''It's frowned upon.''

[Baneat]

If you're good natured and well intended, people, and lots of them, will take advantage of it. Doesn't mean you should be stopping though.

 

[DeathWyrmNexus]

What difference are you making exactly? The chicken isn't destined for grad school, dude. He is going to die either as a pet, prey, or random worm food as ignoble as any roadkill. Hell, what integrity for that matter? You're sitting at a computer who's infrastructure has caused and continues to cause suffering equal to or greater than whatever I eat tonight. You're probably driving the same car as the rest of us. If not, then you're probably still using rubber tires, which all leads back to the same oil nonsense as everybody else. What about that suffering, considering that is actually doing massive damage to an entire ecosystem? No... Your great endeavor is bitching about dinner. Let me just bask in your awe here. >_>

You have a cause and that's cute. The problem is when you think it gives you any kind of moral high ground. By all means, I'm sure the chick you save from the factory will write a great dissertation in thanks to all you've done for it. In the meantime, I'm going to consider my options for lunch.

I eat meat. I have no moral high ground.

Also, I don't drive. I catch the bus or cycle everywhere : |

So you ride in a diesel vehicle or use rubber tires. I do commend you for commuting, though that could be for the same reason as everybody else I know stuck to it.

Here is the thing, I'm not wanting to be in your face about this. I just despise hypocrisy, especially easy to fix hypocrisy. For those who think hypocrisy in a message doesn't matter, I present to you, the world... Take note of how much isn't taken seriously because of hypocrisy and apathy. Then reevaluate your stance and realize that debate rules of fallacies only matter in debates. If the real world functioned off logic, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

[ThrobbingEgo]

Actually if your message has value, you adhere to it. Critical thinking works both ways. You were comparing a drug addiction to a dude with leather shoes. Bob is saying it is bad and probably wants to quit but has to deal with physical dependency. The guy with shoes just likes the look of leather on his feet.

Kind of a big difference there as perception is a big part of a person's reality. As for the message itself, sure, wisdom from the mouths of fools is still wisdom but one has to ask why is the chef slim...

So thank you, I have taken classes, I just accept the idea that presentation can be as important as the message. I am surprised that propaganda classes didn't teach you that. How do you think propaganda works? It is based on a human's instinctive need to understand something at a glance. So if you want to convey a message, you have to present a message. Just because you have the "truth" behind you doesn't exempt you from that rule. Thinking things through would prove that.

And that's still entirely irrelevant to whether or not the message is true. You know this, so you should know better. You know you're in trouble when you're trying to argue in favor of blatant logical fallacies.

That said, here is the roadmap to my conclusion. Chickens and the suffering thereof does not bother me. Why? Because I am hungry and they don't matter to me in the grand scheme of things.

Speaking of fallacies, circular logic. Good job, mate.

My survival and the survival of my family is more important than them.

Hey, another one! False dilemma! (This is fun.) You can ensure your family survives and not consume animal products. I'm also more concerned with human beings than I am concerned with animals, but that doesn't mean that I shouldn't be concerned with animal suffering. Including animal suffering for frivolous reasons, such as eating meat because I like the taste of it. (And I do like the taste of meat. I just don't think my enjoyment of meat is worth the animal's suffering.)

I am a predator and they are prey. How I catch said prey does not matter. If it can be done more efficiently, that is my concern. If free range is more efficient, let it be. I find many things about our society inefficient and foolish, however, as you said, the hypocrisy of the system doesn't stop meat from being something I prefer so I will still eat meat just as the fools in leather shoes you're defending will continue to preach something they don't even comprehend.

And now we're back to preference. Because it is preference, not survival. You can get healthy monounsaturated fats from non-animal sources.

I guess you just can't stop some things. I like the idea of high energy fat helping my brain do its job better. What I will continue to point out is that while you are for stopping some suffering of animals, you aren't for stopping all the suffering because, and this is an admitted assumption, it is just too inconvenient for you to not drive, not be on the computer, and not enjoy the trapping of civilization. Pardon me if I take you a tiny bit less seriously because of said assumption.

I'm not crusading to end all suffering. I'm just not going to contribute to mass suffering for something that can only be described as frivolous. You can belittle that by drawing attention to what I may or may not be doing, and that might ease whatever guilt you may or may not have. It might make you feel good. But it ultimately doesn't change the fact that I don't have to be contribute to the suffering of animals - suffering for no other purpose than my direct pleasure.

Two year ago I was in your shoes. Then I took an ethics course and studied Peter Singer's Animal Liberation. At the time I laughed it off. Then I did a little digging in philosophy. That stewed for a while. I began to realize that the reasons which I've laughed off the idea of veganism were all ill founded and fallacies. I had no reason not to stop eating meat, and every reason to. So, whatever man. If you want to keep telling yourself that you don't care because you like the taste of meat, and you've seen hippies wearing leather shoes, that's something you're going to have to live with.

PS: I added a paragraph in my last post about your claim that meat sparked the evolution of our bigger brains. (Which would be irrelevant, even if it was right and you just explained it wrong.)

 

[Camembert]

So you ride in a diesel vehicle or use rubber tires. I do commend you for commuting, though that could be for the same reason as everybody else I know stuck to it.

Here is the thing, I'm not wanting to be in your face about this. I just despise hypocrisy, especially easy to fix hypocrisy. For those who think hypocrisy in a message doesn't matter, I present to you, the world... Take note of how much isn't taken seriously because of hypocrisy and apathy. Then reevaluate your stance and realize that debate rules of fallacies only matter in debates. If the real world functioned off logic, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Ooh, please see edit

Edit: And you're too hung up on hypocrisy. People try to do what they can, and they can move in small steps. Some may eventually give up the enjoyment of the 'trappings of civilisation' altogether, but for now let them do what they can. Veganism is not an easy thing at all, far from it - I've never been brave enough to try it - so please give them some credit for that. They would surely be ten times as hypocritical if (like me) they felt unease about the suffering of farm animals but then went ahead and scoffed 'em anyway...?

 

[ThrobbingEgo]

A vegan doesnt eat eggs milk or anything that ever came from an animal. I have a vegan friend but i honestly cant see why you cant just be free range instead. That way not only do uo not fund the unethical battery farming but you get to eat the food AND fund the ethical treatment of animals. I like to think i make more of an impact.

"Free-range" is little more than a marketing term. They give the chickens a few more square feet in their wire cages, maybe put the cages over a dirt floor, and leave a unaccessible window open. It'd be prohibitively expensive for your supermarket to stock meaningfully "free-range" products, what with all the land, tracking, and care requirements.

Google search.
http://www.google.ca/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=%22free-range%22+myth

 

[Camembert]

A vegan doesnt eat eggs milk or anything that ever came from an animal. I have a vegan friend but i honestly cant see why you cant just be free range instead. That way not only do uo not fund the unethical battery farming but you get to eat the food AND fund the ethical treatment of animals. I like to think i make more of an impact.

"Free-range" is little more than a marketing term. They give the chickens a few more square feet in their wire cages, maybe put the cages over a dirt floor, and leave a window open. It'd be prohibitively expensive for your supermarket to stock meaningfully "free-range" products, what with all the land, tracking, and care requirements.

Google search.
http://www.google.ca/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=%22free-range%22+myth

Really...? I mean, I knew it wasn't as rosy as people pretend - they're not frollicking about in a dappled glade or anything - but they're not even outside? The way you put it, it sounds as though they're worse off than barn hens.

 

[Count Igor]

Depends whether it was an inside bin.

 

[F-I-D-O]

*snip*

snip

I never said it was right or wrong. I tried to avoid ethical implications, instead saying that they were in fact the same. i don't have the most coherent posts, but the last few lines seemed to sum it up. They were the same problem, just with different ways of saying it. I believed humans to be natural because we are part of nature as a whole. By extension, anything humans do would be natural. It is said we (humans) are "naturally" more destructive, violent, and worse than anything else to walk on earth. But, a lion kills it's prey, slaughtering them without prior warning, destroying the prey's family, only for personnel gain. Is what the lion doing not part of what "comes naturally" to the beast?

However, I'm not saying that we should say everything we do is okay because it is natural. Don't take a bulldozer to the amazon screaming "but it's natural" as you destroy the ecosystem. Humans should take the responsibility for how we are slowly destroying the earth (through landfills, pollution etc, Global warming lacks supporting evidence from a reliable source). I was trying to use the term natural, not as a loaded term, but something occurring in the environment through processes that the animals or plants do.
Humans are omnivores. It is natural for us to eat both meat and vegetables, but we can survive on just one.
As opposed to:
Humans are omnivores. It is natural for us to eat meat and vegetables. Therefore, you are evil for not eating meat, and you are not natural. You must be punished. *lightning strikes, followed by a scream in the background*
Occurring naturally or through a natural process does not make it good or bad, but makes it a part of the environment. Keep in mind that bad things happen naturally in the environment.
Those last two lines sorta sums it up if you don't want to read the above.

 

[ThrobbingEgo]

A vegan doesnt eat eggs milk or anything that ever came from an animal. I have a vegan friend but i honestly cant see why you cant just be free range instead. That way not only do uo not fund the unethical battery farming but you get to eat the food AND fund the ethical treatment of animals. I like to think i make more of an impact.

"Free-range" is little more than a marketing term. They give the chickens a few more square feet in their wire cages, maybe put the cages over a dirt floor, and leave a window open. It'd be prohibitively expensive for your supermarket to stock meaningfully "free-range" products, what with all the land, tracking, and care requirements.

Google search.
http://www.google.ca/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=%22free-range%22+myth

Really...? I mean, I knew it wasn't as rosy as people pretend - they're not frollicking about in a dappled glade or anything - but they're not even outside? The way you put it, it sounds as though they're worse off than barn hens.

There's a lot of work that goes into making the public perception look as rosy as it is. The factory farms have deep pockets and huge political lobbies. I don't know what it's like wherever you are, but in Ontario there are plenty of commercials on TV on behalf of dairy farmers, skateboarding around like arseholes, showing them on traditional farms, with, like, a single cow each.

That's not a realistic portrayal. Supply would never meet demand that way.

 

[ThrobbingEgo]

*snip*

snip

I never said it was right or wrong. I tried to avoid ethical implications, instead saying that they were in fact the same. i don't have the most coherent posts, but the last few lines seemed to sum it up. They were the same problem, just with different ways of saying it. I believed humans to be natural because we are part of nature as a whole. By extension, anything humans do would be natural. It is said we (humans) are "naturally" more destructive, violent, and worse than anything else to walk on earth. But, a lion kills it's prey, slaughtering them without prior warning, destroying the prey's family, only for personnel gain. Is what the lion doing not part of what "comes naturally" to the beast?

This is all irrelevant. We are not lions. For us, eating meat is not necessary. We have no survival claim to keeping millions of animals in captivity, for their entire short lives.

I am not going to argue against more fallacious logic with you today.

 

[DeathWyrmNexus]

I am glad you can play the "I was you" card. I'm sure it serves you well.

Here is a checklist of problems.
1. Isn't a false dilemma. Meat lasts longer in the freezer and has a more economical cost in regards to gas, travel, and time.

2. You have yet to address the problem in your smoking analogy. Shoes and Addiction are apples and oranges.

3. You haven't actually given me a reason to consider the suffering of chicken. Saying circular logic is nice and all but you haven't given me a convincing argument otherwise. If they suffer and I don't have a reason to care, where is your convincing argument to the contrary.

4. Stating I can get fats from another source is cute. It is an empty statement and gives no reason to change. I could shave my entire body and paint it blue but I don't see a reason to do that either. By the way, I believe you would call that metaphor a strawman, still doesn't change the fact that you give no convincing argument.

5. I don't eat meat because hippies wear leather. I eat meat because I choose to and its pros outweigh the cons for me.

6. I have read philosophy and while I find plenty inspiring about it, none of it really convinced me that I needed a dietary change. I found Fast Food Nation interesting and it even did a good job of presenting the human side of the problems inherent in the system.

7. This is why I bring up the suffering ignored. It is a bigger problem and only ignored out of convenience. Just as I find people who read fashion magazines shallow, I find people who want to fight over whether I have chicken instead of a salad at lunch due to suffering equally shallow. You want a fight you think you can win and dig up all sorts of joyous reasons to as long as it doesn't inconvenience you overmuch. How quaint. While I am sure you will be more than happy to put this back on some nagging guilt in the back of my mind, it still remains that you choose a relatively shallow fight in the name of suffering when more animals suffer for your normal conveniences. It is like freaking out over a scabbed knee instead of the jutting bone in somebody's leg.

I am not saying to stop your crusade or pet internet fight or whatever you call it, I am simply saying that perhaps, just perhaps, your moral high ground and command of debate fallacies isn't as profound as you may think. Then again, once you said philosophy classes, I kinda predicted the rest of your post.

 

[Camembert]

There's a lot of work that goes into making the public perception look as rosy as it is. The factory farms have deep pockets and huge political lobbies. I don't know what it's like over there, but there are plenty of commercials on TV on behalf of dairy farmers, skateboarding around like arseholes, showing them on traditional farms, with, like, a single cow each.

That's not a realistic portrayal. Supply would never meet demand that way.

Yes, I was aware it wasn't quite as rosy, but... damn it, I don't want to be a vegan : | I love eggs and yoghurt too much. I have all but given up cheese lately though, which is a big thing for me.

Anyway, I checked a site and it's unpleasant in ways I hadn't even thought of.

It's kind of sad that if you show any evidence of empathy for animals it makes everyone immediately think you must be a raving hippy, eh?

 

[s0denone]

Have you ever tried to do something with good intention, but other people found it to be quite frowned upon or wrong?

Rape.

Hahahahahaha, that is just super fucking wrong, man

OT:
What do you mean by "Frowned upon"? That means it is generally not accepted. No, I don't care what wierd definition you are using, that's what it means. People here are just listing random stuff where people seem ungrateful to- or unwilling to accept- their help. It's not really the same thing.

I've been pissed and then keyed the car of a teacher who made my life hell in high school. That's frowned upon.
I've intentionally thrown up on another guy while drunk.
That's (probably) frowned upon.
I've committed vandalism.
Frowned upon.
I've broken into my former high school while drunk.
Frowned upon.

There is quite a list, and I'm not listing the worst stuff here

 

[DeathWyrmNexus]

Have you ever tried to do something with good intention, but other people found it to be quite frowned upon or wrong?

Rape.

Hahahahahaha, that is just super fucking wrong, man

OT:
What do you mean by "Frowned upon"? That means it is generally not accepted. No, I don't care what wierd definition you are using, that's what it means. People here are just listing random stuff where people seem ungrateful to- or unwilling to accept- their help. It's not really the same thing.

I've been pissed and then keyed the car of a teacher who made my life hell in high school. That's frowned upon.
I've intentionally thrown up on another guy while drunk.
That's (probably) frowned upon.
I've committed vandalism.
Frowned upon.
I've broken into my former high school while drunk.
Frowned upon.

There is quite a list, and I'm not listing the worst stuff here

I think he meant good deeds gone wrong due to reaction to said good deed.

 

[Camembert]

7. This is why I bring up the suffering ignored. It is a bigger problem and only ignored out of convenience. Just as I find people who read fashion magazines shallow, I find people who want to fight over whether I have chicken instead of a salad at lunch due to suffering equally shallow. You want a fight you thin you can win and dig up all sorts of joyous reasons to as long as it doesn't inconvenience you overmuch. How quaint. While I am sure you will be more than happy to put this back on some nagging guilt in the back of my mind, it still remains that you choose a relatively shallow fight in the name of suffering when more animals suffer for your normal conveniences. It is like freaking out over a scabbed knee instead of the jutting bone in somebody's leg.

It confuses me that you think of a vegan diet as 'convenient'.

 

[DeathWyrmNexus]

7. This is why I bring up the suffering ignored. It is a bigger problem and only ignored out of convenience. Just as I find people who read fashion magazines shallow, I find people who want to fight over whether I have chicken instead of a salad at lunch due to suffering equally shallow. You want a fight you thin you can win and dig up all sorts of joyous reasons to as long as it doesn't inconvenience you overmuch. How quaint. While I am sure you will be more than happy to put this back on some nagging guilt in the back of my mind, it still remains that you choose a relatively shallow fight in the name of suffering when more animals suffer for your normal conveniences. It is like freaking out over a scabbed knee instead of the jutting bone in somebody's leg.

It confuses me that you think of a vegan diet as 'convenient'.

It confuses me that you are confused considering that Throbbing Ego has gone on about easy to replace fats and nonessential meat eating. If meat eating is a convenience, then how is a vegan diet inconvenient. Surely, if meat and the suffering thereof is entirely unnecessary then a vegan should have plenty of options for alternative nutrition and better diet, etc etc.

What exactly is confusing, eh?

 

[Camembert]

It confuses me that you are confused considering that Throbbing Ego has gone on about easy to replace fats and nonessential meat eating. If meat eating is a convenience, then how is a vegan diet inconvenient. Surely, if meat and the suffering thereof is entirely unnecessary then a vegan should have plenty of options for alternative nutrition and better diet, etc etc.

What exactly is confusing, eh?

There's nothing convenient about it. He only says that it's far within the realm of possibility.

Edit: You obviously haven't thought about it much. It means giving up cake; it means giving up yoghurt; it means giving up pizza; it means giving up honey; it means giving up butter; it means giving up anything and everything that contains one of those things that appears in most food dishes - milk, eggs and meat; it means checking the label of everything you eat; and it means a right fucking hassle every time you want to go out to eat.

 

[s0denone]

Hahahahahaha, that is just super fucking wrong, man

OT:
What do you mean by "Frowned upon"? That means it is generally not accepted. No, I don't care what wierd definition you are using, that's what it means. People here are just listing random stuff where people seem ungrateful to- or unwilling to accept- their help. It's not really the same thing.

I've been pissed and then keyed the car of a teacher who made my life hell in high school. That's frowned upon.
I've intentionally thrown up on another guy while drunk.
That's (probably) frowned upon.
I've committed vandalism.
Frowned upon.
I've broken into my former high school while drunk.
Frowned upon.

There is quite a list, and I'm not listing the worst stuff here

I think he meant good deeds gone wrong due to reaction to said good deed.

While I can accept your reasoning here, it still does not make sense at all. People, topic-starter included, shouldn't use words or phrases that they do not know what mean. "Frowned upon" is not something *one* person decides, as I am very sure you know - it's something that goes against the general perception of what is- and is not acceptable behaviour.

"Have you every done something in good faith, only to find that people turn out mad/ungrateful because it doesn't float their particular boat" would be a more proper wording in the topic, methinks.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

A vegan doesnt eat eggs milk or anything that ever came from an animal. I have a vegan friend but i honestly cant see why you cant just be free range instead. That way not only do uo not fund the unethical battery farming but you get to eat the food AND fund the ethical treatment of animals. I like to think i make more of an impact.

"Free-range" is little more than a marketing term. They give the chickens a few more square feet in their wire cages, maybe put the cages over a dirt floor, and leave a unaccessible window open. It'd be prohibitively expensive for your supermarket to stock meaningfully "free-range" products, what with all the land, tracking, and care requirements.

Google search.
http://www.google.ca/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=%22free-range%22+myth

I see cows, sheep, chickens and pigs in fields everyday as i go to and from school and a friends house. Explain. Please, i see them in very large fields and i do not understand why they are there. Keeping them there for no reason would be EVEN more expensive than keeping them there honestly.

 

[DeathWyrmNexus]

... Sorry for the double post but I am finding our vegan/meat debate to be a tad rude and offputting to the actual topic of the thread. If you want to continue this, make a thread and send me a message to join the fight there. I apologize to the OP for my part in continuing this tangent as I was actually enjoying the shared suffering of my fellows in their punished good deeds. Only reason I haven't given statement of my own misfortune is because I completely lack a proper recollection of a similar event though I know I have to had at least one relevant experience.