I have a question for vegans.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

As a vegetarian, I don't eat eggs or fish purely out of distaste.
On another note, don't trick long-time vegans into eating beef. It could lead to severe illness due to digestive problems.

thesilentman:
Welcome to kingdoms of Archeabacteria and Eubacteria. No, I'm okay with yeast and yogurt. Considering that both of those things are a big part of my diet, I don't mind as much.

No. Yeast is neither archea, or bacteria, also neither of those are kingdoms but rather domains. Yeast is of the domain eukaryote, and of the kingdom fungi. I know, I know, so nitpicky.

Perhaps a little more on subject would be two thoughts I have had, the first is would people be okay with eating animal products which are no more derived from any suffering than plant products (myoblast produced meat, or animals which lack a CNS and thus cannot experience any form of suffering)

The second thought is, if everyone went vegan how many animal species would go extinct since they exist almost exclusively as domestic variants. I don't know about you, but I think sheep, as a species, have got a pretty good deal on their Darwinian survivability due to us using them for wool, the same can be said for the remnants of the now extinct Aurochs.

We are not the only species to do this either, it seems to me that from a population perspective its a form of symbiosis just something to consider. Would it be more moral to abstain for the suffering of the individual with the result being the eradication of the species?

(edit clarification: note as a species, not necessarily as individuals)

Jerram Fahey:

Rastien:
I respect vegetarians and vegans for there choices, unfortuntley i have only met one vegan who respected my choice to eat meat.

It's much harder for them to respect you considering you're doing something they consider unethical. bananafishtoday brought up the slavery analogy, so let's go with that:

Let's say you found slavery immoral, and as such chose to abstain from owning slaves. How easy would it be for you to respect someone who basically said "Yeah I can kinda see that owning slaves isn't the best thing to do, but on the other hand I really like having people I can boss around."?

Hmm this is true, although i personally feel the analogy to slavery is a bit extreme but i understand the point being made.

I guess my issue is being on the receiving end of a verbal tirade and being made to feel guilty for my choice to consume animals. I grew up on a farm so have always had respect for my meat and fully know where it comes from and process involved in creating it. Whilst i understand there choices for not eating meat, i would ask that perhaps not preaching to others about the choices they make as i wouldn't preach to them about mine.

But as you have highlighted it's a tricky area and can see why they would want to convince me to see things from there point of view but personally i have weighed up both sides of the argument and fall on the side of eating meat.

Tyelcapilu:
As a vegetarian, I don't eat eggs or fish purely out of distaste.
On another note, don't trick long-time vegans into eating beef. It could lead to severe illness due to digestive problems.

It could also prevent their eternal soul from reaching paradise.

Oh, no, wait. That's the other bunch.

Tyelcapilu:
As a vegetarian, I don't eat eggs or fish purely out of distaste.
On another note, don't trick long-time vegans into eating beef. It could lead to severe illness due to digestive problems.

Wait, really? Does the stomach become incapable of processing beef after being on a vegan diet for too long lol? *headscratch*

i have a question for vegans and vegetarians too:
why do you eat the food of my food? letting them pigs and cows and chickens starve ain't cruel, or what? hypocrites, all of you! (the moral-veggies, that is; taste/texture are completely different stories)

but seriously, as i see it: eating meat is natural. but nature is not an ethical thing, it just IS. it's also doesn't make that much sense to call big industrial "farms" inHUMANe
so you go eat your salad, and i'll have some expensive [something] that grew up as natural and free and "happy" as an animal designated to be primarily food possibly could

captcha agrees, i am a: good samaritan :D

Here's my problem with vegans and the whole "it's not right to kill and eat another living thing" deal: Plants are living things. Several plants have to be killed to make a salad. The flour that bread's made of is essentially a bunch of ground up wheat fetuses. Humans are omnivores, evolution shaped us to be able to eat both meat and vegetable matter. In fact, eating meat is what allowed our species to evolve beyond a mere bunch of land-dwelling apes.

SimpleThunda':

Are you a "pescetarian" because you think it's cruel to the animals?

In that case I can't see why you would be eating fish.

I'm a pescetarian for a number of reasons: sustainability, personal health, moral obligations, to name a few. Cruelty is one of those, but given that, well, they're fish, I find it an acceptable compromise, since I'd likely be very unhealthy if I didn't eat fish.

thesilentman:

John the Gamer:

thesilentman:
(...)A simpler way to state this is, "if something died, not eating it."(...)

So you only eat rocks? Since "if something died, not eating it" kind of means you can't eat anything that was once part of a living being, including everything we can use as nutrients.

Did you know that about a billion of the atoms forming your very own body once belonged to someone like Mozart or Buddha?

Just saying.

Steak is awesome btw.

What you're implying is something different from what I'm trying to say. Don't take that literally, I know about the Conservation of Mass. I'm saying that if something lost it's life to be food, I'm not eating it. I don't mind if any people eat meat. The reason I say that is because most people are confused about what I mean when I tell them I'm a vegetarian.

Yeah I know. Taking it literally was more fun, that's all.

Evil Smurf:
I can understand not using animal products for religious, environmental and cruelty reasons. However the one thing I don't get is this: What if you kept chickens and treated them right, fed them and made them free range etc. Could you then collect, and use the eggs knowing that you had not abused the chickens into laying them?

If you had animals, and treated them without abuse or hormones could you then harvest their products? Milk for example comes naturally to cows.

I am not looking to flame or troll, so please don't any of you.

Well for one that would contravene the environmental reasons, any sort of sustaining animal life for the purpose of food is inherently wasteful. At least compared to vegetables. So in principle they would be opposed to it regardless I would think.

Then there might be that fact that they don't like the taste.

I for one approve very much of Vegans, they're like Vegetarians but hardcore and morally absolute. Fuck Vegetarians though, you wishy washy bastards. Grow a set of developed opinions you ponce!

Evil Smurf:

Zen Toombs:
There's also that after you stop eating meat and other animal products for a while, it can sometimes stop tasting good.

I had no idea you lose the taste for meat!

It doesn't happen to everyone, but it can.

Aaron Sylvester:

Tyelcapilu:
As a vegetarian, I don't eat eggs or fish purely out of distaste.
On another note, don't trick long-time vegans into eating beef. It could lead to severe illness due to digestive problems.

Wait, really? Does the stomach become incapable of processing beef after being on a vegan diet for too long lol? *headscratch*

Incapable? No.

But it can become harder.

This really shouldn't be too shocking. It happens all the time. Ever wonder why most people on western diets have to run for the toilets 30 minutes after eating a curry but the entire continent of India manages to get through the work day with no mishap? Your digestive track needs time to adapt to new food. Hell, even my box of fiber bars warns people to not ramp up their daily fiber content too quickly.

Meat is an incredibly inefficent way to feed a population. If I remember from ecology you generally transfer approximately 10% of energy between tropic levels. So if you go from Plant --> Cow --> Person, you are losing 99% of the energy the plant had made from the sun. If you consider the economic and environmental consequences of 9 billion people moving to a meat centered diet, suddenly the carrying capacity of the world is a lot smaller. So you can be vegetarian or vegan morally by justifying yourself with physics!

John the Gamer:

thesilentman:
(...)A simpler way to state this is, "if something died, not eating it."(...)

So you only eat rocks? Since "if something died, not eating it" kind of means you can't eat anything that was once part of a living being, including everything we can use as nutrients.

Did you know that about a billion of the atoms forming your very own body once belonged to someone like Mozart or Buddha?

Yes... Saying you won't eat anything that required something to die is a pretty poor choice of words. (Or you have a very selective definition of death.)

I can't believe however, that the first thing anyone jumped to as a counter-example was bacteria...

I mean, what about plants?

Did you know a lot of the plant material humans eat could technically still be considered to be alive when we eat it?

Just as well plants don't have feelings right? I mean, how many would eat an animal while it's still alive? Sounds a lot more cruel than killing it, then eating it...

Daveman:

I for one approve very much of Vegans, they're like Vegetarians but hardcore and morally absolute. Fuck Vegetarians though, you wishy washy bastards. Grow a set of developed opinions you ponce!

I despise people that deal in absolutes! ;p

Arrogant, out of touch with reality know-it-alls...

Ye... I am aware of the contradiction in what I've just said... XD

I heartily encourage people to become vegetarians / vegans...

...it means more meat for me!

Seriously though, eating meat and animal products is natural for humans so I do it...that and the whole loving meat thing. That said, I cannot and will not tolerate things like battery-farming and inhumane treatment of animals and if the eggs aint free-range then I'm not touching them. We used to keep our own chooks so we could be 100% sure...

Evil Smurf:

thesilentman:
Exactly what can't vegans eat again?

Animal products like meat, jelly, ice cream, leather, glue, chocolate. The good stuff.

]

Who eats leather? O-o

OT: I am a bit of a carnivore but in my pursuit of health I've found myself eating meat for protein and not much else.

Professor Lupin Madblood:

SimpleThunda':

Are you a "pescetarian" because you think it's cruel to the animals?

In that case I can't see why you would be eating fish.

I'm a pescetarian for a number of reasons: sustainability, personal health, moral obligations, to name a few. Cruelty is one of those, but given that, well, they're fish, I find it an acceptable compromise, since I'd likely be very unhealthy if I didn't eat fish.

See I don't eat fish on the principle that I find mass fishing to be utterly digusting and horribly wasteful.

I'm one of those organic whole food hippies though .___.

thesilentman:
"if something died, not eating it."

So, you only eat live animals. You monster!

thesilentman:
Eggs are a bit of a gray area in this regard...

Yeah, so is Schrodinger's cat.

:P

Starik20X6:
This informative chart may help!

image

Ha! You just made my day!

Thank you for this wonderful info-graphic. I shall save it to my hard drive to present to anyone who tells me I should be vegan.

OT: Sorry, no insight here. I considered adding a comment, but honestly I think others have said it better, and anyway I don't like being impolite to groups of people unless they have insulted me first.

I tried to become a vegetarian once. That was quickly done away with when I realized I would have to give up bacon and turkey. I'm sorry vegans and vegetarians. They're too delicious for me to give up.

I'm being completely serious.

SkarKrow:

Professor Lupin Madblood:

SimpleThunda':

Are you a "pescetarian" because you think it's cruel to the animals?

In that case I can't see why you would be eating fish.

I'm a pescetarian for a number of reasons: sustainability, personal health, moral obligations, to name a few. Cruelty is one of those, but given that, well, they're fish, I find it an acceptable compromise, since I'd likely be very unhealthy if I didn't eat fish.

See I don't eat fish on the principle that I find mass fishing to be utterly digusting and horribly wasteful.

I'm one of those organic whole food hippies though .___.

. . .

Fuck.

i forgot about mass fishing

i only thought about it in terms of fish farming

Professor Lupin Madblood:

SkarKrow:

Professor Lupin Madblood:

I'm a pescetarian for a number of reasons: sustainability, personal health, moral obligations, to name a few. Cruelty is one of those, but given that, well, they're fish, I find it an acceptable compromise, since I'd likely be very unhealthy if I didn't eat fish.

See I don't eat fish on the principle that I find mass fishing to be utterly digusting and horribly wasteful.

I'm one of those organic whole food hippies though .___.

. . .

Fuck.

i forgot about mass fishing

i only thought about it in terms of fish farming

Sorry :P

Fish farming and stuff is fine since it's sustainable but giant ocean trawlers are horrific things, especially since so much of it gets thrown back because of the quotas.

Shellfish fishing is far worse though since it tends to only be very specific species you can harvest....

Professor Lupin Madblood:

SkarKrow:

Professor Lupin Madblood:

I'm a pescetarian for a number of reasons: sustainability, personal health, moral obligations, to name a few. Cruelty is one of those, but given that, well, they're fish, I find it an acceptable compromise, since I'd likely be very unhealthy if I didn't eat fish.

See I don't eat fish on the principle that I find mass fishing to be utterly digusting and horribly wasteful.

I'm one of those organic whole food hippies though .___.

. . .

Fuck.

i forgot about mass fishing

i only thought about it in terms of fish farming

I can refrain from my rant on overfishing at least. I'd say people underestimate fish. I mean if we're going by intelligence here it's not like chickens are Einstein. not to mention dolphins caught in tuna nets... and fish farming isn't all that great either... it's a complex issue, which is why I tend to somewhat judge anyone who isn't a full blown vegan, and that includes myself.

I became a vegan when I was 15 (now 25) because I was essentially scared into it by PETA and I found them infallible, before I learned just what kind of organization they really are. In the last 4 years I've been a vegetarian, when I realized that I might as well live in the forest on berries to be truly vegan, and even then I'm sure I would disturb animal life. I just simply cannot fathom eating meat. It's no longer about animal liberation (which is insane, as rights come with responsibility that animals lack the intellectual prowess to handle and understand), and I know that I'm doing dick to help animals or to end animal suffering at this point.

I don't place animals as equal with humans, and I find PETA's equating the holocaust with factory farming to be grossly offensive and devalues human life more than anything else. I do believe that humans have a responsibility towards those "below" us, and to consciously avoid needlessly harming them or causing them undue suffering. I accept that, for many people, eating meat is as natural as taking a piss and I would never tell them not to or that their belief system is wrong. I would simply ask those in charge of providing the meat to not make the short life a complete living hell for the creature in question as it isn't necessary to create the food.

As to the "gastro intolerance" to eating meat, I have some anecdotes. My wife (who has been a vegetarian for 5 years) ate a piece of pizza that was pepperoni with the pepperoni removed, and the person who removed it didn't tell her. Within 10 minutes she had flu-like nausea and vomited about 3 times. She is a vegetarian simply because she never liked the taste of any meat her entire life, and after becoming an adult she had a more of a choice as to what was on the dinner table. It is not an ethical or moral issue.

My brother was a vegetarian for 4 years. His wife called him a "pussy" and "not a real man" and was tired of having to deal with 2 separate meals to accommodate his lifestyle. In response he ate a baconator from Wendy's, got incredibly ill (his face turned white and he looked like a zombie) and he couldn't keep any meat down for about the two weeks he transferred into an omnivore again.

I hate that simply saying "I'm a vegetarian" causes so much hate to be thrown at me, and at least one person deciding to be completely sarcastic and talk about loving animals (next to the mashed potatoes HAHAHA). I've never told an omnivore that I despised their lifestyle or to be so presumptuous as to attempt to program something so culturally significant as food for someone else. Please don't attack someone because you've had bad experiences with someone who identified similarly, as we are not a hive mind. Thank you for your time.

Comocat:
Meat is an incredibly inefficent way to feed a population. If I remember from ecology you generally transfer approximately 10% of energy between tropic levels. So if you go from Plant --> Cow --> Person, you are losing 99% of the energy the plant had made from the sun. If you consider the economic and environmental consequences of 9 billion people moving to a meat centered diet, suddenly the carrying capacity of the world is a lot smaller. So you can be vegetarian or vegan morally by justifying yourself with physics!

Not quite, you lose ten percent, but that means the other ninety percent is compressed to a much more smaller amount. If you were to try and eat grass versus cow, you would need only really one tenth as much mass of cow flesh, as you would with grass. In other words, our stomachs have a hard time fitting all that food at once. Sure you may lose energy, but it's more condensed.

Post Script:
If it was so efficient to just eat the grass, we would've never evolved the carnivore based diet, as it would be just ineffective and rooted out by the more efficient herbivore diet.
Bonus points for noticing semi pun.

I think it's because roosters are useless, so if you buy five chickens for your yard and take care of them it's all fine for them, but in doing so you support an enterprise that kills 50% of the baby chickens that won't grow up to lay eggs.

Store milk is always induced with hormones and other unnatural methods because keeping a cow that only produces milk sometimes is very unprofitable. If you have the land and money to keep a cow that only produces milk for a small fraction of its life go nuts. It's extremely impractical though, and easier to just get the nutrients from other sources.

SimpleThunda':
Are you a "pescetarian" because you think it's cruel to the animals?

In that case I can't see why you would be eating fish.

For the same reason that a lot of people are comfortable with eating tuna or lamb, but horrified at the idea of eating "higher order" animals like dolphins or monkeys. Pescetarians just draw the line a bit further down.

waj9876:
I tried to become a vegetarian once. That was quickly done away with when I realized I would have to give up bacon and turkey. I'm sorry vegans and vegetarians. They're too delicious for me to give up.

I'm being completely serious.

Tastes change according to what your body is used to consuming. It's not like you'll be craving turkey and bacon forever if you become a vegetarian. After an adjustment period of a few months you'll realise foods you thought were bland are actually really delicious, and meats you used to like will start seeming gross. So if the only thing stopping you is that you can't put up with craving for a relatively short period of time... well, just don't take up smoking, eh.

CrystalShadow:

John the Gamer:

thesilentman:
(...)A simpler way to state this is, "if something died, not eating it."(...)

So you only eat rocks? Since "if something died, not eating it" kind of means you can't eat anything that was once part of a living being, including everything we can use as nutrients.

Did you know that about a billion of the atoms forming your very own body once belonged to someone like Mozart or Buddha?

Yes... Saying you won't eat anything that required something to die is a pretty poor choice of words. (Or you have a very selective definition of death.)

I can't believe however, that the first thing anyone jumped to as a counter-example was bacteria...

I mean, what about plants?

Did you know a lot of the plant material humans eat could technically still be considered to be alive when we eat it?

Just as well plants don't have feelings right? I mean, how many would eat an animal while it's still alive? Sounds a lot more cruel than killing it, then eating it...

Yeah, I prefer my salads live and kicking. Tastes a lot better when they struggle a bit...

Meat tends to be killed completely first, because raw meat tends to contain lots of delicious deseases.

I too have a question for vegans.
Since the definition of vegan is that you don't eat animal products, does that make cannibalism vegan?

Starik20X6:

Daystar Clarion:
Personally, I think veganism is hypocritical, considering how many day to day products uses resources from animals.

Computers, vehicle tires, fabric softeners etc. It would be pretty damn difficult to live a modern life that doesn't include using something made with animal parts.

Very difficult, but still hypocritical.

This informative chart may help!

image

As far as I can see, the only way to be truly vegan is to become some kind of nudist cave-dwelling vagrant, eating only berries and roots and generally avoiding all contact with the civilised world.

That chart is actually kinda fuckin' mindblowing. I'm sure someone somewhere has hit that vegan singularity where they use absolutely no animal products, but I'm pretty sure that kind of neurosis would literally classify medically as a psychological disorder.

Tyelcapilu:
As a vegetarian, I don't eat eggs or fish purely out of distaste.
On another note, don't trick long-time vegans into eating beef. It could lead to severe illness due to digestive problems.

Isn't that just as bad as talking someone into going vegetarian then? I eat a diet of mostly meat and junkfood so if I switch to fresh greens I can't digest it.

Stasisesque:

amiran123:
Well, eating eggs would be the same to vegans as an abortion but i don't see a problem with drinking milk.

I would suggest most supermarket eggs are more akin to periods than abortions as very, very few of them will be fertilised (if any at all). It's only when you buy eggs from independent shops or farms that you run any great risk of eating an unborn baby chicken.

Just... Just stop. I'm trying to eat a scrambled period right now...

Evil Smurf:
I can understand not using animal products for religious, environmental and cruelty reasons. However the one thing I don't get is this: What if you kept chickens and treated them right, fed them and made them free range etc. Could you then collect, and use the eggs knowing that you had not abused the chickens into laying them?

If you had animals, and treated them without abuse or hormones could you then harvest their products? Milk for example comes naturally to cows.

I am not looking to flame or troll, so please don't any of you.

I think this is something some vegetarians/vegans do instead of simply boycotting meat entirely; making a positive impact on the industry rather than just staying out of it. I'm guessing the reason most don't is the amount of effort it takes compared to just avoiding meat.

Souplex:
I too have a question for vegans.
Since the definition of vegan is that you don't eat animal products, does that make cannibalism vegan?

Humans are animals. Though I guess there are some extreme vegans who prioritise animal welfare over human rights so I guess maybe they'd be cool with that?

bananafishtoday:

Edit: And it's funny that you think the "global warming" -> "climate change" terminology shift is propaganda. It is. Right-wing propaganda. The term "climate change" was invented by a GOP strategist named Frank Luntz at the behest of the Bush II administration to make global warming sound less severe than it actually is, and the term eventually caught on in general usage.

To be fair, it's a better term anyway. It's a better term for the millions of people who don't understand that snow today doesn't mean that it's not getting warmer. And since it sounds more like the radial shifts we get, it works there, too.

But yes, the propaganda complaint IS kind of funny how it works.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked