Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-04-2012, 04:19 PM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
(26-04-2012 03:36 PM)tazmin98 Wrote:  I think veggies secretly eat bacon in the closet... No one can resist the smell of bacon!!
Amen sister!

So many cats, so few good recipes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2012, 04:44 PM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
(26-04-2012 03:36 PM)tazmin98 Wrote:  I think veggies secretly eat bacon in the closet... No one can resist the smell of bacon!!
I can resist it! Actually I hate the smell.... now TVP-veggie based "bacon"... that's different (not smell, just the stuff itself).
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2012, 05:19 PM
RE: No.
(20-04-2012 09:02 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(20-04-2012 08:53 PM)elemts Wrote:  The main argument that I hear is that most of the humans' teeth are designed for vegetation, not ripping flesh--and that humans' digestive system is designed for vegetation more than meat. The closest thing to fangs, strength I hear is that considering the amount of energy that humans would use to catch animals, they'd have to make a huge kill otherwise they'd have used more energy than they will acquire.

Or even as most vegetarians (OK, All that I know) say: humans are omnivores. We can eat virtually anything. Now the catch comes as I've seen things that say we can't live on only meat, but we can live off of vegetation only.
No, we can't be healthy on plants only. There are chemicals you can't get from plants.

Our canines and incisors evolved to rend flesh, our molars to crush plants and bones.

Veganism and vegetarianism are ethical choices that people make. I don't share their ethos.


Quote:Then we get into the hormones used that get into the water and into us. There's a reason that 10 year old girls have the breasts and figures of 18 year olds.
Oh, I thought that was just a bonus.
I would argue that people can be quite healthy on a vegetarian diet as opposed to a vegan one.

At least one study carried out with Seventh Day Adventist vegetarians, showed a marked decrease in cancers of all types. There have been fit and strong vegetarian body builders and the great alleged values of meat serve best the interests of the meat industry, their food factories, and such establishments that turn a food type into a fad.

It is hard to justify the huge amount of meat consumed by some people either nutritionally or etically.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2012, 07:26 PM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
(26-04-2012 09:59 AM)NotSoVacuous Wrote:  
(26-04-2012 05:46 AM)Filox Wrote:  Pih, that is all you want? Look around you and then redefine the word "natural". All those things you just said are natural today. That is because we live in a fucked up word, we are all corrupted by our technology and scientific advances. So, fuck it, "natural" is one of those archaic words, something we have lost and redefined to suit our modern needs.

But worry not, after the WW3 we will all be forced to go back to the nature, this time in a real sense. Then you will have to eat meat, because there would be no choosing what you want to eat, but what you have for eating.

Thanx to human stupidity, it may come sooner than you would expect. Pray to your Gods that I am just being stupid all the time.

Smile
(26-04-2012 08:18 AM)germanyt Wrote:  I'm not debating what is or isn't natural. Just pointing that we are indeed omnivores. So in that case it's perfectly okay to chock eating meat up to genetics and nature. As for your points at the end. All animals do not endure suffering before they are killed. And we have legislation in place as an attempt to prevent it. Trees are a renewable resource and last I knew we weren't causing mass extinction via reduced habitat. And I don't agree with climatologists who argue for global warming. So in short, I just plain don't give a fuck about your reasons and happen to enjoy eating meat very, very much. So until eating mean causes a problem that I actually have a problem with then I'll keep eating it.

/thread
This is addressed to both of you--and a few others who I won't waste time mentioning.

-Can't defend appeals to nature when asked.
-Won't defend appeals to nature when asked.
-But will use appeals to nature despite no justification.


The epitome of being irrational.

I am done with this discussion, because apparently I am the only one partaking in it.
And you haven't justified dismissing the argument from nature.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2012, 07:41 PM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
(26-04-2012 07:26 PM)Chas Wrote:  And you haven't justified dismissing the argument from nature.
Quote:Please, someone, for the love of god, tell me why we keep going back to appeals to nature. Explain to me why it is a justification for anything. If you are doing things, because it is "natural" you need to step back and rethink the situation. There are better reasons for doing things than "it is natural."

Example: I have sex, not because it is natural, but because it feels good, and harms no one. (There's a joke or two coming from this, I feel it...)
Example: I eat, because I want to live, not because I have to because nature intended it that way.

A better justification for your actions must be found.
This thread's ignorance is really tiring me out...

Also, justification is required from the person partaking in the action. Not the other way around. Call me an Ameatist.

Btw, 5 pages later, I am STILL waiting for the justification that I am owed.

"We Humans are capable of greatness." -Carl Sagan
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2012, 08:07 PM (This post was last modified: 26-04-2012 08:31 PM by Antirepublican.)
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
(26-04-2012 07:41 PM)NotSoVacuous Wrote:  
(26-04-2012 07:26 PM)Chas Wrote:  And you haven't justified dismissing the argument from nature.
Quote:Please, someone, for the love of god, tell me why we keep going back to appeals to nature. Explain to me why it is a justification for anything. If you are doing things, because it is "natural" you need to step back and rethink the situation. There are better reasons for doing things than "it is natural."

Example: I have sex, not because it is natural, but because it feels good, and harms no one. (There's a joke or two coming from this, I feel it...)
Example: I eat, because I want to live, not because I have to because nature intended it that way.

A better justification for your actions must be found.
This thread's ignorance is really tiring me out...

Also, justification is required from the person partaking in the action. Not the other way around. Call me an Ameatist.

Btw, 5 pages later, I am STILL waiting for the justification that I am owed.
You are completely vacuous.

Lets look at your examples,

Example: I have sex, not because it is natural, but because it feels
good, and harms no one. (There's a joke or two coming from this, I feel
it...)

It feels good, because it was designed to by nature. You evolved that way to ensure the species survived.


Example: I eat, because I want to live, not because I have to because nature intended it that way.

You do eat because you want to live, because nature built you with a strong desire to live. You feel hunger pain, the taste satisfaction while eating, and the satisfaction of being full after eating. Again, you evolved that way to ensure the species survived.


So you can falsely argue that nature plays no role in the activities you do, but of course you would be dead wrong.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-04-2012, 01:58 AM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
The point he is trying to make is that if we eat meat because it is natural, why don't we do all other stuff then as well, stuff like no wearing cloths, not watching TV and other natural/unnatural things.

I actually did explain that, but as usual, I am not heard in the right way. It is abut prioritising things, someone prioritise food, someone TV watching. As for me, if I could, I would live in the woods all alone. What is the problem? The law that prohibits me from hunting without a permit, prohibit me form having a hunters weapon (gun, bow and arrow or crossbow) without a permit and even then I have to use what they like, not what I want. Then, there is all sorts of other regulations and laws I have to abide, so it is pretty impossible to live like some might want. When it comes to food, I have a choice, I can choose what I want. I have chosen what feels normal and natural to me and that is all the food I eat. I don't claim it is the natural way of things (although I don't see how it is not), but I claim it FEELS natural and normal TO ME. It may not look like that to you, but is not the problem of what is natural or not, it is a problem of how me and you view and understand the world around us, which, again, brings us back to the word PERCEPTION.

Now, I can't explain why it is natural to me, it just is, it is the normal part of my life, I eat meat. Period. It is the way I was raised, it is the way I am surrounded it is the way I live every day.

I would like to hear your explanation how do you see this as not-natural thing? I see your vegetarianism as your choice, your free will, not natural way of things, or to be more precise, it is natural and normal for you, but not for me, which, again, brings us back to the word PERCEPTION.

Want to philosophy some more?

Smile

[Image: a6505fe8.jpg]
I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours.
-Hunter S. Thompson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-04-2012, 06:05 AM (This post was last modified: 27-04-2012 06:09 AM by NoahsFarce.)
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
(26-04-2012 07:41 PM)NotSoVacuous Wrote:  
(26-04-2012 07:26 PM)Chas Wrote:  And you haven't justified dismissing the argument from nature.
Quote:Please, someone, for the love of god, tell me why we keep going back to appeals to nature. Explain to me why it is a justification for anything. If you are doing things, because it is "natural" you need to step back and rethink the situation. There are better reasons for doing things than "it is natural."

Example: I have sex, not because it is natural, but because it feels good, and harms no one. (There's a joke or two coming from this, I feel it...)
Example: I eat, because I want to live, not because I have to because nature intended it that way.

A better justification for your actions must be found.
This thread's ignorance is really tiring me out...

Also, justification is required from the person partaking in the action. Not the other way around. Call me an Ameatist.

Btw, 5 pages later, I am STILL waiting for the justification that I am owed.
I can't speak for everyone, but you better not group me into the comment you just made. Call me ignorant and I will debate you to death.

I gave you plenty of justification. You want to get all philosophical on us? First of all, I am a firm believer that philosophy has no significant place in debates of this nature. You and I can debate philosophy all day long and it will be no different from flexing our peens in the mirror. Subjective BS in other words. This is exactly why William Lane Craig fails so miserably in debates. Philosophy is a great subject to debate when philosophy is the subject. It's a great social topic to bring up in conversation. I love talking philosophy over a brewski. But in real-world issues, leave it at home.

Others, including myself, already brought up that human-beings by nature are omnivores. This is an evolutionary byproduct that cannot be ignored in terms of debating the subject. Yet you brush off this "natural" explanation as no fucking big deal. Yea, thousands of years of human evolution means diddly squat.

What I also emphasized is that we have the unique ability to make a conscious choice to go against this natural inclination towards eating both meat and vegetables. Guess what? This ability to make that choice is also and evolutionary by-product. So the very process you just flicked off like a fresh booger you just picked is the reason YOU are able make a choice about consuming meat.

I'm a bit confused because admittedly, I only read a few of your recent posts on this. What exactly are you arguing here? That eating animals is not the moral action because we have a brain that can realize this? If so, weren't you trying to argue that dolphins are very intelligent much like us? Dolphins are neither vegetarians nor vegans. They are carnivores.

That's the thing, animals eat animals. We are animals. To say any different is venturing into the same realm that religious people do.

What's my point? It is not meat-eaters that need to justify slaughtering and consuming meat. It is YOU VEGANS AND VEGETARIANS that owe US a justification. For it is YOU that goes against the nature of us animals.

Let me ask you vegans something (and hardcore vegetarians), where do you get your protein from? How about Omega-3? Iron? If not from supplements (not sure you can get significant omega-3 without them), you get it from farmed vegetables like soy beans. Well how convenient that you can obtain products such as tofu and other vegan items enriched with nutrients like protein and omega-3 in a neat little super market. So convenient in fact that you now have the ability to make the choice not to eat meat.

Do you see what I'm getting at? The natural explanation for eating both meat and vegetables is perfectly sufficient. Without the first world luxury that we all enjoy, you vegans and hardcore vegetarians would be severely lacking in nutrients.

And DO NOT attempt to insult my intelligence by giving me bullshit remarks about how you could farm stuff or obtain it by consuming buckets of this and that vegetable.

AND YOU STILL OWE ME AN EXPLANATION AS TO WHY YOU HARM PLANTS WHEN THEY ARE LIVING ORGANISMS TOO.

“We are all connected; To each other, biologically. To the earth, chemically. To the rest of the universe atomically.”

-Neil deGrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes NoahsFarce's post
27-04-2012, 06:16 AM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
Meh... I just eat meat because it tastes amazing. Don't know why everyone is going all Hulk over this.

[Image: opforum1.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-04-2012, 06:50 AM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
Because HULK SMASH little man and eat only meat!! HULK SMASH, HULK SMASH!!

Where did I read it, here somewhere...
"Vegetarian - an Indian word for bad hunter..."

Big Grin

[Image: a6505fe8.jpg]
I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours.
-Hunter S. Thompson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: