Veganism...why?

[The_Lost_King]

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

...

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

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

 

[Eamar]

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

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

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

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

Does that make any sense at all? :S

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

 

[Daystar Clarion]

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

Carnist?

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

Because that's silly.

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

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


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

 

[CrystalShadow]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

snip

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

Also, this is funny:

 

[Jammy2003]

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Daystar Clarion]

snip

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

Also, this is funny:

Indeed

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

Awesome sword is awesome

Also, picture is hilarious.

 

[Vegan_Doodler]

snip

snip

snip

Ok admittedly the initial post I do think could have been handled with a bit more decorum, but it's not like this reaction should come as a shock just look at the majority of the previous posts describing vegans as hypocritical and snobby, not to talk for everyone but this is pretty much what its like in the real world as well and it can get very frustrating very fast to continually hear the your believes belittled and scoffed at.

 

[Stu35]

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

Well thats... Crazy.


We're top of the food chain because we're the smartest animals out there. If Cheetahs were smart enough to corral and breed Springboks instead of having to risk life and limb trying to stalk, chase, and eviscerate them, they would be right up there with us... So no, on an intellectual level, Monkeys would never be top of the food chain, even if we all immediately became vegan.

As it is, we're the only animals that have successfully beaten the natural order of things. I don't necessarily feel any guilt about that, but I do worry that our current habits are so unsustainable we're ultimately going to end up destroying ourselves - which is, ironically, the natural order of things - a Predator thrives when there is a large stock of it's prey, as the Predator thrives, the Prey dwindles, which causes the Predator to starve, and then they dwindle, allowing the Prey to thrive...

The difference, of course, is that when we inevitably begin to dwindle (having fucked up our environment), we're taking our prey down with us.


Anyway, that as an aside, you argue that Vegitarians and Vegans aren't achieving anything, because the rest of us still eat meat... I would argue that such changes as they're trying to make don't happen all at once. It takes time - there are more Vegans now than there were in the 1900s, by the 2100s there'll be more still, and so on, and so on. I don't know if everyone will eventually go that way, but I do believe there will come a point where enough of them do it to make... Whatever difference it is, they want to make.

Thankfully I won't be around to see those days, but I do worry that my children or grand children may decide to go Veggie or Vegan, and given that I take pride in belonging to the one species that has conquered all others (pride being an emotion I can feel and understand, unlike most of the other species out there), I wouldn't approve of that.

Of course, I consider how my Grandparents feel about Gay people and Gay Marriage (They're against it), and I wonder if my stance on Vegans isn't exactly the same as their stance on gays (after all, I don't condone veganism because 'it isn't natural', a similar argument used against Gays by such people).

...

Hmmmmm...

Well, once again I think I've managed to identify a prejudice I have, appreciate that it's wrong of me for having it, and still have no intention of changing my opinion. Vegans are wrong. However, they're not hurting me with their choices, and generally I'd say they don't bother me or try to ram their opinions down my throat (the exception being the PETA retards who hang round outside my local KFC). So, let 'em have their crazy opinions about food, and let them fail to appreciate the irony of arguing against modern farming practices for being so artificial, whilst they ram vitamin and mineral pills created in a laboratory down their neck.


Captcha - 'tastes good'... You said it you sentient son-of-a-bit.

 

[Jammy2003]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Oh come now, with that logic there is no point in doing anything at all. That's a ridiculous extrapolation and can be done in reverse, to suggest that if living causes suffering then why be compassionate to anything? Why have a dog, cat or family? Why not eat them?

 

[Denamic]

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

To start with, stopping would essentially be genocide, but let's ignore that for now.
Domesticated animals are highly successful creatures, from an evolutionary standpoint.
In a sense, they're parasitic, having humanity secure their survival for them.
They're also leading far better lives than wild animals. Objectively better.
They live longer, never have to starve, don't have to fear predators, get medical care, and die far more painlessly than they would in the wild.
I won't pretend it's all roses and rainbows. I mean, we do murder them for food.
Considering what nature has in store for them, they're still better off as our 'prey'.
In the wild, they're driven by hunger and fear.
In the wild, they die from predators that starts eating them before they die, diseases that make them starve to death because they grow too weak to find enough food, an easily treatable infection is a death sentence, etc.
Nature is far more cruel than humans ever were.

 

[Vegan_Doodler]

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

I was thinking of this earlier, I don't see why scientists don't put more effort into this, the mp3 is small enough guys lets start on the important stuff.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

Indeed

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

Awesome sword is awesome

Yeah the sword was great, especially when it was something so innocuous at the start before anyone realised what it was. Rhapsody was cool, as were the two guys who travelled with her, Achmed and Whatshisface. But Ash, I never warmed to him. I thought he was a ponce when we first met him and nothing changed my mind about him. I wonder if there are any more books out in that series, been a long, long time since I looked. It wasn't my favourite series by any stretch but wasn't bad by any stretch. Interesting characters and setting with the whole musical thing going on.

 

[Jammy2003]

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

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

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

The person didn't direct it at anyone in particular, both views of where it is directed are equally valid.

You raise a valid point, the whole post was fairly snobby, not just that one point.

And yes, and I do know that. Most vegans are just as ignorant as the people they whine about.[/quote]

Actually... Sorry mate but I know this person, and the amount of effort they go to educate themselves means they have cut out animal products, things tested on animals, clothing and.... pretty much anything it is possible to?
Also, I did the civil thing, and ASKED where it was directed. It was directed at the first half of the thread. So.... Mine is valid (Or at least correct) and yours isn't.

"Most vegans are ignorant" is not the same as all are, so it's quite the assumption you are throwing around there. Do you know most vegans? Or is this just vegans you happen to have met? Anecdotal evidence?

 

[Eamar]

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

I was thinking of this earlier, I don't see why scientists don't put more effort into this, the mp3 is small enough guys lets start on the important stuff.

Actually, they are working on it. This news report is from February of this year: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16972761 . The problem is that the process is massively expensive at the moment.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Indeed

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

Awesome sword is awesome

Yeah the sword was great, especially when it was something so innocuous at the start before anyone realised what it was. Rhapsody was cool, as were the two guys who travelled with her, Achmed and Whatshisface. But Ash, I never warmed to him. I thought he was a ponce when we first met him and nothing changed my mind about him. I wonder if there are any more books out in that series, been a long, long time since I looked. It wasn't my favourite series by any stretch but wasn't bad by any stretch. Interesting characters and setting with the whole musical thing going on.

The series started off really well, but all the characters were just too perfect, especially Rhapsody, dear lord did she turn into the biggest Mary Sue in the universe.

 

[mad825]

Yes, but our stomach is much longer than a pure carnivores, so I was just putting that we are purely neither. Also, as we live in a society of convenience where everything is produced and so easy to obtain.

When did I say we were carnivores? Seeing as we don't have teeth like a tiger and fruit/vegetables were the core diet of our great ancestors we can be neither of two extremes. We do need meat but sometimes we eat too much, often the wrong type of meat.

the arguement we NEED to eat meat instead of the large quantities of veg to keep up calories is a bit of a fail.

Not really, the most common problems for a vegan is malnutrition especially in the young. The advice for vegans is to eat more rather than to eat less in order to get the recommended daily allowance of minerals and vitamins.

If were are going to use the "eat well plate" for reference

Spoiler

Then that's well of a quarter off the plate in which they need to compensate for which contains quite a bit of fat,minerals and vitamins. I suppose you don't need it but life without it isn't easy.

 

[randomrob]

Nature is far more cruel than humans ever were.

But Humans are still cruel. We may be less cruel to animals than nature is, but we are far crueller to them than we are to fellow humans.

 

[Vegan_Doodler]

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

To start with, stopping would essentially be genocide, but let's ignore that for now.
Domesticated animals are highly successful creatures, from an evolutionary standpoint.
In a sense, they're parasitic, having humanity secure their survival for them.
They're also leading far better lives than wild animals. Objectively better.
They live longer, never have to starve, don't have to fear predators, get medical care, and die far more painlessly than they would in the wild.
I won't pretend it's all roses and rainbows. I mean, we do murder them for food.
Considering what nature has in store for them, they're still better off as our 'prey'.
In the wild, they're driven by hunger and fear.
In the wild, they die from predators that starts eating them before they die, diseases that make them starve to death because they grow too weak to find enough food, an easily treatable infection is a death sentence, etc.
Nature is far more cruel than humans ever were.

I completely disagree with the last line even if it is just semantics because nature isn't a thing that's going out of its way just to trip hikers down mountains.
Genocide is an active thing, allowing something to die naturally is passive and there for no blame.
Apart from that I half agree with you and I though I was the only one that noticed that pets where esentialy highly evolved parasites, (that's right felix! get a job!) but I do have to say that my quwarle is with the fact that they are being kept in the first place, if they are supposed to be dead at this point then we should let them bow out with not stick around because their useful.

 

[Breywood]

I was thinking of this earlier, I don't see why scientists don't put more effort into this, the mp3 is small enough guys lets start on the important stuff.

Industrial pork (raised on hefty amounts of steroids and antibiotics with other chemicals, subject to immobility and lack of light):
If I don't know who raised my animal, I don't eat it.

Free range pork:
Leave plenty of room to run around, gets shelter from the elements when necessary. Augment diet if need be. Treat for disease if sick.

Vat grown meat:
Hefty amounts of expensive machinery, specialized nutrient solutions and other chemicals. Not to mention the electricity required to keep it all running.


I know it's like recycling paper, that it would be a matter of time before the process would be inexpensive, but there's still a matter of knowing where your food came from, which is a significant concern of mine.