Veganism...why?

[Jammy2003]

Q: How can you tell if someone is a vegan?
A: Don't worry, they'll tell you.

He says, coming into a thread asking vegans about their lifestyle.

Well done on trying to be funny, and just ending up provoking people. I hope you're proud.

 

[thiosk]

Is this true?:

Yeah either way I subscribe to the reason that you know, human's today are made to consume animals. So there is no reason against doing it.

Yeah, its true enough.
In america, I was taught in elementary school that the indians (natives) were a fantastic people because they used every part of every buffalo they killed. That we should all strive to live in such balance with nature.

I hold that modern industrial farming uses substantially more of the animals than the indians ever did. Bone jewelry? Thats nothin! We turn that bone back into corn, which we then feed back to the cows! (Or sometimes, feed the bones directly back to the cows)

Even the blood is spray dried and flaked, to be turned into fish food. Those flakes and pellets you sprinkle on the top of the fish tank? Yep.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

If people want to be vegan, fine. Go on with ya bad self. But when you have children, don't raise them vegan. The goal for global diets is to increase meat consumption in the third world and for poor children. Children need large doses of readily digestible protein, unless you want them to grow up sickly and short.

 

[Vivi22]

Also, I live near a medical research facility and there have been a number of human deaths there in recent years. One of the bigger cases was caused by medicine (that had actually effected monkeys but not caused any deaths) being given to human volunteers. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-380395/Elephant-Man-resist-drug-test-money.html
Yes, that's a link to the Daily Mail site but I can't seem to find anything else right now.

I appreciate that this is not all cases but still. When animal testing doesn't even have an effect on whether the drug is tested on humans, what's the point?

Yeah, that is kind of fucked, but I don't think it discredits animal testing necessarily. Now I want to add the caveat that results of animal tests obviously don't have perfect carry over to humans since there are obviously a few differences between mice and other animals and us, but they can be useful for informing future testing, especially if there are huge issues which arise in that phase.

The big problem with the testing of drugs and other medicines though is that it's big business for pharmaceutical companies, R&D is expensive, potential patents are worth billions, and they aren't above cutting corners and doctoring results to get to them. So I'd agree with you, if companies aren't going to take the animal test results seriously then it's kind of pointless, but the upside is, if the animal testing happened and potential side effects were readily available and known in the research community, they can be used to better fine, regulate, or file suit against companies that willfully ignore them. So I wouldn't say they're totally useless. I agree it's stupid, but prior animal testing can at least be used as evidence that companies may have willfully ignored the dangers.

 

[itsthesheppy]

Veganism is a thing because we're all unique snowflakes and different strokes for different folks and stop liking things I don't like.

 

[Jammy2003]

I never planned to try...

Everything effects everyone when we're talking about large scale production. Large crop yield probably effects you more than large livestock farming.

And a Vegan diet can only consists of crops, nuts/seeds and fruit. And if we're being totally honest, the way that crops are grown use animal by-products too. There is no such thing as a true vegan unless they grow all their own food and make all their own clothes out of hemp or something.

Animals are used in so many things that it's just completely infeasible.

The only problem I have with that...

But there's an obvious difference between say a crow dropping nutshells on a road for cars to crack, and someone making an irrigation system.

I'm not debating that no other animal but humans can be ingenious. But our ability to make highly complex tools and form complex languages came from a surplus amount of energy due to cooking previously hard to digest foods and high calorie food consumption.

Most of us wouldn't be able to make ropes out of plants now because it's not pertinent to our survival.

If you were to plonk a b.c. inhabitant infront of a PC and ask them to do a spreadsheet they couldn't do that. Knowledge has to be passed down, making a rope out of plants was something our species learnt through trial and tribulation, then that knowledge was passed down because it was important. When it was no longer required, it stopped being passed down. We still have the capability to learn how to do these primitive things if we are taught them.

And a lot of animals communicate, but you can't seriously be willing to compare base communication to even the first written languages?

I'm not saying ALL livestock

And I wouldn't argue with that, but we also need to cut down on shock agricultural farming and some forms of crop cross breeding. There's a lot we need to change, picking on one thing is counter-productive.

And if you eliminate that

You're thinking in linear terms. The cycle doesn't simply go Sun>plant>herbivore>carnivore. There's a lot of too and fro in-between that.

How do you think this mass of agriculture is fertilised? Animal faeces and by-products. Animals aren't just used for food. If you suddenly cut this supply of animals a lot of other human conveniences would disappear.

You're really not being practical if you think that freeing up the grain we use to feed some cattle is going solve all the problems that cutting the livestock industry out of the picture would create.

This was the one under debate...

It would cause far more problems than it would solve. You don't fix a broken wall by knocking out another brick.

I would argue it doesn't, because large animal farming requires crops to be grown, then fed in order to sustain and make the animals grow. How can that have less effect that just crop growing?

Why does everyone get so hung up on this idea of a "True Vegan", as if it's an all or nothing attitude? Isn't doing something constructive better than nothing at all? You're probably right, in today's society there is probably no way to cut out each and every product that has at some point had an animal product used in its development or making. It's about making the choice you can, when/if they are available to you. "Voting with your wallet" as is always thrown about on this site. That means money is put into alternative, and more products are made through other means and with other materials.

You say "When it was no longer required, it stopped being passed down", but so many traditions and "Habits" are passed down in our society that are no longer needed. Is there not the potential that eating meat is one of these? Or at least in the huge quantities now eaten? Our brain's have developed through eating cooked meat etc. yes. I'm not arguing that. I'm asking if there is any need to continue the practice, now there are alternatives which meet all requirements?

Well for one, I'm big on utilising human faeces in crop production. Its where the nutrients went, so shouldn't it cycle back from us? It wouldn't even be THAT hard to set up. But lets suppose it was impossible, and that the high yields are for some reason insustainable from man-made fertiliser and the organic stuff we do manage to get. The intensive cattle production takes up a huge space that could be used instead for additional crops, which may cover the reduced production rates.

Would this be enough? I don't know honestly, I haven't studied it, ran figures, and all of that. But it's kind of moot because it's never going to happen overnight is it? It would have to be a gradual transition in any case, but I think it would be a step in the right direction.

So far better to keep the status quo as it is, because there is some potential for it to get worse? Every change has the potential for it to be good or bad, but surely it's better to look at potential change and decide, rather than just going along with it because it's alright now. Always leave things better than or at least the same as you found them. You're right, the wall is pretty broken, and I'm all for knocking it down and starting again. Hence the plan to become supreme overlord.

 

[Thistlehart]

Because health, life, cruelty, death, leather... etc. ad nauseam.

And they don't understand what life is.

 

[Jessy_Fran]

Because health, life, cruelty, death, leather... etc. ad nauseam.

And they don't understand what life is.

Actually, we're fully aware of 'what life is', we just choose to give an animals more sanctity than most people it would seem. I don't understand why that is a thing to mock.

 

[Thistlehart]

Because health, life, cruelty, death, leather... etc. ad nauseam.

And they don't understand what life is.

Actually, we're fully aware of 'what life is', we just choose to give an animals more sanctity than most people it would seem. I don't understand why that is a thing to mock.

That attitude right there. Acting like you're doing the world a favor then turning around and playing at being martyrs. What do vegans use to hang themselves on their little crosses, anyway?

It's not the veganism that gets on people's nerves. It's the attitude of the people behind it.

 

[Jessy_Fran]

Also, I live near a medical research facility and there have been a number of human deaths there in recent years. One of the bigger cases was caused by medicine (that had actually effected monkeys but not caused any deaths) being given to human volunteers. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-380395/Elephant-Man-resist-drug-test-money.html
Yes, that's a link to the Daily Mail site but I can't seem to find anything else right now.

I appreciate that this is not all cases but still. When animal testing doesn't even have an effect on whether the drug is tested on humans, what's the point?

Yeah, that is kind of fucked, but I don't think it discredits animal testing necessarily. Now I want to add the caveat that results of animal tests obviously don't have perfect carry over to humans since there are obviously a few differences between mice and other animals and us, but they can be useful for informing future testing, especially if there are huge issues which arise in that phase.

The big problem with the testing of drugs and other medicines though is that it's big business for pharmaceutical companies, R&D is expensive, potential patents are worth billions, and they aren't above cutting corners and doctoring results to get to them. So I'd agree with you, if companies aren't going to take the animal test results seriously then it's kind of pointless, but the upside is, if the animal testing happened and potential side effects were readily available and known in the research community, they can be used to better fine, regulate, or file suit against companies that willfully ignore them. So I wouldn't say they're totally useless. I agree it's stupid, but prior animal testing can at least be used as evidence that companies may have willfully ignored the dangers.

Like I say, I totally appreciate that that example is not representative of the entire issue and there are things that can't be ignored when this topic comes into discussion.

And yeah, pharmaceutical companies are in it for the money so aren't about to stop any time soon. That isn't me admitting to defeat and I've done my share of protests but BIG companies like AstraZeneca aren't going anywhere while there's a cheap supply of rabbits to test on and people sit back and allow it. I'd like to see alternatives to non-human animal testing being researched into but again, that's not cost effective and all people care about is money really.

Ultimately, I don't want medical animal testing but I'll admit it's a more sensitive area than most topics surrounding veganism. I was merely curious as to others opinions. I don't often get to talk about this

 

[Jammy2003]

I would argue it doesn't...

Because crops directly effect the land on which they're grown. And not all livestock farming requires grain production.

Why does everyone get so hung up...

Because it's kinda important, especially considering that a Vegan is a choice on principle (I assume). And Vegans choices literally have no effect on the meat market. They might do if a sizeable amount of the population shared their pov... but they don't. So the meat market is stronger than ever.

Boycotts don't work. Especially when you're pretty much completely unable to truly boycott everything that you want to.

You say "When it was no longer required...

The alternatives aren't as good. It's that simple.

Most people don't want to be on pills an supplements when the original sources is still so readily available and better for you.

When we finally manage to grow meat in petri dishes, I'll be all for completely axing the livestock market. But until that time, I'm not going to stop eating animals in exchange for a starkly regimented diet of corn and nuts or dietary supplements.

Well for one, I'm big on utilising human...

So your answer is more landshock? Use up more land to produce more crops which have knock-on effects further down the line. And how do we fertilise all these extra crops? Faeces isn't enough. We require bonemeal too, are we to start churning up our dead's bones to fertilise crops?

What about all the other things that animal corpses are turned into? Such as other animal foods? Cats and dogs don't have the option of going vegan. Fish will always need blood flakes.

What about industry? Are you going to completely destroy the glue market, lubricants used in heavy machinery often come from livestock.

Given a few hundred years of slowly phasing it out, sure. We could find all the alternatives we'd need. But it really isn't as simple as you and many others are making it out to be. Livestock by-products are so widely used it's simply not feasible to get rid of them.

Would this be enough...

It would need to be a gradual transition that happens over decades upon decades. Along with all the other reforms we need to do as a species. It's certainly not the most pressing issue we face.

So far better to keep the status...

You knock that wall down and you take society with it. It's the only supporting wall in a crumbling house.

You need to build support structures that support the weight of an entire world and then carefully remove each brick and start again.

Focusing on one brick will make things worse. And like I said, that brick isn't even one the major problems.

I think we've successfully taken that analogy as far as it'll go.

Yes, but as I said, the majority of meat produced is grain-fed, and so the impact of meat farming is larger than that of crops. It doesn't have to be, but the fact is that at the moment it largely is, particularly for the prices we have all come to expect our meat for.

That's funny, I didn't know the 5-10% of the population made up of vegans and vegetarians in most European countries and the USA, along with the 30% veggie population in India have absolutely no impact on the meat market. How silly of me. That was a pretty unfounded statement you just made there... Of course it has an impact, supply and demand. They won't breed animals they can't then sell. And if they do, they then reduce in response to the drop in demand, which lowers it in the long run.

Something is infinitely better than nothing, and if we can't see eye to eye on that, then I guess we may as well drop it. Pushing for the alternatives to be made makes it easier to continue a lifestyle you believe in.

Why do you keep INSISTING that you have to take pills and supplements? Or that it's some kind of regimented thing that you can only eat about 4 meals and rotate them? That is simply not the case, as I've stated before, and I'm getting you tired of making these unfounded claims. I have yet to see vegans dropping in the street due to malnutrition, therefore it's viable. And you still aren't addressing the fact we need to lower our meat production, just focussing on this view about vegans that it's all or nothing.

You know what I'm personally for? Massive population control or culls. That'd solve a lot of problems if we just shaved off the top 1% of the rich, redistributed the wealth, shaved off the bottom 10% or so of the poor who don't contribute (based on my own countries statistics here, I'm sure this would need to be tailored from place to place) and maybe a good chunk of the old and infirm. Living in an aging population with a proportion of people who don't want to contribute and no guarantee of security in my old age gives me a pretty negative view perhaps, but we have grown beyond our capabilities. We need a serious overhaul to ensure that we don't just quietly die as a species, or there is no going back.

If we start growing it in petri dishes it'll suddenly then be viable to axe the industry? That's pretty curious, what about the crops then? Or all the other bi-products we need to produce from animals?
And seriously? Corn, nuts and supplements? If that's all you eat apart from meat, eggs and dairy, I fear for your health. Particularly as you seem to hate supplements so much.

Dogs can go on a vegan diet I'm told, and in any case, I keep saying that it just needs to be reduced a lot, not wiped out. If we need to grind up the bones of the dead to support the living, then why not? They don't need their bones anymore and apparently we do.

I don't know all the answers, but at least I'm looking. We don't have hundreds of years without looking at alternative technology, in many regards. Times, they are a changin', and we gotta change with them. It takes a gallon of fuel to produce a pound of beef with current intensive farming methods, and the tanks getting a little empty if you hadn't noticed.

Yes, there is significantly more problems than just this. But this thread is dealing with this one, and that's what I'm trying to do. You've gunned down every suggestion I've made without coming up with alternatives yourself. I'm sorry if this post is more aggressive but you're passive attitude of picking holes is beginning to grate on me.

I'd say this house of society is condemned to fall, and so maybe it's time to start thinking about building a new one, instead of just patching this one up. And that means some more drastic changes, yes.

 

[Jessy_Fran]

That attitude right there. Acting like you're doing the world a favor then turning around and playing at being martyrs. What do vegans use to hang themselves on their little crosses, anyway?

It's not the veganism that gets on people's nerves. It's the attitude of the people behind it.

You get attitude when you give attitude. I responsed in a calm manner (maybe a little condescending but it was no worse than your first comment that stated vegans don't know what life is) and you have in turn answered with yet another mocking reply.

With statements like those is it any wonder why vegans get defensive?

 

[remnant_phoenix]

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.

The only sound explanation I've heard came from an ex-vegan. He only got into it because he was dating a vegan, and he got out of it after they broke up. When he explained his former veganism to me, it was something along the lines of...

"I don't give a toss about animals rights or animal cruelty or any of that, I got into it because of my health...and I gotta tell you, when was I a vegan, I felt great. Lots of energy, easy to get out an exercise. Compare that to now? I feel so slow inside, like an un-greased machine."

So, yeah. As someone who is trying to eat more organic foods and less treated/processed foods, and feels physically better as a result, I can see the appeal from that angle. I'd have to try it myself before accepting his testimonial, but I don't think I ever will; I value the freedom to not obsess over my diet too much to bother with something so restrictive.

 

[Thistlehart]

That attitude right there. Acting like you're doing the world a favor then turning around and playing at being martyrs. What do vegans use to hang themselves on their little crosses, anyway?

It's not the veganism that gets on people's nerves. It's the attitude of the people behind it.

You get attitude when you give attitude. I responsed in a calm manner (maybe a little condescending but it was no worse than your first comment that stated vegans don't know what life is) and you have in turn answered with yet another mocking reply.

With statements like those is it any wonder why vegans get defensive?

Sorry, I can't help myself sometimes. Easy targets and all. Point to you on that one.

Spoiler: Learn to laugh, darling.

I suppose I tend to equate vegans to Christian conversionists. Y'know, telling people how much better their life has become with Jesus (veganism) in their life, in the hope that repeating it at you enough times (and also pointing out how horrible life was without Jesus (hemp underwear)) will make you wonder if your life wouldn't be better to follow suit.

Yes, I've run into them. Yes, their presence is like nettles.

Just gives me an itch I scratch by lashing out. You're justified in saying there's a lot of hate there.

That hate also comes from being raised on a ranch. I tend to react in a ballistic manner to folks condemning (however indirectly) what my family does for a living as evil. And I tend to see veganism as lifestyle built around that condemnation.

 

[Vivi22]

Like I say, I totally appreciate that that example is not representative of the entire issue and there are things that can't be ignored when this topic comes into discussion.

And yeah, pharmaceutical companies are in it for the money so aren't about to stop any time soon. That isn't me admitting to defeat and I've done my share of protests but BIG companies like AstraZeneca aren't going anywhere while there's a cheap supply of rabbits to test on and people sit back and allow it. I'd like to see alternatives to non-human animal testing being researched into but again, that's not cost effective and all people care about is money really.

Ultimately, I don't want medical animal testing but I'll admit it's a more sensitive area than most topics surrounding veganism. I was merely curious as to others opinions. I don't often get to talk about this

It's all good. Like I said, I don't entirely disagree with you on certain aspects of animal testing. If you're going to do it, you damn well better consider the results and give them their due weight. The trouble is that pharmaceutical companies will often rig the results even in human trials. Many will go so far as to give applicants for testing a large initial dose of the drug, much higher than the dose they plan to test, and see if there are any negative side effects. People who do present negative side effects aren't included in the trial. Essentially, they pre-screen to eliminate people who experience side effects so their side effect rates look better. It's a shady business no matter which way you look at it, and stuff like that is a large part of the reason people are only just starting to realize that drugs like statins have much more prevalent and serious side effects than originally thought. Just in time for them to start marketing a replacement as the patents run down probably.

I just had a thought a minute ago though that perhaps lab grown tissues might be the answer to future drug testing concerns, at least where side effects are concerned. We've got people trying to grow meat in labs, so why not human muscle, bone, skin, or brain tissues someday? Something which is organic and technically alive so you can test on it, but not sentient so there's no moral concerns and you can do whatever you want to it? I'm sure pharmaceutical companies would still game the system by trying to grow tissues resistant to side effects, so there would likely have to be regulations requiring tissue samples to be grown be taken from a random and anonymous sample population, but it's still an interesting possibility. All of the benefits of human testing with the exception of one (grown tissue can't tell you where it hurts) with none of the draw backs like potential death or serious medical complications. Perhaps the same idea could even be applied to animal tissues first since certain religious groups might take issue with growing human tissue.

 

[Jessy_Fran]

Sorry, I can't help myself sometimes. Easy targets and all. Point to you on that one.

Spoiler: Learn to laugh, darling.

I suppose I tend to equate vegans to Christian conversionists. Y'know, telling people how much better their life has become with Jesus (veganism) in their life, in the hope that repeating it at you enough times (and also pointing out how horrible life was without Jesus (hemp underwear)) will make you wonder if your life wouldn't be better to follow suit.

Yes, I've run into them. Yes, their presence is like nettles.

Just gives me an itch I scratch by lashing out. You're justified in saying there's a lot of hate there.

That hate also comes from being raised on a ranch. I tend to react in a ballistic manner to folks condemning (however indirectly) what my family does for a living as evil. And I tend to see veganism as lifestyle built around that condemnation.

Yeah, the militant vegans are awful and I'll admit that I haven't been the best representative but I have reeled myself back in after my initial outburst. I don't enjoy being aggressive and it doesn't achieve anything on the internet anyway!

That's cool, I lash out too having been mocked for my diet for a good part of my life (I grew up in a working class background with friends who weren't exactly understanding) so I totally understand that.

I'm not trying to convert people, just to get points across. I guess I don't do too much of a good job (oops) but ah well... Sorry about that.

Also, hemp underwear? Hardly! That would hurt like hell and wouldn't exactly attract the men

 

[Thistlehart]

Sorry, I can't help myself sometimes. Easy targets and all. Point to you on that one.

Spoiler: Learn to laugh, darling.

I suppose I tend to equate vegans to Christian conversionists. Y'know, telling people how much better their life has become with Jesus (veganism) in their life, in the hope that repeating it at you enough times (and also pointing out how horrible life was without Jesus (hemp underwear)) will make you wonder if your life wouldn't be better to follow suit.

Yes, I've run into them. Yes, their presence is like nettles.

Just gives me an itch I scratch by lashing out. You're justified in saying there's a lot of hate there.

That hate also comes from being raised on a ranch. I tend to react in a ballistic manner to folks condemning (however indirectly) what my family does for a living as evil. And I tend to see veganism as lifestyle built around that condemnation.

Yeah, the militant vegans are awful and I'll admit that I haven't been the best representative but I have reeled myself back in after my initial outburst. I don't enjoy being aggressive and it doesn't achieve anything on the internet anyway!

That's cool, I lash out too having been mocked for my diet for a good part of my life (I grew up in a working class background with friends who weren't exactly understanding) so I totally understand that.

I'm not trying to convert people, just to get points across. I guess I don't do too much of a good job (oops) but ah well... Sorry about that.

Also, hemp underwear? Hardly! That would hurt like hell and wouldn't exactly attract the men

Exactly! Hemp underwear = life without Jesus. Probably not a good joke, but oh well.

And no worries, thinking about the ways this conversation could have developed, and so thinking about responses, has given me a little something to contemplate. With any luck it will improve my attitude, or perhaps give me something more to laugh at.

Thanks for that, at least.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Thats fine. I have no issue with it. As long as other vegies dont have issue with my meat eating....even though us meat eaters eat both meat and veg as a balanced diet. Not veg and back up pills. But we are what we are and make the choices we make. Just dont like the hypocrisy from vegis when i have a steak and they make pointless comments while wearing leather.

Also there are vegis that eat only white meat....chicken and fish. Fuck, i think fish have it worse when it comes to humane killing, being that they suffocate.

 

[Treblaine]

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.

Well it's certainly an interesting challenge.

I'm quite big into systems analysis and what it would take to maintain a self-sufficient society in for example in a bunker that survives a nuclear war or huge meteorite impact.

Veganism is the most efficient way of getting energy from raw sunlight or electrical circuit to nutrition. Feeding animals, food, some will turn into milk and deposit as tissue but most will simply be burned as waste heat or

Now there may be a place for ruminants. Because if you are growing any plants for vegetables and wheat, you can't eat the entire plant, you can eat the grain of wheat but not the straw that is almost entirely cellulouse which passes strait through the body. You can feed this to ruminants (like cows) and extract that energy as milk or beef or veal.
You can also feed rabbits that will breed and grow quickly as a source of meat through rabbit meat is not the most nutritious meat.

But arguably more efficient is to take this waste biomass and compost it to extract the organic nitrogen then ferment it to make ethanol.

Remember, is a closed system running only on say nuclear power (preferably Molten Salt Thorium reactor) or geothermal, you won't have any useful hydrocarbons, turning cellulose into Ethanol might be much more useful that feeding it all to cows and rabbits.

That, I find interesting about veganism. As a systems design challenge of maximum efficiency. Not sympathy for animals, its just why feed them?

What I don't find interesting is vegans being dogmatic, not even eating honey because it "comes from animal" even though keeping and protecting bees benefit bees and the flowers and the energy you are extracting is from the sun as the bees turn the nectar (that plants produce) into honey.

The only real problem with veganism is B12. A "natural" vegan diet there is no obcious way to get B12 into your diet. But vegan foods (like almost all processed Soya products) are easily fortified with B12, which is made using a special yeast a bit like marmite. You do not need much B12, it's a trace chemical needed in the brain, but it's more evidence that in recent history humans were never naturally vegan.

But I still couldn't give up on pancakes. Vegan pancakes... they just aren't the same. Oh and Mayonnaise. No, eggs and milk are just to nice tom COMPLETELY cut out and they are the foundation of any vegetarian diet. Oh, BTW, I'm not vegetarian and if I had to be I'd find it very difficult to be.

 

[Jessy_Fran]

Also there are vegis that eat only white meat....chicken and fish. Fuck, i think fish have it worse when it comes to humane killing, being that they suffocate.

In all honesty, if they eat chicken and fish they have no reason/right to call themselves vegetarian and that's a bit daft.

 

[Secret world leader (shhh)]

snip

That's...a very interesting way of looking at it. Tell me your secrets, oh wise one! That i may see the world the way you do