|
On June 04 2011 03:17 garlicface wrote:
Relax bro.
u gotta skate
You don't agree?
He argued that domesticated animals need to be reproduced because they race of cows have the right to not go extinct somehow. So we need to keep eating meat and slaughter them. Then when it is explained to him he thinks vegetarians want to kill animals to put them out of their misery for being genetically inferior and asks why they don't want to do the same with humans?
He already understood that the issue is the production of new domesticated animals and that this will stop if everyone stopped eating meat. So how does his argument make any sense?
He is either an idiot or a malicious and insecure argumentative meat eater. I think the first. What is your input?
|
On June 04 2011 03:20 Ig wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2011 03:19 travis wrote:On June 04 2011 03:15 Ig wrote:Dear OP: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=229315¤tpage=7#124Seriously though, there's absolutely nothing backing your arguments besides the word of others. No hard facts, no details, and some cherry-picked examples. You should consider the reason you are able to make this argument in the first place: you're in the lap of luxury (relative to the rest of the world) and don't need to depend on meat for protein, as many actually do. Actually most of those that depend on meat for protein live "in the lap of luxury". imjuzzsayin Seriously? We in the Western world don't "depend" on meat but simply have access to a large amount of it. We have plenty of rice and beans for our protein needs, we just choose to eat meat because lets face it, bacon is delicious.
Well then I guess we need to define "depend".
I'll put it this way: most of the world gets their proteins from plants/nuts/insects rather than from larger organisms.
|
On June 04 2011 03:21 Hekisui wrote:You don't agree? He argued that domesticated animals need to be reproduced because they race of cows have the right to not go extinct somehow. So we need to keep eating meat and slaughter them. Then when it is explained to him he thinks vegetarians want to kill animals to put them out of their misery for being genetically inferior and asks why they don't want to do the same with humans? He already understood that the issue is the production of new domesticated animals and that this will stop if everyone stopped eating meat. So how does his argument make any sense? He is either an idiot or a malicious and insecure argumentative meat eater. I think the first. What is your input?
My only input is that you don't need to lower yourself to his level for the sake of making your argument. Stay classy. This is TL, baby.
|
On June 04 2011 03:23 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2011 03:20 Ig wrote:On June 04 2011 03:19 travis wrote:On June 04 2011 03:15 Ig wrote:Dear OP: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=229315¤tpage=7#124Seriously though, there's absolutely nothing backing your arguments besides the word of others. No hard facts, no details, and some cherry-picked examples. You should consider the reason you are able to make this argument in the first place: you're in the lap of luxury (relative to the rest of the world) and don't need to depend on meat for protein, as many actually do. Actually most of those that depend on meat for protein live "in the lap of luxury". imjuzzsayin Seriously? We in the Western world don't "depend" on meat but simply have access to a large amount of it. We have plenty of rice and beans for our protein needs, we just choose to eat meat because lets face it, bacon is delicious. Well then I guess we need to define "depend". I'll put it this way: most of the world gets their proteins from plants/nuts/insects rather than from larger organisms.
What about those that do then? Where's the argument? You can say that the majority don't depend on we'll say vertebrates for protein, but >1 billion people depend on fish as a primary protein source. A fairly significant number that doesn't include some indigenous peoples I mentioned earlier. You also still haven't said a thing about how we can only even make this argument because of our access to so many choices through industrial agriculture that we can remove meat from our diet.
PS: You might want to troll somewhere else since the quality of your trolling is about the same as that of unregulated health supplements.
|
Anyone who's watched a video of what it looks like inside a factory farm has got to admit that the way we treat animals in the food industry is fucking horrible.
I'll admit though that I do eat meat. Ignorance is bliss I suppose. Not being forced to see the horrid lives these animals endure just to be slaughtered lets me eat meat. Does that make me a shitty person? Possibly, but goddamn if bulgogi isn't delicious T_T;
The biggest argument for eating plants imo is just the energy transfer. However many people a cow can feed, the amount of food fed to that cow could feed what, 7 or so times that number I think?
I usually only cook a meal involving meat once a week or so. Rest of the time I eat mostly veggies and such.
|
On June 04 2011 03:31 Ig wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2011 03:23 travis wrote:On June 04 2011 03:20 Ig wrote:On June 04 2011 03:19 travis wrote:On June 04 2011 03:15 Ig wrote:Dear OP: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=229315¤tpage=7#124Seriously though, there's absolutely nothing backing your arguments besides the word of others. No hard facts, no details, and some cherry-picked examples. You should consider the reason you are able to make this argument in the first place: you're in the lap of luxury (relative to the rest of the world) and don't need to depend on meat for protein, as many actually do. Actually most of those that depend on meat for protein live "in the lap of luxury". imjuzzsayin Seriously? We in the Western world don't "depend" on meat but simply have access to a large amount of it. We have plenty of rice and beans for our protein needs, we just choose to eat meat because lets face it, bacon is delicious. Well then I guess we need to define "depend". I'll put it this way: most of the world gets their proteins from plants/nuts/insects rather than from larger organisms. What about those that do then? Where's the argument? You can say that the majority don't depend on we'll say vertebrates for protein, but >1 billion people depend on fish as a primary protein source. A fairly significant number that doesn't include some indigenous peoples I mentioned earlier. You also still haven't said a thing about how we can only even make this argument because of our access to so many choices through industrial agriculture that we can remove meat from our diet. PS: You might want to troll somewhere else since the quality of your trolling is about the same as that of unregulated health supplements.
Well the answer is that for those people, there isn't much an argument. Not until there could be alternate protein sources.
P.S: it's sad that you get so defensive over my comments that you resort to calling it trolling. you must wiiinnn!! you must win the arguments!!!!!
here's a fact for you: I haven't even taken a position in this argument. I don't give a shit if people are vegan or not.
|
You vegans are monsters. You kill plants to enjoy. We've never killed a single living organism to eat.
- Zeratul
![[image loading]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_PXvBwb8MhCk/S93BoTxCLiI/AAAAAAAAAGM/HA6hfo8_xlY/s1600/zeratul.jpg)
|
On June 04 2011 02:05 BackHo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2011 02:03 Blix wrote:On June 04 2011 01:59 howerpower wrote:
lmao wow I thought this thread was going to be about what you guys eat and just discussing meals and I thought that would be really interesting to read and try out some of them, but oh my god is this pathetic. The whole OP reads like some kind of political propaganda flyer. veganism vs carnivorism is even worse than religion vs atheism.. it just doesn't seem possible to have a reasonable discussion about it. Well the way I see it is like this - in the religion versus atheism debate, it is clear atheism wins because there is no evidence for God. In the veganism versus meat-eaters thread, veganism is the clear winner because murdering when murdering can be avoided is wrong.
This is a silly way to approach things. There is no right and there is no wrong. A much better way to phrase your thoughts would be:
"The existence of a God is unlikely but not impossible." and "I will only eat plants because I think eating meat is wrong except when your life depends on it (or whatever other exception you have)."
If you were trapped in a room with a platter of meat and nothing else to eat and had to live for 7 days (you had water but not food), I think most people would eat the meat.
|
Pros and Cons of being vegan:
Pros:
-You get to spend far more money for the same product (nutrients and vitamins) that meat eaters do, which makes you trendy and hip in the same way that purchasing a Mac does.
-If you dislike your friends, you don't have to worry about them ever inviting you out to eat.
Cons:
-If your house gets infested by rats or roaches, you've pretty much just got to deal with it and let them have the house. What self-respecting vegan would commit genocide against an entire colony of living creatures?
-That awful heart-sinking feeling every time you sneeze and kill hundreds of thousands of micro-organisms.
|
I would just like to post my rationale for not eating meat because I think it makes a lot of sense.
In the society I live in, and most people live in, people eat meat for pleasure. People eat food to survive, but most people eat meat rather than tofu, and other types of veggie proteins because they receive pleasure from the taste of meat. In order to eat that meat, an animal was put through the most intense forms of physical and emotional pain(in the forms of panic, fear etc..). What is essentially going on here is humans inflicting pain upon animals for personal pleasure. I see anyone causing others pain for personal pleasure as immoral. I understand people eating meat if it is necessary for them to survive, because now they are causing pain for their own survival, which in my opinion, is more justifiable. Many people argue that plants suffer too, but again, I eat plants to survive, (its not possible to survive without eating plants). It's also for this reason that I see eating as a duty, a service I perform to keep my body healthy. If anyone sees fault with my thought process please let me know.
|
On June 04 2011 03:47 Laerties wrote:
I would just like to post my rationale for not eating meat because I think it makes a lot of sense.
In the society I live in, and most people live in, people eat meat for pleasure. People eat food to survive, but most people eat meat rather than tofu, and other types of veggie proteins because they receive pleasure from the taste of meat. In order to eat that meat, an animal was put through the most intense forms of physical and emotional pain(in the forms of panic, fear etc..). What is essentially going on here is humans inflicting pain upon animals for personal pleasure. I see anyone causing others pain for personal pleasure as immoral. I understand people eating meat if it is necessary for them to survive, because now they are causing pain for their own survival, which in my opinion, is more justifiable. Many people argue that plants suffer too, but again, I eat plants to survive, (its not possible to survive without eating plants). It's also for this reason that I see eating as a duty, a service I perform to keep my body healthy. If anyone sees fault with my thought process please let me know.
What about halal food?
What forms of "physical and emotion pain" did these animals go through?
|
So basicly you're vegan because you want to feel good about yourself. Nothing wrong with that. 
|
On June 04 2011 03:20 Ig wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2011 03:19 travis wrote:On June 04 2011 03:15 Ig wrote:Dear OP: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=229315¤tpage=7#124Seriously though, there's absolutely nothing backing your arguments besides the word of others. No hard facts, no details, and some cherry-picked examples. You should consider the reason you are able to make this argument in the first place: you're in the lap of luxury (relative to the rest of the world) and don't need to depend on meat for protein, as many actually do. Actually most of those that depend on meat for protein live "in the lap of luxury". imjuzzsayin Seriously? We in the Western world don't "depend" on meat but simply have access to a large amount of it. We have plenty of rice and beans for our protein needs, we just choose to eat meat because lets face it, bacon is delicious. If you understand that, why did you say this?
On June 04 2011 03:04 Ig wrote:
It's never said how many of the people arguing for veganism are the ones with access to all the food from industrial agriculture, nor is it even said that vegan diets are in many ways unsuitable for infants and children. It's ridiculous to make a moral argument for or against veganism/vegetarianism period and even more foolish on a social/scientific basis when you don't know all the details and exceptions. I agree with you that moral arguments are irrelevant. But don't you agree that it's healthier to eat a balanced vegetarian meal than it is to eat meat?
|
On June 04 2011 03:52 Ravencruiser wrote:
What about halal food?
What forms of "physical and emotion pain" did these animals go through?
I'm not really familiar with what you are talking about. I did a quick Wikipedia read but it didn't really say if the process was completely painless. If it is, I would be somewhat conflicted, but probably not eat that form of meat because you are still taking an animals life for pleasure.
On June 04 2011 03:53 Cyba wrote:So basicly you're vegan because you want to feel good about yourself. Nothing wrong with that.
I guess you could say that. It is also that I value morality more than most people I'd say. But like you were saying, It makes me feel proud of myself to do this so......yes.
|
"I invented a device called Burger On The Go. It allows you to obtain six regular sized hamburgers, or twelve sliders, from a horse without killing the animal. George Foreman is still considering it, Sharper Image is still considering it, SkyMall is still considering it, Hammacher Schlemmer is still considering it. Sears said no."
Dwight Schrute
|
|
|
On June 04 2011 04:00 Laerties wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2011 03:52 Ravencruiser wrote:
What about halal food?
What forms of "physical and emotion pain" did these animals go through? I'm not really familiar with what you are talking about. I did a quick Wikipedia read but it didn't really say if the process was completely painless. If it is, I would be somewhat conflicted, but probably not eat that form of meat because you are still taking an animals life for pleasure. Show nested quote +On June 04 2011 03:53 Cyba wrote:So basicly you're vegan because you want to feel good about yourself. Nothing wrong with that. I guess you could say that. It is also that I value morality more than most people I'd say. But like you were saying, It makes me feel proud of myself to do this so......yes. If you knew that an animal had a life of a king, much better than his life in jungle. And died of natural causes, having lived longer than he would in the wild. He died while smiling. Now he's a beef in front of you. Would you be ok with eating it?
|
On June 04 2011 04:07 VIB wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2011 04:00 Laerties wrote:On June 04 2011 03:52 Ravencruiser wrote:
What about halal food?
What forms of "physical and emotion pain" did these animals go through? I'm not really familiar with what you are talking about. I did a quick Wikipedia read but it didn't really say if the process was completely painless. If it is, I would be somewhat conflicted, but probably not eat that form of meat because you are still taking an animals life for pleasure. On June 04 2011 03:53 Cyba wrote:So basicly you're vegan because you want to feel good about yourself. Nothing wrong with that. I guess you could say that. It is also that I value morality more than most people I'd say. But like you were saying, It makes me feel proud of myself to do this so......yes. If you knew that an animal had a life of a king, much better than his life in jungle. And died of natural causes, having lived longer than he would in the wild. He died while smiling. Now he's a beef in front of you. Would you be ok with eating it?
Yea, if the animal just died naturally that is fine. In this case no one is causing something pain for their pleasure, so there is no moral issue with it. I don't see it as a practical solution tho ^.^
EDIT: On June 04 2011 04:13 Ravencruiser wrote:
LOL, well played sir, well played.
????
|
On June 04 2011 04:07 VIB wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2011 04:00 Laerties wrote:On June 04 2011 03:52 Ravencruiser wrote:
What about halal food?
What forms of "physical and emotion pain" did these animals go through? I'm not really familiar with what you are talking about. I did a quick Wikipedia read but it didn't really say if the process was completely painless. If it is, I would be somewhat conflicted, but probably not eat that form of meat because you are still taking an animals life for pleasure. On June 04 2011 03:53 Cyba wrote:So basicly you're vegan because you want to feel good about yourself. Nothing wrong with that. I guess you could say that. It is also that I value morality more than most people I'd say. But like you were saying, It makes me feel proud of myself to do this so......yes. If you knew that an animal had a life of a king, much better than his life in jungle. And died of natural causes, having lived longer than he would in the wild. He died while smiling. Now he's a beef in front of you. Would you be ok with eating it?
LOL, well played sir, well played.
|
On June 04 2011 03:38 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2011 03:31 Ig wrote:On June 04 2011 03:23 travis wrote:On June 04 2011 03:20 Ig wrote:On June 04 2011 03:19 travis wrote:On June 04 2011 03:15 Ig wrote:Dear OP: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=229315¤tpage=7#124Seriously though, there's absolutely nothing backing your arguments besides the word of others. No hard facts, no details, and some cherry-picked examples. You should consider the reason you are able to make this argument in the first place: you're in the lap of luxury (relative to the rest of the world) and don't need to depend on meat for protein, as many actually do. Actually most of those that depend on meat for protein live "in the lap of luxury". imjuzzsayin Seriously? We in the Western world don't "depend" on meat but simply have access to a large amount of it. We have plenty of rice and beans for our protein needs, we just choose to eat meat because lets face it, bacon is delicious. Well then I guess we need to define "depend". I'll put it this way: most of the world gets their proteins from plants/nuts/insects rather than from larger organisms. What about those that do then? Where's the argument? You can say that the majority don't depend on we'll say vertebrates for protein, but >1 billion people depend on fish as a primary protein source. A fairly significant number that doesn't include some indigenous peoples I mentioned earlier. You also still haven't said a thing about how we can only even make this argument because of our access to so many choices through industrial agriculture that we can remove meat from our diet. PS: You might want to troll somewhere else since the quality of your trolling is about the same as that of unregulated health supplements. Well the answer is that for those people, there isn't much an argument. Not until there could be alternate protein sources. P.S: it's sad that you get so defensive over my comments that you resort to calling it trolling. you must wiiinnn!! you must win the arguments!!!!! here's a fact for you: I haven't even taken a position in this argument. I don't give a shit if people are vegan or not.
You're mistaken and quite cocky if you think I'm actually being defensive. Perhaps I did take the tone, but I don't see an actual need to...win...over someone like you because it was clear from your first post towards me that you're an asshole with little to no knowledge of the issue who just wants to dick around in the thread. I merely took your statements as an opportunity to present some other points.
I know you haven't taken a position so you can stir things up a little, I'm just feeding you to see how far you go. I called you a troll because you are one, but not a very good one. If you're going to troll, do it well: "take" a stance and proceed from there.
As for me, well I've already stated I don't have issues with either side, only with idiots trying to argue about the morals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
