and mighty about it. There's really no need to be on the moral high ground when we're not. Eating meat is something that's done out of habit, and out of convenience, and certainly not born of morals. That humans aren't alone in having feelings among animals is well-documented by the scientific community. Also the claim that most meat (at least in the US) isn't factory farmed is really just false, if you look up the statistics. Here's one for you now: http://www.pressherald.com/life/foodanddining/the-real-cost-of-the-food-we-eat_2010-09-01.html. | ||
teh_longinator
Canada725 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:46 Taosu wrote: Interesting. Where's the boundary between what is killable and what is not? Size? I find babies to be a nusiance... do I get a free pass to deal with these "vermin"? | ||
SerpentFlame
415 Posts
On February 09 2011 18:12 Belial88 wrote: And by the way, commenting on things like The Cove, and Austrailian Hallal (sic) - these are cultural activities, and it suprises me how so many people enjoyed the cove. Activities such as killing dolphins in the bay have gone back for centuries, and are an integral part of the identity of certain cultures. To say such activities are cruel and should be outlawed sounds like the epitome of close-minded personality, prejudice, and lack of appreciation for different cultures. Does it make sense? Maybe not. Is it stupid and wasteful? Probably. Outdated? Definately. But these activities identify a culture you will never be a part of, and may never understand. Now if american shuttled dolphins into a bay, that would be odd. But the Japanese have been doing this for a long time, and it is a part of their cultural identity. To say that it's stupid, is to say your culture is superior to theirs, which is just the most arrogant thing I have ever heard in my life. This is a dangerous line to walk. Aztec cultures supported cannibalism, as do Paupa New Guineaus. This is not to say that you're wrong, but the brand of reasoning you're using is a very fine one. | ||
nOia.pod
Hungary263 Posts
On February 09 2011 18:20 teh_longinator wrote: I find babies to be a nusiance... do I get a free pass to deal with these "vermin"? Wish granted, you are now a gynaecologist. But you have to deal with 80+ yo women. + Show Spoiler + Oh, wrong thread! :D | ||
Sotamursu
Finland612 Posts
On February 09 2011 18:17 MiraMax wrote: I think you are taking a bit the easy way out here. Do you think that a moral system should be equally valid for any moral agent? If, to take an exotic example, an advanced alien race would fly to planet earth, imprison all of mankind and begin to eat one after the other, do you think that they would be doing something "wrong", in any meaningful sense of the term? There is no objective morality. Of course I would think that they're doing something wrong, because mankind is suffering. Mankind is what keeps me alive and provides for me. But from the alien pow, they aren't doing anything wrong. I don't really understand what you mean by taking the easy way out. I feel like you're trying to go into arguing semantics. | ||
SerpentFlame
415 Posts
| ||
SerpentFlame
415 Posts
On February 09 2011 17:52 Rflcrx wrote: Live just a week as a vegetarian and you will notice that it is far worse as a vegetarian. I usually don't tell that I am one at dinner/restaurant/cafeteria because you won't have a peaceful dinner than. Meateaters fucking always want to argue about it. I just want to have my dinner and if somebody knows they always start with bullshit like "you have to eat meat man, or you die!!1". Trust me, meat eater propaganda and aggresiveness is far worse. Unlike you I have seen both sides. This is pretty true. All of my friends give me TONS of sass when I try to limit my meat consumption by ordering a vegetarian dish once in a while. Just look at this thread and see that meat eaters are just as aggressive at pushing their lifestyles. | ||
TrinitySC
101 Posts
| ||
KameZerg
Sweden1759 Posts
| ||
555
56 Posts
On February 09 2011 18:11 KingAce wrote: It's called google, look up Energy Pyramid. It's not that complicated, trees, plants receive energy from the sun in the process making their own food. Herbivores that eat the plants, gains the energy within them. They use some of it storing the rest of it, and whatever eats herbivores replays the situation. Point is at the top of the food chain they're is less energy than at the bottom. So because vegetarians eat plants at the bottom of the food chain they get more energy than they would from eating animal that eats plants. Herbivores although usually prey because they lack tools to defend themselves, are usually stronger and more powerful or durable. Whales eat plankton for example. I think you are missing the point of the Energy Pyramid. There is no reason for the plants at the bottom to contain more energy. Instead the energy is concentrated by the cows and whatnot, so in general meats and fats should contain more energy. It would be correct to say that it would be most efficient to eat plants, but you would have to eat a lot in comparison to eating an animal. Elephants and such have to basically eat plants all day, compared to a carnivore. Also herbivores being stronger has nothing to do with anything. I'm assuming you are referring to their size as evidence for plants having more energy. That would not be true, herbivores are in general larger because the carnivore needs to spend more energy chasing and hunting food, while herbivores can just eat from basically anywhere. I am not a vegetarian. Although I do agree that there are several health benefits for cutting down (not eliminating) meat, I do not feel any moral obligations at all to not eat meat. I see my food, and myself, as just complex machines. | ||
thehitman
1105 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:36 Lexpar wrote: I'm not going to research your argument. That makes no sense within the scheme of a debate. Why should I work to prove you right? If you want to make a point (that's fundamentally wrong in the first place), at least attempt support it. I've not heard of a single study that "proves" that human beings need meat". Every nutrient, vitamin, fat, and protein that is found in livestock can be found in plants. Prove me wrong? I'm not going to waste my time to prove vegans wrong. You don't eat meat and animal products=more for me, thank you very much. If vegans don't care about their health why should I be forcing them to care. I'm a bit indifferent about vegetarians because they at least eat eggs, cheese, drink milk, etc and consume their daily nutrients. | ||
chuigo
Australia93 Posts
| ||
KameZerg
Sweden1759 Posts
| ||
imapotato
New Zealand35 Posts
To make matters worse the person who started this whole thread comes from NZ were we have incredibly high standards on animal cruelty, so the video doesn't really relate to him at all. I guess the thing i have to say is that there's nothing wrong with eating meat, the only thing i would like to see happen is to see stricter rules on how animals are treated in these farms, feeding people sick animals is not alright! Stop forcing your goddamn life style on other people! | ||
Skeny
Australia121 Posts
On February 09 2011 18:48 ICanFlyLow wrote: most people seem to forget that chickens and so on has a brain the size of a fingernail But pigs are smarter than dogs. | ||
FrayzZeUsher
United States225 Posts
We live in a modern world where we can (anything) so we have a large variety of food to chose from, the healthiest food avaliable is obviously the best option (vegetable, fruit, grains). We no longer hunt since we dont have to work for any of our food now, we may aswell pick the best food. It's literally unnatural for humans to eat meat, we have taken a herbivore approach to food. since we just pick off food instead of hunting it down. | ||
Shirohige
Germany398 Posts
@OP: I understand your motivations, I really do, but if you want to do something about it, don't do it here. You are wasting your time. There are better ways. p.s. This is me, not partaking in this "discussion", even though I really would like to. | ||
Nycaloth
147 Posts
[quote] While from a completely rational viewpoint this makes sense, from a logistic standpoint, as well as realistic standpoint, you are wrong. Rich countries in the west like meat, we make a lot of meat, and we like vegetables, and we make a lot of vegetables. We just make a lot of food in general. Now, you aren't complaining about veggies. You are complaining about meat, which we make a lot of. We make so much meat, that we actually export some of this meat to developing countries. By limiting demand, or to be more inclusive and direct, by hurting supply/suppliers, you lessen how much meat we export. [/QUOTE] Will focus on this part of the post. Western countries do produce a lot of meat, i will give you that. But they largely DONT produce the the food used to raise the cattle. A prime example is the european meat industry, which, while exporting lots of meat to african countries, imports even greater amounts of grain from those same countries to feed the cattle from. I think that you might be oversimplifying the issue a bit, because you completely disregard the fact that the cattle used in meat production has to be fed as well. In that light, i find arguing that "meat production in the west feeds the poor" highly questionable, since it is the same poor peoples resources that drive the meat production to begin with. | ||
NiTenIchiRyu
United Kingdom273 Posts
On February 09 2011 18:49 FrayzZeUsher wrote: Meat eating is primitive and stupid. We live in a modern world where we can (anything) so we have a large variety of food to chose from, the healthiest food avaliable is obviously the best option (vegetable, fruit, grains). We no longer hunt since we dont have to work for any of our food now, we may aswell pick the best food. It's literally unnatural for humans to eat meat, we have taken a herbivore approach to food. since we just pick off food instead of hunting it down. Is this why vegans are forced to take vitamin B12, calcium and other supplements (found in the "unnatural" food called meat)? Oh and enjoy the particular "perks" that come with being a vegan: + Show Spoiler + * inadequate milk production for nursing mothers, as well as retarded physical and mental development in some children who are strictly on a vegan or raw food diet; * low body temperature (always cold); * a weak, touchy digestive system with a loss of digestive strength (unable to metabolize food quickly, have to be careful what you eat, how much, must practice food combining to be able to digest food, etc.); * food cravings (especially among women); * stalled weight loss because metabolism is too low (predominately in women); * inability to gain weight, resulting in shrunken, cadaverous-looking bodies (predominately in men); * amenorrhea (menstrual cycles cease), even in young women; * loss of libido; * hair loss and nail problems; * dental cavities, tooth loss, and gum problems; * joint pain; * inability to conceive | ||
Humppis
Finland52 Posts
Only option is to create our food from lifeless materials, whitch pretty much means that only laboratories can make food in form of pills, powders and chemical solutions. This can very well be the future of feeding as you could eliminate all the useless and harmful materials in our food suply, resulting in healthier life. For now, we must consume another living being to nourish our selfs, be it plant or animal. | ||
CooDu
Australia899 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:17 Disquiet wrote: Well I'm happy you to be a vegan, the more the merrier, drives down meat prices for me. Haha, that's a good way to look at it. OT: While I enjoy meat, I generally try not to think about the origins of my steak too much. Call me ignorant ![]() | ||
Shiragaku
Hong Kong4308 Posts
And seeing how The Cove appears to be very popular and attracts a cult like fandom, sadly, dolphins are not cute and gentle. They are one of the 6 species out there that rape one another like humans. | ||
Naphal
Germany2099 Posts
however that costs you more money, if you do not have it, you have to buy lower quality (do not think cheap vegetables grown heavy on chemistry or genetics are that good either) to sum it up, as a passionate fishermen i have killed my fair share of fish, i imagine mammals to be a different matter, but as the animals killed to be sold in the supermarket would never be born in the first place, it is their one and only purpose to be eaten, and i have no hard feelings about it... | ||
MiraMax
Germany532 Posts
On February 09 2011 18:55 Humppis wrote: What vegans tend to forget, is that plants and us animals have common ancestor. You are eating biomass of another living being, who just hapens to not be able to fight or even yell back. In that sence, all vegans are self righteous hypocritics. Only option is to create our food from lifeless materials, whitch pretty much means that only laboratories can make food in form of pills, powders and chemical solutions. This can very well be the future of feeding as you could eliminate all the useless and harmful materials in our food suply, resulting in healthier life. For now, we must consume another living being to nourish our selfs, be it plant or animal. Well, from what I get of vegans/vegetarians they base their argument on sentience and cognition, not common ancestry, so their view seems pretty consistent to me. While I eat meat, I have to agree that I find it difficult to argue for "my right" to eat meat and stay consistent with my other values. | ||
StyLeD
United States2965 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:25 jalstar wrote: I drive through fields of cows all the time in SoCal so I refuse to believe that all cows are locked up inside in tiny pens. And I don't eat meat or poultry often because it's too expensive to get stuff that isn't processed garbage, so if anything I'm closer to vegetarian than carnivore. Because SoCal is the world in a nutshell, right. | ||
Tony Campolo
New Zealand364 Posts
On February 09 2011 18:48 imapotato wrote: Ok right of the bat i'm gonna say i'm a meat eater. All i really have to say is that the video shown here is crap, it shows the worst factory farms on the planet and ignores any points on free range / fairly treated animals. To make matters worse the person who started this whole thread comes from NZ were we have incredibly high standards on animal cruelty, so the video doesn't really relate to him at all. I guess the thing i have to say is that there's nothing wrong with eating meat, the only thing i would like to see happen is to see stricter rules on how animals are treated in these farms, feeding people sick animals is not alright! Stop forcing your goddamn life style on other people! Firstly, welcome to TL - I see it is your first post. Secondly, are you sure about that? I totally did not expect this many pages of replies, last time I started a topic like this (under a different account) it reached something like three pages. Don't have time to reply to most of the posts right now but will do so tomorrow. | ||
feaynnewedd
Germany41 Posts
On February 09 2011 18:08 Belial88 wrote: While from a completely rational viewpoint this makes sense, from a logistic standpoint, as well as realistic standpoint, you are wrong. Rich countries in the west like meat, we make a lot of meat, and we like vegetables, and we make a lot of vegetables. We just make a lot of food in general. Now, you aren't complaining about veggies. You are complaining about meat, which we make a lot of. We make so much meat, that we actually export some of this meat to developing countries. By limiting demand, or to be more inclusive and direct, by hurting supply/suppliers, you lessen how much meat we export. Now in a perfect world we wouldn't waste the food on our plates, and mail it to Africa. But there are huge logistic issues, as well as health, issues with that. All in all, we have a surplus, and we can export our meat, made cheap by popular demand, to poor people. First, there is a lot of meat import. Second, producing meat requires insane amounts of crops. If you do not need the forage, you have more soil to grow crops. If you have more soil in order to grow crops, prices for food will drop. No logistics issue, no nothing, this is just how basic economics work, Mr. I'm an economist (with a degree to prove it) . Maybe you can still learn a little, huh?If you want to have an argument about the farts of farm animals leading to the destruction of the world, then go for it. But don't derail this argument by changing subjects. I may agree with you on this one, but it's off topic to say the least. This is not off-topic. This is a debate about vegetarianism / veganism, isn't it? It's not necessarily meat, or vegetarianism, that I am saying is for the poor/rich. A huge redux of what I am saying is that by limiting economy, you can hurt poor people far away - in essence, globalization, and the narrow viewpoint held by those who think that their actions have no impact on others, particularly when it comes to sectors of the economy. My point of view of extreme veganism like PETA is the same as my point of view against monopolies, and against simple, neighborhood vandals. When your goal is to hurt a sector of the economy, the damage can hurt the livelihood of others, sometimes people who are extremely sensitive to such damages. PETA might be hurting the cause of vegetarianism because they are stupid. I don't like PETA either. So your point is that if someone does not eat meat, he hurts people far away - what?!?! I would say the same thing if there was a radical meat-only group who's goal was to destroy the crops of international agricultural giants. Many countries don't have the choice to pick and choose between meat and vegetables, and these two goods are often interchangeable in poor societies, so raising the price of one leads to a rise in the price of the other (complementary goods). What?! Which country doesn't have a choice to import meat or vegetables? What?! And while I haven't been to India, I have been to Hindu societies, and poor Hindus eat meat too. I think you are referring to beef, but the poster wasn't saying don't eat beef he was saying don't eat meat. However, I don't expect you to know this and poor people in Hindu countries eat meat, eat vegeatbles, eat whatever they can afford, just like poor people everywhere. If you have visited a country you know all about it, of course. This is not about beef, there are just a lot of vegetarians in India. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetarianism_by_country#india read please. To make it clearer, in many countries McDonalds is a luxury. In poor areas in America, it is a major source of sustanence (contributes greatly to health problems but at least they eat, and they do pick it for a reason). I know this because I've traveled (more than once I was told the best restaurant in town was McDonalds). So... what IS your point? As I mentioned above, it's a logistic issue. Rich countries make a surplus of meat, poor countries benefit from the surplus through international trade. If rich countries stopped eating so much meat, poor countries do not have an import for cheap food. Ideally, the most efficient thing would be for everyone to eat rice/maize (depending on geographical location) but that would not provide enough nutrients, even for vegans. The fact of the matter is life is inefficient, yet running an inefficient system of meats like kobe beef somehow leads to a rise in the standard of living. People need rich, excessive foods, even if to give them more reason to make more money, to be more productive, even if the reason is so stupid to take a girl out for a fancy dinner in a materialistic society. And while materialism may be the cause of a loss of spirituality in our world today, that man driving a lamborghini in my city who just made national news by beating up his famous pop-star singer girlfriend is driving many in my country to spend more money, to work longer hours, and to make better things, sometimes unnecessary, and sometimes very necessary. So while you say this is the wrong way to go, you also say that keep living life like that? You contradict yourself a little... no, completely. If you say living like that is wrong, why do you advocate it? Take a drive through the ghetto, actually, but many people rely on mcdonalds. Maybe a bit dramatic what I said - to be clear, in poor countries it is a luxurious place to eat where luxury does not exist, and for rich countries it may be a way for the kids to be fed when they cant do so otherwise, as easily, so they have more time, and a better standard of living if there were no mcdonalds. Are you talking about US "ghettos"? There is no issue anywhere in rich countries for kids to be fed. McDonald's is far more expensive than buying healthy stuff like vegetables, potatoes and so on at a supermarket. Uneducated people will feed their children with crap like that, not because it is the only way to do so (what the fuck do you even believe what you are writing yourself T_T) but because they don't think about it. I don't mind vegetarians, or vegans, and I actually believe they live a much healthier lifestyle than I do (nevermind I'm a smoker). But I don't eat to be healthy (I'm quite healthy as it is, and I don't eat unhealthiy, ie no fast food, snacks, or junk food, but I do drink a lot of milk and eat a lot of meat), and I do realize the importance of overconsumption in western societies. I'm an economist (with a degree to prove it) and I've traveled much of the world, and have seen what the excess in our country has done for other countries - great things. Our unending thirst for oil props up entire continents, our love of junk food gives luxury where none exists, and our fast cars are a means for transnational transportation where horseback dominated. Being vegan is fine, but groups like PETA turn a lifestyle choice into an aggressive campaign that's blind to whom it hurts. Our living in excess does not help other countries. Our lust for gold and diamonds fuels civil wars in Africa. Our driving fast cars and blowing greenhouse gases in the air sustains Arabian dictatorships because they are "stable" and creates natural catastrophes that pull poor countries down even further (I am not talking about catastrophes caused by tectonic shifts btw). Our love for junk foods does not give luxury. On the contrary, it drives food prices up and thus fuels starvation. As I said above, I agree that PETA can go suck it. | ||
nTwLegy
Croatia63 Posts
On February 09 2011 14:04 FuDDx wrote: I don't care about you're eating habits. Ive been a vegi for over 16 years both my kids are vegi and my wife a Masters (almost Phd,quitter) In nutritonal sciences also been vegi for 16 years. We enjoy our lifestyle and are educated about it. eat what you want ... I also work in a Vegan Kitchen (I hate the food love the pay) And most of our clients are people trying to loss weight by getting french fries, deep fried fake chicken nuggets and fake tuna melt. silly fools. Give your children a Hot Dog and we will proudly see how long their gonna be vegies after 18 or what's the mature dealine in your country. OT:Well I eat meat alot,like 4 times a week meat,and 3 times a week pasta/vegetables and other things,I don't know why people become Vegeterians or Vegans,but cruelty to animals is not on every farm in the world.Take a note that they took the worseomfg scenes they could to make that video,and it's NOT like that on every farm,real farmers treat their animals right,take care of them and love them,and as long as there is "X" number of normal farms with humanity,ill eat meat. | ||
Silence-
Canada116 Posts
| ||
snpnx
Germany454 Posts
On February 09 2011 18:19 SerpentFlame wrote: Your cat isn't special among animals, and by owning one you've certainly seen how they have feelings albeit different from human ones. I'm sure you'll think about animal feelings and empathy in life when s/he dies. I know I did when my cat died. Additionally, I really hope that people who eat meat (myself included) stop trying to act so high and mighty about it. There's really no need to be on the moral high ground when we're not. Eating meat is something that's done out of habit, and out of convenience, and certainly not born of morals. That humans aren't alone in having feelings among animals is well-documented by the scientific community. Also the claim that most meat (at least in the US) isn't factory farmed is really just false, if you look up the statistics. Here's one for you now: http://www.pressherald.com/life/foodanddining/the-real-cost-of-the-food-we-eat_2010-09-01.html. I honestly don't know what you're trying to tell me. I know animals have feelings, as I said, it depends on the relationship if I would kill an animal or not. | ||
MiraMax
Germany532 Posts
On February 09 2011 18:23 Sotamursu wrote: There is no objective morality. Of course I would think that they're doing something wrong, because mankind is suffering. Mankind is what keeps me alive and provides for me. But from the alien pow, they aren't doing anything wrong. I don't really understand what you mean by taking the easy way out. I feel like you're trying to go into arguing semantics. I am not at all trying to "argue semantics", but I thought you would argue for objective morality, since I thought you said that "killing humans" would be wrong for humans (maybe I mixed up your statements). I only wanted to point out that if a moral system exists for humans I don't see any consistent way to limit it to humans merely on the basis of species. I think if it exists, it necessarily exists for all moral agents with comparable cognitive abilities and has to consider all sentient beings. Do you hold that humanitarianism just means that you are feeling sorry for other humans, too? So if a person feels more sorry for other animals than for humans he is perfectly entitled to hold their happyness in higher regards than the happyness of humans? | ||
Zim23
United States1681 Posts
Also our right to eat meat involves our dominance over those species. We are at the top of the food chain and so we have the right to eat everything always. In fact I'm pretty sure the only reason we don't eat each other is because humans taste like shit (trust me long story). | ||
ryanAnger
United States838 Posts
I say we just let natural selection play out. | ||
Spyfire242
United States715 Posts
Edit:And indeed if eating animals is evil surely us meat eaters will be reborn as cows, so whats the problem? | ||
MiraMax
Germany532 Posts
On February 09 2011 18:04 mcc wrote: I am definitely not ![]() Maybe I missed it, but could you share with me your main argument for "eating meat happily". I eat meat happily, but only because I decided that I don't care (too much) about animal well-being, even though I think I should, much like I decided that I will not care (too much) about the poverty in the world, even though I know I should. I have taken these decisions mainly out of convenience, since I cannot fight all evil in the world at once. I nonetheless grant to people who actively fight for animal rights and against poverty that they have "the moral high ground" (in the respective field). What's your take on it? | ||
TrinitySC
101 Posts
| ||
Spyfire242
United States715 Posts
On February 09 2011 19:22 TrinitySC wrote: At this point I'm actually curious. Why should animals have rights? Because their brains allow them to sense and react to pain. | ||
SpoR
United States1542 Posts
I recently watched a TEDtalk about how the ancient prehistoric humans obviously must have been eating animals, but they never found any tools or weapons as to how they captured these animals. They theorize that they used to just form packs and run down an animal for hours/days until it became exhausted and collapsed. Because humans are slow but we have the highest endurance. Is that a more or less humane in your opinion? sure someonealready mentioned this as well, they only do the throat slit thing for jewish/hebrew kosher techniques. So blame the jews lol | ||
danielsan
Romania399 Posts
I'd appreciate vegans way more if they weren't trying to pull this biased shit on everyone. | ||
Robellicose
England245 Posts
Vegetarians and Vegans are ridiculous hypocrites. Just because they anthropomorphise animals because they act a little like humans they get squeamish about eating them. There are plenty of plants that react to damage in much the same way as animals do (although they usually give off odours rather than screams) yet because they look nothing like humanity, they are happy to eat them. Long story short, if you're vegan for ethical reasons, you shouldn't be eating plants either. | ||
Belial88
United States5217 Posts
Will focus on this part of the post. Western countries do produce a lot of meat, i will give you that. But they largely DONT produce the the food used to raise the cattle. A prime example is the european meat industry, which, while exporting lots of meat to african countries, imports even greater amounts of grain from those same countries to feed the cattle from. I think that you might be oversimplifying the issue a bit, because you completely disregard the fact that the cattle used in meat production has to be fed as well. In that light, i find arguing that "meat production in the west feeds the poor" highly questionable, since it is the same poor peoples resources that drive the meat production to begin with. That helps my point even more. Western countries making inefficient meat leads to a greater demand for grains, which poor countries may be able to supply. The poor countries end up supplied with cheap surplus meat while at the same time have someone to sell their grains to, whereas if rich, fatcat westerners didn't demand meat, the poor both wouldnt have food nor a job. I am completely oversimplifying things, of course. But what does that have to do with anything, and your point is just a talking point for me, not you. First, there is a lot of meat import. Second, producing meat requires insane amounts of crops. If you do not need the forage, you have more soil to grow crops. If you have more soil in order to grow crops, prices for food will drop. No logistics issue, no nothing, this is just how basic economics work, Mr. No need to be snarky, we all like TeamLiquid and SC here. Yes, it does require lots of crops. As I said, it's inefficient, but better to have inefficiency than nothing at all. American can either eat meat, or not. The latter hurts poor people more. And I don't think I've ever heard of the soil being sold as a commodity on the NYSE. I could be wrong though, maybe soil is a great way to invest money these days. PETA might be hurting the cause of vegetarianism because they are stupid. I don't like PETA either. So your point is that if someone does not eat meat, he hurts people far away - what?!?! I stated quite a few times that I think vegan is a much healthier choice than meat eating. If you have visited a country you know all about it, of course. This is not about beef, there are just a lot of vegetarians in India. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetarianism_by_country#india read please. Not a lot of vegetarians in India, despite what you may think. So while you say this is the wrong way to go, you also say that keep living life like that? You contradict yourself a little... no, completely. If you say living like that is wrong, why do you advocate it? Because I want to eat a fucking hamburger when I'm hungry, not a salad! And I really could care less for shock tactics like the OP to sicken people away from meat. It's nasty, no one wants to see where their food came from. But what of it? So pigs are nasty, who didn't know that? I disagree with the idea that eating animals is wrong. And it's not even the premise that eating animals is wrong that I have a problem with, it's the idea that someone else knows what's good for me. Pardon me, and I do not aim this towards you, but my opinion to that kind of thinking is "go fuck yourself". Again, let me make clear I mean no disrespect to you, I just feel strongly about it, and dislike it when others try to control me, or tell me what I should be doing. I'll be the judge of that. If I want to go smoke crack, I'll damn well do as I please. Are you talking about US "ghettos"? There is no issue anywhere in rich countries for kids to be fed. McDonald's is far more expensive than buying healthy stuff like vegetables, potatoes and so on at a supermarket. Uneducated people will feed their children with crap like that, not because it is the only way to do so (what the fuck do you even believe what you are writing yourself T_T) but because they don't think about it. I wouldn't say you are wrong here. If you said education is key to healthy living, and we should get rid of McDonalds by encouraging healthy living at a young age and to lower income families, I wouldn't disagree at all. I agree with you on this. Our living in excess does not help other countries. Our lust for gold and diamonds fuels civil wars in Africa. Our driving fast cars and blowing greenhouse gases in the air sustains Arabian dictatorships because they are "stable" and creates natural catastrophes that pull poor countries down even further (I am not talking about catastrophes caused by tectonic shifts btw). Our love for junk foods does not give luxury. On the contrary, it drives food prices up and thus fuels starvation. As I said above, I agree that PETA can go suck it. Gold and Diamonds were fueled by war lords in Africa, not by British Diamond firms (however there was a point where the British Diamond firms became responsible and unethical). If Afghan war lords chose to make computer chips instead of opium, and sold them at competitive market prices, then they would profit from people buying computers. That is the nature of capitalism, and it is also the nature of capitilism for strong policing, and sellers like this will be punished, in an ideal system. The idea is to provide strict policing and regulation with free trade. I'm not going to discuss greenhouse gases, but the US only imports 15% of the oil they use, while exporting over 50% of the oil we produce domestically. It has nothing to do with "arabian dictatorships" as we do not buy oil from countries that are dictatorships (however if you wanted to argue that all muslim countries are dictatorships to some level, I wouldnt argue with you, and if you wanted to say when Venezuela lied and said they would us our oil proceeds for humanitarian reasons, we were at fault, I wouldnt argue either). The reason the US uses foreign oil, despite producing enough at home to fuel our appetite, is because of the global nature of a global commodity. Our love for junk foods does not give luxury. On the contrary, it drives food prices up and thus fuels starvation. No, I don't think it works that way. i would say the market is more like the increased supply lowers food prices and fuels tummies. | ||
feaynnewedd
Germany41 Posts
On February 09 2011 19:28 Robellicose wrote: Have you ever seen a combine harvester go to town on crops? That's extremely cruel and brutal to do to the plants... Vegetarians and Vegans are ridiculous hypocrites. Just because they anthropomorphise animals because they act a little like humans they get squeamish about eating them. There are plenty of plants that react to damage in much the same way as animals do (although they usually give off odours rather than screams) yet because they look nothing like humanity, they are happy to eat them. Long story short, if you're vegan for ethical reasons, you shouldn't be eating plants either. what the... really? Because plants have a nervous system and all... REALLY? Or are you just trolling? | ||
T0fuuu
Australia2275 Posts
| ||
RoseTempest
Canada196 Posts
On February 09 2011 19:30 feaynnewedd wrote: what the... really? Because plants have a nervous system and all... REALLY? Or are you just trolling? So having a nervous system is it then? Ever step on an ant? Ever swat a fly? fucking hypocrite | ||
Sotamursu
Finland612 Posts
On February 09 2011 19:10 MiraMax wrote: I am not at all trying to "argue semantics", but I thought you would argue for objective morality, since I thought you said that "killing humans" would be wrong for humans (maybe I mixed up your statements). I only wanted to point out that if a moral system exists for humans I don't see any consistent way to limit it to humans merely on the basis of species. I think if it exists, it necessarily exists for all moral agents with comparable cognitive abilities and has to consider all sentient beings. Do you hold that humanitarianism just means that you are feeling sorry for other humans, too? So if a person feels more sorry for other animals than for humans he is perfectly entitled to hold their happyness in higher regards than the happyness of humans? Our moral system is meant to keep our society alive and going. Most people agree to "You don't hurt me and I don't hurt you." Humanitarianism is just a way of enforcing this. In the case of animals it is "I don't hurt you and I don't get anything in return." Why would I want to do something that offers me absolutely nothing, but limits my choices? Are you starting see what I mean? If you hold animals in higher regard than other humans, other humans will not like you. Sure that person is entitled to his opinions, but he/she has to be ready to handle the consequences. Some people are against animal testing, even though it has given us huge leaps in medicine and saved thousands, if not millions of human lives. These same people would rather see all of those saved people die, if it meant that a few rats didn't have to suffer. These people can go fuck themselves. | ||
feaynnewedd
Germany41 Posts
I'm not going to discuss greenhouse gases, but the US only imports 15% of the oil they use, while exporting over 50% of the oil we produce domestically. It has nothing to do with "arabian dictatorships" as we do not buy oil from countries that are dictatorships (however if you wanted to argue that all muslim countries are dictatorships to some level, I wouldnt argue with you, and if you wanted to say when Venezuela lied and said they would us our oil proceeds for humanitarian reasons, we were at fault, I wouldnt argue either). The reason the US uses foreign oil, despite producing enough at home to fuel our appetite, is because of the global nature of a global commodity. I am not American, I am German, we import all of our oil. But can you please give me a link for your numbers? By the way, non-constitutional monarchies = dictatorships (like Saudi Arabia, Kuweit, Bahrain, UAE, etc.) So having a nervous system is it then? Ever step on an ant? Ever swat a fly? fucking hypocrite Insects do not have a central nervous system. Insects have very basic ganglions that enable them to react to their environment. Also, by killing them (swatting, stepping on), you do not make them suffer. If you read my posts, you would know that I am against making animals suffer,and against industrial livestock farming, not against the consumption of meat and killing per se. | ||
SpoR
United States1542 Posts
PS- this wouldn't be a vegan thread without this pic http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/images/bigpot6.jpg | ||
Apexplayer
United States406 Posts
Comment = Pending approval. Afraid of free speech, vegans? I'm going to stop by Sonic tomorrow just to get an egg-bacon-chicken burrito. | ||
Humppis
Finland52 Posts
On February 09 2011 19:22 TrinitySC wrote: At this point I'm actually curious. Why should animals have rights? A sociopath could ask why anyone else than him/her self has rights. Its showing empathy to our fellow earth dwellers, and not everybody can understand this. We humans define rights for our selves, whitch tends to end up in very selfish rules. On February 09 2011 19:01 MiraMax wrote: Well, from what I get of vegans/vegetarians they base their argument on sentience and cognition, not common ancestry, so their view seems pretty consistent to me. While I eat meat, I have to agree that I find it difficult to argue for "my right" to eat meat and stay consistent with my other values. It dosent matter if vegan dosent acknowledge our common ancestors. They are simply selecting truths that fit their agenda, and that i dont respect one bit, especially when they are trying to force their twisted ideas on me. To sum it up, we are living in a world of cruelty. We humans are perhaps the first animals to begin pondering our cruel relationship with our surrounding. We are living our intellectual infancy, developing one step at a time. Those in future might look at 21st century people with disgust for our meat and plant eating habits, similar to how we look at slavery today. | ||
Samurai-
Slovenia2035 Posts
I eat meat because i enjoy eating it, i wont stop, even though i disagree with how animals are treated in those huge factories that produce a lot of meat by demand, but what did u expect ? We are humans after all, master killers.. The system needs to change, not someone becoming a vegan, because its money that drives the big machinery and its wheels.. Damn, today everyone would like to save something.. Save this, save that bla bla bla.. | ||
InsaniaK
Sweden120 Posts
I eat meat though. | ||
Kamais_Ookin
Canada4218 Posts
On February 09 2011 19:23 Spyfire242 wrote: That's not a good enough reason to stop slaughtering them.Because their brains allow them to sense and react to pain. | ||
Belial88
United States5217 Posts
I am not American, I am German, we import all of our oil. But can you please give me a link for your numbers? By the way, non-constitutional monarchies = dictatorships (like Saudi Arabia, Kuweit, Bahrain, UAE, etc.) A lot of US oil data can be found at the Energy Information Administration, a part of the US Department of Energy. I've lived on this web site for 2 years writing a research paper, not to mention class papers written with this site. http://www.eia.doe.gov/ To sum it up, we are living in a world of cruelty. We humans are perhaps the first animals to begin pondering our cruel relationship with our surrounding. We are living our intellectual infancy, developing one step at a time. Those in future might look at 21st century people with disgust for our meat and plant eating habits, similar to how we look at slavery today. I don't really agree with this philosophy at all. We live in a cruel world, so might as well just be cruel? And people in the past did look at slavery with disgust, the US fought a war over it (yes, that's the reason, its actually that simple, dont let warped history books twist it). Countries simply didn't have democratic institutions to get rid of it at the time - even the US did things such as the 3/5s compromise to prevent slave holding states from having more congressional power to enforce their policies. But this is a HUGE digression... | ||
Slakter
Sweden1947 Posts
Also, if you dont enjoy vegans pushing their opinions on you you might think about how it feels for vegans to be pushed your opinions on us all day every day of the year and how it feels like to be an animal forced into dying. If you really think that Vegan opinionpushing is a problem, take a fucking look at yourself you tool. User was temp banned for this post. | ||
Samurai-
Slovenia2035 Posts
Save the planet | ||
Nycaloth
147 Posts
On February 09 2011 19:30 Belial88 wrote: That helps my point even more. Western countries making inefficient meat leads to a greater demand for grains, which poor countries may be able to supply. The poor countries end up supplied with cheap surplus meat while at the same time have someone to sell their grains to, whereas if rich, fatcat westerners didn't demand meat, the poor both wouldnt have food nor a job. I am completely oversimplifying things, of course. But what does that have to do with anything, and your point is just a talking point for me, not you. . But you agree that there is food shortage and malnutrition problems in developing countries. The point is that these countries probably could support themselves if most of their farmland was not tied up in producing meat for the west. Farmers could sell to the local population directly, instead of using western corporations as middle men. This would still allow for a limited production of meat in western countries. This is obviously an issue of scale. I want to state for the record that, while i am a vegetarian, i do not condemn meat consumption on a matter of principle. The point is that at this stage, producing meat for the west seems more important then supplying the world in general with adequate amounts of food. This might make sense from an economical perspective, since the west is where the money is, but is detrimental on humanistic grounds. The point is that imo, the world could be a better place if everyone ate less (note: less, not no) meat, but western society is to self-centered to acknowledge this. | ||
MiraMax
Germany532 Posts
On February 09 2011 19:35 Sotamursu wrote: Our moral system is meant to keep our society alive and going. Most people agree to "You don't hurt me and I don't hurt you." Humanitarianism is just a way of enforcing this. In the case of animals it is "I don't hurt you and I don't get anything in return." Why would I want to do something that offers me absolutely nothing, but limits my choices? Are you starting see what I mean? If you hold animals in higher regard than other humans, other humans will not like you. Sure that person is entitled to his opinions, but he/she has to be ready to handle the consequences. Some people are against animal testing, even though it has given us huge leaps in medicine and saved thousands, if not millions of human lives. These same people would rather see all of those saved people die, if it meant that a few rats didn't have to suffer. These people can go fuck themselves. I see, so then I just misinterpreted your other posts. Well, a moral system is exactly explaining (as in aiming to provide reasons for) why you should do (or not do) something without expecting anything in return, so it seems to me that you simply think "morals" don't exist, which is fine with me - even though I don't share your point of view. Why do you even have to justify animal experiments with the reduction of human suffering though? I take it for your view that had we the possibility to run lab experiments in the same efficiency that we have now but without harming animals, there would be absolutely no reason to take this possibility, since animals won't give us anything in return anyway ... right? | ||
Spyfire242
United States715 Posts
On February 09 2011 19:47 Kamais_Ookin wrote: That's not a good enough reason to stop slaughtering them. Well that is your opinion my friend, one that I share! BRING ON THE STEAK. | ||
Kamais_Ookin
Canada4218 Posts
On February 09 2011 19:53 Spyfire242 wrote: So yummy indeed. Well that is your opinion my friend, one that I share! BRING ON THE STEAK. ![]() | ||
Blackjack111
75 Posts
If i eat at your house, i wont complain about the lack of meat. I'll simply go eat the fuck out of some flesh when we are done. Had this one chick complain about the fact that i'll try just about anything i can get my hands on. Kangaroo, horse, snake, crocodile. "Would you eat a puppy?" *smug face* "I sure would. I would eat your dumb ass too, if i thought you would taste good." Don't mistreat animals if you can avoid it, and people mistreating their pets are despicable. Ohh and try to not make species extinct because you want to crush up their penis for medicin. But we are in a position to eat the fuck out of all the tasty animals there are plenty of, yummy yum yum. This is why i don't feel bad for humans either, if they get jacked by wild animals. They saw their chance, and they took it. Crocodile, shark or lion gets you, you just lost the foodchain game. Get ghosted by a 500 lbs creature, that is all teeth and claws, as a slow, fragile 180 lbs meatbag with gimpy teeth and shitty nails... Face it, you are a foodsource bitch. A chimp rips your nuts and face off? What the fuck were you doing that close to an animal that can easily to that to you anyway? It's not the chimp's fault, it's your fucking fault for being a dumbass. If you are tasty, and not about to die out. At some point i will snuff out your life and put you on bread or eat you with a side of rice. If i think an animal can and will stomp out my existence as it pleases, i stay the fuck on the other side of the glass. | ||
Samurai-
Slovenia2035 Posts
On February 09 2011 19:51 Slakter wrote: Haha, Samurai, that is the most retarded thing ive read in this thread. Is it something negative that "today everyone would like to save something.. Save this, save that bla bla bla.."? Also, if you dont enjoy vegans pushing their opinions on you you might think about how it feels for vegans to be pushed your opinions on us all day every day of the year and how it feels like to be an animal forced into dying. If you really think that Vegan opinionpushing is a problem, take a fucking look at yourself you tool. . I am tired of your "saving" kind of people, enforcing your views on us. I guess today, if you are normal, everyone is enforcing something on you.. You eat meat, for what we have done for thousands of years, there is a group like vegans or something that is pushing their believes on you, save this, save that, turn to something else. If you dont have god, again, some group will try to force their believes on you or try to force you to believe to something. If you are hetero, ofcourse there is a gay group calling you something, even though you didnt do anything, but hey, thats life right? Soon i ll be convicted because i am white.. So jeah, i think you are selfrighteous people.. edit: and ofcourse i dont enjoy vegans pushing their oppinions on me because i never ever said anything to vegans, but ofcourse if i defend my self, than i am an intolerant bastard, i have to look around my self, i am tool , i dont feel for the anima bla bla. Well i am going to eat a nice, juicy hamburger really soon, and i ll laugh at your face.. Cheer, meat eaters.. | ||
Zocat
Germany2229 Posts
So I expect that I can eat whatever I want without anyone telling me if it's good/bad. I will leave open if I'm vegan/vegetarian/meat eater, because it doesnt matter. Tolerate the opinion / lifestyle of others. | ||
NapstaR
Germany128 Posts
vegans or vegetarians should perhaps not look at it :> but it's SFW i'm against torture or something similar to animals but not against eating them at all. + Show Spoiler + ![]() | ||
Facedriller
Sweden275 Posts
I honestly cant imagine how the butchers sleep at night. | ||
Humppis
Finland52 Posts
On February 09 2011 19:48 Belial88 wrote: I don't really agree with this philosophy at all. We live in a cruel world, so might as well just be cruel? And people in the past did look at slavery with disgust, the US fought a war over it (yes, that's the reason, its actually that simple, dont let warped history books twist it). Countries simply didn't have democratic institutions to get rid of it at the time - even the US did things such as the 3/5s compromise to prevent slave holding states from having more congressional power to enforce their policies. But this is a HUGE digression... Im not vegan, choise is between death and staying alive. I simply dont share this vegan idea that plants are somehow differend from animals. For now, there is no choise but to be cruel, unless you wish to die in starvation. That dosent mean that i should like it or endorse it, id like to see alternatives in future. If there is cruelty on the planet, then we should work into geting rid of it. Ofcourse, in nature cruelty is not something we can abolish, but if you wish to be intellectually anything but a just slightly evolved ape, you should ponder these issues even if it breaks your current world view. Slavery hasnt actually gone anywhere, there are more slaves than ever, modern nations simply look down on it and are mostly intolerant/ignorant( sadly ) of it in their land. As long as we have third world countries, there will be slavery in large scale, and money to be made by the cruel who dont care. edit: fixed quotes a bit. | ||
Belial88
United States5217 Posts
But you agree that there is food shortage and malnutrition problems in developing countries. The point is that these countries probably could support themselves if most of their farmland was not tied up in producing meat for the west. Farmers could sell to the local population directly, instead of using western corporations as middle men. This would still allow for a limited production of meat in western countries. I could support myself if I went into the wilderness, and so could many of these homeless people. Its a lack of education and economy that hurts, and people who are disabled or old can't live off the wild either. These countries, and the farmers/people in them, are not forced to make meat for the west. The reason they make grains for the meat for the west is because it makes them more money to do this than to make food to sustain themselves - it's the same reason farmers in Afghanistan make heroin/opium instead of crops - they are better off making drugs and using the cash to buy imported food with money leftover, than to make sustenance and solely live on that. It's the basic principle of trade. I don't really want to explain it when others have done it better, but look up why 3 people making their own thing is much more productive than 3 people simply trying to sustain themselves. This is obviously an issue of scale. I want to state for the record that, while i am a vegetarian, i do not condemn meat consumption on a matter of principle. The point is that at this stage, producing meat for the west seems more important then supplying the world in general with adequate amounts of food. This might make sense from an economical perspective, since the west is where the money is, but is detrimental on humanistic grounds. Quite the opposite is true. Look up how trade works - not to be derisive, but to show that each country doing what it specializes in, is better than every country fending for itself. America will never make rice like Asians can, and Asians can never make beef like we can, and so on. A lot of this depends on the development of the country, which is a process that takes time though. The point is that imo, the world could be a better place if everyone ate less (note: less, not no) meat, but western society is to self-centered to acknowledge this. | ||
plainsane
Germany98 Posts
classic! PETA and ALF are silly, of course we should ensure that there is as little animal torture as possible, but being against 1. holding animals under decent conditions as a source of food 2. scientific medical research on animals 3. dairy products for children just proves to me that they are blind leftist actionist that will hopefully never get any power whatsoever. | ||
Zim23
United States1681 Posts
| ||
storm8ring3r
Germany227 Posts
Go cure AIDS and world hunger and let me have my steak. Animal rights are a disease of wealth. Let's solve the world's real problems. You don't see people in poor countries like Bangladesh running around yelling animal cruelty when they have nothing to eat | ||
Ksyper
Bulgaria665 Posts
Funny how I was eating meat while watching this dough... | ||
MiraMax
Germany532 Posts
On February 09 2011 20:02 Samurai- wrote: I am tired of your "saving" kind of people, enforcing your views on us. I guess today, if you are normal, everyone is enforcing something on you.. You eat meat, for what we have done for thousands of years, there is a group like vegans or something that is pushing their believes on you, save this, save that, turn to something else. If you dont have god, again, some group will try to force their believes on you or try to force you to believe to something. If you are hetero, ofcourse there is a gay group calling you something, even though you didnt do anything, but hey, thats life right? Soon i ll be convicted because i am white.. So jeah, i think you are selfrighteous people.. edit: and ofcourse i dont enjoy vegans pushing their oppinions on me because i never ever said anything to vegans, but ofcourse if i defend my self, than i am an intolerant bastard, i have to look around my self, i am tool , i dont feel for the anima bla bla. Well i am going to eat a nice, juicy hamburger really soon, and i ll laugh at your face.. Cheer, meat eaters.. If there is one thing I am tired of, then it is this wimpy whining about "ooh nnooes other people are enforcing their opinions on me"-blabla. It's called freedom of speech and it's here to stay, so you better start dealing with it. Truth is, not all opinions are equally valid and it's the purpose of public discourse to seperate the wheat from the chaff. So yes, you can believe whatever you want, but no, you don't have the right to not be called out on it. | ||
Sotamursu
Finland612 Posts
On February 09 2011 19:52 MiraMax wrote: I see, so then I just misinterpreted your other posts. Well, a moral system is exactly explaining (as in aiming to provide reasons for) why you should do (or not do) something without expecting anything in return, so it seems to me that you simply think "morals" don't exist, which is fine with me - even though I don't share your point of view. Why do you even have to justify animal experiments with the reduction of human suffering though? I take it for your view that had we the possibility to run lab experiments in the same efficiency that we have now but without harming animals, there would be absolutely no reason to take this possibility, since animals won't give us anything in return anyway ... right? If option a) was exactly as effective as animal testing without animals and option b) was animal testing. This situation is highly unrealsitic, but it would be a coinflip. Both would be equally good. How are morals about doing something without getting anything in return? Do you believe objective morals exists? If you do, please explain why you believe so and what evidence do you have for it. This is starting to become an arguement about altruism. I don't believe true altruism exists, but it's almost like arguing about free will. What are you really trying to prove? | ||
xiyuema
87 Posts
| ||
freestalker
469 Posts
On February 09 2011 19:36 feaynnewedd wrote: Insects do not have a central nervous system. Insects have very basic ganglions that enable them to react to their environment. Also, by killing them (swatting, stepping on), you do not make them suffer. If you read my posts, you would know that I am against making animals suffer,and against industrial livestock farming, not against the consumption of meat and killing per se. so according to you it is better if animal is shot by a hunter, escapes, then is tracked down for a day and half, suffering and bleeding, knowing it'll eventually die, then it dies, hunter tracks it down, and takes the meat so he can feed the family. You prefer this to one shot killing at slaughterhouses. | ||
Kamais_Ookin
Canada4218 Posts
On February 09 2011 20:20 Ksyper wrote: Punching the veal is more aggression then necessary but what's more horrifying IMO is you saying that the man should be killed. Seriously? A human-being categorized in the same ranks as an animal we eat everyday?I'm a meat lover and an animal lover, I understand that none of these animals would have ever existed if it weren't for these farms and I also understand that this is cheapest and fastest way to get meat for people. But watching that was a bit horrifying at times, that guy that was punching the baby cow deserves to be beaten to death if you ask me. Funny how I was eating meat while watching this dough... | ||
FrozenFlare
Australia103 Posts
RIP George Carlin, genius comedian. | ||
feaynnewedd
Germany41 Posts
I'm not going to discuss greenhouse gases, but the US only imports 15% of the oil they use, while exporting over 50% of the oil we produce domestically. It has nothing to do with "arabian dictatorships" On February 09 2011 19:48 Belial88 wrote: A lot of US oil data can be found at the Energy Information Administration, a part of the US Department of Energy. I've lived on this web site for 2 years writing a research paper, not to mention class papers written with this site. http://www.eia.doe.gov/ I don't really agree with this philosophy at all. We live in a cruel world, so might as well just be cruel? And people in the past did look at slavery with disgust, the US fought a war over it (yes, that's the reason, its actually that simple, dont let warped history books twist it). Countries simply didn't have democratic institutions to get rid of it at the time - even the US did things such as the 3/5s compromise to prevent slave holding states from having more congressional power to enforce their policies. But this is a HUGE digression... If you are that well informed, you just plainly lied. In 2009, the US imported 9,669,000 barrels/day, produced 9,141,000 barrels/day and wasn't even in the top 15 of oil exporting countries (the lowest was qatar with about 1,000,000 barrels/day). Consumption was 18,810,000 barrels/day, so I don't there was a lot of exporting. Thanks for the site, I like it. For the hypocrite discussion: I smoke pot, but I think that people selling crack to children should go to jail. Does that make me a hypocrite? | ||
Manit0u
Poland17238 Posts
Obligatory comedy relief to release some tension in this thread. | ||
danielsan
Romania399 Posts
not really, he was a dumbass. | ||
Grantalf
United States29 Posts
It may be worth it to do research a few layers deeper than both PETA and Penn and Teller. Regardless, it's all incredibly interesting no matter how you feel. And I also think that all of the Protoss race would be vegan if they had mouths. | ||
MiraMax
Germany532 Posts
On February 09 2011 20:24 Sotamursu wrote: If option a) was exactly as effective as animal testing without animals and option b) was animal testing. This situation is highly unrealsitic, but it would be a coinflip. Both would be equally good. How are morals about doing something without getting anything in return? Do you believe objective morals exists? If you do, please explain why you believe so and what evidence do you have for it. This is starting to become an arguement about altruism. I don't believe true altruism exists, but it's almost like arguing about free will. What are you really trying to prove? I am not trying to prove anything!? The mere definition of a moral system entails codes of conduct which are set in place in order to promote "good" (whatever that means in a particular context). The vast majority of moral systems in modern meta-ethics is based on a non self-centered notion of "good", so it is a simple empirical fact that moral systems in place aim to provide reasons for actions which do not guarantee you a "return", but instead increase "goodness". I am a moral realist, in that I think truth statements can be made with respect to moral contentions. I hold this view because I am sure that if there are two possible worlds, and in world 1 every sentient being is better or equally well off than in world 2", then the statement "world 1 is better (i.e. more "good") than world 2" is true. Otherwise I would not even know what "better", "good" or "bad" could even mean. Since I do not see any meaningful way to seperate humans from other animals, except on the basis of their cognitive abilities which does not seem to provide any clear cut-off, I cannot discard the states of other animals (at least not completely). | ||
adeezy
United States1428 Posts
My friend who is vegan has to take all these protein and supplement pills.. Our bodies arent meant to be vegan.... | ||
Kirameki
96 Posts
1)ignorant 2)stupid 3)more loyal to their own beliefs and moral standards Half of you would be at least vegetarians. These posts are really stupid and all meat eaters should be ashamed of them. If you eat meat at least be able to defend your views in a reasonable way when you feel so insecure you have to respond. Only then you can be a 'proud' meat eater. Really, you people all seem to be 'self hating' meat eaters. | ||
BrogMeister
Sweden22 Posts
1. Aproximately 53 billlion land animals are killed annually worldwide in the farming industry (this is UN statistics from 2003, so it's bound to be more now). It takes infinite naivety to actually believe that a greed driven industry of this scale has any chance to treat the average animal anywhere near decent. 2. The farming industry is one of the top two or three causes of global warming. 3. A consistent finding in epidomelogical studies across diverse populations is that meat eating is associated with poor health outcomes such as CVD and cancer, even when controlled for health awarness. | ||
lOvOlUNiMEDiA
United States643 Posts
On February 09 2011 20:40 MiraMax wrote: I am not trying to prove anything!? The mere definition of a moral system entails codes of conduct which are set in place in order to promote "good" (whatever that means in a particular context). The vast majority of moral systems in modern meta-ethics is based on a non self-centered notion of "good", so it is a simple empirical fact that moral systems in place aim to provide reasons for actions which do not guarantee you a "return", but instead increase "goodness". I am a moral realist, in that I think truth statements can be made with respect to moral contentions. I hold this view because I am sure that if there are two possible worlds, and in world 1 every sentient being is better or equally well off than in world 2", then the statement "world 1 is better (i.e. more "good") than world 2" is true. Otherwise I would not even know what "better", "good" or "bad" could even mean. Since I do not see any meaningful way to seperate humans from other animals, except on the basis of their cognitive abilities which does not seem to provide any clear cut-off, I cannot discard the states of other animals (at least not completely). I agree with you that a moral system entails a code of conduct. And I agree with you that the vast majority of moral systems are "other" oriented. But there are some important exceptions that are not prima facie incoherent: Aristotle's conception of Eudaimonia is tickling the edges of an ethical//rational egoism. M. Stirner is a straight up egoist of some kind. Nietzsche certainly thinks ethics, if it is to be something wholesome at all, should be a code of conduct that increases the strength of the individual practicing it. And don't forget Ayn Rand's Objectivist ethics (which should get more attention that it does and is getting more attention that it used to). | ||
W2
United States1177 Posts
However, meat just tastes too good to give up... And as such, I did not watch that movie. One thing I'd like to add, since there are a lot of vegetarians on this thread: Vegetarians are cool, but what really annoys me and a lot of others is the vegetarian that makes you feel guilty about eating meat, and acts like he/she is above you. So... try not to preach! Respect each other's decision. I've always wondered what the stance is on fish/eggs/dairy products/etc. To some people, fish is okay because they are less similar to animals. | ||
Kirameki
96 Posts
Fish are animals. They are less similar to mammals. It depends on your reasons for being a vegetarian. Eating beef or pork won't destroy the ecosystem. At least not directly. Eating fish often does. Suffering is different. Fish also live in the wild. So different moral principles are applied. | ||
adeezy
United States1428 Posts
On February 09 2011 20:52 W2 wrote: The human body doesn't need meat. In fact, a vegetarian is less likely to get heart disease/high blood pressure/other complications and will live longer. So the bullshit about top-of-the-food-chain "we need meat to survive" arguments do not hold at all. (Learned from medical school curriculum as of last year) However, meat just tastes too good to give up... And as such, I did not watch that movie. One thing I'd like to add, since there are a lot of vegetarians on this thread: Vegetarians are cool, but what really annoys me and a lot of others is the vegetarian that makes you feel guilty about eating meat, and acts like he/she is above you. So... try not to preach! Respect each other's decision. I've always wondered what the stance is on fish/eggs/dairy products/etc. To some people, fish is okay because they are less similar to animals. So.... why do vegans take protein supplements and what not? I learned otherwise in some of my classes | ||
Kirameki
96 Posts
Consuming less protein is a solution, not a problem. | ||
Nycaloth
147 Posts
On February 09 2011 20:15 Belial88 wrote: I could support myself if I went into the wilderness, and so could many of these homeless people. Its a lack of education and economy that hurts, and people who are disabled or old can't live off the wild either. These countries, and the farmers/people in them, are not forced to make meat for the west. The reason they make grains for the meat for the west is because it makes them more money to do this than to make food to sustain themselves - it's the same reason farmers in Afghanistan make heroin/opium instead of crops - they are better off making drugs and using the cash to buy imported food with money leftover, than to make sustenance and solely live on that. It's the basic principle of trade. I don't really want to explain it when others have done it better, but look up why 3 people making their own thing is much more productive than 3 people simply trying to sustain themselves. Quite the opposite is true. Look up how trade works - not to be derisive, but to show that each country doing what it specializes in, is better than every country fending for itself. America will never make rice like Asians can, and Asians can never make beef like we can, and so on. A lot of this depends on the development of the country, which is a process that takes time though. Maybe i was not quite clear in what i said. I am of course not opposing trade, but i think that supplying the world with food should be more important than supplying the west with meat and that it could easily be done if the west was less hungry for meat. | ||
forcestealer
Canada60 Posts
| ||
Kirameki
96 Posts
I know some of the percentages by memory, but it's just that I wonder what this means in practice.. | ||
W2
United States1177 Posts
On February 09 2011 20:54 Kirameki wrote: It's always meat eaters that call out the vegetarians. Not the other way around. Ask any vegetarian. Fish are animals. They are less similar to mammals. It depends on your reasons for being a vegetarian. Eating beef or pork won't destroy the ecosystem. Eating fish often does. Suffering is different. Fish also live in the wild. So different moral principles are applied. What is there to call out on vegetarians? I think people are just striking up a conversation and you are reading too much into it. | ||
adeezy
United States1428 Posts
On February 09 2011 18:48 imapotato wrote: Ok right of the bat i'm gonna say i'm a meat eater. All i really have to say is that the video shown here is crap, it shows the worst factory farms on the planet and ignores any points on free range / fairly treated animals. To make matters worse the person who started this whole thread comes from NZ were we have incredibly high standards on animal cruelty, so the video doesn't really relate to him at all. I guess the thing i have to say is that there's nothing wrong with eating meat, the only thing i would like to see happen is to see stricter rules on how animals are treated in these farms, feeding people sick animals is not alright! Stop forcing your goddamn life style on other people! This is the type of quote that people who are Vegans/ Vegetarians avoid answering. I mean seriously... whats the answer to this? What about sweatshops and FoxConn? Vegans hold on happily to their iPhones and MacbookPros when the product comes from just as much injustice to Humane conditions as some of these slaughterhouses. Foxconn is on only one example of this. In my Asian American Studies classes there was terrible amounts of human working conditions to produce common clothes. Yet... People still wear them. And also... to the previous post. you HAVE to fish otherwise you risk overpopulation or having certain fish wipe out another fish. The fishing industry is very calculated. They avoid overfishing. I'm not sure I've read anywhere that fishing destroys the environment.... And no... that dolphin whaling thing in japan does not count as fishing industry. | ||
hifriend
China7935 Posts
On February 09 2011 20:49 Kirameki wrote: Reading these posts, if people here wouldn't be: 1)ignorant 2)stupid 3)more loyal to their own beliefs and moral standards Half of you would be at least vegetarians. These posts are really stupid and all meat eaters should be ashamed of them. If you eat meat at least be able to defend your views in a reasonable way when you feel so insecure you have to respond. Only then you can be a 'proud' meat eater. Really, you people all seem to be 'self hating' meat eaters. Yeah you're probably right. I always get swedish meat, free-range/organic eggs etc but I would never give up meat altogether. The reason I wouldn't give up meat is because I simply place my own well being far above that of any animal. I certainly won't try to defend my meat consumption. | ||
Sotamursu
Finland612 Posts
I am not trying to prove anything!? The mere definition of a moral system entails codes of conduct which are set in place in order to promote "good" (whatever that means in a particular context). The vast majority of moral systems in modern meta-ethics is based on a non self-centered notion of "good", so it is a simple empirical fact that moral systems in place aim to provide reasons for actions which do not guarantee you a "return", but instead increase "goodness". The return is almost never something solid like pick up that trash and receive 5 dollars. I would say that increasing general goodness and well-being of everyone is a pretty decent return. Of course the problem here is that someone can just abuse this system and receive the return without doing much good. I don't understand how abiding a moral code like this is not selfish. Most people however act good, as in they don't go around killing, raping and stealing. When a lot of people agree to this, everyone receives a return. It's not like you really have a choice either. You commit crimes, you get punished. I would argue that people would go pretty feral, if there was no chance of them getting caught or/and punished. I am a moral realist, in that I think truth statements can be made with respect to moral contentions. I hold this view because I am sure that if there are two possible worlds, and in world 1 every sentient being is better or equally well off than in world 2", then the statement "world 1 is better (i.e. more "good") than world 2" is true. Otherwise I would not even know what "better", "good" or "bad" could even mean. I don't really understand what you're trying to say here. In a moral code things that abide it are considered good and things that don't are considered evil. It doesn't really matter what kind of a moral code it is. I guess you could say that I'm a relativist of some sort, but the reason I think my morals are better than the jungle cannibals is, that it minimizes human suffering and allows the human race to improve itself. If the scientific method finds a better way to achieve these goals, I would advocate that moral code. Since I do not see any meaningful way to seperate humans from other animals, except on the basis of their cognitive abilities which does not seem to provide any clear cut-off, I cannot discard the states of other animals (at least not completely). What other reason do you need that we are humans and they are not. They have lesser cognitive abilities, if that doesn't matter to you, you must be feeling sorry for all those plants and insects too. Every species is out there to survive and reproduce on the expense of other species. Some species develop symbiotic relationships, which complicates things a bit, but even that only happened because it was the most efficient way for them to continue their legacy. | ||
aseq
Netherlands3975 Posts
Eating meat: Not Wrong. Canine teeth. | ||
MiraMax
Germany532 Posts
On February 09 2011 20:52 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote: I agree with you that a moral system entails a code of conduct. And I agree with you that the vast majority of moral systems are "other" oriented. But there are some important exceptions that are not prima facie incoherent: Aristotle's conception of Eudaimonia is tickling the edges of an ethical//rational egoism. M. Stirner is a straight up egoist of some kind. Nietzsche certainly thinks ethics, if it is to be something wholesome at all, should be a code of conduct that increases the strength of the individual practicing it. And don't forget Ayn Rand's Objectivist ethics (which should get more attention that it does and is getting more attention that it used to). You are absolutely right that there are prominent exceptions, even though sometimes it is difficult to pinpoint the difference between self-centered and not self-centered takes on morality. Nietzsche, for instances, also seemed to despise actions which make other individuals "weak" and objectivism certainly condones actions with no immediate or direct return - as long as it can be argued that they contribute to the overall stability of society. I find Ayn Rand's take on animal rights not convincing though, since he does not offer a biological argument on how to distinguish rational from non-rational agents. I think he is further subject to an incorrect syllogism in that he seems to say that since a sentient being is not a moral agent and thus cannot be subject to a moral statement, it cannot be object in a moral statement either. Just because I think that a 6 months old child cannot be held morally responsible for anything, it doesn't mean that whatever I do to this child is morally irrelevant. I see a similar connection to animals. | ||
BrogMeister
Sweden22 Posts
On February 09 2011 21:06 adeezy wrote: This is the type of quote that people who are Vegans/ Vegetarians avoid answering. I mean seriously... whats the answer to this? What about sweatshops and FoxConn? Vegans hold on happily to their iPhones and MacbookPros when the product comes from just as much injustice to Humane conditions as some of these slaughterhouses. Foxconn is on only one example of this. In my Asian American Studies classes there was terrible amounts of human working conditions to produce common clothes. Yet... People still wear them. And also... to the previous post. you HAVE to fish otherwise you risk overpopulation or having certain fish wipe out another fish. The fishing industry is very calculated. They avoid overfishing. I'm not sure I've read anywhere that fishing destroys the environment.... And no... that dolphin whaling thing in japan does not count as fishing industry. The answer to that quote is quite simple: An industry designed to convert living, feeling beings into profit is not compatible with any animal wellfare. For example: a cow which is allowed to bond naturally to her calves would only give milk in their presence, which would be a huge extra cost for the diary industry. Therefore the calve is separated from the cow early to prohibit the bonding, and this is true whether it's so called "ecological" production or not. This one of many obvious frustrations of the cows' basic needs in the industry. In general I think you would find vegans more engaged in global economical fairness than your average joe. The notion that if we left nature alone it would somehow mismanage itself is absurd. | ||
MiraMax
Germany532 Posts
On February 09 2011 21:14 Sotamursu wrote: The return is almost never something solid like pick up that trash and receive 5 dollars. I would say that increasing general goodness and well-being of everyone is a pretty decent return. Of course the problem here is that someone can just abuse this system and receive the return without doing much good. I don't understand how abiding a moral code like this is not selfish. Most people however act good, as in they don't go around killing, raping and stealing. When a lot of people agree to this, everyone receives a return. It's not like you really have a choice either. You commit crimes, you get punished. I would argue that people would go pretty feral, if there was no chance of them getting caught or/and punished. Well, we might get into a pointless semantic argument here, so I will just say: If you think that increasing "goodness" is always egoistic/selfish, then yes, you always get a return. I don't understand what you could possibly mean by egoistic if you use it like this, since it does not seem to allow any distinction from altruistic anymore, but this might just be my problem and I am happy to accept your definition. What other reason do you need that we are humans and they are not. They have lesser cognitive abilities, if that doesn't matter to you, you must be feeling sorry for all those plants and insects too. Every species is out there to survive and reproduce on the expense of other species. Some species develop symbiotic relationships, which complicates things a bit, but even that only happened because it was the most efficient way for them to continue their legacy. My empathy with animals/living beings certainly does increase with their level of cognitive abilities. That's exactly why I care less for a potatoe (not at all since no cognition), than for a fly, than for a pig, than for a dolphin, than for a human. If you take extreme speciism seriously, then a potatoe should be as relevant to me, as a dog. I doubt anybody really feels that way. Furthermore "species" is a rather vague biological entity (in the sense that at transition points it becomes arbitrary) since we are all related. If we would find out that mice are actually highly intelligent (and have for generations tried to contact us with sounds in morse codes since they lack the vocal cords), I think that this should fundamentally change the way we treat mice. | ||
TrinitySC
101 Posts
On February 09 2011 19:41 Humppis wrote: A sociopath could ask why anyone else than him/her self has rights. Its showing empathy to our fellow earth dwellers, and not everybody can understand this. We humans define rights for our selves, whitch tends to end up in very selfish rules. See, this is the problem. Rather than attempting to offer up a decent rationale as to why animals should have rights, you react emotionally. You're basically telling me this is so because you're right and I'm wrong. Just because this is how you feel things should be, you label me as a sociopath at the slightest implication of disagreement from your views rather than taking the time to explain to me with reason why animals should have rights. "You are wrong because your views are not the same as mine." In that sense, how are you any different from religious extremists? I could even go so far as to reduce to ad hitlerum, and it would apply. There actually are many reasons why animals, to an extent, should have rights. An obvious one is that there is virtue in avoiding and discouraging cruelty (i.e. deliberate infliction of pain or suffering), whether it is to a human or animal. Even so, many factory farms around the world utilize methods that cause unnecessary pain and suffering for the animals they raise, and some people inflict pain to animals for no other reason than simple pleasure. Such forms of cruelty can expand as a menace to society as a whole, yet they can be avoided with little or no cost, and therefore it is good that we do so. But alas, no; we must give animals rights because you "believe" and "feel" that it's wrong. Bah. This is why I personally consider many of the opinions and arguments of PETA and other animal rights activists to be utter shit. Because even though some of them are valid efforts towards worthy causes, most of them amount to little more than adolescent outcries of self-righteous drama queens pickled in confirmation bias. When you consistently resort to emotional, perjorative responses based upon faulty judgements (availibility, overconfidence, confirmation... you name it, you probably have it), all you manage to do is encourage reciprocation from those who disagree with you. But then again, maybe it's no coincidence this trait is so common among the more active activists... P.S. as for veganism.. I honestly don't care what you eat or don't eat, and to an extent I can empathize with your choices; the treatment of animals at certain facilities can be too much for me, too, sometimes. A lot of it is definitely unnecessary and, by all means, it's worth it to raise awareness in an effort to bring needless cruelty to an end. But consider this that somebody once told me: "Religion is like a penis; it's fine to have one and it's fine to be proud of one, but it's not fine to go around shoving it in other peoples' faces." The same pretty much applies to beliefs or practices of any kind, not just religion. Even so, some people have been being rather assertive with their beliefs regarding dietary habits of others, and even proceeded to call others out for reciprocating a response. This just ties right back to the ad hitlerum statement I made a few paragraphs above and it's downright annoying there's a thread with such an ulterior motive. Sometimes I'm genuinely embarrassed that I belong in this genus. </wall of text> | ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 09 2011 19:17 MiraMax wrote: Maybe I missed it, but could you share with me your main argument for "eating meat happily". I eat meat happily, but only because I decided that I don't care (too much) about animal well-being, even though I think I should, much like I decided that I will not care (too much) about the poverty in the world, even though I know I should. I have taken these decisions mainly out of convenience, since I cannot fight all evil in the world at once. I nonetheless grant to people who actively fight for animal rights and against poverty that they have "the moral high ground" (in the respective field). What's your take on it? By that happy phrase I meant that I have no moral problems with eating meat per se. Empathy is emotion(even towards animals) that most normal people have, you just have to use reason to look at the practical side of things. So of course I feel empathy towards tortured animal, but that just means I don't want it to suffer, but killing them for food is natural. And by saying that you think you should care shows that you actually at least slightly care. I think if you saw screaming and crying tortured animal you would feel sorry for it, yes it is possible to grow accustomed to human/animal suffering, but that is not the case for most citizens of first world. Of course you are not feeling bad for every suffering animal on the planet, because that is not humanly possible as it is not possible to be actively 24-7 sorry for the people in the third world or in disaster areas. But thanks to that empathy you acknowledge that something is wrong and using your brain support practical measures to rectify it. PETA people go too far with the emotional part, on the other hand people who do not really care about animal suffering (and as I said by caring I mean just that, there is no action required, although than you run risk of being kind of hypocrite) are just kind of inhuman. Also note that there is big moral distinction between humans and animals. So it is easily possible to have "absolute" moral system where there is no problem with eating meat and even using animals for research (specific one). | ||
Terrakin
United States1440 Posts
| ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 09 2011 19:34 RoseTempest wrote: So having a nervous system is it then? Ever step on an ant? Ever swat a fly? fucking hypocrite Black and white much ? You do not recognize the difference between ant ant dog ? They have differently complicated nervous systems. | ||
nathangonmad
United Kingdom316 Posts
| ||
MiraMax
Germany532 Posts
On February 09 2011 21:14 Sotamursu wrote: I don't really understand what you're trying to say here. In a moral code things that abide it are considered good and things that don't are considered evil. It doesn't really matter what kind of a moral code it is. I guess you could say that I'm a relativist of some sort, but the reason I think my morals are better than the jungle cannibals is, that it minimizes human suffering and allows the human race to improve itself. If the scientific method finds a better way to achieve these goals, I would advocate that moral code. We seem to not be too much apart then. If you make a distinction between two moral systems and say one is (or can in principle be) "better" than another, then the question of whether you should adapt one system or the other is a morally relevant action. If you think that this question can (in principle) be answered by more than just personal taste or cultural presupposition, then you are a moral realist in my book. | ||
incifan
Germany138 Posts
And because a picture sais more than a wall of text: ![]() | ||
BrogMeister
Sweden22 Posts
On February 09 2011 21:35 TrinitySC wrote: See, this is the problem. Rather than attempting to offer up a decent rationale as to why animals should have rights, you react emotionally. You're basically telling me this is so because you're right and I'm wrong. Just because this is how you feel things should be, you label me as a sociopath at the slightest implication of disagreement from your views rather than taking the time to explain to me with reason why animals should have rights. "You are wrong because your views are not the same as mine." In that sense, how are you any different from religious extremists? I could even go so far as to reduce to ad hitlerum, and it would apply. There actually are many reasons why animals, to an extent, should have rights. An obvious one is that there is virtue in avoiding and discouraging cruelty (i.e. deliberate infliction of pain or suffering), whether it is to a human or animal. Even so, many factory farms around the world utilize methods that cause unnecessary pain and suffering for the animals they raise, and some people inflict pain to animals for no other reason than simple pleasure. Such forms of cruelty can expand as a menace to society as a whole, yet they can be avoided with little or no cost, and therefore it is good that we do so. But alas, no; we must give animals rights because you "believe" and "feel" that it's wrong. Bah. This is why I personally consider many of the opinions and arguments of PETA and other animal rights activists to be utter shit. Because even though some of them are valid efforts towards worthy causes, most of them amount to little more than delusional outcries of self-righteous drama queens pickled in confirmation bias. When you consistently resort to emotional, perjorative responses based upon faulty judgements (availibility, overconfidence, confirmation... you name it, you probably have it), all you manage to do is encourage reciprocation from those who disagree with you. But then again, maybe it's no coincidence this trait is so common among the more active activists... P.S. as for veganism.. I honestly don't care what you eat or don't eat, and to an extent I can empathize with your choices; the treatment of animals at certain facilities can be too much for me, too, sometimes. A lot of it is definitely unnecessary and, by all means, it's worth it to raise awareness in an effort to bring needless cruelty to an end. But consider this that somebody once told me: "Religion is like a penis; it's fine to have one and it's fine to be proud of one, but it's not fine to go around shoving it in other peoples' faces." The same pretty much applies to beliefs or practices of any kind, not just religion. Even so, some people have been being rather assertive with their beliefs regarding dietary habits of others, and even proceeded to call others out for reciprocating a response. This just ties right back to the ad hitlerum statement I made a few paragraphs above and it's downright annoying there's a thread with such an ulterior motive. Sometimes I'm genuinely embarrassed that I belong in this genus. </wall of text> The whole farming industry is unnecessary and inherently cruel. Even if we disregard the animals in the industry, it's still a source of unhealty food, a great waste of resources and a major cause of global warming. The reason vegans want to spread their lifestyle is not (mainly) because they are self-righteous, but because they care about the animals. "Superior intelligence is like a penis; it's fine to have one and fine to be proud of it, but it's not fine to use it to exploit less intelligent animals." | ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 09 2011 20:35 Grantalf wrote: I've been vegan for 9 years. And from my experience and research, the health and environmental benefits would be enough to suggest it to anyone even if they don't agree with the animal rights argument. It may be worth it to do research a few layers deeper than both PETA and Penn and Teller. Regardless, it's all incredibly interesting no matter how you feel. And I also think that all of the Protoss race would be vegan if they had mouths. There is absolutely no data to support any benefits of being vegan as opposed to being vegetarian. Actually opposite is true. | ||
SubtleArt
2710 Posts
![]() | ||
enzym
Germany1034 Posts
On February 09 2011 21:36 mcc wrote: At what level of intellectual sophistication do you draw the line between it being ok to kill an organism for food and it being not ok? Which criteria does an organism have to fulfill for you to consider other factors additionally to just suffering and efficiency?By that happy phrase I meant that I have no moral problems with eating meat per se. Empathy is emotion(even towards animals) that most normal people have, you just have to use reason to look at the practical side of things. So of course I feel empathy towards tortured animal, but that just means I don't want it to suffer, but killing them for food is natural. And by saying that you think you should care shows that you actually at least slightly care. I think if you saw screaming and crying tortured animal you would feel sorry for it, yes it is possible to grow accustomed to human/animal suffering, but that is not the case for most citizens of first world. Of course you are not feeling bad for every suffering animal on the planet, because that is not humanly possible as it is not possible to be actively 24-7 sorry for the people in the third world or in disaster areas. But thanks to that empathy you acknowledge that something is wrong and using your brain support practical measures to rectify it. PETA people go too far with the emotional part, on the other hand people who do not really care about animal suffering (and as I said by caring I mean just that, there is no action required, although than you run risk of being kind of hypocrite) are just kind of inhuman. Also note that there is big moral distinction between humans and animals. So it is easily possible to have "absolute" moral system where there is no problem with eating meat and even using animals for research (specific one). | ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 09 2011 20:24 Sotamursu wrote: If option a) was exactly as effective as animal testing without animals and option b) was animal testing. This situation is highly unrealsitic, but it would be a coinflip. Both would be equally good. How are morals about doing something without getting anything in return? Do you believe objective morals exists? If you do, please explain why you believe so and what evidence do you have for it. This is starting to become an arguement about altruism. I don't believe true altruism exists, but it's almost like arguing about free will. What are you really trying to prove? I think better scenario to illustrate the point is : a) Medical research without animals but somewhat more expensive than with animals b) Medical research with animals What would you decide in this scenario based on the cost difference. What if the cost difference is very small and easily affordable for the society. Would you still prefer testing with animals ? Also of course there is objective morality possible, and not only possible. You think that every moral judgment on any situation is as valid as any other ? | ||
BrogMeister
Sweden22 Posts
On February 09 2011 21:47 mcc wrote: There is absolutely no data to support any benefits of being vegan as opposed to being vegetarian. Actually opposite is true. Source please. I would guess milk and cheese is an evolutionary irrelevant source of nutrition. | ||
enzym
Germany1034 Posts
On February 09 2011 21:47 mcc wrote: There is absolutely no data to support any benefits of being vegan as opposed to being vegetarian. Actually opposite is true. Meat consumption creates problems by inflicting unnecessary suffering (current form of meat harvesting), being inefficient (requiring more land to sustain a population than non-meat diet) and by releasing gases emanating from dung which can have an impact on global climate. I haven't read anything invalidating these claims yet. If you have any information in that regard please share. | ||
Mahoogee
Australia23 Posts
- Tires : You cannot drive a vehicle, ride a bus or a bike. No transportation except walking (horses are forbidden) . And no walking on asphalt or concrete, they contain animal products. Anti- freeze, brake fluid and oil also contains animal products. - Plastic: Several fatty acids from animals are key ingredients in plastic. No combs to untangle your greasy hair. Your B-12 and other supplements come in plastic bottles ( read more to find out about those vitamins and supplements) , so you can' t take them. No using those little plastic produce bags at the grocery store for your veg. Oh yeah, and since almost every thing is made out of plastic or contained by it you are shit out of luck. - Tooth paste and mouth wash: Cows provide a substance called glycerin that helps to fight dental plaque. The tooth brush is also mostly plastic. No wonder vegans have such horrible breath. - Medicine: 350 modern pharmaceuticals are made from animal products. Anything in a gel cap contains gelatin which is made from animals. Cortisone and insulin (the synthetic stuff is very expensive and hard to get) too. Also, Latex surgical gloves contain tallow, x- ray film contains gelatin. - Perfume/ cologne/ deodorant: made from whales, deer or beaver. No synthetic has ever been made to match the natural animal shit. So you' ll have to keep smelling like a cheap whore with BO. -Wax paper , cellophane , cardboard and paper containers your processed foods come in is all made from animals. - White sugar : purified bone ash is used to refine sugar . - Your house or apartment: paint , wallpaper, linoleum, carpet, plywood, drywall, insulation all made from animal products, ceramic tile. - Furniture: foam rubber contains egg whites, wood glue contains animal products. - Laundry detergents , fabric softeners, disinfectants, house hold cleaners and polishes. You have to live a filthy life in filthy rags. - Sunscreens , soaps , shampoos, cosmetics: all contain animal products. Lotion and makeup contain lanol in which comes from sheep' s wool. - Vitamins and mineral supplements: which ever vegan requires are also derived from animals. - Fire extinguishers: use animals products. - Electrical devices: Electrical circuitry is made from animal products. Your printers ink and/ or toner is also made from animal products | ||
Sm3agol
United States2055 Posts
Meat is tasty. There is nothing morally wrong with eating meat that I see. They are lower than us on the food chain, and their animal contemporaries certainly have no problem with ripping them to shreds and eating them alive. Why aren't you people crying out for the murder of all predators to keep all these poor animals from being mangled by lions and wolves and such? It is good for you. I eat meat, and don't ever intend to stop. | ||
BrogMeister
Sweden22 Posts
On February 09 2011 21:58 Mahoogee wrote: saved this list from somewhere, can't remember where, but i feel its appropriate to re-post in this situation. - Tires : You cannot drive a vehicle, ride a bus or a bike. No transportation except walking (horses are forbidden) . And no walking on asphalt or concrete, they contain animal products. Anti- freeze, brake fluid and oil also contains animal products. - Plastic: Several fatty acids from animals are key ingredients in plastic. No combs to untangle your greasy hair. Your B-12 and other supplements come in plastic bottles ( read more to find out about those vitamins and supplements) , so you can' t take them. No using those little plastic produce bags at the grocery store for your veg. Oh yeah, and since almost every thing is made out of plastic or contained by it you are shit out of luck. - Tooth paste and mouth wash: Cows provide a substance called glycerin that helps to fight dental plaque. The tooth brush is also mostly plastic. No wonder vegans have such horrible breath. - Medicine: 350 modern pharmaceuticals are made from animal products. Anything in a gel cap contains gelatin which is made from animals. Cortisone and insulin (the synthetic stuff is very expensive and hard to get) too. Also, Latex surgical gloves contain tallow, x- ray film contains gelatin. - Perfume/ cologne/ deodorant: made from whales, deer or beaver. No synthetic has ever been made to match the natural animal shit. So you' ll have to keep smelling like a cheap whore with BO. -Wax paper , cellophane , cardboard and paper containers your processed foods come in is all made from animals. - White sugar : purified bone ash is used to refine sugar . - Your house or apartment: paint , wallpaper, linoleum, carpet, plywood, drywall, insulation all made from animal products, ceramic tile. - Furniture: foam rubber contains egg whites, wood glue contains animal products. - Laundry detergents , fabric softeners, disinfectants, house hold cleaners and polishes. You have to live a filthy life in filthy rags. - Sunscreens , soaps , shampoos, cosmetics: all contain animal products. Lotion and makeup contain lanol in which comes from sheep' s wool. - Vitamins and mineral supplements: which ever vegan requires are also derived from animals. - Fire extinguishers: use animals products. - Electrical devices: Electrical circuitry is made from animal products. Your printers ink and/ or toner is also made from animal products You're absolutely right, individual lifestyle changes are insufficient. Political reform is also needed. | ||
Gummy
United States2180 Posts
On February 09 2011 21:53 enzym wrote: At what level of intellectual sophistication do you draw the line between it being ok to kill an organism for food and it being not ok? Which criteria does an organism have to fulfill for you to consider other factors additionally to just suffering and efficiency? The general criterion used by my vegan friends is the question of whether or not an organism is capable of "suffering." Generally speaking a nervous system with a central unit capable of processing the pain in a meaningful way is sufficient. | ||
enzym
Germany1034 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:00 Sm3agol wrote: If humans weren't supposed to eat meat, then our bodies wouldn't be able to handle eating meat. Meat is tasty. There is nothing morally wrong with eating meat that I see. They are lower than us on the food chain, and their animal contemporaries certainly have no problem with ripping them to shreds and eating them alive. Why aren't you people crying out for the murder of all predators to keep all these poor animals from being mangled by lions and wolves and such? It is good for you. I eat meat, and don't ever intend to stop. Because those other animals don't share human level of awareness and reasoning capability. Animals have little choice to act on anything but instincts. Humans do have that choice and if you do not make use of those capabilities but choose to ignore them then you are degrading yourself back to animal level, in fact placing yourself below the level of animals, because animals do not have such a choice. | ||
Samurai-
Slovenia2035 Posts
jeah, for close-minded people.. | ||
Sm3agol
United States2055 Posts
On February 09 2011 21:58 enzym wrote: Meat consumption creates problems by inflicting unnecessary suffering (current form of meat harvesting), Breaking news, animals eat eat other, and they certainly don't do it efficiently. Is is NECESSARY for us to kill and eat them? No, but it isn't exactly necessary to drive cars and play on our computers either now is it? I'm pretty sure humanity got along just fine without either. being inefficient (requiring more land to sustain a population than non-meat diet) That certainly sounds like a great argument to CHANGE HALF THE WORLD'S EATING HABITS because of. Until land becomes scarce, and people struggle to produce enough food to feed everyone, this isn't even remotely relevant to the conversation. and by releasing gases emanating from dung which can have an impact on global climate. I haven't read anything invalidating these claims yet. If you have any information in that regard please share. And quite possibly the worst argument I've ever heard. Do you drive cars? Do you use electricity? Then fark you. None of these arguments mean anything to me, considering our current lifestyle. Focus on saving tortured and starving kids, worry about animals when you have that problem solved. | ||
MiraMax
Germany532 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:00 Sm3agol wrote: If humans weren't supposed to eat meat, then our bodies wouldn't be able to handle eating meat. Meat is tasty. There is nothing morally wrong with eating meat that I see. They are lower than us on the food chain, and their animal contemporaries certainly have no problem with ripping them to shreds and eating them alive. Why aren't you people crying out for the murder of all predators to keep all these poor animals from being mangled by lions and wolves and such? It is good for you. I eat meat, and don't ever intend to stop. Pretty convincing line of reasoning you have there ... and I guess if humans were not supposed to kill each other they would not have brains to develop guns, nor fingers to trigger them, right? Furthermore might makes right, so the strongest is obviously entitled to eat a weaker contemporary. Why exactly doesn't this rule apply among humans again? Or does it? We got that animals cannot be held morally responsible, so we don't judge a lion in court. We also don't allow them to buy cars by the way, and nobody is arguing that we should. But animals are able to sustain themselves (in principle) and seem to prefer living from non-living and well-being from suffering. Don't you think you might at least want to try an argument as to why we can completely ignore their preferences? | ||
TrinitySC
101 Posts
On February 09 2011 21:46 BrogMeister wrote: The whole farming industry is unnecessary and inherently cruel. Even if we disregard the animals in the industry, it's still a source of unhealty food, a great waste of resources and a major cause of global warming. The reason vegans want to spread their lifestyle is not (mainly) because they are self-righteous, but because they care about the animals. "Superior intelligence is like a penis; it's fine to have one and fine to be proud of it, but it's not fine to use it to exploit less intelligent animals." You realize you just helped prove my point with that first sentence, right? But it is true that farming, the way it is done now, is a major source of global warming. It doesn't have to be, though, and it's much more realistic to have people buy organic meat than to have them stop eating meat altogether. As your second paragraph... you do realize that's what having superior intelligence is all about, don't you? That's how we got this far in the first place, and that's how we're staying here. Civilization itself is grounded in, and would have never got this far without, exploitation of less intelligent animals. | ||
Samurai-
Slovenia2035 Posts
On February 09 2011 20:49 Kirameki wrote: Reading these posts, if people here wouldn't be: 1)ignorant 2)stupid 3)more loyal to their own beliefs and moral standards Half of you would be at least vegetarians. These posts are really stupid and all meat eaters should be ashamed of them. If you eat meat at least be able to defend your views in a reasonable way when you feel so insecure you have to respond. Only then you can be a 'proud' meat eater. Really, you people all seem to be 'self hating' meat eaters. Defend our views ? haha.. we eat meat, thats all there is to it.. Its you who have problems with it... proud meat eaters ? What ? we eat because we enjoy meat, its taste, and because we have been eating it for thousands of years.. its you who calls us insecure, self hating.. so who is insecure, and self hating now? | ||
Sm3agol
United States2055 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:03 enzym wrote: Because those other animals don't share human level of awareness and reasoning capability. Animals have little choice to act on anything but instincts. Humans do have that choice and if you do not make use of those capabilities but choose to ignore them then you are degrading yourself back to animal level, in fact placing yourself below the level of animals, because animals do not have such a choice. So because we are smarter than animals, we shouldn't eat them? Eh? You're making the grand assumption that eating meat is wrong in the first place. I happen to disagree with you. | ||
Velr
Switzerland10650 Posts
Vegans = Retarded. Just wait until science discovers that plants also feel "true" Pain and so on... I wonder what their next step will be... I eat meat because i like the taste of it. Animals die because we want to eat them (and tons of other stuff), big shocker. | ||
N1mrod
Germany64 Posts
| ||
Sm3agol
United States2055 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:09 MiraMax wrote: Pretty convincing line of reasoning you have there ... and I guess if humans were not supposed to kill each other they would not have brains to develop guns, nor fingers to trigger them, right? Wow, that's quite the deviance in argument. I'm pretty sure humans weren't meant to fly either, herp derp. If eating meat was bad for humans, then we wouldn't have evolved with the ability to eat it. You're the people saying humans eating meat is unnatural...as if we haven't been eating it for umpteen thousand years. Furthermore might makes right, so the strongest is obviously entitled to eat a weaker contemporary. Why exactly doesn't this rule apply among humans again? Or does it? Because humans are fundamentally equals. To each other, not to the tasty piece of meat sitting in my freezer atm. Tasty animals are not my equals. Until they develop the ability to interact with us in a reasonable way, I'll continue to eat them. We got that animals cannot be held morally responsible, so we don't judge a lion in court. We also don't allow them to buy cars by the way, and nobody is arguing that we should. But animals are able to sustain themselves (in principle) and seem to prefer living from non-living and well-being from suffering. Don't you think you might at least want to try an argument as to why we can completely ignore their preferences? Because we are at the top of the food chain, and they serve a useful purpose to the human race. So their opinion doesn't matter. And it can't matter because it isn't an opinion....it's merely their instinct. | ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 09 2011 21:53 enzym wrote: At what level of intellectual sophistication do you draw the line between it being ok to kill an organism for food and it being not ok? Which criteria does an organism have to fulfill for you to consider other factors additionally to just suffering and efficiency? Except for being human, there is no big line line as far as killing for eating goes (of course as everything in real life it is more complicated, as factors like killing 1000 bisons "for eating" when in the end only 2 will be actually eaten). I am all for drawing that line beneath humans somewhat, but I never put that much time into thinking about details or if there is any reasonable justification for it, it just feels right. I would exclude animals like primates, dolphins, ... hope you see the pattern. But as far as eating is concerned any line except animal/plant or humans/rest one is arbitrary. And the line animal/plant without also including humans/rest line has its own set of problems if you would like to apply it consistently to other areas. I think the best approach is to just accept that it is continuum or at least a lot of different groups on some scale and draw the line somewhere in reasonably safe point, same as with other stuff like when to allow abortions. | ||
Belial88
United States5217 Posts
If you are that well informed, you just plainly lied. In 2009, the US imported 9,669,000 barrels/day, produced 9,141,000 barrels/day and wasn't even in the top 15 of oil exporting countries (the lowest was qatar with about 1,000,000 barrels/day). Consumption was 18,810,000 barrels/day, so I don't there was a lot of exporting. Thanks for the site, I like it. I know trends have been showing the US importing more oil as a total percentage of oil used, but I can't believe it's that drastic already. But, I'll assume you read the data correct, no reason not to, and worse case I exaggerated a bit, my point still stands that the US exports a lot of the oil we produce - according to these numbers, we roughly produce enough oil to be self sustaining yet we still import a large portion of it (actually I think I might've said 15%, sorry, I meant 15% of imports are from OPEC, the rest is mostly canada). The TOTAL point being, is that trading is better than trying to be self sustaining. Poor countries are better off making useless stuff for the West and than making a large margin of money and economy for jobs and to spend, and then use the money to buy more sustenance then they would have if they were self-reliant. Just look at North Korea, or even how detrimental trade sanctions are when imposed by the UN (despite what some pundits and talking heads may say. Personally I dont know if I agree with sanctions because of the damage they do to the people, as dictators will always live comfortably). For the hypocrite discussion: I smoke pot, but I think that people selling crack to children should go to jail. Does that make me a hypocrite? Children are an exception. If you wanted to argue that children shouldn't be able to eat meat, I don't know if I could argue against you on that - I already said that I think vegan is healthier than eating meat. I think more in line with vegan activism is "Pot is bad, therefore we should show over the top videos of how badly marijuana tar messes with your lungs and campaign for legislation and laws that will make it illegal for you to smoke pot, and make laws that make it harder to cultivate pot such as regulations to make sure that the pot was grown in a humane manner" | ||
Supamang
United States2298 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:03 enzym wrote: Because those other animals don't share human level of awareness and reasoning capability. Animals have little choice to act on anything but instincts. Humans do have that choice and if you do not make use of those capabilities but choose to ignore them then you are degrading yourself back to animal level, in fact placing yourself below the level of animals, because animals do not have such a choice. Yup, I agree. Forgoing free choice would be putting yourself down. But most of us in this thread arent ignoring that choice. We are actively choosing to put our own desires to eat meat in front of our sympathy for suffering animals. Yea, animal cruelty sucks, I wish those farms that are being cruel would treat their animals better (before slaughtering them for consumption lol). But I like to eat meat, those few instances of excessive cruelty won't stop me from eating it. Just like how blood diamonds wont stop a loving couple from buying an engagement ring, how environmental hazards wont stop people from driving cars or using electricity, how animal testing wont stop people from using pretty much any critical medical innovation in our modern day, etc. Oh, and you should really choose another argument. All youre trying to do is shame us meat eaters into thinking that we are somehow "sub-human". Theres no logical reasoning behind your argument. By putting yourself on a high horse and judging us to be "below the level of animals", you really make an ass of yourself. | ||
enzym
Germany1034 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:13 Sm3agol wrote: So because we are smarter than animals, we shouldn't eat them? Eh? You're making the grand assumption that eating meat is wrong in the first place. I happen to disagree with you. I do in fact not make that assumption. Please stop repeatedly strawmanning my posts. | ||
EscPlan9
United States2777 Posts
Re: "Meat tastes good" - Taste does not justify supporting practices that produce suffering. You wouldn't eat a human if they taste good because of the suffering that would be a result. Now listen to your internal dialogue saying "BUT THEY'RE AN ANIMAL!". That's arbitrary considering it is not the sex, race, or species of an individual that is a major concern in ethical matters. Suffering is a major concern, if not the prime concern, in most ethical evaluations. Re: "There are more important problems in the world" - how does eating different food take up so much time that you cannot help out with other problems in the world? Point being, yes there are many problems in the world, and being vegetarian only means what you eat is different, so vegetarians can still help out with other problems in the world than unnecessary animal suffering. Re: "I've seen pastures of cows at a local farm..." - those are the minority. The majority, sadly, are from factory farming. Factory farming is more efficient and cost-effective, yet results in significantly more unnecessary suffering. | ||
Body_Shield
Canada3368 Posts
| ||
enzym
Germany1034 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:24 mcc wrote: Except for being human, there is no big line line as far as killing for eating goes (of course as everything in real life it is more complicated, as factors like killing 1000 bisons "for eating" when in the end only 2 will be actually eaten). I am all for drawing that line beneath humans somewhat, but I never put that much time into thinking about details or if there is any reasonable justification for it, it just feels right. I would exclude animals like primates, dolphins, ... hope you see the pattern. But as far as eating is concerned any line except animal/plant or humans/rest one is arbitrary. And the line animal/plant without also including humans/rest line has its own set of problems if you would like to apply it consistently to other areas. I think the best approach is to just accept that it is continuum or at least a lot of different groups on some scale and draw the line somewhere in reasonably safe point, same as with other stuff like when to allow abortions. Yes, exactly. I think that it's a continuum too, but wanted to hear your take on where you would logically draw that line and say "that organism is too intelligent for us to kill it even if we do it painlessly and for the most efficient method of production available". | ||
couches
618 Posts
| ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 09 2011 21:57 BrogMeister wrote: Source please. I would guess milk and cheese is an evolutionary irrelevant source of nutrition. As far as milk goes really ? ![]() As for the rest, source for what do you want ? The guy I reacted to made claims that were unsupported. The only claim I made is that as far as benefits go vegetarians are better off than vegans. I would think being able to live without supplements is benefit. And that is if I accept that as far as health goes the two are the same. | ||
enzym
Germany1034 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:26 Supamang wrote: Yup, I agree. Forgoing free choice would be putting yourself down. But most of us in this thread arent ignoring that choice. We are actively choosing to put our own desires to eat meat in front of our sympathy for suffering animals. Yea, animal cruelty sucks, I wish those farms that are being cruel would treat their animals better (before slaughtering them for consumption lol). But I like to eat meat, those few instances of excessive cruelty won't stop me from eating it. Just like how blood diamonds wont stop a loving couple from buying an engagement ring, how environmental hazards wont stop people from driving cars or using electricity, how animal testing wont stop people from using pretty much any critical medical innovation in our modern day, etc. Oh, and you should really choose another argument. All youre trying to do is shame us meat eaters into thinking that we are somehow "sub-human". Theres no logical reasoning behind your argument. By putting yourself on a high horse and judging us to be "below the level of animals", you really make an ass of yourself. I bolded the part where you expressly favour instinct over reasoning. | ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 09 2011 21:58 enzym wrote: Meat consumption creates problems by inflicting unnecessary suffering (current form of meat harvesting), being inefficient (requiring more land to sustain a population than non-meat diet) and by releasing gases emanating from dung which can have an impact on global climate. I haven't read anything invalidating these claims yet. If you have any information in that regard please share. Way to not read my post, did you actually see any mention of meat eating in that post. | ||
MiraMax
Germany532 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:22 Sm3agol wrote: Wow, that's quite the deviance in argument. I'm pretty sure humans weren't meant to fly either, herp derp. If eating meat was bad for humans, then we wouldn't have evolved with the ability to eat it. You're the people saying humans eating meat is unnatural...as if we haven't been eating it for umpteen thousand years. First, I never said it's "unnatural" that humans eat animals, only that it is hardly relevant whether it is natural or not, but I guess you understood by now that this argument of yours is not doing any work for you. Because humans are fundamentally equals. To each other, not to the tasty piece of meat sitting in my freezer atm. Tasty animals are not my equals. Until they develop the ability to interact with us in a reasonable way, I'll continue to eat them. You are hardly making sense to me!? First you make an argument from speciism and then peddle back and allow them rights in principle if only their cognitive abilities were more advanced. Which of the two are you arguing for? Both? Because we are at the top of the food chain, and they serve a useful purpose to the human race. So their opinion doesn't matter. And it can't matter because it isn't an opinion....it's merely their instinct. Humans are animals too and their suffering from pain or emotional distress is not "an opinion" either, but an automatic/instintive reaction of a sentient being to external stimuli. The position of any animal in the "food chain" is completely irrelevant. If you take this argument to its logical conclusion you end up with: "it's okay for me to do, because I can hardly be stopped doing it". | ||
Kirameki
96 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:30 Body_Shield wrote: Will some of the vegan/vegitarian community return to eating meat when they finally get it tank grown? After I stopped eating meat I slowly developed an irrational repulsion towards meat. I used to like most kinds of meat. But I always had issues with the consistency. Like the fat, cartilage, ligaments, etc. Now the idea is quite repulsive. Most vegetarians I know say they would like to eat meat and. I guess when they smell meat being cooked the smell must stir their appetite. To me it is repulsive. Therefore, I am not sure. If they can tank grow stuff I would like to eat some fish again. But still it is strange to eat tissue that matches the tissue of your own body so closely. Would everyone have no problems eating tank grown meat that is grown out of human DNA? Also, I think it's time for mods to hand out warnings to all the people with fallacious arguments like 'If I can be immoral, it can not be immoral but it is just natural'. I am seeing some of the worst stuff ever.This is almost going towards creationist-level when it comes to fallacies. | ||
BrogMeister
Sweden22 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:10 TrinitySC wrote: You realize you just helped prove my point with that first sentence, right? But it is true that farming, the way it is done now, is a major source of global warming. It doesn't have to be, though, and it's much more realistic to have people buy organic meat than to have them stop eating meat altogether. As your second paragraph... you do realize that's what having superior intelligence is all about, don't you? That's how we got this far in the first place, and that's how we're staying here. Civilization itself is grounded in, and would have never got this far without, exploitation of less intelligent animals. Please describe your point in one sentence. If meatproduction were to be optimized from a global climate perspective, it would probably involve creating conditions even worse for the animals. Organic production are more concerned about pesticides and local environment than about climate. I do recognize that using our intelligence to exploit nature and expand our civilization is a central part of the human success story, but I do also recognize that we seem to fail in using our intelligence to create a fair, sustainable society even when we seemingly have sufficient resources to do so. | ||
Mitchlew
Australia428 Posts
Oh by the way, don't use computers or phones etc. The mining of the materials is killing apes / monkies in Africa. So no more technology please. After all we don't want to contradict ourselves do we? | ||
Kirameki
96 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:42 Mitchlew wrote: I really hope all of you ethical vegetarians never wear a leather belt or sit on a leather seat, thats unethical! Oh by the way, don't use computers or phones etc. The mining of the materials is killing apes / monkies in Africa. So no more technology please. After all we don't want to contradict ourselves do we? This is just an example. People murder for the stuff in your mobile phones. Does that mean I can murder you? If not, why do you have a phone? | ||
Supamang
United States2298 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:34 enzym wrote: I bolded the part where you expressly favour instinct over reasoning. Thanks, but thats not favouring instinct over reasoning. Thats weighing how much I care about either choice, and choosing my own satisfaction over another animal's well being. You can call me an asshole but you cant call me stupid. | ||
smokeyhoodoo
United States1021 Posts
On February 09 2011 21:57 BrogMeister wrote: Source please. I would guess milk and cheese is an evolutionary irrelevant source of nutrition. That's true for most people but northern Europeans actually are adapted for drinking milk and dairy products into adult hood, so it was clearly an integral source of nutrition since it initiated natural selection against people who can't drink milk. Heres a picture from Wikipedia that shows lactose intolerance for each country. ![]() | ||
GreEny K
Germany7312 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:41 Kirameki wrote: After I stopped eating meat I slowly developed an irrational repulsion towards meat. I used to like most kinds of meat. But I always had issues with the consistency. Like the fat, cartilage, ligaments, etc. Now the idea is quite repulsive. Most vegetarians I know say they would like to eat meat and. I guess when they smell meat being cooked the smell must stir their appetite. To me it is repulsive. Therefore, I am not sure. If they can tank grow stuff I would like to eat some fish again. But still it is strange to eat tissue that matches the tissue of your own body so closely. Would everyone have no problems eating tank grown meat that is grown out of human DNA? Also, I think it's time for mods to hand out warnings to all the people with fallacious arguments like 'If I can be immoral, it can not be immoral but it is just natural'. I am seeing some of the worst stuff ever.This is almost going towards creationist-level when it comes to fallacies. You sound like a true vegan, and you are repulsed by the thought or meat, so you are ok in my book. But there are people who just do it because, and that pisses me off for some reason. | ||
Spidinko
Slovakia1174 Posts
| ||
BrogMeister
Sweden22 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:42 Mitchlew wrote: I really hope all of you ethical vegetarians never wear a leather belt or sit on a leather seat, thats unethical! Oh by the way, don't use computers or phones etc. The mining of the materials is killing apes / monkies in Africa. So no more technology please. After all we don't want to contradict ourselves do we? This is the worst kind of argument. If you can't change the world all at once, don't do anything. Is that your point? | ||
Stropheum
United States1124 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:15 FrostyTreats wrote: I'm glad we live in a society where you can make such lifestyle choices. And it wouldn't be American if you didn't force it on other people. 90% of vegans treat me like shit when I tell them I have no gripes with eating meat and love it. Apparently the butcher who I've known for most of my life tortures all of his animals, even though I've seen the living conditions and process and it's absolutely completely humane. They're treated better than most pets I've seen. It's not EATING meat that's the issue, it's corporations playing into consumerism and then trying to get everything out the door for the cheapest dollar. I agree what corporations do is fucking sick, something should be done about it =\ I hate seeing, even thinking about cows getting tortured. | ||
Kirameki
96 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:47 GreEny K wrote: You sound like a true vegan, and you are repulsed by the thought or meat, so you are ok in my book. But there are people who just do it because, and that pisses me off for some reason. Wait, my bad arguments you respect. But my good arguments piss you off? Well, I guess that goes to show the logic of the anti-vegan/vegetarians here. BTW, I am not vegan. Anyway, all your meat eaters should be happy you are born this generation and not 50 years into the future. It won't take long until we frown upon the time where animals didn't have their universal basic rights protected. | ||
enzym
Germany1034 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:44 Supamang wrote: Thanks, but thats not favouring instinct over reasoning. Thats weighing how much I care about either choice, and choosing my own satisfaction over another animal's well being. You can call me an asshole but you cant call me stupid. That's what I wanted to hear. Honest people are more likeable than stupid people, so my hat seriously goes off to you (I think). It is consistent in its own way, even if you admit to ignoring to address why you deserve more "rights" than an animal. On the other hand doing that is exactly what animals do and might makes right is also what they do, so I'm not sure whether to welcome you or not. Hum. Anyways, just wanted to acknowledge your reply. | ||
Mitchlew
Australia428 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:48 BrogMeister wrote: This is the worst kind of argument. If you can't change the world all at once, don't do anything. Is that your point? No my point is how much these "ethical" vegetarians think they are all high and mighty and above those who enjoy eating meat because "Meat is murderer" Yet they constantly contradict themselves with the points I made. | ||
Naphal
Germany2099 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:44 Supamang wrote: Thanks, but thats not favouring instinct over reasoning. Thats weighing how much I care about either choice, and choosing my own satisfaction over another animal's well being. You can call me an asshole but you cant call me stupid. my thoughts exactly, i do not emphasize with animals, it is food, we breed cattle for this single reason... i mean i would not eat species near extinction, but i sure as hell do not shed a tear when i order meat, that would mean that i would have to cry a river each time i watch the news and OMG some people somewhere died... again! To the point of global warming, someone uses a car... GUILTY you eat certain fruit or vegetables during winter... GUILTY you sit on the interwebz wasting energy... GUILTY you shower once a day... GUILTY simple as that, luxury equals pollution, yet why do we live in such a way, because we were born into this society? or because we want a comfortable life? my answer is yes to both, you may choose your answers and i wont stop you if you want to live secluded in a forest with no electrics, but when your berry and cropharvest fails, i bet those squirrels and rabbits look delicious xD | ||
Robstickle
Great Britain406 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:42 Mitchlew wrote: I really hope all of you ethical vegetarians never wear a leather belt or sit on a leather seat, thats unethical! Oh by the way, don't use computers or phones etc. The mining of the materials is killing apes / monkies in Africa. So no more technology please. After all we don't want to contradict ourselves do we? I don't what point you're making other than the fact that it's hard to avoid using products which animals had to die for. This doesn't mean you shouldn't try to minimize the number of such products you use, the most obvious way to do so being to stop eating meat. Really it's also hard to avoid using products which don't involve sweat shop labour. Does this mean you shouldn't try to give preference to companies that don't rely on sweat shops? | ||
Kirameki
96 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:53 Mitchlew wrote: No my point is how much these "ethical" vegetarians think they are all high and mighty and above those who enjoy eating meat because "Meat is murderer" Yet they constantly contradict themselves with the points I made. So in your mind there's only two kinds of people. Those who are ethical and those who are not? And those that are ethical can't exist, so no need for ethics? This is just stupid. Anyone can see that calling caring for your ecological footprint as long as it is zero 'contradictory', is stupid. Yet you can't. | ||
enzym
Germany1034 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:56 Naphal wrote: my thoughts exactly, i do not emphasize with animals, it is food, we breed cattle for this single reason... i mean i would not eat species near extinction, but i sure as hell do not shed a tear when i order meat, that would mean that i would have to cry a river each time i watch the news and OMG some people somewhere died... again! To the point of global warming, someone uses a car... GUILTY you eat certain fruit or vegetables during winter... GUILTY you sit on the interwebz wasting energy... GUILTY you shower once a day... GUILTY simple as that, luxury equals pollution, yet why do we live in such a way, because we were born into this society? or because we want a comfortable life? my answer is yes to both, you may choose your answers and i wont stop you if you want to live secluded in a forest with no electrics, but when your berry and cropharvest fails, i bet those squirrels and rabbits look delicious xD I hope you realize that you made a broad generalization. While most of transportation certainly does accelerate the emission of CO2, energy can be generated without the use of fossil fuels and sustainable energy sources such as wind/solar are growing. So as far as global warming goes, transport: guilty, car: probably guilty as well for the vast majority of cases. The other two are not nearly as absolute. But this is off topic. | ||
nozaro33
Taiwan1819 Posts
THE REASON why this animal factory farm exists is because we made that choice. We wanted cheap meat. and the costs don't reflect on the price. Not only is it cruel, but a big waste of resources and disastrous to the environment. If you look into all the resources thrown into raising a animal to be slaughtered, how can you expect the price to be so low? No wonder Farmers raise the animals this way! IT's CHEAPER AND MORE EFFICIENT. We choose our lifestyles. We can be aware of the environment around us, or just stay ignorent and believe that this lifestyle can last forever. We've been trashing the earth for this long, anybody can argue their beliefs, everybody has the right. that's the beauty of free will. But perhaps you can ask yourself. When I choose this lifestyle/or habit, What am I saying yes to? Yes to animal cruelty? Yes to destroying the earth? Yes to what? We're all part of it. Everybody is responsible | ||
Handuke
Sweden48 Posts
Personally I think that eating meat can be a good thing, but everyone should know how their food was produced so the choice they make is an informed one. I support those who kill their own food, but I don't support those who buy a burger and feel quesy after seeing pictures of how it was manufactured. I don't support food industry that isn't open and honest about its methods and neither should you, but I'm ok with it as long as you're informed and feel good about your choice. | ||
Mitchlew
Australia428 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:57 Robstickle wrote: I don't what point you're making other than the fact that it's hard to avoid using products which animals had to die for. This doesn't mean you shouldn't try to minimize the number of such products you use, the most obvious way to do so being to stop eating meat. Really it's also hard to avoid using products which don't involve sweat shop labour. Does this mean you shouldn't try to give preference to companies that don't rely on sweat shops? Sweat shops are good for a lesser developed countries economy. Worked wonders for Taiwan, once as poor as some African nations now is a pretty big player in computers. | ||
AgentSmax
Slovenia26 Posts
I generally have nothing against vegans or vegetarians, but trying to force your beliefs on others is just stupid. I'm not saying every vegan/vegetarian is like that, but most of the vocal ones I have met are. | ||
Mitchlew
Australia428 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:59 Kirameki wrote: So in your mind there's only two kinds of people. Those who are ethical and those who are not? And those that are ethical can't exist, so no need for ethics? This is just stupid. Anyone can see that calling caring for your ecological footprint as long as it is zero 'contradictory', is stupid. Yet you can't. Wow how did you come to that conclusion? You guys just think you are more ethical and caring than those of us who eat meat. When in reality everyone has their own faults. Isn't it possible for someone who eats meat to emit less green house gases into the atmosphere by riding to work rather than some vegan hippy who drives around in his vb combi? | ||
StarStruck
25339 Posts
a) used as many strawmans/ad homimens as those against you b) tried to force your values on other people 0 respect; 0 credibility. As long as meat is still around, people will still eat it. You don't like it. That's fine, but as long as you keep this tirade up, you won't make many friends here. I'm not going to nitpick against your values or religion ever. Just don't force it on others. At least be tactful. | ||
Supamang
United States2298 Posts
On February 09 2011 22:53 enzym wrote: That's what I wanted to hear. Honest people are more likeable than stupid people, so my hat seriously goes off to you (I think). It is consistent in its own way, even if you admit to ignoring to address why you deserve more "rights" than an animal. On the other hand doing that is exactly what animals do and might makes right is also what they do, so I'm not sure whether to welcome you or not. Hum. Anyways, just wanted to acknowledge your reply. I dont know. I honestly can't answer the question as to why we humans deserve more rights in a way that I can be happy with. I would say that its because we are far smarter and far more powerful that we get to dictate who gets rights and who doesnt, but that seems pretty heartless. It is a little barbaric, but thats how things have always been done through our current day, both for the animal kingdom and for human to human interaction. Instead, Id rather answer your question with question of my own (yeah, I hate it when people do that, but I couldnt resist this time). Why do animals deserve more rights than us humans? You suggest that humans endorsing meat consumption need to justify why they have more rights than the animals they eat. But animals are allowed to consume meat without being judged harshly by vegans like yourself. Why do animals have that right while humans do not? Im sure your first answer will be "They can't help themselves. We can, so we should do something about it," but isnt that a bit degrading to a being you see as having equal rights as us? Plants, who try just as hard to live as any thinking living being, get eaten all the time with no complaints. Im guessing this is because they have far less thinking ability than any of us (namely zero thinking ablity). So is the criteria for eating something dependent on cognitive ability? If thats the case, why don't we have the right to eat animals since we clearly have much higher intelligence? | ||
Papvin
Denmark610 Posts
Most discussion in this thread is completely retarded, but still the only thing one could imagine comming from an op like that. Close thread please? | ||
Enervate
United States1769 Posts
| ||
Robstickle
Great Britain406 Posts
On February 09 2011 23:11 Supamang wrote: Instead, Id rather answer your question with question of my own (yeah, I hate it when people do that, but I couldnt resist this time). Why do animals deserve more rights than us humans? You suggest that humans endorsing meat consumption need to justify why they have more rights than the animals they eat. But animals are allowed to consume meat without being judged harshly by vegans like yourself. Why do animals have that right while humans do not? Because animals (unlike us) don't exactly have concepts of morality and ethics, they're incapable of understanding that they inflict suffering when they kill other animals. Essentially it's the lack of mental faculty that does it. Also a lot of animals need to eat other animals to exist, if a human finds himself in that position then I don't think many vegetarians or vegans would tell him to just lie down and die instead of eating meat. Oh you edited: Im sure your first answer will be "They can't help themselves. We can, so we should do something about it," but isnt that a bit degrading to a being you see as having equal rights as us? Plants, who try just as hard to live as any thinking living being, get eaten all the time with no complaints. Im guessing this is because they have far less thinking ability than any of us (namely zero thinking ablity). So is the criteria for eating something dependent on cognitive ability? If thats the case, why don't we have the right to eat animals since we clearly have much higher intelligence? Firstly I don't see animals as having equal rights to us, largely because of the cognitive ability. I just don't think the rights difference is big enough to justify eating them when it's not necessary. By the way as a total aside one thing that does annoy me is vegetarians giving disingenuous reasons to be vegetarian. "Oh you should be vegetarian because it's healthier." No if you want to be healthier go get advice from someone who is actually qualified. | ||
blackodd
Sweden451 Posts
| ||
adamisuber
Canada35 Posts
I for one will continue to eat meat because I require it to continue physically exerting myself. And nothing tastes like it. Nothing. | ||
enzym
Germany1034 Posts
On February 09 2011 23:11 Supamang wrote: I dont know. I honestly can't answer the question as to why we humans deserve more rights in a way that I can be happy with. I would say that its because we are far smarter and far more powerful that we get to dictate who gets rights and who doesnt, but that seems pretty heartless. It is a little barbaric, but thats how things have always been done through our current day, both for the animal kingdom and for human to human interaction. Instead, Id rather answer your question with question of my own (yeah, I hate it when people do that, but I couldnt resist this time). Why do animals deserve more rights than us humans? You suggest that humans endorsing meat consumption need to justify why they have more rights than the animals they eat. But animals are allowed to consume meat without being judged harshly by vegans like yourself. Why do animals have that right while humans do not? Im sure your first answer will be "They can't help themselves. We can, so we should do something about it," but isnt that a bit degrading to a being you see as having equal rights as us? Plants, who try just as hard to live as any thinking living being, get eaten all the time with no complaints. Im guessing this is because they have far less thinking ability than any of us (namely zero thinking ablity). So is the criteria for eating something dependent on cognitive ability? If thats the case, why don't we have the right to eat animals since we clearly have much higher intelligence? I'll try to answer, but I'm far from having understood that problem entirely myself. First of all rights and morals (values) don't exist in nature, that is to say that it requires an intellect to come up with such concepts and define what is valuable and what rights are. But that also means that once you have that intellect, you must acknowledge that beings other than you can have rights as well. To the main question. Why do humans have more rights than animals? I don't think they do. But I still eat meat and don't think that it is wrong per se to kill in order to harvest meat (so long as you do not inflict unnecessary amounts of suffering, do not waste ressources, etc). Obviously the main difference between humans and other animals lies with the cognitive ability of both sides. I'd say that it is more wrong to kill a human than to kill another animal, because humans are incredibly aware of their surroundings to the point of making plans about their own future. If you kill a human then those plans are lost. You deny them that future. Animals with less awareness, "shorter plans", lose less by their death, so it is less wrong to kill those animals. You deny them less than you would deny a human. Best I could come up with so far. Hope that holds a candle somewhere. ![]() | ||
StarBrift
Sweden1761 Posts
I know the US is one of the worst places in the western world for animal rights becaue your right wing politicians put such reverence in the process of uninhibited capitalism and anything that can hurt a market is considered socialist propaganda by them. The problem in all western countries though is the lingering farmer culture and their sense of entitlement to their fading lifestyle, even if that lifestyle includes torturing animals to death. In Sweden we have a pretty good ammount of "eco" food or food that is marked with a quality mark ensuring that no cruel treatments took place of the animals. Unfortunately that food is considerably more expensive but often also of better quality. I think the focus should be on trying to get a working buisness model for this eco marking stuff and that will take the inhumane farmers out of buisness completely. And for all you little cunts that actually enjoy that video. I hope you die a horrible death some day, rather sooner than later. Just be aware that you would in fact be murderers and rapists if you weren't well adjusted to society. Because you seemingly have no shred of empathy in your bodies. | ||
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 09 2011 23:17 Robstickle wrote: Because animals (unlike us) don't exactly have concepts of morality and ethics, they're incapable of understanding that they inflict suffering when they kill other animals. Essentially it's the lack of mental faculty that does it. Well I would not say animals in general, some of them definitely have some rudimentary concepts of ethics. That's probably one reason why consider some animals closer to us than to other animals and am against killing them for food. For example primates. | ||
Kirameki
96 Posts
On February 09 2011 23:09 StarStruck wrote: Kira people like you piss me off. Not only have you attempted to backseat mod, but you have: a) used as many strawmans/ad homimens as those against you b) tried to force your values on other people 0 respect; 0 credibility. As long as meat is still around, people will still eat it. You don't like it. That's fine, but as long as you keep this tirade up, you won't make many friends here. I'm not going to nitpick against your values or religion ever. Just don't force it on others. At least be tactful. I don't care what you eat. I do get offended by terrible arguments. I don't try to force my arguments on anyone. So 2) is wrong. 1) is wrong too. I never made an ad hominem argument. I did call people 'idiots'. Doesn't matter. My arguments don't become bad just because I hurt your feeling. And I never strawmaned either. Just because you, and the guy that made the argument, don't see that my Reductio ad absurdum holds up doesn't mean it is a straw man. I don't eat meat because it is more ethical. Doesn't matter for anything else I do. I also don't own a car or a mobile phone, btw. I don't think there is any inconsistency. But even if there is, so what? You are really going to call people out because they are inconsistently more moral than you are? Yeah, we are still doing some damage by being alive. So what? You are going to call me out for existing? If I choose to exist it doesn't matter how big my ecological footprint is and how many animal rights I pay to violate? Really? Pissing off people like you is exactly my goal. Now I only hope you learned your lesson. | ||
dangots0ul
United States919 Posts
On February 09 2011 13:17 babyface wrote: good thread backed hard. vegan death squad unite fuck humans etc. Good job! this requires you to fuck urself. | ||
Krehlmar
Sweden1149 Posts
Demand well raised animals instead of your american-in-a-box fed animals and problem is solved. Don't have to go Vegan, only Sith's and idiots deals in absolutes. | ||
Maeldun
Australia169 Posts
So many stupid people exist, even in an "intelligent" community such as TL. *sigh* In response to some posts: It is not scientifically proven that we need meat as part of our diet. A bunch of research papers coming to this conclusion =/= proof. One can find an equal amount of research papers to suggest the opposite. (Imo refer to the living and walking proof right next to us. Many of the healthiest people I know are vegan/vegetarian, and don't have health issues due to their diet.) + Show Spoiler + TBH I guarantee you that the vaaaaast majority (if not 100%) of peoples' (I suppose I'm refering to Westerners) health problems originate from their diet. I have 0 proof and understand this sounds crazy, just putting it there so I can say I told you so later when we are spirits in heaven or w/e. Also, people who say that human lives are so important that the suffering of animals is inconsequential, that we are at the top of the food chain, blah blah.... one retard even said that the only reason other useless animals existed on the planet is because we didn't go out of our way to destroy them..... seriously a lot of posters in this thread totally letting down the human race here (I hope aliens aren't watching us right now!). All of these people are stupid. There is no need for animals to suffer in order to "save lives" or "feed children." Some have stated that animal farming is actually grossly inefficient, someone quoting a ratio of 1 meat meal = 7 veg meals. I have no idea where this statistic comes from, but the point is that we don't need to farm animals (even if it was in a perfectly nice and acceptable way) to sustain human life, in fact we would be much better off if we didn't farm animals at all. To the people who say they would torture 1 million cows to save 1 human life: 1. I bet you can't, unless you are a sadistic fuck (clearly some exist). 2. Quite heroic of you, but actually regardless of how many cows you torture (or breed and slaughter for food) you aren't actually saving any lives. Vegetarian farming is more productive, one might say devoting resources to the meat industry as the same as taking away resources from vegetarian farming, reducing the amount of people we are able to feed. Why not put all that torturing energy into something that actually does save lives, like growing some (organic) crops perhaps =) 3. If you are all of a sudden soooo concerned about saving/feeding humans, what the fuck are you doing being a fat shit infront of a computer with a random job that supports only you and those around you. Why don't you get off your arse and actually go save lives, for real. How about those starving people in Africa (which apparently the meat industry affects, though I'm unsure of the specifics). If you're having second thoughts, perhaps make a donation to the charities which support the people that actually DO get off their asses and save lives. | ||
AzarIntrets
109 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
Kirameki
96 Posts
On February 09 2011 23:37 Krehlmar wrote: It's still from an American perspective. Demand well raised animals instead of your american-in-a-box fed animals and problem is solved. Don't have to go Vegan, only Sith's and idiots deals in absolutes. Caring better for animals is actually worse for some arguments that are made to be vegetarian. The resources it costs to care for animals that are to be slaughtered is one of the main arguments. Taking better care only makes it worse, not better. | ||
Body_Shield
Canada3368 Posts
You can't escape animal products entirely, but this shouldn't be a blanket reason on the entire subject. The "if you don't eat it something else will" arguement doesn't have any application to this topic unless everyone went out and hunted for their meals, which is impossible in every developed country. If the person decides not to eat it, the demand goes down (no matter how fractionally), and the suppliers (ranchers/farmers) will just not inseminate as many feed animals as last year. There may be some waste initially, but that is leveled out fairly quickly. I'm not a vegitarian myself or a vegan, I just like meat too much. I think that the arguement here is that non-vegitarians really hate it when the really annoying vegitarians/vegans shove it in our face, and are now just blaming all of them with the frustration. Story time: My Mom's side of the family is a farm family, the dairy sector. My Uncle and Aunt with their children run the farm now, by Grandfather does a few things but he's fairly old (He has harness racing horses, one of which was bred there, then sold for a couple million). Anyway, the farmers association does an "open house" where which people can travel to specified farms and look around, see what's up and all that. So this "animal rights" person, in polite terms, comes in and tells them that they are horrible people keeping cows like that and yada yada that whole speal. This person was so rude and insensitive that she reduced my aunt to tears, my Uncle and everyone who works there cares about the animals, and are always heatbroken when one has to be put down. They generally give everything they can for the well being of the dairy cattle. Besides the fact that there are no wild cows anymore, and cows are the dumbest things you have ever seen. One hung itself accidentally once... I'm not putting them down, dairy cows are well tempered and friendly, sometimes too friendly with the tongue :| Shortened: I just hate those types of people who have no idea of the whole picture, but yet dish out their opinion anyway. | ||
HardCorey
United States709 Posts
| ||
plainsane
Germany98 Posts
On February 09 2011 23:17 Robstickle wrote: ... Because animals (unlike us) don't exactly have concepts of morality and ethics, they're incapable of understanding that they inflict suffering when they kill other animals. ... Actually the suffering occurs before the slaughtering, killing cattle with a bolt gun is painless... Holding them in cages for almost all their lives is cruel and is indeed something that should be adressed at some point. Breeding and killing animals for food is the most natural thing in the world and thusly not immoral, more so i want you to know that without livestock husbandry we wouldnt be this technologically advanced, especially regarding science/medicine. It is either eat or get eaten. | ||
enzym
Germany1034 Posts
On February 09 2011 23:40 HardCorey wrote: Whats so bad about cruelty is the real question. It cost a lot of money to be humane. Consistency would be a main concern. What stops aliens from applying that concept to us, or even us applying that concept to ourselves. Why use anaesthetics in medicine? | ||
trainRiderJ
United States615 Posts
| ||
Lexpar
1813 Posts
On February 09 2011 18:41 thehitman wrote: I'm not going to waste my time to prove vegans wrong. You don't eat meat and animal products=more for me, thank you very much. If vegans don't care about their health why should I be forcing them to care. I'm a bit indifferent about vegetarians because they at least eat eggs, cheese, drink milk, etc and consume their daily nutrients. I'm claiming that vegans and vegetarians can live a healthy lifestyle. I reference the fact that all the nutrients human beings needs can be found inside plants. Even the hardest ones to find: B12 and Omega fatty acids can still be found in soy products and flax seeds. That's my claim. I can link you the Wikipedia page on veganism, but I doubt you'd read it. More importantly, the constraints of a vegan diet encourage a very low intake of harmful fats and cholesterol. Every omnivore in this thread is arguing from the standpoint of the pristine and perfect omnivorous diet: Moderate portions of lean meat, large amounts of vegetables, fruits, and complex grains. Very few omnivores actually eat like that. Fatty cuts of red meat, butter and cheese are daily stapled of millions. If you want to argue that someone who eats like that is inherently healthier than a person who doesn't eat meat, then I'm afraid your argument relies on nothing but stereotypes and generalities. You were the one to initially "waste your time" and come into this thread to tell all the vegans how it was scientifically proven, empirically, that they are not healthy. So unless you can prove me wrong, I ask you, whats the difference between killing an elephant for Ivory when you could use a plastic, than killing a cow for steak when you could eat a bean? | ||
StarStruck
25339 Posts
| ||
JroDBraSiL
Brazil18 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
Anachromy
United States194 Posts
I don't know what makes me more sick. You can take any subject matter and make it completely despicable with the correct footage, narrative, and editing. | ||
Krehlmar
Sweden1149 Posts
| ||
pyrogenetix
United Arab Emirates5091 Posts
40 thousand children die EVERYDAY in africa from starvation. take a moment for that figure to sink in. thats like 3 airplanes crashing everyday. but oh wait they're black people no one from the western world gives a fuck about them anyway. most of these bullshit people are rich as fuck living in air conditioned houses and suddenly one day get some sort of spiritual midlife crisis and decide to "lead a better life" by not eating meat. so. full. of. shit. and yes there are ways of getting the omega 3 fatty oils from god knows what the fuck pills, but if you cannot sprinkle them all over the world for free then shut the fuck up. meat is a VERY luxurious product. i've been to villages in china where they only eat a pound of meat a year. A GOD DAMN YEAR. the only reason why meat is so cheap is because cows are fed corn which is subsidized HEAVILY by the US government. stop that and drive the price of beef up and your demand will drop drastically. fatass americans eating too much anyway. these videos are just so juvenile and one sided its almost painful to watch. yea if it really helps you sleep at night then fine you can live a life of not killing animals. you probably have a heater in the winter and have cold drinks in the summer. but if i put you somewhere less well off (which is the majority of the world) and let you not be able to fill your stomach for 5 years you will be singing a very VERY different song. i remember a show where they took kids of rich parents who wouldnt eat anything and put them in the poor villages of china where they could only eat corn porridge and salted cabbage. they came back and ate like there was no tomorrow. i seriously have no problem at all going out and slitting a cows throat. that's their life it's just too bad. are you going to go into the african plains and serve the lions and tigers flax seeds so they can stop killing your precious antelopes and giraffes? get real. it's a harsh and very unfair world, and this issue is just so waaaay off on a tangent it really has nothing to do with the more pressing problems of the world. shit dude go sell some medicine for the UN or something. jesus christ. | ||
Kirameki
96 Posts
| ||
![]()
CTStalker
Canada9720 Posts
| ||
| ||