Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-04-2012, 08:25 AM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
It is as moral as nature is. We are animals, omnivores at that, why some people feel the need to show an irrational amount of empathy for cattle is beyond me.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Logica Humano's post
23-04-2012, 08:50 AM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
Your lobes can argue all they want but you are still an animal and by nature, an omnivore. The evidence is in the evolution of your teeth. So stop being a pussy and eat a fucking ribeye. Tongue

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like germanyt's post
23-04-2012, 11:40 AM (This post was last modified: 23-04-2012 11:47 AM by NotSoVacuous.)
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
Streetwaves,

You will not find many intellectual responses on this forum regarding vegetarianism or veganism. There are few who will give decent insight, but the majority here are blind. I on the other hand am a vegetarian. And I will give you my basis for it.

We are no different then the other animals when we get technical. We arguably do have the ability to feel more pain than another animals--among other emotions. Yet, this isn't a valid reason for eating them just because we are emotionally superior. We as humans can survive just fine without meat, in fact red meat is harmful to us--as you probably already know. So back to the basis for not eating them. Well being. Whether or not the animal can feel just as much pain or less, it still feels pain. It still has the ability to be happy and have that retracted. It still has the ability to love and have that retracted. It has the ability to be loyal and have that retracted.

Bottom line, there is something to retract from our fellow Earthlings, and I will not take part in it if I do not have to. Observe the arguments from your newly found forum members, it's littered with appeals to nature--how fallaciously obvious--about how "Animals do it!" "It's the natural order of things!" Yeah, well animals eat their own shit. Rhetoric hogwash.

Among other things, it's not just the animals well being that we should be concerned about; it is ours also. Currently 90 billion or so animals are being farmed for food. That supports only 4-5 billion people. It is already causing irreparable damage to this planet. Image if our population doubles. What if the amount of people who consume meat doubles with that? This isn't practice or rational.

I am slowly converting to veganism. It was easy to go from meat to vegetarian, but vegan I am finding difficult. My dairy consumption is low though. I drink soy instead of milk, and the only dairy I eat might be cheese every now and then, or the accidental purchasing of something that has whey in it--which is very minute.

Just reflect on what I had said, and now observe the idiotic responses from this thread. The rhetoric dodging of critical thinking.

Quote:Veganism can get lost. Meat power!!!!
Obvious refusing to acknowledge this issues and think critically.

Quote:It is a choice, not as baseline.

Nature is red in tooth and claw. I don't want to be unnatural.
Appeals to nature... Yeah, I don't need to say more.

Quote:So, a bloody beefsteak will kill me? Or the 100% raw tartar steak? Because I am still alive after eating all that raw meat, so it must be I am Superman!

[Image: biggrin.gif]
Fallaciously ignoring someones points again.



I hate to sound conceited, but I have yet to hear a good argument for eating meat. You will find nothing but idiots when displaying your questions to the public.

"We Humans are capable of greatness." -Carl Sagan
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-04-2012, 11:50 AM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
(23-04-2012 11:40 AM)NotSoVacuous Wrote:  Streetwaves,

You will not find many intellectual responses on this forum regarding vegetarianism or veganism. There are few who will give decent insight, but the majority here are blind. I on the other hand am a vegetarian. And I will give you my basis for it.

We are no different then the other animals when we get technical. We arguably do have the ability to feel more pain than another animals--among other emotions. Yet, this isn't a valid reason for eating them just because we are emotionally superior. We as humans can survive just fine without meat, in fact red meat is harmful to us--as you probably already know. So back to the basis for not eating them. Well being. Whether or not the animal can feel just as much pain or less, it still feels pain. It still has the ability to be happy and have that retracted. It still has the ability to love and have that retracted. It has the ability to be loyal and have that retracted.

Bottom line, there is something to retract from our fellow Earthlings, and I will not take part in it if I do not have to. Observe the arguments from your newly found forum members, it's littered with appeals to nature--how fallaciously obvious--about how "Animals do it!" "It's the natural order of things!" Yeah, well animals eat their own shit. Rhetoric hogwash.

Among other things, it's not just the animals well being that we should be concerned about; it is ours also. Currently 90 billion or so animals are being farmed for food. That supports only 4-5 billion people. It is already causing irreparable damage to this planet. Image if our population doubles. What if the amount of people who consume meat doubles with that? This isn't practice or rational.

I am slowly converting to veganism. It was easy to go from meat to vegetarian, but vegan I am finding difficult. My dairy consumption is low though. I drink soy instead of milk, and the only dairy I eat might be cheese every now and then, or the accidental purchasing of something that has whey in it--which is very minute.



I hate to sound conceited, but I have yet to hear a good argument for eating meat. You will find nothing but idiots when displaying your questions to the public.
Meat tastes good and we are at the top of the food chain. Don't like it? Fine. But don't delude yourself into moral superiority for it.

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes germanyt's post
23-04-2012, 03:29 PM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
Hey, Germany.

Humans are in the food web. Food chain is an outmoded term. Too linear. We're in a system. Systems form webs of connections. We're in the web, not atop it. But I grant you, meat is tasty. Ejaculating in a vagina feels great too but that doesn't make rape OK. Factory farming is worse than rape. It's rape, torture, imprisonment and murder. I'm not saying that means no one should eat meat, but that greater thought is called for.

Yo, NSV.

Preach, brother! Straight up.

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-04-2012, 03:55 PM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
(23-04-2012 03:29 PM)Ghost Wrote:  Hey, Germany.

Humans are in the food web. Food chain is an outmoded term. Too linear. We're in a system. Systems form webs of connections. We're in the web, not atop it. But I grant you, meat is tasty. Ejaculating in a vagina feels great too but that doesn't make rape OK. Factory farming is worse than rape. It's rape, torture, imprisonment and murder. I'm not saying that means no one should eat meat, but that greater thought is called for.

Yo, NSV.

Preach, brother! Straight up.

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
I could understand a moral objection to cattle farming but farming is what helped build communties and ended the days of the hunter/getherer. No longer did people have to travel long distances to find a good hunt. We are meat eaters and that will not change without some serious social and biological evolution. I'm thinking tens of thousands of years of behavior modification are necessary for it to happen. We are going to kill and eat the animals anyway. Why is it so different though to breed animals specifically for this purpose than it is to just hunt them all down?

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-04-2012, 06:29 PM (This post was last modified: 23-04-2012 06:34 PM by Ghost.)
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
Hey, Germany.

Don't get me wrong. Animal husbandry has its issues (the sedentarisation of man has caused some serious problems and that's only accomplished through agriculture and animal husbandry) but there is a huge difference between, say, Stark's farm, and (WARNING!!!! I watched like 2 seconds of this video and had to turn it off. For real, I was about to cry. DO NOT WATCH THIS VIDEO UNLESS YOU ARE PREPARED TO SEE HORRIBLE THINGS. There are things in life that you cannot un-see) a factory farm.

It isn't about abandoning meat or animal husbandry, or even hunting for that matter (although sport hunters are scum in my book). It's about our humanity and what we're willing to accept. There are limits. It's not a binary all or nothing situation.

ON EDIT: I was a vegan for 7.5 years. Since I went back to eating meat, maybe a year and a half ago, I have been completely conscious of the fact that although I cannot abide factory farming, I'm eating factory farmed meat anyway. I have settled the cognitive dissonance by purposefully ignoring my disgust with factory farming. This thread is returning the anxiety of that dissonance and making me rethink eating meat again. This is very difficult for me.

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-04-2012, 07:05 PM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
(23-04-2012 11:40 AM)NotSoVacuous Wrote:  
Quote:It is a choice, not as baseline.

Nature is red in tooth and claw. I don't want to be unnatural.
Appeals to nature... Yeah, I don't need to say more.
Why are the self-righteous so blind to humor? Lighten up.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
23-04-2012, 08:28 PM (This post was last modified: 23-04-2012 08:36 PM by NotSoVacuous.)
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
(23-04-2012 11:50 AM)germanyt Wrote:  
(23-04-2012 11:40 AM)NotSoVacuous Wrote:  Streetwaves,

You will not find many intellectual responses on this forum regarding vegetarianism or veganism. There are few who will give decent insight, but the majority here are blind. I on the other hand am a vegetarian. And I will give you my basis for it.

We are no different then the other animals when we get technical. We arguably do have the ability to feel more pain than another animals--among other emotions. Yet, this isn't a valid reason for eating them just because we are emotionally superior. We as humans can survive just fine without meat, in fact red meat is harmful to us--as you probably already know. So back to the basis for not eating them. Well being. Whether or not the animal can feel just as much pain or less, it still feels pain. It still has the ability to be happy and have that retracted. It still has the ability to love and have that retracted. It has the ability to be loyal and have that retracted.

Bottom line, there is something to retract from our fellow Earthlings, and I will not take part in it if I do not have to. Observe the arguments from your newly found forum members, it's littered with appeals to nature--how fallaciously obvious--about how "Animals do it!" "It's the natural order of things!" Yeah, well animals eat their own shit. Rhetoric hogwash.

Among other things, it's not just the animals well being that we should be concerned about; it is ours also. Currently 90 billion or so animals are being farmed for food. That supports only 4-5 billion people. It is already causing irreparable damage to this planet. Image if our population doubles. What if the amount of people who consume meat doubles with that? This isn't practice or rational.

I am slowly converting to veganism. It was easy to go from meat to vegetarian, but vegan I am finding difficult. My dairy consumption is low though. I drink soy instead of milk, and the only dairy I eat might be cheese every now and then, or the accidental purchasing of something that has whey in it--which is very minute.



I hate to sound conceited, but I have yet to hear a good argument for eating meat. You will find nothing but idiots when displaying your questions to the public.
Meat tastes good and we are at the top of the food chain. Don't like it? Fine. But don't delude yourself into moral superiority for it.
That's right, do what you do best as someone who is incapable of critical thinking, post idiotic remarks. Ignorance of your actions isn't justification for them. Thanks for proving my post correct by the way.

(23-04-2012 07:05 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(23-04-2012 11:40 AM)NotSoVacuous Wrote:  Appeals to nature... Yeah, I don't need to say more.
Why are the self-righteous so blind to humor? Lighten up.
The OP was expecting serious responses. I cannot help your humor mimics that of what a dumbass would take as infallible logic. Take a look, others are using appeals to nature, not just your trivial response. Don't get mad at me when you intentionally made a post to sound stupid.

"We Humans are capable of greatness." -Carl Sagan
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-04-2012, 08:45 PM
RE: Is veganism at the "moral baseline"?
(23-04-2012 08:28 PM)NotSoVacuous Wrote:  
(23-04-2012 07:05 PM)Chas Wrote:  Why are the self-righteous so blind to humor? Lighten up.
The OP was expecting serious responses. I cannot help your humor mimics that of what a dumbass would take as infallible logic. Take a look, others are using appeals to nature, not just your trivial response. Don't get mad at me when you intentionally made a post to sound stupid.
Well, your lack of humor is clear. And your lack of sense of proportion.

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: