Vegetarianism/Veganism and You

[Saint Frankenstein]

Meat eaters arguments are SO pathetic!!

Are you going to make an argument or not?

 

[Lyndon]

Read the thread, already done.......

 

[illykitty]

It's just another variation of speciesism and hypocrisy. They use the same arguments regarding non-mammals that idiots like Descartes used regarding dogs, when he tortured them to death during vivisection and claimed that their cries of agony were just a "mechanical reflex". When you bring up how plants react to their environment, how they defend themselves, send warnings to other members of their species in the area, how they prey on other plants and animals, compete for resources, reproduce, etc. it's dismissed as some sort of automatic reaction. They just don't want to face up to reality.

If one really cares about plants, it takes around 7 pounds of grain to get 1 pound of beef. Not a good ratio. This is why I find "plants are alive too" arguments dishonest most of the time. I don't think most people that makes this argument truly cares and they never look into how many plants are destroyed in the process of making meat. Plus there's other side casualties, like the Amazon rain forest being destroyed by cattle ranching and to grow soy (the majority is fed to farm animals, not humans). I do think you might care though, so it's worth posting this.

---
I have to get this off my chest.

Eating less meat, being pescetarian, vegetarian or vegan is about reducing harm. No one's going to be perfect, saintly or whatever by this. I'm vegan and I know I'm still doing some harm, there are other areas in my life where I haven't done much because there's only so much I can care about. I don't think of myself as perfect. My husband is a meat eater, though he has significantly reduced his consumption. I don't hate him, think of him as being heartless and so on. I know no one in real life that is vegan. I don't think I'm surrounded by monsters. Perhaps people don't have all the information, perhaps they have other causes they care about, etc. There's only so much one can do, constantly dividing our energy and focus to various parts of our lives.

But I do encourage people to reduce their consumption, since the environmental arguments are pretty strong and most people accept those as evidence to reduce meat consumption. I will welcome the day lab meat becomes commercial, and my advice will change, so I'll encourage people to eat that instead of reducing meat consumption. My focus is entirely on less harm. And it includes less harm towards other human beings, from the people who have the horrible job of killing these animals, to having compassion towards people and understand they don't want to change their whole habits and lifestyle. I just want some workable solution because I care about what happens to this planet.

~_~ I don't want to argue, I'm tired of that and I feel it gets us nowhere... But I needed to post because I am annoyed at some vegans making us all look like jerks. And people dismiss the whole thing because they just focus on "vegans are jerks so I won't listen to anything they have to say". There's some good information out there about the environmental damage and sometimes one doesn't need to go all the way to have an impact. If people ate less meat, I'm sure the environment would benefit a lot from that. And if people get on board with lab grown meat, even better! Then being a meat eater will be more or less like being a vegan!

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Meat eaters arguments are SO pathetic!!

It's remarks like that that make me want to go to Texas Roadhouse and order a 12 ounce sirloin steak. It's not something I would do, but I find vegans who smugly attack human omnivores to be as repulsive as most anti-smoking commercials that treat smokers as childish buffoons, which makes me feel like lighting up to spite them. It also makes me want to challenge these "holier than thou" vegans to seeing whose carbon footprint is lower. I may eat meat, but I'm also anal about wasting electricity, repairing things to keep using them rather than replacing them, avoiding unnecessary chemicals, recycling, and promoting environmental issues and preservation. And I'm consciously aware that I end and destroy life even when I eat a plant.
You'll never get humanity as a whole to become vegetarian/vegan, and it's unnecessary. However, we can work on reducing meat consumption, which is good for health and the environment. But it will never happen as long as we have the demands of convenience foods, fast foods, and cheap processed food that is more chemical than food. We aren't fishing certain types of fish to extinction because people eat fish, but because we expect every grocery store and McDonalds to have them readily available in endless amounts, even if it the fish is not found anywhere for hundreds of miles.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

If one really cares about plants, it takes around 7 pounds of grain to get 1 pound of beef. Not a good ratio. This is why I find "plants are alive too" arguments dishonest most of the time. I don't think most people that makes this argument truly cares and they never look into how many plants are destroyed in the process of making meat. Plus there's other side casualties, like the Amazon rain forest being destroyed by cattle ranching and to grow soy (the majority is fed to farm animals, not humans). I do think you might care though, so it's worth posting this.

---
I have to get this off my chest.

Eating less meat, being pescetarian, vegetarian or vegan is about reducing harm. No one's going to be perfect, saintly or whatever by this. I'm vegan and I know I'm still doing some harm, there are other areas in my life where I haven't done much because there's only so much I can care about. I don't think of myself as perfect. My husband is a meat eater, though he has significantly reduced his consumption. I don't hate him, think of him as being heartless and so on. I know no one in real life that is vegan. I don't think I'm surrounded by monsters. Perhaps people don't have all the information, perhaps they have other causes they care about, etc. There's only so much one can do, constantly dividing our energy and focus to various parts of our lives.

But I do encourage people to reduce their consumption, since the environmental arguments are pretty strong and most people accept those as evidence to reduce meat consumption. I will welcome the day lab meat becomes commercial, and my advice will change, so I'll encourage people to eat that instead of reducing meat consumption. My focus is entirely on less harm. And it includes less harm towards other human beings, from the people who have the horrible job of killing these animals, to having compassion towards people and understand they don't want to change their whole habits and lifestyle. I just want some workable solution because I care about what happens to this planet.

~_~ I don't want to argue, I'm tired of that and I feel it gets us nowhere... But I needed to post because I am annoyed at some vegans making us all look like jerks. And people dismiss the whole thing because they just focus on "vegans are jerks so I won't listen to anything they have to say". There's some good information out there about the environmental damage and sometimes one doesn't need to go all the way to have an impact. If people ate less meat, I'm sure the environment would benefit a lot from that. And if people get on board with lab grown meat, even better! Then being a meat eater will be more or less like being a vegan!

Well, I'm a rather nihilistic person and I recognize how powerless I am in society, being dirt poor (and possibly being literally homeless within a month). Personally, I don't know how to cook, am living in a filthy, rundown place, am very mentally ill and don't have the desire to cook in such a disgusting environment. I just buy whatever is quick to heat up and requires as little effort as possible. I am a highly empathetic person, but I recognize that reality is crammed with suffering and death. Those seem to be what the Cosmos revolve around - destruction, predation, struggle, etc. So even the "harm reduction" argument kind of falls flat, to me, when looking at reality on this planet as a whole. (I definitely support animal welfare, humane slaughter practices and so on, though. We can't get away from the killing and consumption cycle, but we could at least try to reduce the experience of suffering as much as possible.)

Even one of my cats kills the mice here seemingly "just because". She doesn't eat them. Just strangles or crushes them to death and leaves them for me to find and throw out. (At least she doesn't behead them like another cat I had did, but it actually might be a more merciful death for her to do so.) Humans are just animals and predators. I don't view us as "higher" or "superior" in any way. We're just better able to use tools. I don't believe in any hierarchies in nature. If another animal ate me, oh well. That's just how it is. So to me, ethical veganism is rather pointless in the grand scheme of things. I find that the arguments are often based on idealism, the belief that humans either aren't animals or are somehow "above" other animals (especially in terms of supposed moral advancement, which is bs to me) and so on. However, if a person wants to be a vegan, that's fine. That doesn't bother me. Eat whatever you want. But when people act like they're morally superior, that is a problem, imo.

As for the environment, the main problem there is capitalism and greed. I'm an anti-capitalist and I do care about the environment. But do most people actually care about those things? I don't think so. Most people seem to be rather apathetic, in action. Another glaring problem is population growth. There's over 7 billion of us. If there were about only a billion of us, this wouldn't be such a problem. But people are dumb and irresponsible when it comes to reproduction. I don't see that changing anytime soon. People just really don't care.

Anyway, I'm drunk and rambling so I'll stop. It's not like anything I say has any real importance. Anyone of us could drop dead at any moment.

 

[Lyndon]

You're free to eat meat, just don't try to BS me by telling me its because you care about plants, if you cared about plants you wouldn't eat meat. Because meat eating kills by far more plants.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

You're free to eat meat, just don't try to BS me by telling me its because you care about plants, if you cared about plants you wouldn't eat meat. Because meat eating kills by far more plants.

I do care about plants, but it's rather pointless since everything ends up destroyed in the end.

 

[Ponder This]

If one really cares about plants, it takes around 7 pounds of grain to get 1 pound of beef. Not a good ratio. This is why I find "plants are alive too" arguments dishonest most of the time. I don't think most people that makes this argument truly cares and they never look into how many plants are destroyed in the process of making meat. Plus there's other side casualties, like the Amazon rain forest being destroyed by cattle ranching and to grow soy (the majority is fed to farm animals, not humans). I do think you might care though, so it's worth posting this.

---
I have to get this off my chest.

Eating less meat, being pescetarian, vegetarian or vegan is about reducing harm. No one's going to be perfect, saintly or whatever by this. I'm vegan and I know I'm still doing some harm, there are other areas in my life where I haven't done much because there's only so much I can care about. I don't think of myself as perfect. My husband is a meat eater, though he has significantly reduced his consumption. I don't hate him, think of him as being heartless and so on. I know no one in real life that is vegan. I don't think I'm surrounded by monsters. Perhaps people don't have all the information, perhaps they have other causes they care about, etc. There's only so much one can do, constantly dividing our energy and focus to various parts of our lives.

But I do encourage people to reduce their consumption, since the environmental arguments are pretty strong and most people accept those as evidence to reduce meat consumption. I will welcome the day lab meat becomes commercial, and my advice will change, so I'll encourage people to eat that instead of reducing meat consumption. My focus is entirely on less harm. And it includes less harm towards other human beings, from the people who have the horrible job of killing these animals, to having compassion towards people and understand they don't want to change their whole habits and lifestyle. I just want some workable solution because I care about what happens to this planet.

~_~ I don't want to argue, I'm tired of that and I feel it gets us nowhere... But I needed to post because I am annoyed at some vegans making us all look like jerks. And people dismiss the whole thing because they just focus on "vegans are jerks so I won't listen to anything they have to say". There's some good information out there about the environmental damage and sometimes one doesn't need to go all the way to have an impact. If people ate less meat, I'm sure the environment would benefit a lot from that. And if people get on board with lab grown meat, even better! Then being a meat eater will be more or less like being a vegan!

You're free to eat meat, just don't try to BS me by telling me its because you care about plants, if you cared about plants you wouldn't eat meat. Because meat eating kills by far more plants.

It is good to see that you actually accept that killing plants is doing harm. When someone tries to argue that killing plants isn't doing harm because killing animals does more harm, I find it to be dishonest. It's like saying, "I only steal one dollar bills and not ten dollar bills. Therefore, I don't steal!"

The "eating animals kills more plants than eating plants" argument to justify vegetarianism by reduction of harm needs to be re-examined. You seem to be saying that animals are doing massive amounts of harm to plant-life. So logically speaking, if we let these animals live, they will continue to do a lot of harm! And if we kill these animals, then they will cease to do harm (unfortunately we have to do harm to make that happen). So, it's just an absurd argument (unless you actually believe it's okay to drive animal species extinct in order to protect plants).

Vegetarians are often trying to argue (or defend) that eating vegetarian is a better way to live because it does less harm (or it's non-violent). It's the same conceit in a different form. The reality is that many vegetarians believe there is a significant difference between animal and plant life that justifies their eating habits, but have trouble articulating what that difference is to people who are okay with eating meat. Arguments based on harm, violence, sentience, and even the environment fall apart when you examine them (or at least they aren't very convincing to meat-eaters). I'm not saying that there isn't some important difference between plants and animals that justifies vegetarian eating habits, but just because you hold a belief doesn't mean you have to jump on whatever argument you think supports your "cause".

 

[Lyndon]

The idea that plant life is as important as animal life like cows and pigs is morally bankrupt and suspect as the argument is always presented by people that are responsible for the death of more plants and animals.

 

[illykitty]

It is good to see that you actually accept that killing plants is doing harm. When someone tries to argue that killing plants isn't doing harm because killing animals does more harm, I find it to be dishonest. It's like saying, "I only steal one dollar bills and not ten dollar bills. Therefore, I don't steal!"

The "eating animals kills more plants than eating plants" argument to justify vegetarianism by reduction of harm needs to be re-examined. You seem to be saying that animals are doing massive amounts of harm to plant-life. So logically speaking, if we let these animals live, they will continue to do a lot of harm! And if we kill these animals, then they will cease to do harm (unfortunately we have to do harm to make that happen). So, it's just an absurd argument (unless you actually believe it's okay to drive animal species extinct in order to protect plants).

Vegetarians are often trying to argue (or defend) that eating vegetarian is a better way to live because it does less harm (or it's non-violent). It's the same conceit in a different form. The reality is that many vegetarians believe there is a significant difference between animal and plant life that justifies their eating habits, but have trouble articulating what that difference is to people who are okay with eating meat. Arguments based on harm, violence, sentience, and even the environment fall apart when you examine them (or at least they aren't very convincing to meat-eaters). I'm not saying that there isn't some important difference between plants and animals that justifies vegetarian eating habits, but just because you hold a belief doesn't mean you have to jump on whatever argument you think supports your "cause".

For us to live, something has to die. It's fact of live. So I look for a way to live that minimises harm (to both plants and animals). It's that simple. Someone doesn't need to be vegan to cause less harm, but to me, it's an easy thing to do, since I have the means to do it and the access to alternatives. Not everyone does and I understand that. But if someone has the ability to reduce harm and reduce environmental damage, then isn't it the moral thing to do so? Being flexitarian/vegetarian/vegan is not perfect, but it's a step in the right direction. There's many other things someone can do too. My reasons to go vegan are mainly some ethical argument of reducing harm, when one is able to, and for environmental reasons, since meat uses a lot of land, food and water, and contributes to climate change via various gases and petrol use.

Now tell me exactly, how is a diet that includes meat on equal footing as a vegetarian or vegan diet if it both uses more plant life and animal life? All people do is argue against vegetarianism but not provide any evidence of meat eating being ok. We've already provided tons of links of the repercussions of meat (and funnily they seem to be ignored). And you call the arguments not convincing? Well that's your problem. Personally, I like facts, numbers, documented research on the impact of different diets and so on. I try to adjust myself to truth, not beliefs or social norms. These things need to be questioned. We've done it with various other things in life, but when it comes to diet, suddenly it's taboo and touches a nerve. To me, it's the same as anything else that's a "sensitive" subject. I don't care, I am looking for what makes most sense.

You say the arguments are flawed, but really, they're yours not mine. No where did I argue the things you said. You created a strawman: "By exaggerating, misrepresenting, or just completely fabricating someone's argument, it's much easier to present your own position as being reasonable, but this kind of dishonesty serves to undermine honest rational debate." I have never made such arguments and I am not even sure if I should bother responding because I really don't like someone misrepresenting my views.

It would be easy to, instead, ask me to clarify on things. For instance, one such question would be: "Do you advocate for farm animals to cease to exist then?"
To which I'd answer: Of course not! We've been over breeding these animals to meet the demand. It's a supply and demand equation. If the world was slowly eating less farm animals, whether it's via adopting a more plant-based lifestyle and/or eventually through technology like cultured meat, then demand will fall and thus the industry would lessen the amount of animals to breed, causing the amount of farm animals to decrease. I don't want these animals to disappear, I love animals! Perhaps we could create some sanctuaries for them in the future. Those already exist today, people created them for rescued farm animals, you can visit them.

So please, don't assume what someone is saying and instead, ask. It's really not that difficult. But then again, it's much easier to paint someone as crazy than to assume they made a rational choice with something that goes against the precious cultural norm. That's sort of expected though, it always happens when someone is fighting for social awareness and change.

 

[whirlingmerc]

People were originally vegetarian as per the instructions given Adam
but after the flood Noah and mankind was given permission to eat all things
then at Moses there was a covenant with Israel of the Kosher laws

 

[Quintessence]

*** MOD POST ***​

This thread is in Interfaith Discussion. That means no debating. If members want to debate this topic, a different thread needs to be created in a debate area of the forums (remember, that quoting someone else's post to start a new thread requires their permission).

 

[Spideymon77]

I always wanted to be a vegetarian because I love animals! Still though, I don't have the commitment because animals taste soooooo gooood.

 

[Chakra]

Fantastic to see that people who have very little knowledge on nutrition, sentience, and human environmental impact suddenly become informed once you use a couple of trigger words.

Please, keep this thread focused on DJ's OP. If you are a meat-eater looking to get a quick snap at vegans/vegetarians and vice versa, create a different thread as per @Quintessence 's warning.

 

[Sundance]

Oh, just to ask as I had forgotten to, can ANYONE, ANYONE AT ALL, give me resources? Thanks!

 

[Chakra]

Oh, just to ask as I had forgotten to, can ANYONE, ANYONE AT ALL, give me resources? Thanks!

Just to make sure, but did you get the links/videos I sent?

 

[Sundance]

Yeah, Chak, I did! They're very cool! Now, I'm looking for more...

 

[Ponder This]

*** MOD POST ***​

This thread is in Interfaith Discussion. That means no debating. If members want to debate this topic, a different thread needs to be created in a debate area of the forums (remember, that quoting someone else's post to start a new thread requires their permission).

Well said.

 

[Sirius Star]

Those are some loaded words there, and as such, I'm not sure how to respond. I'm not seeing a necessary connection between being an obligate heterotroph (as humans are) and having to "terrorize" or "exploit" the things we must kill to live. Perhaps it suffices to say I see no reason to condemn any biological organism for being a heterotroph.

[...]

It is probably a couple of things. First and foremost, I've been mentioning relationships here and there before? Animistic cultures may recognize non-human persons, but it is important to understand that this doesn't mean they consider all persons to be the same. Cat persons aren't the same as dog persons, and you have different types of relationships with them. Those relationships in turn govern the cultural norms that a society develops, which then inform the behavior of members of that society. Contemporary Western culture, for example, places a very strong taboo on eating humans for virtually any reason, as we're seeing some examples of in this thread. That's a cultural norm, and one that is (or has been) foreign to other cultures and historical eras. Western culture is pretty notorious for its ethnocentric supremacy complex, which means we not only have these taboos, we think our culture is the "correct" one and others are "primitive" or "savage" or what have you. But I digress.

This is not how an animist would see it.

Who wrote this? Is there an issue? It's in the hieroglyphs found in an ancient Egypt found not too long ago right there: > ***/\/\/\ the 144,000 foundation stones of stone. Those words are. Revelation 7th chapter. Just one one of Earth's four corners. N.orth E.ast W.est S.outh the N.E.W.S. Just the Medes and the Persians.