Veganism...why?

[Jammy2003]

Yes, but as I said...

I take issue with that. Maybe it's the case for the States, but the stringent EU legislation surrounding livestock means that we can't have the majority of our animals grain fed. Most EU cattle grazes.

That's funny...

Yea man, that 5-10% is really driving down the prices of meat. That's why it's a declining market... Oh wait.

Something is infinitely...

Not if it has side effects, how are you not getting this? The livestock trade doesn't end at peoples bellies. It's tied up in tons of things.

Why do you keep INSISTING...

Because to have the same benefits of a balanced diet whilst not eating protein rich foods and a complete lack of iron, you require either a heavily regimented diet or supplements.

I also never claimed Vegans where inherently unhealthy. Just that a Vegan diet isn't as good as a balanced one. You really need to read before you start getting pissy about things I haven't actually said.

Likewise you still haven't addressed the fact that we need to lower our agriculture production.

See, I can do that too.

You know what I'm personally...

Then you're a fool.

That'd solve a lot of problems...

And if we could live off of sunshine and unicron farts there'd be no war.

You point?

and maybe a good...

Oooooo, so edgy.

Living in an aging population...

All valid points, none of which could be resolved with a cull.

I mean, it worked so well for the Nazis.

(Dammit, you made me flout Godwins law in a Vegan debate with your stupid ideas about population culls and farting unicorns.)

If we start growing...

If we could grow everything that is currently used from actual bred livestock... Then sure. It would still take a while to implement. But it would basically be exchanging farms for labs.

That's pretty curious...

See above.

And seriously? Corn...

Nice Ad hominem.

Dogs can go on a vegan diet...

Dogs? As in the carnivorous animals with about 3 meters of gut? I'm sure there must be some way I could file for animal cruelty charges to anyone feeding their dog a vegan diet.

I'm not joking, please tell me who told you this so I can try and get the dog taken off them.

and in any case, I keep saying that it just needs to be reduced a lot...

Which I'm not arguing with. What I'm saying is that it's a small piece of a much larger reform that would all have to happen very slowly over a long period of time. It's also not the most pressing issue on our table.

If we need to grind....

I'm going to put that in the cull the weak and infirm pile. Infact, I'll streamline your proposal.

Old people and invalids are just thrown in a grinder and sprinkled over corn. That's 2 birds one stone man.

I don't know all the answers....

No you're wildly flapping about genocide and other BS on an internet forum.

We don't have hundreds of years...

I'll point out the EU legislation again. The farming industry is anything but stagnant.

It takes a gallon of fuel to produce...

Here we have a more pressing matter, alternative fuels. That's a little higher on the list of priorities. And Seeing farming tends to use a lot less of it than say, running a factory. It's not really a convincing argument to say that 'save the cows, save the world.'

Yes, there is significantly more problems...

They're not alternatives, the people who can actually do something are the ones coming up with alternatives. Not internet warriors.

I'd say this house...

An actual societal collapse would mean there's not much of anything to rebuild with. Patching up and reforming is our only option. Grand talk about rebuilding from the bottom up get's us nowhere. Because in the end it's just grand talk, no substance.

You aren't appreciating the vast amount of cattle grown in the America. Between USA and Brazil, they cover 45% of the worlds cattle production, compared to the EU's 17%. So yes, I'd say that would include enough that (ok, maybe the majority might be a little too far) a huge chunk is grain fed. Enough for cause for concern perhaps?

Yeah, I'd also say 5-10% of the worlds population not eating meat does lower the amount of meat needed to be produced. I never said it was making the market decline or any such thing, simpye the fact that these people don't eat meat means less has to be produced. Am I wrong?

It is tied to lots of things, it is unsustainable in it's current form, therefore we need alternatives. I'm arguing that with you on that point, it's tied into so much that its ridiculous. How are you not seeing that?

Sorry what? "Dried beans and dark green leafy vegetables are especially good sources of iron, even better on a per calorie basis than meat" We all know vegans can't eat those beans and vegetables, it's all corn and nuts! Sorry, couldn't resist that jab.

What I'm telling you is that it doesn't need to be as regimented as you seem to think. And I didn't claim you claimed it was inherently unhealthy, I stated that in every post you keep going on about supplements, but they aren't nesseccary.

Yes, we need to lower all food production, but there is no way to do that without less people. Hence population control. You're right, I was having an outburst and slipping back into a mindset I used to have a few years back, thanks for being triggering. But to be completely honest, it would go a long way to solving a good chunk of the problems it seems at times. How would lowering the population, raising the bar of average contribution to society per person and generally tighting things up societally not help? Admittedly not the best, nor most elegant of solutions, but I still don't see any others being forthcoming from you.

So let me get this right.... crops are unsustainable with the crap etc for fertilisers, and we will grow everything in labs? Are you suggesting we grow shit in labs? Literally?

Dogs can survive fine on a vegan diet (admitedly with supplements), google it if you want sources, I'm tired of presenting information to you only to have it ignored. Well maybe the changes aren't happening quick enough, and more people taking an interest would encourage others to do it a bit quicker. Companies need incentive to change their practices.

What is the most pressing issue? Could you list them in order of importance so they can be dealt with one by one? Or perhaps we can just deal with the simultaniously? I started "flapping" because you are shooting down every point I attempt to make, with no evidence for your claims. You throw endless problems at every possible thing that might happen if things were to change. Stop throwing problems and start telling HOW I'm wrong, and HOW you could do it better.

Nice suggesting I'm an internet warrior, I suppose the degree I'm studying for in Physics, hopefully to work on clean energy sources means I'm doing nothing. The biggest stumbling block I have for working on it? I endlessly wonder if there is any damn point, and if it wouldn't be better of if humanity just died off. Thanks for improving my outlook on that.

 

[Jammy2003]

Ah fair point...

I guess that depends at how we want to look at it.

True, the uber being...

Before I get to my actual point, you are open to name in what meaningful way a cow could surpass me. The whole "IT" things implies that you believe a Cow could actually surpass me at something. So give me something that isn't entirely meaningless.

And even if you aren't the...

I have long since adressed it, but to answer your Question, no, it wouldn't. Because I would still be a human. The fact that this theoretical being would have to be leaps and bounds better then I am isn't enough, I'd have to be as bad as the cow is aswell. The fact that I can do tons of things that a cow never could keeps it from making sense. This is like starting the argument with "Ok, for the sake of argument, turn off your higher brain functions, go" I can't do that and I can't exactly comprehend what that would be like, just as much as a cow couldn't compehend what human thought is.

I get its extrapolation...

What could I possibly learn from this? That it would suck if someone wanted to eat me? Yeah, I can figure that out myself. What you and some others need to learn is that a Cow doesn't have the concept of Life and Death that we have, it makes a huge difference. The entire argument is based, whether it is spoken or not, on humanizing the animal, rolling with this notion that they feel like we do, they don't.

A duck would still have more worth...

Because you can eat them? You can eat humans too. I see no other reason.

And those that aren't? They won't...

Or, in the case of a fellow predator, they'll probably kill and eat you. Most Herbivores would just die seeing as they wouldn't have much to eat and no survival skills for the area. Oh and they also lack the creativity to find a way to survive on the fly. Your solution is essentially that you'd want to be alone. Which quite frankly doesn't cut it.

Human's tend to latch onto other humans...

Nonsense. We are social animals, we are where we are because we function in Groups. Not only would you be turning someone down who would potentially have better ideas of what to do, you're also turning down potential food if all else fails. Not to mention that we Humans have things like Planes with which we can just fly right over those pesky deserts.

I'm try to argue that worth...

I know that you are trying that. The reason you are failing is that you are simply wrong. I am inherently better then any other species at any given thing unless that species is specifically in it's element, in which case I can still easily one up that species with a human invention that will not only allow me to do the same thing, but do it better. I am inherently better, I (as in the human race in this case) am a master of all trades in comparison to the animal kingdom.

That doesn't make you inherently...

Have I mentioned that I consider misanthropes morons?

Why would the...

It was a Twin, it could have easily been very weak in comparison to it's sibling.

Surely survival instinct would...

No, not necessarily, different animals have different behavior when it comes to those things. Many will hide in the absense of their mother. Others will play dead. I don't know what precisely a cow would do, but even if it were normal for them to follow their mother on instinct, it would still have to be able to do it.

And seeing as the calf was still alive...

Well, for one, several days is ambigious. Secondly, who says it would be able to walk after a few days of nuture? You? Since when are you a bovine expert? It would have been relevant to say so earlier if that is the case.

I also made pretty clear, the reason I named is one of many, the calf could have also been mentally retarded, that's happens to animals sometimes too you know.

Personally?
I find zoo's...

Meh, I like Zoos. I just wish they could actually hold the animals as well as possible.

Circuses, particularly with elephant acts...

They still do that? I haven't been to a circus since I was 5 or something and that one didn't have elephants. If yes, I agree, also simply because a Elephant that snaps is fucking dangerous as hell.

Fur farms are pretty damn atrocious.

While I personally don't see the point in wearing real fur, atleast they seem to use the whole animal, that's atleast a minor plus. Still, entirely pointless to have them.

Animal testing...

I'm on the fence here. It's easy to say "Oh, well, not sure about medical, but all that other stuff is bad!" when you realise that all that stuff, including medical, is intertwined. Cosmetics? Your skin is a Organ, you don't want just anything on it. Washing Powders? Same difference. Then you'd also have to take Pet's into consideration, I'm not sure to which degree this kind of thing would be tested or atleast noted, but it would also be nice to know that my theoretical dog won't die if he eats my girlfriends handcreme while we are out.

Because companies have...

Yes, that's generally how things are tested. now, don't get me wrong, if we didn't have to do this, I would be against it. But if the option is "put humans in potential danger for advancement" or "put animals in potential danger for advancement" I'm going to go with the animals.

Rodeo's and bull fighting.
Maybe more but that'll do for now.

I don't really have a opinion on Rodeo's. Bull Fighting on the other hand is stupid. But, both of those things have a cultural value. Not that I consider that worth it. Just sayin'

But the issue is partly here...

Does it matter that it's a double standard? Because if that's what you are worried about, boy do I have a list of double standards that could use your attention alot more then that one.

A lot of people object to whaling and dolphin eating...

Go ahead and show me these people, I've never met or seen them. I have however met people that consider Whales, Dolphins, Dogs, Cats, Rabbits, Cows, Pigs, Chickens, etc. too cute to kill. They tend to be the people the would have this kind of discussion with me. I don't agree with the "too cute to kill" notion, no matter who is saying it, but I honestly have never seen anyone, let alone a MASS of people complain that the problem with eating dolphins and whales is that they are cute. I'm just thinking this might be in your head.

At one point, I was a misanthrope...

It wouldn't inherently invalidate your arguments, it would however end the discussion. I don't waste my time with misanthropes, if your views are that one sided then you don't deserve my attention.

I live in a small town/village...

I ain't no City-folk boooooy.

I have lived in a few small towns myself, for that reason I know that unless your town is really, really, really tiny, the whole "everybody knows everybody" thing is a exaggeration. I'm also not entirely convinced that you hold the elephant thing to any scrutiny. Anyway, I'm sticking to it, that claim is bullshit.

Teaching an ape sign language is difficult...

I don't see what you are getting at here? I you trying to say that the Bonobo simply knows what dog, snake and bite are without it having been taught that? If that's what you mean, bullshit, I don't even have to read the article to know that. If what you mean is that the Bonobo comprehends what the human wants from it after having been taught these words, sure, why not? I didn't say they couldn't, I said that a chimp that wasn't trained by humans and learned some signs from another chimp cannot be assumed to know what it is signing.

Ah, well I've never said to STOP...

I don't disagree with that. I try not to eat too much meat. I ate meat yesterday and today, leftovers from yesterday. Otherwise? All I've eaten beside the leftovers has been vegetables and dairy, which for a few weeks now has been pretty common place, I eat meat maybe twice a week at the time.

Plus as a member...

I agree, we however have far bigger problems then this.

Digesting grass? I don't know, I'm not a cow, I don't know what they consider important My point was, you said that as the creator of the tests, we get to pick what's important. Therefore, the theoretical being would do the same surely? Cows are so fundamentally different to us that abscribing something "meaningful" would be subjective.

If you want an example of a different animal being better at something, whales are better at diving pretty deep down than us, even with technological assistance and all the training in the world.

Why would you have to be as bad as the cow? You argued that no animals come close to being as intellegent as us, in fields that we deem important. You said even if they are less stupid than we thought, it doesn't matter as they don't approach us. If this being was that much better than a singular one of us, then couldn't they have this same attitude?

I don't agree. Based on footage I've seen I believe a cow to have a concept of life and death, I beleive most things do. But I guess that's gonna have to be one of those points we agree to disagree on, as I can't imagine any way you'll change my view on that, and you seem pretty firm on yours. Personally, I find it fun to stretch the brain in new ways by trying, if you don't then fair enough.

Well for one, I can use a birds feathers for a pretty fan? Hmm, harder as I was considering just eating it I guess, though in a desert thirst is more the danger. I keep myself in fair shape, to the stage I fancy my chances of outrunning or killing a good chunk of things that are in this random animal generator, particularly given the number of different insects on the planet

Plus, if we were going for a random person, the chances of them being particularly helpful are low. I consider myself above average (maybe not marvelous, maybe a bit of arrogence there but still) and so there is a bigger chance of them being a burden than a help. Statistically a random animal would be better than a random human, though the extremes mean that human could be more helpful or worse than an animal.

Ah, you are valuing the species as a whole, and all achievements of mankind. I was meaning on an individual basis, based on what that individual knows, does, has done and can do. We are adaptable, so we tend to come out on top a lot yes, but I'm just saying a person has no more value inherently, JUST because they are human. We aren't the chosen race or something is what I mean.

True, there are many different reasons the calf might not have come in, and I don't base my beliefs on a single case but many, as I'm sure you do. But on the whole, herd animals are born ready to go, and for one to remain outside would have required something outside of the ordinary in order for it to not have followed mother into the barn at least once. Endless possibilities, but the most likely thing would have been for it to have gone in.

As there is mostly agreement except testing, I'll respond to that. I do see that, but if it's not vital for saving a human's life, so for cosmetics etc. then its really a luxury, not some life saving treatment. My main problem with the testing is the fact results rarely carry over from animals to humans, and I've seen professionals suggest animal testing has set back medical science about 20 years.

We must live in different communities then, because most people I know are squeemish about eating dolphins and whales, and not simply for the reason they are endangered. Put that down to cultural difference as there isn't really a way to argue that?

True, it is exaggerated, but with my nan having been a town gossip and also having lived in that town all of her life, I heard a lot about some people. But fine, I hold to it, you disagree, that's allowed

Ah, I thought your arguement was that the initial chimp was only using mimicry, and ther others then just copied him. My bad. Na, the article says by watching the mother learning, the child learn just through watching and listening.

Fair enough, we are perhaps similar in that. I just think that the arguement "Well there are bigger problems so why bother with this one?" is a bit of a false one. Yes there is bigger ones, but you don't have to solve problems one at a time, and not everything I can actually change. So much is wrapped up in politics and other BS that it's impossible for me to actually control it. So why not do what I can?

 

[shoddyworksucks]

Humans are animals. There is no magical difference between me and a cow. We both want things and we both suffer. That's all that I think should be required to make a creature worth moral consideration.

It seems like a lot of this argument has more to do with definition (what is life, what are the differences between man and animal, etc.) than anything else. Some would state, as you do, that there is no difference, while others might argue that the capacity for higher cognitive or logical functions is the key. Without an agreed upon definition, this argument can't really go anywhere.

That said, I know plenty of vegans living in Southern California, and they all have their own reasons. Health, personal moral beliefs, etc. I'm not a vegan, but I personally don't care if anyone else is. I have the same attitude towards veganism as I do religion: don't proselytize, moralize, or intrude upon my own day-to-day life. If you feel a moral obligation to follow a vegan lifestyle, then do your thing, just leave me out of it. That said, I don't think I have any vegan friends who cross that boundary. Hell, there are a couple of vegan restaurants I frequent regularly, and having a discussion about it is all well and good since no one is trying to convert somebody.

 

[NikolaiK]

Interestingly, I was just reading about this -
http://gluontheferengi.wordpress.com/2008/02/19/vegetarianism-the-elitist-idealism/
Obviously the article talks about vegetarianism, but the points it makes are applicable to this discussion.

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

I happen to know a vegan, who just so, happens to be slighly preachy(ie, everytime I try to enjoy a chicken salad sandwich or a BLT, he has to add if I'm enjoying eating little chicks/piggies), and from my experience with vegans, its kind of the same reason for as to why people are hipsters.

Just because.

Or because someone famous does it, or maybe they're just misleaded/ easily persuaded, they might just employ such a way of life in the same way that one might decide to change one's religion because they came across the idea(on a whim basically).

I don't hate vegans, but in the end, it's my choice at the end of the day(regarding what I want to eat).

Also their "milk is produced by raping cows" point of information is false; cows produce said substance naturally.

And just in case the vegans are still preaching, I can just say that my blood type demands that I eat meat, and a truly vegan world would result in a genocide that would cull over 1/3 of the world's population.

 

[hazabaza1]

Yeah, I hate vegans!!!

How dare they stand up for those who have no voice?
How dare they value thousands of innocent lives over their mere taste buds?
How dare they strive to make the world a better, more cruelty-free place for all?
How dare they challenge my blind, ignorant habits with logical thinking?
How dare they live a lifestyle of compassion and love?

Seriously guys, what a loads of idiots!!1!

Although you joined about a year ago, it seems you only just started posting recently.
Hi, welcome to the Escapist. Good luck, you're going to need it if you want to stay around.

 

[Jammy2003]

You aren't appreciating...

I never said it wasn't a concern, but you can't say the farming industry isn't doing anything about it. There are constant reforms going on within.

Yeah, I'd also say 5-10% of the...

I wouldn't say so no. We're nothing if not wasteful. We could probably supply an extra 30% of our population with the meat we currently produce.

I'm certainly not against stricter rules and regulations regarding the wasting of consumables.

It is tied to lots of things...

But snuffing it out of the picture would just make matter worse. You'd need decades of reform to successfully find alternatives for all the things that the livestock industry supplies.

Sorry what? "Dried beans and dark...

Nowhere near as good as meat, hence why one of the most common health complaints from vegetarians and vegans especially is anaemia.

You're completely disregarding the fact that if it isn't meat, it's non-heme iron. Which means you have to consume much, much more to absorb the same amount. And that a balanced diet would also contain a lot of vitamin C which aids iron absorption and leafy green vegetables and beans. Just like vegans, only with added protein and heme iron.

No matter how much you argue this point you're not going to win. A vegan diet is not as healthy as a balanced one.

I couldn't resist that jab.

What I'm telling you is that it...

Not to live a relatively healthy, normal life no. But if you want to get all the benefits of a balanced diet then yes.

I'm not saying Veganism is bad or unhealthy. I'm just sick of people trying to further the misnomer that it's healthier than a balanced diet with meat.

Yes, we need to lower all...

It's much more of a waste problem than it is a supply is lower than demand problem. Just like it's a population distribution problem, not an overpopulation problem.

But thank you for going back on your little megalomaniac rant there. I was about to abandon the conversation.

So let me get this right....

The thing that isn't widely talked about with crops is that with most of them, after a few years of yield, the area needs to be left alone and constantly fertilised for a few years for the soil to be good enough to yield healthy crops again. If you don't do that you run the risk of killing the plot you're growing on. Some crops get away with being cycled, but most of the time, it leaves us with only getting half the total yield that the space could optimally allow.

Growing crops is surprisingly devastating to the environment. And it's not something that's widely reported because agriculture has this air of greenness about it.

And yes, growing animal parts and even plants in labs would be an ideal solution. it's just more sci-fi than sci-fact at the minute.

Dogs can survive fine on a vegan diet...

Again, that's cruel. Dogs are pure carnivore (with slight omnivorous tendencies). Their digestive tracts are not built for vegetarian diets, never-mind vegan ones. And I don't ignore anything, just counter it. It's what I do best.

Also you'd be surprised how much the farming industry has changed over the last 10 years. It can't really go much quicker without risking serious consequences further down the line.

What is the most pressing issue? Could...

Most pressing, definitely fuel. We need viable alternative sources yesterday. After that, economics. We're up shitcreek without a suitable floatation device. Rightnow we need to worry about the now, not the future. As horrible short sighted as that sounds.

Id say the issue of agriculture and livestock comes a good few places underneath that. After general health concerns and mass medical issues such as ebbing hospital budgets and people training in those professions. Resistances to antibis and vaccine failures etc etc etc.

And before you say it, people are already doing what they can about unethical farming (maybe not in the US, I don't know there.). It's just not one of the things that needs to be brought into mass public concern. There's enough there already.

Also I so explain why your suggestions won't work. I explain that by telling you the problems it would cause. And do you really think we could be sourcing this argument? It would take weeks to proof read and list the appropriate sources required.

Nice suggesting I'm an...

It's not like I can infer that from your ramblings about culling populations or using human bones to fertilise crops. (low blow, but still)

But as to the discussion we're having. You are being an internet warrior. If you're not actually working on a way to cut down the demand for animal based products, then all your doing is chatting on a forum.

As for your degree, hope it goes well for you. Cleaner energy is certainly high on the list of priorities and we damn-well need it fast.

The biggest stumbling block...

But kindly drop that attitude, we don't need more pessimistic self-deprecators out there.

I wouldn't say the industry isn't changing, I'm saying it needs more pressure to have bigger changes and quicker. Not an overnight reform, I know that would be devastating to all sort of things, but more.

And if those 5-10% ate meat we would be less wasteful? More would still be produced (maybe it wouldn't HAVE to, but it still would) as it would be more convinient than being less wasteful.

It doesn't need decades, not we were inclined to find them. If a fraction of the worlds military budget went to finding these alternatives, they would be found pretty quickly (not gonna happen, I know, but the idea still holds). If it is important enough to people, it will be found quicker as more effort will go into finding them.

But it still can be done, meaning it can BE a balanced diet. It's difficult, in no way am I suggesting it wouldn't be, just that it is possible. And to be on par with the average persons' diet? It's not really that difficult at all, probably easier in some ways.

I don't think I know anyone who claims it's healthier than a balanced diet involving good quality meat, if that diet is looked at. Probably are some, but none I know. I do know people who argue it's much easier to have an average diet without obesity which is a growing (excuse the pun) problem.

You believe it isn't an overpopulation problem? Fair enough, I do. Waste is also a huge factor, don't get me wrong, and it would help a great deal, but even if actual population isn't a problem, the rate of growth means it soon while be. So something needs to be done.

Hmmm, it's a dodgy mindset I have to choose not to believe. It's difficult at times. Might have to let this lie soon anyway to work.

Ah, wrong terminology on my part, by cycling I meant leaving fields to fallow, not rotating the type of crop on them. I also assumed you were actually talking about producing all animal by-products in labs as in artificially growing crap for fertiliser. If you mean growing meat and vegetation in labs, I consider that too far away to wait around for the coming of the saviour piece of technology.

I'm unsure about feeding a dog vegan, but it was to prove the point it CAN be done. Personally my dog is pescetarian, but that's due to his being a poor example of a dog and being allergic most sorts of meat, dandilions and various other things that make his fur fall out.

We would already have alternative sources of power if it wasn't for certain vested interests that have held us back over the years... But that's another thread. And politics. *shudder*
I'm for the UK, farming statistics of the US are just easier to obtain and hold a larger chunk of the market, so more impact.

I think it does need to be brought to the mass public concern, along with a large number of other things. The population of my country seems incredibly docile to me, with no interest in much. Oh except reality TV, they get good and hyped about that! But farming standards and international economics? Not so much...

You mention potential problems, as neither of us is fully backing everything we say with hard facts and statistics. It still gets infuriating to not have any alternative suggestions come with the criticism though. And I do beleive that by lowering the number of products I buy so they don't need to be made for me, I am having a positive impact. Maybe you disagree, but I really don't see how it has 0 effect as is often thrown about. If everyone when omni tomorrow and that 5-10% started eating meat it would have an effect on the demand surely?

Well, easier said than done. It's tiring to always choose positively. I used to want to be a weapons designer, would be far easier to make and sell those than efficiency improvements for solar energy...

 

[Jessy_Fran]

Yeah, I hate vegans!!!

How dare they stand up for those who have no voice?
How dare they value thousands of innocent lives over their mere taste buds?
How dare they strive to make the world a better, more cruelty-free place for all?
How dare they challenge my blind, ignorant habits with logical thinking?
How dare they live a lifestyle of compassion and love?

Seriously guys, what a loads of idiots!!1!

Although you joined about a year ago, it seems you only just started posting recently.
Hi, welcome to the Escapist. Good luck, you're going to need it if you want to stay around.

Thanks, but I've spent enough time on the internet to handle myself. Besides, if you'd read the rest of the thread I've already apologised for that post and made some fairly decent contributions to the discussion.

 

[Jammy2003]

I happen to know a vegan, who just so, happens to be slighly preachy(ie, everytime I try to enjoy a chicken salad sandwich or a BLT, he has to add if I'm enjoying eating little chicks/piggies), and from my experience with vegans, its kind of the same reason for as to why people are hipsters.

Just because.

Or because someone famous does it, or maybe they're just misleaded/ easily persuaded, they might just employ such a way of life in the same way that one might decide to change one's religion because they came across the idea(on a whim basically).

I don't hate vegans, but in the end, it's my choice at the end of the day(regarding what I want to eat).

Also their "milk is produced by raping cows" point of information is false; cows produce said substance naturally.

And just in case the vegans are still preaching, I can just say that my blood type demands that I eat meat, and a truly vegan world would result in a genocide that would cull over 1/3 of the world's population.

Meh, you get preachy vegans, you get preachy everyone. As a meat-eater I still can't understand the fuss about bacon, and get pretty tired about hearing about it. The meat is somewhat tasty but hidden in fat and that stuff's just nasty to me!

Though you're wrong about milk, cows produce it after giving birth, and to artificially inseminate cows they are put onto a "rape rack" (Industry term, I shit you not!) in order to impregnate them using a stick covered in sperm. Kinda a rapey vibe to me, though I guess that's up to you to decide if you feel the same way.

Most vegan's argue from the view point of as it can be considered no longer nesseccary for people to eat meat then you shouldn't, I doubt pretty much any of them expect you to die in order to though. What blood type are you to need that?

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

I happen to know a vegan, who just so, happens to be slighly preachy(ie, everytime I try to enjoy a chicken salad sandwich or a BLT, he has to add if I'm enjoying eating little chicks/piggies), and from my experience with vegans, its kind of the same reason for as to why people are hipsters.

Just because.

Or because someone famous does it, or maybe they're just misleaded/ easily persuaded, they might just employ such a way of life in the same way that one might decide to change one's religion because they came across the idea(on a whim basically).

I don't hate vegans, but in the end, it's my choice at the end of the day(regarding what I want to eat).

Also their "milk is produced by raping cows" point of information is false; cows produce said substance naturally.

And just in case the vegans are still preaching, I can just say that my blood type demands that I eat meat, and a truly vegan world would result in a genocide that would cull over 1/3 of the world's population.

Meh, you get preachy vegans, you get preachy everyone. As a meat-eater I still can't understand the fuss about bacon, and get pretty tired about hearing about it. The meat is somewhat tasty but hidden in fat and that stuff's just nasty to me!

Though you're wrong about milk, cows produce it after giving birth, and to artificially inseminate cows they are put onto a "rape rack" (Industry term, I shit you not!) in order to impregnate them using a stick covered in sperm. Kinda a rapey vibe to me, though I guess that's up to you to decide if you feel the same way.

Most vegan's argue from the view point of as it can be considered no longer nesseccary for people to eat meat then you shouldn't, I doubt pretty much any of them expect you to die in order to though. What blood type are you to need that?

Well, yeah, I am aware of artificial insemination; I just assumed that my country's production of milk (au naturel happens more often that AI) happened worldwide, I apologise for that.
, also I was misinformed, and I thank you for your input.

Also, meat does work as a sort of universal supplement of proteins, amino acids , so in order to substitute the rare and valuable nutrients that you get from meat, you would have to splash money on expensive supplements/specialist diets, those that couldn't afford such things wil likely starve under a "vegan regime", especially people in developing countries and the working class.

Also, blood type A positive, as well as O are reliant on animal protein/ large ammounts of amino acids/proteins that basic, non-exotic plants couldn't provide.

 

[Bolwing]

Just a note for anyone who thinks cows suffer in farms more than in the wild:
Cows can't pretty much survive in the wild, at least not the farm ones. Darn, some types of cows can't even reproduce in the wild. And, to put it bluntly, are pretty stupid. But then, there are a lot of pepole who are less clever than a common cow.

 

[Jessy_Fran]

Also, meat does work as a sort of universal supplement of proteins, amino acids , so in order to substitute the rare and valuable nutrients that you get from meat, you would have to splash money on expensive supplements/specialist diets, those that couldn't afford such things wil likely starve under a "vegan regime", especially people in developing countries and the working class.

Hey, I know you're not interested in following these but I figured I'd just give you some examples of vegan eating that is healthy but not expensive!
http://vegan.tribe.net/thread/cab726e5-4ab7-488a-b06d-6764bfd3e292
http://myvega.com/resources/7-day-meal-plan
http://cost.ezinemark.com/you-too-can-be-a-vegan-on-a-3-a-day-budget-16fbf6dabca.html
http://www.amazon.com/Eat-Vegan-4-00-Day-Conscious/dp/1570672571

These are all ways to eat well on a $3-4 a day budget. I personally live on about £17 a week (so about $26) which is more than enough for me That's without supplements too.

Also, I know people who live in Thailand and South Africa who live on a mainly vegan/veggie diet because it's cheaper a lot of the time. It's actually easier for me to eat when I'm over there because their dishes are so full of fresh vegetables and such that meat isn't always important!

 

[Treblaine]

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

Thanks, though in the past I used to be unreasonably hostile over this subject.

I guess what I didn't like about the concept of veganism was the dogma that seemed almost masochistic or monastic, denying meat as some sort of sill non-religious purity ritual. But I've since realise my problem was the reasons people chose to be vegan, not the actual veganism itself. I guess it's a case of doing the right thing for all the wrong reasons.

Anyway, I'm doing more research into the possibility of a "meat free society" though for the time being I'm going to keep eating animals and using animal products. There are a few major issues, like how we need dogs for things like guide dogs and sniffer dogs yet they really need a meat-based diet. Also whether it is more efficient to use waste biomass for cows to easily get milk AND fertiliser or focus more on producing bio-ethanol. It's tricky, but interesting.

I realise that if humanity ever hopes to explore the stars (and ultimatley conquer the inevitable death of our Sun), any spaceship would have to be vegan. It simply would not be practical to have cows and chickens on agriculture deck twenty three of the USS Enterprise, you've have to fix the exhaled CO2 from the air and very efficiently turn it back into edible and nutritious food. No need to be a smug git about it, it's pure practicality, I'm sure if Captain Picard beamed down to a planet and he was offered a cheese burger by a local tribesman he wouldn't be an uppity git and refuse it... though he might find it quaint that they had to eat other animals that ate plants that take energy from the sun.

 

[Tono Makt]

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.

Human nature. Most humans are moderate, generalized folk; they believe in the existence of a supreme being but don't see the hand of that being in every action they take. They tend to fall into either a Centre-Liberal or Centre-Conservative mode of thought, but don't assume their mode of thought is the only one that's worthwhile. They enjoy in moderation the things they enjoy; they might buy a DVD or BluRay that has extra features on it, they may go to a website to find more info about the item, they may even ghost in a forum or two once in a while. Some people don't eat much meat, either for medical reasons or personal reasons.

Then you get humans who are more concentrated, more extreme. Fundamentalists in various religions. Partisans in politics. Your average poster here on the Escapist. Vegetarians. They set themselves apart from the moderates and often will intentionally draw attention to themselves. (Though not always!)

And finally you get the crazy human beings who are extreme in their views. Extremist fundamentalists in proselytizing religions. Partisans who believe that any side but theirs is utterly evil and must be entirely destroyed. Otaku, hardcore LOST fans and people who must always be right on the Internet. And Vegans. Most of the time there is just no point in getting into a debate with someone at this level of concentration; the amount of effort it takes to stay at this level makes it nigh-impossible for them to see it from another vantage point.

So, summation: Vegan = Hardcore LOST fan. (I thought about going with Vegan = Browncoat, but Mrs. Makt has told me to stop poking the Browncloaks with shiny sticks.)

 

[Secret world leader (shhh)]

snip

This is all rather interesting. However, your hypohetical sitatuation doesn't seem to take into account the possibility/inevitibility of such spacefaring communities growing their own meat.

 

[Jammy2003]

Digesting grass? I don't know, I'm not a cow, I don't know what they consider important

Fun Fact: Cows can't really digest Grass.

My point was, you said that as the creator of the tests, we get to pick what's important. Therefore, the theoretical being would do the same surely? Cows are so fundamentally different to us that abscribing something "meaningful" would be subjective.

And we have a winner. That is why I cannot be compared to a Cow. Because they just are so fundamentally different.

If you want an example...

Wrong. We have totally been deeper then a Whale could go. James Cameron was just recently.

Why would...

Because gap between me and a cow or me and the theoretical being isn't the only contributing factor. What I am capable of is also important. It causes some key differences. Like I already explained, a Cow doesn't have a concept of life and death the way we have, so regardless of how much better the being is, it would still be a completly different experience for me then it is for a cow.

I don't agree...

What footage would that be? Pretty much every Animal has a fight/flight instinct, that however is not equivilant to the way we look at life and death. If you have footage that in any way illustrates that a cow has something similar, I might give you that point. On regard of "streching my brain" the thing is, in comparison to you, judging by some of the things you have been saying, I have a better idea of what I am talking about. I am by no means a expert, but these kind of things interest me, I enjoy reading about them and watching videos and what not. I'm not just throwing random ideas into the wind. When I say that I know of nothing meaningful a animal can do that we as a species can't do better, I am not joking. We've been to the deepest spots of the ocean, we've been to space, we tunnel through entire mountains and that's when we aren't climbing the things. To me it seems that you don't have the best concept of what incredible feats our species can accomplish.

Well for one...

Wait, we are counting insects too? I wasn't actually thinking of insects, especially since you know, nobody thinks twice about just squashing them, seemed too easy to bring them up to me, it's also why I haven't mentioned Mice or Rats either.

Also, just as a tip, while we may physically be good at alot of thing in proportion to our size (we are for instance porportionately stronger then elephants), I wouldn't assume that you could outrun most of the predators that you will encounter. Especially since outrunning wouldn't be enough, you'd have to have a large enough distance to begin with if you don't want something that is just plain faster then you just catching up before it runs out of steam.

Plus if we were going...

I'd wager that I myself have read enough about the kind of thing that I could be pretty useful, it wouldn't surprise me if I would end up saving your butt But then agan, I know for a fact that I'm above average, so I guess I don't count? I'd remind you that general intelligence is only so and so usefull, even if you were generally more intelligent then the person, it doesn't mean they aren't more knowledgeable on deserts or some of the specifics of your survival.

Ah, you are valuing the species as a whole...

Even on a individual basis a given human has more potential then any given animal. The fact that we are a highly adaptive species cannot be ignored because teaching and building upon each others ideas is what makes us the best of the best of the best. No other animal can do that the way we can. We are one of the few species that sees a failing in ourspecies and then instead of waiting around for natural selection, we just augment the situation to our advantage. And while a few other species do that kind of thing, no other species does it anywhere near as effective as we do.

I don't believe in some kind of choosen race, but we all come from the same basis, we've all had the same amount of time to evolve. not only are we at the top of the food chain, we rule that thing with a iron fist. We are, and nothing you say can refute this, the pinnacle of evolution up until this point and it really doesn't look like anyone else will be catching up anytime soon.

Consider the following. We are currently having ethical discussions about designer babies. Do you comprehend what that means? It means, we are pretty close to being able to enter realities God Mode Cheat and controlling our own evolution. And that would pretty much be the human singularity.

True, there are many different reasons the calf...

Yes, tons of possibilities. That the Cow reasoned that the calf would be taken away and even reasoned that the Owner would know something was up if she showed without any calf at all, is probably the least likely of reasons. I'm not sure if it's entirely impossible, but at the very least it's extremly improbable.

As there is mostly agreement except testing...

I'm too lazy to look that up right now, so I'll just take your word for it.

We must live in different communities then...

I don't want to eat a Dog. I don't give a shit if someone in China does. I do give a shit if the Dog is being subject to pointless cruelty.

See? Whether I would want to eat it or not has no bearing on the actual reason why I don't think some others should. You'll find this applies to most people, because they have no actual reason to otherwise even pretend they give a shit.

True, it is exaggerated, but with my nan having been a town gossip and also having lived in that town all of her life, I heard a lot about some people. But fine, I hold to it, you disagree, that's allowed

Would you like to hear a personal story about the truth content of gossip?

I happend to work with one of the gossip chicks in our area. Somehow, suddenly rumors started sprouting up that I was gay (because she didn't know I had a girlfriend) and that I was planning on shooting up a school that I used to go to (based on me liking video games and not being that talkative type [in comparison to her ofcourse] ). I'm now engaged to said Girlfriend and if I'd shoot some School up I wouldn't be here discussing with you, I'd be either dead or behind bars. People that spread gossip tend to be very boring people, so they make up stories about other people so that somebody might be interested in giving them the light of day.

Ah, I thought your arguement was that...

No problem, misunderstanding are bound to occur.

Fair enough, we are perhaps similar in that...

Time and place man, time and place, you have to pick your battles, otherwise you'll just end up disillusionised. It's a issue, but it is nothing in comparison to alot of our more pressing issues, we need to take care of the stuff that can truely fuck us for good before we worry about the more minor stuff. Helping animals live a better life isn't going to do much good if that life is on a dying planet.

Really? I find that a little hard to believe...

Just because it's different doesn't mean it can't be compared, otherwise how do we test their intellegence compared to ours to conclude they aren't intellegent? You can't claim they are completely different to us, so you can't be compared to them, but then compare them to us.

Huh, curious, last I remember hearing was that it was only unmanned probes but google proves you to be correct. Hmm..... Cows are better at getting on with one another than people? They don't bomb each other or invent atomic bombs? (Unless that's a new name for cow pats I haven't heard of).

I guess the footage I have seen, I give the reactions different meaning. I've seen chickens grieving, same with cows, seal mothers and birds. Without having a common language how would you show to me that you have a understanding of life and death such that it fills that criteria? Or even know you are meant to be showing me it?
How can you test an animal for emotions with judging which "expressions" they do to display those emotions? As we have both said, they are fundamentally different, and so how can we tell without "Humanising" them?

I know about the great stuff humanity has done, I guess I just see the bad stuff too. But I don't see why animals have to be able to do something better than us to be considered worthy of consideration. I'm somewhat new to these concepts to myself, and still have to sort them out in my own head before I can describe them, so maybe I don't come across as clearly as I could. And maybe it's because I used to spend more time dwelling on the atrocities that humans have commited that I'm more forgiving of animals apparent shortcomings. Recovering misanthrope here remember? I have to always try see the best of things, the most potential, or it all goes to shit... And that probably skews my views somewhat.

Haha, I didn't consider them until I started considering my chances against any animal out there, but that pretty much decided it for me
Unless it's a large enough predator that is actually likely to be aggressive from the get go and not just run away from me as I run away from it, then my chances wouldn't be too bad. And I read a fair number of bits and pieces, though you may be able to help. But it's 1 in 8 billion I'd get you out there in the desert, just as much chance I'm there with George Bush, whom I don't imagine to be the most helpful of people!

We are headed that way, which will be a good thing I hope. We did reach the top, and I wouldn't argue that point, just that it still doesn't determine worth, at least not to me. I still prefer to do it on an individual basis, on each persons contribution personally and not in relation to everything humans have accomplished. Guess that's just the way I have to look at it.

Hmm, most people I know, those that it's been idly brought up around them, have been pretty violently against the eating of dog, and not just that they wouldn't want to. There seems to be a general attitude of scorn to those who do even in some cases, as it seems to relate too closely to Lassie over in the corner. But maybe that's different where you are

It's probably a debated statement anyway, there is always evidence to back up both sides, or there wouldn't be an arguement in the first place.

Most people on this site have been the victim of vicious gossip, so I'm sorry to hear that. I guess I give that point as hearsay then, but the fact he couldn't read or count still stands in my eyes with regards to intellegence compared to elephants. Just in that they are closer to humans than many would care to admit.

I am trying to pick my battles to those things I can influence. I used to get bogged down in all the huge things, everything that politics entangles and makes impossible for me to really have any effect upon. I'm studying Physics in the aim to either help renewable energy, or work on robotics connected to the nervous system (deus ex, here we come!), and I'll help in those areas as I can. I can vote with my wallet in terms of how I want my food produced and other aspects. Can I really do anything to help solve the economic crisis? Not that I'm aware of, so I'll go with what I can have an effect on, as small as it may be.

 

[Treblaine]

snip

This is all rather interesting. However, your hypohetical sitatuation doesn't seem to take into account the possibility/inevitibility of such spacefaring communities growing their own meat.

Well that raises an interesting paradox.

Veganism is usually defined as not eating either the flesh of animal nor the any products from them.

But if you grow meat in a petri dish, or in some other chemical vat process, that was completely newly created and never came from any animal. Would you still fit the definition of vegan to knowingly and willingly eat that? There are a lot of meat substitutes made entirely from plant matter that are very meat like. Not steak, but sausages and mince and similar such, you can still be considered vegan eating those.

But there is a similar problem with growing steaks in a vat as growing the whole animal. The space problem is greatly solved and is much more efficient but you still have to "fix" carbon in the air (CO2 form) to organic carbon before it can be added to the synthetic steak to absorb the nutrients. The steak must absorb the same nutrients that you and I need, and the Carbon must be fixed by some sort of plant. So so the synthetic steak process is an extra step of inefficiency, might as well go straight from the carbon fixed in a plant to a meal.

Unless...

Unless the carbon fixed is by some sort of disgusting algae that no human can drink without retching. But instead the algae is regularly purified, blended and then fed into the synthetic steaks which change the nutrients into something much more palatable.

Maybe then. But by then the definition of "meat" will have to be modified. Today you cannot get meat without an animal dying to get it. But it's different in so many ways when you grow the meat without the animal.

 

[MortisLegio]

Animals clearly have desires. They clearly feel pain. I don't see any scientific reason why a human being with severe mental retardation should be considered any more important than a pig.

Sir, you have convinced me!

We SHOULD be serving up the mentally retarded for dinner! Just think of the world hunger problems we could solve!

We'd be cleaning up the genepool on the side! It's fantastic!

I actually made a similar argument for a paper. Got an A.

OT:Of the vegans I've known they do it to protect animals. I also love animals and find them delicious.

Captcha: Moveable Feast - Another name for cows.

 

[galaktar]

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?

It comes down to food economics. Farmers basically spend all day thinking about ways to maximize profit, so they wouldn't just throw away a valuable resource for no reason. As chicks, roosters haven't consumed much, if any, food. If they grow they will have to be separated from all of the hens, and from each other at enormous expense, otherwise they will kill each other and impregnate all of the hens (no useful eggs), and the probably kill some of the hens too. What i'm getting at is that roosters are assholes.

 

[galaktar]

I'm an abolitionist, in that I think even non-human animals should be considered moral "persons" due to their ability to suffer and thus should not be slaughtered, held in ownership, or used as food producers.

I consider cows and pigs and chickens to be morally equivalent to retarded human beings, in that using them for our own benefit when they can't consent is immoral and a violation of their rights.

Animals clearly have desires. They clearly feel pain. I don't see any scientific reason why a human being with severe mental retardation should be considered any more important than a pig. Both deserve the right to exist free from violence or coercion. That includes not slaughtering them as well as not buying and selling them. If you wouldn't hook up a toddler to a milking machine, then I don't think you should hook a cow up to one.

What's so weird about that?

But then again, Vegans would call me a monster because my attitude is simple: We made these animals, they would not exist without us because we took the original animals and bred them/modified them to our purposes. The modern cow, pig, and chicken simply wouldn't exist without us, and we made them for specific purposes, such as meat, milk, and eggs. Thus, not using them for the reason we made them for is wasteful.

So if the slave trade had continued long enough that Africans developed particular genetic traits making them more useful as field workers, it would be okay to continue their bondage forever?

If not, please give me a scientific difference between the two situations.

Intelligence. The thing we value most is intelligence. Lets pretend that there is only enough room in a life boat for one more person. Do you take the able bodied but severely retarded person, or do you take Stephen Hawking, who was on a cruise for some reason. People matter because they are capable of reason.

Lets apply this logic to animals. Do you save the 100 jellyfish stranded on a beach or one dolphin (given the choice)? Even though their intelligence is debatable, a dolphin, great ape, problem solving octopus, etc. is much more valuable than other creatures because of their relative ability to reason.

Heck, when you look at the low end of the scale, animals aren't much smarter than plants.