Veganism...why?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NEXT
 

Vegan_Doodler:

FelixG:

Jessy_Fran:
Yeah, I hate vegans!!!

How dare they stand up for those who have no voice?
How dare they value thousands of innocent lives over their mere taste buds?
How dare they strive to make the world a better, more cruelty-free place for all?
How dare they challenge my blind, ignorant habits with logical thinking?
How dare they live a lifestyle of compassion and love?

Seriously guys, what a loads of idiots!!1!

And right on queue one of those ones that gives vegans a bad name.

Bravo!

Why? she's making a valid point, and I completely get the frustration, just look at this forum, the general consensus is that vegans are arrogant, snobby, hypocrites.

His point was that she wasn't doing much to dispel that.

Vegan_Doodler:

spartan231490:
Why? Because people are illogical. It doesn't make any sense, and if you follow veganism to it's logical conclusion, it doesn't result in peace and happiness for all of the little animals, but extinction.

Please enlighten me, why would it?

Cows and chickens are only alive because we help them stay that way. They don't have the defenses or drive to survive the wilderness. Sheep are in a similar boat. They have some drive, but they feed mostly on grasses, meaning there is a very limited region in which they could survive, and they're slow and relatively small, leaving them vulnerable to predators. Even coyotes can take sheep, and that's while they're being protected by the farmers.

Virtually all domesticated animals lack what it takes to survive in the wild anymore, we've made sure of that. Without the farmers who raise them, they would die, and that's assuming the farmers let them go wild, instead of just slaughtering them for convenience, or selling them to anyone who would buy(glue factories, research institutes).

Abandon4093:

Vegan_Doodler:

spartan231490:
Why? Because people are illogical. It doesn't make any sense, and if you follow veganism to it's logical conclusion, it doesn't result in peace and happiness for all of the little animals, but extinction.

Please enlighten me, why would it?

Because we wouldn't need them. And most livestock aren't really capable of being self sufficient.

We've bred them over thousands of years to yield the most milk, or the most meat or lay the most eggs etc.

If we just released all the chickens into the wild, their population would probably be decimated within a month. They are too far removed from their wild ancestors.

Dairy cows need to be consistently milked, if you were to suddenly stop doing this they'd suffer a long, drawn out and painful death.

The fact of the matter is, is that if we suddenly didn't require our livestock. We'd have to put the majority of them down.

True, we have bred them to be that way, and the majority of them would die. Pretty sure there are a lot of quote supporting the sentiment of dying free is better than living a slave, besides, they'll die soon anyway to be served as meat.

It's false logic to say you care if they'll survive in the wild and then kill them for food anyway.

Also, dairy cows need to be milked constantly as they are constantly cycled through pregnant and having just given birth. Whenever the milk dries up they are impregnanted again to make them produce, just like humans only produce after birth. Leave them with their calves, and they'll "milk" their mothers do the cow wont die a painful, drawn out death.

Abandon4093:

His point was that she wasn't doing much to dispel that.

Why should I have to? There was no hypocrisy in my statement and this thread is full of people who are attacking veganism so why should I have to hold back the punches?

Jammy2003:

d) I don't believe we are naturally carnivores, nor are we naturally herbivores, we are opportunistic omnivores. We eat whatever we can get our hands on at the time, be it meat or veg. Veg and plants in the summer, and meat in the winter. But predominantly we had a vegetation diet. This means the actual amount of protein we need in our diet is low not that high daily. You can get 30-40% of your RDA from a serving of beans damn it, and we are oversaturated with it, a pizza I ate the other day? 160% of RDA of protein in one meal.
In a college urine sample I got told to eat less protein and drink more as I was actually pissing the stuff.

We are omnivores and our body has adapted to that. Our teeth have developed from flat molars which are effective for chewing grass/vegetables to become more concave which is effective for chewing meat. If we are also to compare other evaluational traits such as our intestines which are shorter than our fellow cousins to conserve energy therefore our bodys are not so keen on a herbivore's diet...Some people get a bad stomach and spend time on the toilet.

The most accepted reason why we do eat meat is because it's a far quicker and easier way of getting energy as you only need to eat a small amount of meat to meet the equivalent of eating a large amount of vegetables. Just because you over-consumed (more than you actually needed) doesn't mean that "we are not designed for it". The RDA is a guideline (of the minimum amount you should have everyday) not an accurate measurement of nutrition which everyone must have, some people require more. Hell, you can over-consume on water.

OT:Honestly, Veganism is more like a religion than a diet. When they claim for health reason it's usually because they don't understand and often worry about their own health, even something as basic like tap water which contains contaminates (lead, arsenic, copper and microbes) which millions of people live-off everyday without any health issues might even cause them unnecessary panic.

Also, they are also concerned that meat causes disease (pathogenic). Well, yes, that's true but it's not like one of the most, if not, thee most deadliest toxins/poisons are naturally occurring from plants. >.>

If were going to talk about empathy, lets all start being nice to insects and plants (what about microbes?) seeing as they are also considered as "living". Personally, I think it's a human thing where our imaginations get to the best of us. It's a cruel world and they should know it because they've been around longer than us.

Killer Vegan class skill in the Dungeons of Dredmor!

It's like three bucks on Steam.

Abandon4093:

Vegan_Doodler:

spartan231490:
Why? Because people are illogical. It doesn't make any sense, and if you follow veganism to it's logical conclusion, it doesn't result in peace and happiness for all of the little animals, but extinction.

Please enlighten me, why would it?

Because we wouldn't need them. And most livestock aren't really capable of being self sufficient.

We've bred them over thousands of years to yield the most milk, or the most meat or lay the most eggs etc.

If we just released all the chickens into the wild, their population would probably be decimated within a month. They are too far removed from their wild ancestors.

Dairy cows need to be consistently milked, if you were to suddenly stop doing this they'd suffer a long, drawn out and painful death.

The fact of the matter is, is that if we suddenly didn't require our livestock. We'd have to put the majority of them down.

Maybe, but then we need to ask the question "is submission not preferable to extinction" and I say no. I don't want any animals to die, but don't act like you'r being the righteous savoir by condoning continued exploitation of other creatures. I like to think that if the roles where reversed then I would be allowed to die with dignity rather than be kept around because it's convenient for others.

Vegan_Doodler:

Eamar:

peruvianskys:

So if the slave trade had continued long enough that Africans developed particular genetic traits making them more useful as field workers, it would be okay to continue their bondage forever?
If not, please give me a scientific difference between the two situations.

The difference is of course that human slaves are not animals.

But you haven't given a reason as to why they differ, Farming and slavery are about the exploitation of another creature, the only reason people find the latter more objectionable is because the creature in question is human.

Yes, but no-one's given a good reason as to why they're the same either. I did go on to explain that this is just something we're going to have to agree to disagree on, it's a very primal thing. You're not about to convince me that a chicken is equivalent to a human, however mentally disabled. In fact, many people would find the notion pretty offensive.

Jammy2003:

Abandon4093:

Vegan_Doodler:

Please enlighten me, why would it?

Because we wouldn't need them. And most livestock aren't really capable of being self sufficient.

We've bred them over thousands of years to yield the most milk, or the most meat or lay the most eggs etc.

If we just released all the chickens into the wild, their population would probably be decimated within a month. They are too far removed from their wild ancestors.

Dairy cows need to be consistently milked, if you were to suddenly stop doing this they'd suffer a long, drawn out and painful death.

The fact of the matter is, is that if we suddenly didn't require our livestock. We'd have to put the majority of them down.

True, we have bred them to be that way, and the majority of them would die. Pretty sure there are a lot of quote supporting the sentiment of dying free is better than living a slave, besides, they'll die soon anyway to be served as meat.

Also, dairy cows need to be milked constantly as they are constantly cycled through pregnant and having just given birth. Whenever the milk dries up they are impregnanted again to make them produce, just like humans only produce after birth. Leave them with their calves, and they'll "milk" their mothers do the cow wont die a painful, drawn out death.

That's not what they asked though. They asked

Please enlighten me, why would it?

In response to someone saying they would die without us.

I'm not arguing the merits of keeping them alive over letting them die. Just informing them that they would indeed die.

Also, animals bred for production such as egg laying chickens and dairy cows aren't killed for meat because they're more useful alive. They haven't been bred for the best cuts.

And mastitis is a very slow and painful death. And I'm fairly sure dairy cows haven't been pregnancy cycled for years. I'm pretty sure the majority of it is hormone endued. RBST etc.

Vegan_Doodler:

Abandon4093:

Vegan_Doodler:

Please enlighten me, why would it?

Because we wouldn't need them. And most livestock aren't really capable of being self sufficient.

We've bred them over thousands of years to yield the most milk, or the most meat or lay the most eggs etc.

If we just released all the chickens into the wild, their population would probably be decimated within a month. They are too far removed from their wild ancestors.

Dairy cows need to be consistently milked, if you were to suddenly stop doing this they'd suffer a long, drawn out and painful death.

The fact of the matter is, is that if we suddenly didn't require our livestock. We'd have to put the majority of them down.

Maybe, but then we need to ask the question "is submission not preferable to extinction" and I say no. I don't want any animals to die, but don't act like you'r being the righteous savoir by condoning continued exploitation of other creatures. I like to think that if the roles where reversed then I would be allowed to die with dignity rather than be kept around because it's convenient for others.

Never said anything about being a righteous saviour, you just wanted to know why they'd die if we stopped needing them. I told you.

Jessy_Fran:

Abandon4093:

His point was that she wasn't doing much to dispel that.

Why should I have to? There was no hypocrisy in my statement and this thread is full of people who are attacking veganism so why should I have to hold back the punches?

This thread has quickly become a lets bash vegans thread, for what ever reason.

Some reasons may include:

- They do not approve of how animals are treated
- They do not wish to "endorse" aforementioned treatment by buying any meat or animal byproducts (leather, eggs, milk)
- They do not wish to encourage the mistreatment of animals by financially supporting companies that mistreat them
- They may further consider using animals for testing to be unnecessarily cruel
- They don't like the taste of meat or other animal byproducts

Generally, I understand it to usually come down to the combination of my first two points. They would suggest it's quite possible (and the fact that they survive proves their point) to live without breeding, slaughtering and mass-butchering animals for meat, leather, milk, eggs, gelatin, etc and that we are doing unnecessary harm to them in the process.

Jessy_Fran:

Abandon4093:

His point was that she wasn't doing much to dispel that.

Why should I have to? There was no hypocrisy in my statement and this thread is full of people who are attacking veganism so why should I have to hold back the punches?

Do I really need to answer that?

It's like screaming that you're 'not angry' or something.

You're not dispelling anyones assertion that most vegans are condescending and smug by being condescending and smug.

mad825:

We are omnivores and our body has adapted to that. Our teeth have developed from flat molars which are effective for chewing grass/vegetables to become more concave which is effective for chewing meat. If we are also to compare other evaluational traits such as our intestines which are shorter than our fellow cousins to conserve energy therefore our bodys are not so keen on a herbivore's diet...Some people get bad stomach and spend time on the toilet.

The most accepted reason why we do eat meat is because it's a far quicker and easier way of getting energy as you only need to eat a small amount of meat to meet the equivalent of eating a large amount of vegetables. Just because you over-consumed (more than you actually needed) doesn't mean that "we are not designed for it". The RDA is a guideline not an accurate measurement of nutrition which everyone must have, some people require more. Hell, you can over-consume on water.

OT:Honestly, Veganism is more like a religion than a diet. When they claim for health reason it's usually because they don't understand and often worry about their own health, even something as basic like tap water which contains contaminates (lead, arsenic, copper and microbes) which millions of people live-off everyday without any health issues might even cause them unnecessary panic.

Also, they are also concerned that meat causes disease (pathogenic). Well, yes, that's true but it's not like one of the most, if not, thee most deadliest toxins/poisons are naturally occurring from plants. >.>

If were going to talk about empathy, lets all start being nice to insects and plant seeing as they are also considered as "living". Personally, I think it's a human thing where our imaginations get to the best of us. It's a cruel world and they should know because they've been round longer than us.

Yes, but our stomach is much longer than a pure carnivores, so I was just putting that we are purely neither. Also, as we live in a society of convenience where everything is produced and so easy to obtain, the arguement we NEED to eat meat instead of the large quantities of veg to keep up calories is a bit of a fail.

I don't believe i ever said we weren't designed for it. I was pointing out that the majority of people overconsume protein, as we are raised with the attitude of needing at least one hot meal a day, which contains meat, and a large portion of people will have a second meal in the day which contains a fair portion of meat also.

RDA is not the be-all-end-all of nutrients, and I never claimed it was. Of course it varies from person to person, but there are vegan bodhy-builders, so that shoots down the arguement that you NEED meat really.

Yes, everything is slowly poisoning us, but that doesn't mean people should try doing what they can. Empathy, well-being and most things in life are not ALL or NOTHING, there is always shades of grey.

Eamar:

Vegan_Doodler:

Eamar:

The difference is of course that human slaves are not animals.

But you haven't given a reason as to why they differ, Farming and slavery are about the exploitation of another creature, the only reason people find the latter more objectionable is because the creature in question is human.

Yes, but no-one's given a good reason as to why they're the same either. I did go on to explain that this is just something we're going to have to agree to disagree on, it's a very primal thing. You're not about to convince me that a chicken is equivalent to a human, however mentally disabled. In fact, many people would find the notion pretty offensive.

In my defence I don't agree with the whole mentally disabled thing, that should have been worded very differently.
I do understand that we identify far more with our own species then with others, but I don't think a case needs to be made for the similaritys because there are plenty (we eat, sleep,ect..), it's kind of like saying 'there is a god now you have to disprove it'
I'd also like to say thanks for being one of the level headed people in the forum, much appreciated.

Abandon4093:

Jessy_Fran:

Abandon4093:

His point was that she wasn't doing much to dispel that.

Why should I have to? There was no hypocrisy in my statement and this thread is full of people who are attacking veganism so why should I have to hold back the punches?

Do I really need to answer that?

It's like screaming that you're 'not angry' or something.

You're not dispelling anyones assertion that most vegans are condescending and smug by being condescending and smug.

And your making generalisations like alot of the people in this thread, do you not see how that could be frustration.

ShaqLevick:
Well when we're just examining Veganism then it's mostly pertaining to Dairy and Eggs. While I have no problem with eggs, they are for the most part an aborted fetus... sort of, and considering how some religious idealist crack pots feel about human abortion they might just need to rethink how other animals are treated (I don't give two shits however).

Dairy I have a big problem with, it's not good for you at all really (unless it's human). Every nutritional value found in a glass of milk can be better found in just about any vegetable. Animals are not supposed to drink other species milk, because alongside with Calcium and vitamins a mothers milk is absolutely loaded with species specific hormones and White Blood Cells, and if your drinking another species White Blood Cells then you are just having a big old glass of Pus!

I'm not a Vegan by any means, but I do try to eat properly when I can (but we all have our vices). Let's put bull shit morality aside, we are Apex predators and it's a very big universe, and if we aren't going to eat these animals we would certainly have to consider getting rid of the ones that don't benefit us. We can't get bogged down with nonsense about mistreating lower animals... when we can treat our fellow man with respect and dignity then it may be time to consider the Chickens and Cows.

It's important to note that there is nothing remotely as bad for you in red meat as is in a KitKat bar! Simple sugars are literally tearing society apart, but that is all part of a much larger debate regarding farm subsidies which is a big part of the Economically Fucked world we are creating!

Just wanted to put it out there, both Whey and Casseine is made from dairy milk, both of these can't be found in any other product (to my knowledge). These are some of the best proteins for building muscle, if they find whey and casseine in anything else, I will abolish dairy from my diet, or if someone finds a better protein.

Yes, we are apex predators, but how much do we actually hunt in the modern age? The space cows etc. take up could be seeded and would pretty much feed the world. 1000 litres of water is required to make 1 kg of meat, versus 10 liters for 1 kg of crops. This is my biggest concern, the meat industry is one of the most ruining practices on earth.

Vegan_Doodler:

Abandon4093:

Jessy_Fran:

Why should I have to? There was no hypocrisy in my statement and this thread is full of people who are attacking veganism so why should I have to hold back the punches?

Do I really need to answer that?

It's like screaming that you're 'not angry' or something.

You're not dispelling anyones assertion that most vegans are condescending and smug by being condescending and smug.

And your making generalisations like alot of the people in this thread, do you not see how that could be frustration.

Yea, I mean me saying that she was being condescending and smug was a total generalisation....... riiiiiiiiiiiiiight?

Yeah, I hate vegans!!!

How dare they stand up for those who have no voice?
How dare they value thousands of innocent lives over their mere taste buds?
How dare they strive to make the world a better, more cruelty-free place for all?
How dare they challenge my blind, ignorant habits with logical thinking?
How dare they live a lifestyle of compassion and love?

Seriously guys, what a loads of idiots!!1!

Ohhhh.......

Abandon4093:

Jammy2003:

True, we have bred them to be that way, and the majority of them would die. Pretty sure there are a lot of quote supporting the sentiment of dying free is better than living a slave, besides, they'll die soon anyway to be served as meat.

Also, dairy cows need to be milked constantly as they are constantly cycled through pregnant and having just given birth. Whenever the milk dries up they are impregnanted again to make them produce, just like humans only produce after birth. Leave them with their calves, and they'll "milk" their mothers do the cow wont die a painful, drawn out death.

That's not what they asked though. They asked

Please enlighten me, why would it?

In response to someone saying they would die without us.

I'm not arguing the merits of keeping them alive over letting them die. Just informing them that they would indeed die.

Also, animals bred for production such as egg laying chickens and dairy cows aren't killed for meat because they're more useful alive. They haven't been bred for the best cuts.

And mastitis is a very slow and painful death. And I'm fairly sure dairy cows haven't been pregnancy cycled for years. I'm pretty sure the majority of it is hormone endued. RBST etc.

True, you did so I'll leave that point. However the world won't suddenly change overnight, it would be a gradual process so this theoretical situation will never happen.

They aren't used for prime meat no.... until they stop producing so well. Then they'll be ground up for whatever purpose. And as they are forced to produce so heavily, their lifespans are usually pretty short before they reach this stage.

A good chunk are still, as hormone treatment gets into the milk and has given people cause for concern. Think it's banned in some places? I'm not as informed on that as I could be. And even if it's only the organic products, that's still a fair number of cows pregnancy cycled.

So even if they were induced to produce through hormones, and some do die from mastitis, if they were released after having given birth, the calf would drink until the hormones left the cows system in any case.

I don't even understand vegetarians. It isn't like they are making a difference. They aren't saving any animals by giving up meat. The only way to stop us from killing animals is to have everyone be a vegetarian and that isn't going to happen because it is the laws of nature for us to eat meat. If we start becoming herbivores next thing you know Monkeys are top of the food chain.

The_Lost_King:
I don't even understand vegetarians. It isn't like they are making a difference. They aren't saving any animals by giving up meat. The only way to stop us from killing animals is to have everyone be a vegetarian and that isn't going to happen because it is the laws of nature for us to eat meat. If we start becoming herbivores next thing you know Monkeys are top of the food chain.

...

You don't know how evolution works, do you? :D

Abandon4093:

Jessy_Fran:

Abandon4093:

His point was that she wasn't doing much to dispel that.

Why should I have to? There was no hypocrisy in my statement and this thread is full of people who are attacking veganism so why should I have to hold back the punches?

Do I really need to answer that?

It's like screaming that you're 'not angry' or something.

You're not dispelling anyones assertion that most vegans are condescending and smug by being condescending and smug.

Who said I wasn't angry? These sorts of threads make me livid, actually. My point was that I'm allowed to get angry at others who are getting aggressive towards me. There seems to be a strange belief that vegans aren't allowed to be angry and other people who are like 'hurr durr, bacon and cheese are yummy hahaha'.

You're not dispelling anyones assertion that most carnists are close-minded and ignorant by being close-minded and ignorant.

I guess I kind of overlooked the protein benefits of dairy milk, my apologies for that. Which I would like to reinforce the benefits of Whey in the average humans diet, and of course you have to acknowledge that vegans probably have had Whey in their hippy shakes from juice bars. All the while blissfully ignorant of where your food really comes from. It's just that I have to state again in a nice tall white glass of dairy milk there is a great deal of pus, bleck.

And nonetheless the Cattle machine is subsidized to no end, it makes no sense from a non business perspective. We are apex predators which means we can make the decision of what to eat, lets not concern ourselves with the feelings of cattle and birds, the most important thing is our well being and that we support the environment we live in.

Jammy2003:

Abandon4093:

Jammy2003:

True, we have bred them to be that way, and the majority of them would die. Pretty sure there are a lot of quote supporting the sentiment of dying free is better than living a slave, besides, they'll die soon anyway to be served as meat.

Also, dairy cows need to be milked constantly as they are constantly cycled through pregnant and having just given birth. Whenever the milk dries up they are impregnanted again to make them produce, just like humans only produce after birth. Leave them with their calves, and they'll "milk" their mothers do the cow wont die a painful, drawn out death.

That's not what they asked though. They asked

Please enlighten me, why would it?

In response to someone saying they would die without us.

I'm not arguing the merits of keeping them alive over letting them die. Just informing them that they would indeed die.

Also, animals bred for production such as egg laying chickens and dairy cows aren't killed for meat because they're more useful alive. They haven't been bred for the best cuts.

And mastitis is a very slow and painful death. And I'm fairly sure dairy cows haven't been pregnancy cycled for years. I'm pretty sure the majority of it is hormone endued. RBST etc.

True, you did so I'll leave that point. However the world won't suddenly change overnight, it would be a gradual process so this theoretical situation will never happen.

They aren't used for prime meat no.... until they stop producing so well. Then they'll be ground up for whatever purpose. And as they are forced to produce so heavily, their lifespans are usually pretty short before they reach this stage.

A good chunk are still, as hormone treatment gets into the milk and has given people cause for concern. Think it's banned in some places? I'm not as informed on that as I could be. And even if it's only the organic products, that's still a fair number of cows pregnancy cycled.

So even if they were induced to produce through hormones, and some do die from mastitis, if they were released after having given birth, the calf would drink until the hormones left the cows system in any case.

Fair enough, I just assumed all of them were pretty much all hormone educed now. I do know that the way they've been bred means they produce much, much more milk than they would naturally. So there would still be a lot mastitis regardless.

spartan231490:

Vegan_Doodler:

spartan231490:
Why? Because people are illogical. It doesn't make any sense, and if you follow veganism to it's logical conclusion, it doesn't result in peace and happiness for all of the little animals, but extinction.

Please enlighten me, why would it?

Cows and chickens are only alive because we help them stay that way. They don't have the defenses or drive to survive the wilderness. Sheep are in a similar boat. They have some drive, but they feed mostly on grasses, meaning there is a very limited region in which they could survive, and they're slow and relatively small, leaving them vulnerable to predators. Even coyotes can take sheep, and that's while they're being protected by the farmers.

Virtually all domesticated animals lack what it takes to survive in the wild anymore, we've made sure of that. Without the farmers who raise them, they would die, and that's assuming the farmers let them go wild, instead of just slaughtering them for convenience, or selling them to anyone who would buy(glue factories, research institutes).

Abandon4093:
Never said anything about being a righteous saviour, you just wanted to know why they'd die if we stopped needing them. I told you.

Ok the righteous think was out of order, apologies, and I already knew what the responce would be because its the same every time, 'if we didn't do time they would die' but like I said it is still fucked up and not a good reason to continue doing it.

Daystar Clarion:

The_Lost_King:
I don't even understand vegetarians. It isn't like they are making a difference. They aren't saving any animals by giving up meat. The only way to stop us from killing animals is to have everyone be a vegetarian and that isn't going to happen because it is the laws of nature for us to eat meat. If we start becoming herbivores next thing you know Monkeys are top of the food chain.

...

You don't know how evolution works, do you? :D

I was just joking around but seriously we need meat and not everyone cares enough to make sure to combine the right plants to get the nutrition you usually get from meat.

Vegan_Doodler:

Eamar:

Yes, but no-one's given a good reason as to why they're the same either. I did go on to explain that this is just something we're going to have to agree to disagree on, it's a very primal thing. You're not about to convince me that a chicken is equivalent to a human, however mentally disabled. In fact, many people would find the notion pretty offensive.

In my defence I don't agree with the whole mentally disabled thing, that should have been worded very differently.
I do understand that we identify far more with our own species then with others, but I don't think a case needs to be made for the similaritys because there are plenty (we eat, sleep,ect..), it's kind of like saying 'there is a god now you have to disprove it'
I'd also like to say thanks for being one of the level headed people in the forum, much appreciated.

No worries, I try to avoid getting overly confrontational online. Thank you for doing the same :) I have absolutely no problem with vegans or vegetarians (as I've said before, I used to be veggy myself), I just really don't "get" veganism, despite having tried to educate myself on the matter. As I said, I cannot equate a human to a chicken, or farming to slavery. However, I'm not completely black and white about it. Someone else in this thread mentioned the differences between various species, and I'm inclined to agree. Species that have been shown to have more complex emotional/social interactions, possibly even some form of language, such as elephants, whales, dolphins, great apes etc are species I'd place in a different category from cows, chickens and the like.

In addition to that, I fully accept that farming is "unnatural," and in an ideal world I'd prefer to only eat wild animals I'd hunted/fished myself. I tend to favour game and unfarmed fish anyway. It's probably a hangover from my vegetarian days.

Does that make any sense at all? :S

EDIT: Furthermore, if they ever perfect the ability to "grow" meat from stem cells such that it has the same nutritional value, flavour and texture as "real" meat, and were able to do so at a reasonable price, I'd fully support switching to that.

Jessy_Fran:

You're not dispelling anyones assertion that most carnists are close-minded and ignorant by being close-minded and ignorant.

Carnist?

Is this some sort of new buzzword for people who eat meat?

Because that's silly.

I have a very varied diet, I eat vegetables, fruit, I love nuts, hell, I even enjoy Quorn every now and then.

But I also enjoy meat, eggs, milk and the like.


Carnist would imply that I only eat meat, which is bullshit.

Vegan_Doodler:

FelixG:

Jessy_Fran:
Yeah, I hate vegans!!!

How dare they stand up for those who have no voice?
How dare they value thousands of innocent lives over their mere taste buds?
How dare they strive to make the world a better, more cruelty-free place for all?
How dare they challenge my blind, ignorant habits with logical thinking?
How dare they live a lifestyle of compassion and love?

Seriously guys, what a loads of idiots!!1!

And right on queue one of those ones that gives vegans a bad name.

Bravo!

Why? she's making a valid point, and I completely get the frustration, just look at this forum, the general consensus is that vegans are arrogant, snobby, hypocrites.

Calling people blind and ignorant because they disagree with you. Arrogant check!
Claiming to speak for those who have no voice, Snobby check!
Calling people illogical while they themselves use products made from animals. Hypocrite check!

So as I said, gives the people they are trying to defend a bad name.

Jessy_Fran:

Abandon4093:

Jessy_Fran:

Why should I have to? There was no hypocrisy in my statement and this thread is full of people who are attacking veganism so why should I have to hold back the punches?

Do I really need to answer that?

It's like screaming that you're 'not angry' or something.

You're not dispelling anyones assertion that most vegans are condescending and smug by being condescending and smug.

Who said I wasn't angry? These sorts of threads make me livid, actually. My point was that I'm allowed to get angry at others who are getting aggressive towards me. There seems to be a strange belief that vegans aren't allowed to be angry and other people who are like 'hurr durr, bacon and cheese are yummy hahaha'.

......... not sure you got what I meant.

I said that you're not dispelling anyone's belief that vegans are smug and condescending by being smug and condescending.... I compared that to someone screaming that they weren't angry... because........ well why am I explaining this.

You're not dispelling anyones assertion that most carnists are close-minded and ignorant by being close-minded and ignorant.

Please tell me where I'm being close minded or ignorant.... no really...... tell me.

Because so far I haven't actually had an opinion on any of this. Just pointed out when people have been taking things the wrong way or explained other peoples points. Kind of the exact opposite of close mindedness and ignorance.

So really, I'll be waiting over here for the SAUCE for that lie-burger you just barfed up.

Also... Carnist?

What will you crazy vegans think of next?

him over there:
If plants could feel pain would veganism even exist? It's just some people have a moral problem with eating things that were raised their entires lives with the express purpose of being killed for food. As for no milk or eggs or whatever? I think it stems from that mindset of how we nourish animals specifically to eat what they produce. It all comes down to morals. Personally I have no qualms about eating living things because it is absolutely necessary but I by from places that I know at least treat the plants and animals with some respect and don't abuse them.

Mmm. The plant issue is a tricky one. Because it betrays the fact that vegans essentially seem to be anthropocentric.

Who says a plant doesn't feel pain? On what grounds can this be asserted other than an inference based on biology and the nature of how human beings feel pain.

To be honest, can you even say breaking a rock into pieces to build a house doesn't hurt the rock?

Pretty much everything we eat was raised for that sole purpose.

Animals just happen to be cuter, and easier to understand because we are animals ourselves.

That doesn't mean plants, (or indeed inanimate objects) don't suffer as a result of what we do to them. Merely that if they do, we are less capable of recognising the suffering.

Still... I thought this through myself and came to the conclusion that being vegetarian or vegan for those reasons was problematic, and, honestly, a little egocentric.

I don't like causing suffering, but the fact remains that me being alive comes at the expense of other living and non-living things. There's no way around this, and presuming the suffering of animals is more important than that of anything else doesn't make sense to me.
That's not to say nothing can be done at all, just that I think vegetarianism doesn't really solve much in that regard.

Daystar Clarion:

Jessy_Fran:

You're not dispelling anyones assertion that most carnists are close-minded and ignorant by being close-minded and ignorant.

Carnist?

Is this some sort of new buzzword for people who eat meat?

Because that's silly.

I have a very varied diet, I eat vegetables, fruit, I love nuts, hell, I even enjoy Quorn every now and then.

But I also enjoy meat, eggs, milk and the like.


Carnist would imply that I only eat meat, which is bullshit.

Well to be fair I looked it up

Carnism is the belief system, or ideology, in which it's considered ethical to consume (certain) animals.

If you eat animals at all you are considered a carnist.

It could just as easily be substituted with the term "normal people" though.

Daystar Clarion:
snip

Elizabeth Haydon fan I presume? :-) Haven't read SoA in a long time, you just reminded me!

Also, this is funny:

image

FelixG:

Calling people blind and ignorant because they disagree with you. Arrogant check!
Claiming to speak for those who have no voice, Snobby check!
Calling people illogical while they themselves use products made from animals. Hypocrite check!

So as I said, gives the people they are trying to defend a bad name.

Actually I think the blind and ignorant was aimed at the first half the the thread which mostly contained "Yeah I don't get it". Which is ignorance. And blind because people like their views and ignore evidence to the contrary.

Speaking for those who have no voice tends to stem from the arguement "I'll stop eating pigs when they stand up and tell me to stop eating them". And even if it didn't stem from that how is that Snobby?

And do you KNOW that vegans use products made from animals? It is possible to cut out animal products you know.

KingsGambit:

Daystar Clarion:
snip

Elizabeth Haydon fan I presume? :-) Haven't read SoA in a long time, you just reminded me!

Also, this is funny:

image

Indeed :D

I haven't read SoA in a long time either, not really a huge fan of hers anymore either, but I loved Daystar Clarion ever since I read about it.

Awesome sword is awesome :D

Also, picture is hilarious.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked