Veganism...why?

[BiscuitTrouser]

50% of the chicks that emerge as males and get casually tossed into a grinder? That is an unavoidable consequence of mass breeding chickens. Not all of them turn out female.

Why cant we eat roosters? That may seem stupid but ive never understood this practice. Youve invested money in getting an egg to hatch into a rooser. Why not just free range farm them for consumption? Isnt it a huge waste not to?

You can eat rooster. I don't understand why we don't if they don't lay eggs and they don't really have any other uses, but they are common to eat at christmas. At least in England. But it's called Capon, but only for some reason I don't want to go into, but will.

Spoiler

It's castrated :/

Someone explained earlier that roosters with balls are fucking angry creatures. This is why cock fighting is a sport. Put even TWO roosters in the same area of grassland thats small enough and they will rip eachother apart. Also they have a faster metabolism with balls. To get musclier. For killing eachother. The hens tend to be fatter for eggs because they dont naturally claw eachother for victory. Ill edit my post to include this.

 

[Lyri]

Snip

This is a wonderful post and very insightful into a lifestyle that's been puzzling me quite frankly, I respectfully disagree with your opinions and I'm still perplexed and curious.
Forgive me if it's been asked before in this very thread but there are a lot of pages and I cam across your post via browsing, however I'd like to ask.
When you say that everything has as much right to live as you do, so you don't wish to cause something harm surely that would allow you to preserve too?
You cannot cause something harm but if something was to cause you harm like bacteria, do you have a moral dilemma on your hands?

I don't want it to sound as flippant as it does, I admit it reads like that. I've been experimenting with Vegetarian cooking and taking meat out of my meals completely, more of a personal love of food and desire to experiment and expand on horizons rather than moral code.
The whole vegan lifestyle is just something that I can't seem to wrap my head around.
I'll stop here for now, who knows I probably came in on a completely different conversation point.

 

[Yeager942]

What I never understood about vegatarians/vegans is that if life is so precious, how come its ok to eat plants. They are just as alive as animals.

 

[CarlMin]

What I never understood about vegatarians/vegans is that if life is so precious, how come its ok to eat plants. They are just as alive as animals.

Are you serious or just trolling?

Vegans are upset because they recognize that the creatures being slaughterer have emotions, a central nervous system and the capacity to feel physical and emotional pain, things that plants do not. With other words, vegans and vegetarians care about animals of the same reason you (hopefully) care about human beings.

 

[CrystalShadow]

Snip

This is a wonderful post and very insightful into a lifestyle that's been puzzling me quite frankly, I respectfully disagree with your opinions and I'm still perplexed and curious.
Forgive me if it's been asked before in this very thread but there are a lot of pages and I cam across your post via browsing, however I'd like to ask.
When you say that everything has as much right to live as you do, so you don't wish to cause something harm surely that would allow you to preserve too?
You cannot cause something harm but if something was to cause you harm like bacteria, do you have a moral dilemma on your hands?

I don't want it to sound as flippant as it does, I admit it reads like that. I've been experimenting with Vegetarian cooking and taking meat out of my meals completely, more of a personal love of food and desire to experiment and expand on horizons rather than moral code.
The whole vegan lifestyle is just something that I can't seem to wrap my head around.
I'll stop here for now, who knows I probably came in on a completely different conversation point.

Well, I'm not a vegetarian, so to me this discussion is mostly a philosophical question to me.

I think about it from time to time, but I don't exactly devote my life to it.

As to causing harm or not, the issue is that I have no choice but to cause harm of some kind or another to stay alive.

The dilemma being that I don't want to sacrifice myself for the sake of something else, but I also know I am in no way privileged over anything else that exists.
Thus, the dilemma. Killing bacteria for instance, yes, most of them are probably trying to harm me, but that in itself doesn't mean I should therefore do the same to them.

That's what makes it so difficult to think about. Yes, if I don't kill them, they will kill me. But since my life is of no greater (or lesser) value than theirs, it becomes difficult to justify killing them for my own sake, except to acknowledge that I am selfish enough to put my own survival ahead of that of others.

You can see the principle at stake here quite clearly if you replace bacteria with people.

Would it be right for me to kill another human being for the sake of my own survival? How about 100? Or 1000?

Pure self-interest would say so, but acknowledging that my own life is no more valuable than anyone else's would start to lead to the question of why I would have the right to do that.

Essentially I am asking the same question without the implicit judgement that human life > animal life > plant life > bacteria > inanimate matter,
Which seems to be a common conceit in a lot of discussions like this.

 

[Lyri]

snip

So if you're not a vegetarian are you a Vegan instead? I just a little confused by your opening statement, sorry.

I can't really seem to wrap my head around the dilemma though, whilst I understand that yes they both have the same right to exist as you do, yet you ask yourself what gives you the right to end their existence but what gives them the right to end yours?
Do you not have the right to that preservation?

This is probably just some kind of mental block from me, I've never really thought about it in any other way so the concept is rather alien to me.

Capture: Cut the mustard. That made me laugh.

 

[ThreeWords]

Why is there any moral viewpoint?
It's really something that varies person to person.

I have a suspicious feeling that the rest of the thread is going to be unnecessary.

[sup]/thread[/sup]

 

[Stu35]

A vegetarian/vegan diet has been proven to be healthier, probably because if a person puts in so much effort to go vegan, they also put in effort into eating healthier and exercising.

Then that does not prove that Vegetarian and Vegan diets are healthier. It proves that people who put effort into their diet and exercise are healthier.

To put this into context, I know of one Ice Hockey player (Stephen Murphy, goalie for the Belfast Giants) who is Vegan - a fine athlete (Best goaltender in Britain).

However, aside from him, and possibly a smattering of others - how many professional athletes are Vegans or Vegetarians? I would argue probably a similar amount (proportionally) to the rest of society.

To that end, no, a Vegan or Vegetarian diet is not more healthy - I will concede that a Vegan or Vegetarian is more LIKELY to be healthy, given that their diet is something they actively focus on, whilst we have a growing obesity problem in the west due to so many people who fail to focus on their diets.

Everyone could do with watching their diet and doing exercise, there's nothing inherently more healthy about being a veggie.

snip

Killing bacteria for instance, yes, most of them are probably trying to harm me, but that in itself doesn't mean I should therefore do the same to them.

Whilst I would agree that, morally, you have no more right to exist than bacteria(bad example given that none of it is trying to kill you, it doesn't think in such terms). I would argue this is precisely WHY you should do the same to anything trying to kill you - Because morally, it makes no bloody difference which creatures live or die.

Morals are a human thing. They are completely in our minds. To that end I'd say don't lose any sleep over the idea of putting your survival above that of other creatures.

You can see the principle at stake here quite clearly if you replace bacteria with people.

Would it be right for me to kill another human being for the sake of my own survival? How about 100? Or 1000?

Yep. 100%, absolutely it would.

Your only job on this planet is to survive and procreate. That is the only purpose of existence - to continue to exist.

Humans, with our superior intelligence compared to other animals, have started inventing all kinds of crazy ideas about why we should exist, concepts completely alien to every single other living organism in the world.

Even if you take into account our moral code - which in itself does stem from a base desire to see the species continue:

Morally, murder is bad, this probably originates from the idea that people who go round killing other people are bad for the species.

Self defence however is GOOD for the species, because you're eliminating a direct threat to the species.

Essentially I am asking the same question without the implicit judgement that human life > animal life > plant life > bacteria > inanimate matter,
Which seems to be a common conceit in a lot of discussions like this.

Find me an animal, plant, bacterium or piece of inanimate matter which can understand the concept of conceit, and I'll shoot it in the face and eat it, because I fucking can.

 

[CrystalShadow]

snip

So if you're not a vegetarian are you a Vegan instead? I just a little confused by your opening statement, sorry.

I can't really seem to wrap my head around the dilemma though, whilst I understand that yes they both have the same right to exist as you do, yet you ask yourself what gives you the right to end their existence but what gives them the right to end yours?
Do you not have the right to that preservation?

This is probably just some kind of mental block from me, I've never really thought about it in any other way so the concept is rather alien to me.

Capture: Cut the mustard. That made me laugh.

Yes, I figured that would get a bit confusing. (only after the fact though). I'm neither vegetarian nor vegan.

In fact, the overall conclusion I've reached about these things is that whatever arguments there are in favour of being vegetarian or vegan, the use of animal welfare arguments don't sit well with me.
But in any event, that doesn't mean vegans and vegetarians might not have valid reasons. It's just that one specific thing has not managed to feel very convincing to me.

snip

Killing bacteria for instance, yes, most of them are probably trying to harm me, but that in itself doesn't mean I should therefore do the same to them.

Whilst I would agree that, morally, you have no more right to exist than bacteria(bad example given that none of it is trying to kill you, it doesn't think in such terms). I would argue this is precisely WHY you should do the same to anything trying to kill you - Because morally, it makes no bloody difference which creatures live or die.

Morals are a human thing. They are completely in our minds. To that end I'd say don't lose any sleep over the idea of putting your survival above that of other creatures.

Yes, it's probably true they aren't actively trying to kill me. (I don't actively try and kill my food either. Especially vegetables, which are technically still alive when I eat them a lot of the time.)

Anyway, since you can state this either way, and point out that my continued existence is as valid as anything else's too, then ultimately, yes, I can make that choice. Since I can control my own actions, but not those of others, there's little point in voluntarily sacrificing myself for something else, when what I would be doing that for wouldn't even consider doing the same for me.

That doesn't mean I have more of a right to exist, but then again it also doesn't mean I have less of a right to exist. So, yes, in the end it is morally neutral.

You can see the principle at stake here quite clearly if you replace bacteria with people.

Would it be right for me to kill another human being for the sake of my own survival? How about 100? Or 1000?

Yep. 100%, absolutely it would.

Your only job on this planet is to survive and procreate. That is the only purpose of existence - to continue to exist.

Humans, with our superior intelligence compared to other animals, have started inventing all kinds of crazy ideas about why we should exist, concepts completely alien to every single other living organism in the world.

Even if you take into account our moral code - which in itself does stem from a base desire to see the species continue:

Morally, murder is bad, this probably originates from the idea that people who go round killing other people are bad for the species.

Self defence however is GOOD for the species, because you're eliminating a direct threat to the species.

Yes, I can see your point here. And a lot of it is in the presentation. Nobody holds it against a lion that it kills gazelles.

But obviously, if you are a gazelle, you wouldn't like the thought much.

(Man-eating monsters are a common theme in certain kinds of fiction somehow. If they're stupid, nobody considers their morality. If they're intelligent, it's often portrayed as some kind of evil. Kind of an odd double standard when you think about it, but whatever.)

Essentially I am asking the same question without the implicit judgement that human life > animal life > plant life > bacteria > inanimate matter,
Which seems to be a common conceit in a lot of discussions like this.

Find me an animal, plant, bacterium or piece of inanimate matter which can understand the concept of conceit, and I'll shoot it in the face and eat it, because I fucking can.

[/quote]

I think my overall point was meant to illustrate that going on about how cruel it is to eat animals while ignoring plants is kind of weird.

Because while I sort of have the choice to eat either, claiming one is better than the other on moral grounds requires claiming that an animal's existence is more valuable than a plant's.

Comparing the value of my own existence against that of something else is one thing, but comparing the value of the existence of two other things, neither of which is myself, or even all that close to me, makes this all seem kind of arbitrary.

Basically, why would eating an animal be wrong, but eating a plant be perfectly fine?

 

[BlueberryMUNCH]

Seems that there's a lot of misinformation, or a lack of it, going around.

I'm vegan, and I'm not gonna go on a huge rant or have any arguments with anyone.
Do the research before slating someone's lifestyle.

I'm vegan for moral reasons, health reasons, and general 'ew' reasons (I'm sorry but the idea of eating eggs makes me feel ill, and the same goes for drinking milk)

Can I recommend you watch 'Forks Over Knives'. Very, very informative documentary which helped encourage me to make the switch from vegetarian to vegan.

So yeah. Have a go at me and call me an idiot and whatnot, but I'm sure if you do the research you'd be able to understand.

 

[velcrokidneyz]

My girlfriend has PKU which doesn't allow her body to deal with proteins so she has to pretty much cut them all out. So she has a vegan diet, not out of choice, she drools over bacon

 

[Lyri]

Yes, I figured that would get a bit confusing. (only after the fact though). I'm neither vegetarian nor vegan.

In fact, the overall conclusion I've reached about these things is that whatever arguments there are in favour of being vegetarian or vegan, the use of animal welfare arguments don't sit well with me.
But in any event, that doesn't mean vegans and vegetarians might not have valid reasons. It's just that one specific thing has not managed to feel very convincing to me.

In what way do they not sit well with you?
As a happy omnivore I'm not sure how I stand on how we treat our food before it's put out into the market, whilst I don't think it's ok to prod and kick animals and mistreat them, I have no objection to battery farming.
I think we could regulate how our battery farms are ran to improve what standards of health we can for our livestock but I don't over look the necessity of it when land is at a premium.

Are we on the same wavelength or did I misunderstand?

 

[Lamnidae]

Because a plant can't look you in the eyes and tell you just how miserable it feels doesn't say they are less equal to any other living organism...

If you have solid evidence that plants have brains and are thus capable of feeling miserable you should probably be collecting your Nobel prize rather than posting about it on random internet forums.

Hah, brains are not required for feeling...
You say plants don't fight wars for the best spot in the habitat they wish for?
And Yellyfish are brainless... Yet the boxyellyfish has been known to be an active hunter...
Brains are overrated... How little do we humans use of our brains to get the technology of our modern world?

 

[Calibanbutcher]

Seems that there's a lot of misinformation, or a lack of it, going around.

I'm vegan, and I'm not gonna go on a huge rant or have any arguments with anyone.
Do the research before slating someone's lifestyle.

I'm vegan for moral reasons, health reasons, and general 'ew' reasons (I'm sorry but the idea of eating eggs makes me feel ill, and the same goes for drinking milk)

Can I recommend you watch 'Forks Over Knives'. Very, very informative documentary which helped encourage me to make the switch from vegetarian to vegan.

So yeah. Have a go at me and call me an idiot and whatnot, but I'm sure if you do the research you'd be able to understand.

I am not supporting this.
Simply eating more plant-based food is not the answer, generally speaking.
Most of these patients are sick NOT because of a high meat intake (although that DOES help. A LOT) but because they decided to also indulge in a ton of plant-based foods.
Treats, such as:
Corn Syrup. Made from Corn, duh.
Chips and crisps, and french fries. Made from potatoes, fried in plant-oils.
White Bread. Made from plants as well. Also water. And bacteria. But you get my drift.

Going vegan does not automatically mean that you will become healthier or fitter.
In fact, if you go vegan and do not take care, you might just end up harming yourself ( and I mentionned this before) via Vitamin B12 deficiency, and there are other nutrients you have to make sure to get enough of, which isn't always easy as a vegan.

However, I fully agree with the notion, that in order to become healthier, one needs to take more care with food. We need to think before stuffing ourselves, because if we do not, we might just kill ourselves.

 

[userwhoquitthesite]

Because idiots exist, and because people need to feel superior in some way.
There are NO health benefits to being vegan or vegetarian. You have to eat just as carefully to remain fit and healthy on plants as you do eating meat. And since most vegans I know claim that vegan is not only not eating, but not USING animal products at all, I'm gonna go ahead and call idiocy again. It is impossible in this world to do anything without involving animals in some way. makeup? soap? Oh wait, hippies don't use those anyway, what am I saying?

Unless you are actually allergic to meat, there is no reason to ever be vegan or vegetarian. All it accomplishes is making you poorer and miserable company.

 

[flarty]

I find it ironic.

One of the reasons we have have the ability to make such a choice is because our brains developed to the level needed by consuming large quantities of iron. Which we get/got from red meat...

i guess they must get their iron from spinach and kale or other leafy greens.

But my brother turned vegan for a short while. Firstly he turned veggy for the health benefits, then progressed to become vegan after seeing how unsustainable intensive farming is (especially the beef industry in the us, remind me never to eat the meat when i visit). But with it being so expensive to be vegan and having a child on the way he had to revert back to being a veggy.

Because idiots exist, and because people need to feel superior in some way.
There are NO health benefits to being vegan or vegetarian. You have to eat just as carefully to remain fit and healthy on plants as you do eating meat. And since most vegans I know claim that vegan is not only not eating, but not USING animal products at all, I'm gonna go ahead and call idiocy again. It is impossible in this world to do anything without involving animals in some way. makeup? soap? Oh wait, hippies don't use those anyway, what am I saying?

Unless you are actually allergic to meat, there is no reason to ever be vegan or vegetarian. All it accomplishes is making you poorer and miserable company.

And smoking doesn't cause cancer.

 

[Conn1496]

Why is veganism a thing?

I understand that there are moral and nutritional reasons behind vegetarianism, but veganism just seems...unnescary? Is that the word? (EDIT: as so many of you kindly pointed out, unnecessary was the word ) I think we're animals and we have a place on the food chain that must be adhered to, it's our duty as humans to keep the lower species in check. There's no need to divorce ourselves from animals completely when it comes to food. Veganism just seems like vegetarianism taken to an almost sillly extreme to me.

Anyway, if someone could explain this to me it would be much appreciated.

It's simple really...
Veganism: Because people want to.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

Because idiots exist, and because people need to feel superior in some way.
There are NO health benefits to being vegan or vegetarian. You have to eat just as carefully to remain fit and healthy on plants as you do eating meat. And since most vegans I know claim that vegan is not only not eating, but not USING animal products at all, I'm gonna go ahead and call idiocy again. It is impossible in this world to do anything without involving animals in some way. makeup? soap? Oh wait, hippies don't use those anyway, what am I saying?

Unless you are actually allergic to meat, there is no reason to ever be vegan or vegetarian. All it accomplishes is making you poorer and miserable company.

The arguement is usually a moral one. I agree there are no health benefits. Id argue though that after i did my biology work on trophic levels i considered being vegetarian. Never got veganism though. Seems weird.

Lets look at food production through two routes:

Sun > Plant > Cow > Human

Sun > Plant > Human

Now you have to accept there is wastage in every arrow, energy is lost to the system. Cows actually only use 1% of their (digested) food for actual biomass. The plants use the sunlight (assumption here) 100% efficiently due to it being a basically infinite resource. However when humans eat the cow we have YET another loss. Not sure how high this is. But it means we have less than 1% efficiency of energy transfer. If we remove the incredibly inefficient cow link we have a far better system for producing and using food. Far less energy is wasted and more land is available for the production of food. Basically in terms of pure logic eating meat is insanely wastefull in terms of energy use. But that isnt really the main point.

Id love to point out here i DO EAT MEAT. These are just thoughts ive had on vegetarianism.

The main point is the morality of it. Lemme pose a question for you here. Lets say i hand you a knife. And a cow. You can stab the cow and kill it painlessly (it wont feel anything) and the reward is 5 mins of a nice taste in your mouth. It seems immoral to take a life of an animal not because you NEED the food, you could very easily manage without it, but because it tastes nice. Not even the best. Just good. Out of laziness to find another diet you would murder a living thing to save you the effort of changing it or giving up a certain taste.

How much killing is a single taste worth? Or a smell? Ive debated if its worth it or not or if its moral but obviously vegetarians dont think it is. The addition of middle men to kill the cow for you doesnt change the morality of it at all. Ive wondered if it makes me a hypocrit to eat an animal that i personally probably couldnt look in the eyes and kill. I would for survival no doubt. But just for the taste? When there was something else RIGHT next to it to eat? It seems like a needlessly cruel option.

Thats my 2 cents.

 

[royohz]

I think we're animals and we have a place on the food chain that must be adhered to, it's our duty as humans to keep the lower species in check.

What? "Lower species"? Are you kidding me? Every animal and plant on the planet is exactly as evolved as homo sapiens. I think we are all of equal value. Now I won't bring this to an extreme level, but I certainly hope you understand what I'm trying to say.

To me, veganism isn't completely insane. I understand the reasons. It's a really big restrictive diet to minimalize the suffering of other animals, hinder (probably not the right word) global warming due to greenhouse gasses, and potentially indirectly help ceasing world hunger. I know that it might not sound like that could help, but it works in theory. Now, you can probably figure I also agree with vegans that everybody should be vegan for the sake of all of us, but as of now, people are far too greedy and selfish to give up "guilty pleasures" for the sake of others, and I understand that it's not that easy.

However, I don't see anything wrong with eating insects simply because it is impossible to avoid. We all eat insects and insect parts every day through plants and processed food. The act of eating insects is called entomophagy and it is only in the western world that we distinguish between eating insects and other foods, because 80% of the world already eat it as a stable source of protein. So why can't we? Why are we so much "better" than the rest of the world? In a way, we aren't... And we aren't.

Captcha: meat with gravy
...The magnitude of irony is immense.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

The thing is it's not a linear process.

On paper this would probably get you a tick in biology class, but it's not really how it works.

For a start, animals also provide a lot of energy to plants via reabsorption of nutrients through fertilisers such as bonemeal and faeces. So cutting animals out of the equation would seriously effect the quality of crops that would be readily available. Ecosystems are very complicated things and do not work in linear equations.

But more than that, meat is much higher in calorific content than equivalent biomass of plant or crop. It's also higher in essential proteins, fatty acids, oils and heme-iron.

What you're looking at is solar energy loss, via digestion. What you're not taking into account is the other forms of energy that aren't passed down in this solar table and as a result aren't lost by this inefficiency. There's also the fact that animals also gain energy from the sun too. Not in the same quantity that plants do with photosynthesis. But certainly with vitamin D.

There's also the effect of agriculture on land to take into consideration. High crop yield effectively drains the soils of nutrients even with animal and synthetic fertilisers, so crops have to be constantly cycled so as not to irreparably(as far as we're concerned) damage the earth. This means that plots of land that could yield (for the sake of simplicity) 3 crops usually only yield 2 or sometimes 1.

Then you've got to take into account the seasonal nature of this type of farming. Crops can only be grown as certain times so you often have to grow 4-5 times that amount of what is currently required and store it, then large plot of land go unused for half of the year.

Crops aren't as efficient as they seem. They're certainly a necessity, but it is a much more wasteful process than naturally reared livestock.

I understand the need for crop rotation. But the issues youve raised are only problems in a VEGAN system, not the vegetarian one i was making a point for. Diary cows can be cycled onto old plant fields and all soil can be regenerated without the need to farm meat. Animals are a neccessary part of the farming process. The killing of them is not. All use of animals in farming for soil regeneration or rotation can be achieved with diary cows and poultry assuming they are free range.