Would you rather be a vegan or a vegetarian
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-06-2014, 12:41 PM
RE: Would you rather be a vegan or a vegetarian
(25-06-2014 12:40 PM)KyleRuby Wrote:  
(25-06-2014 12:37 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  No it is just fun knocking smug idiots back down to size.

Seems to me the ones bashing Veganism are being incredibly smug.

I know it can seem that way but when one is fully backed by facts it comes off as smug when you dismiss the other argument.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-06-2014, 12:42 PM
RE: Would you rather be a vegan or a vegetarian
(25-06-2014 12:35 PM)KyleRuby Wrote:  Damn everyone starts raging when Veganism comes up. Is it cognitive dissonance that makes people lash out? Do they feel threatened by people who have decided to reject the status quo for a stronger moral foundation?


Alright man being vegan does not make you more moral. I don't get why many vegans think about treating cows right, but then sit down as people who are getting shot in gang violence are ignored or not as important. Before you sit down and think about helping cows be safe, let us get pass getting our own damn species safe. KBig Grin?

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-06-2014, 12:47 PM
Would you rather be a vegan or a vegetarian
(25-06-2014 12:31 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(25-06-2014 12:26 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Now that I look at this again, where doe the whole eating animals is murder thing come from? I mean murder is not the right word due to the defenition. Here let me show you

1.
Law. the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder) and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder)
2.
Slang. something extremely difficult or perilous: That final exam was murder!
3.
a group or flock of crows.
verb (used with object)
4.
Law. to kill by an act constituting murder.
5.
to kill or slaughter inhumanly or barbarously.
6.
to spoil or mar by bad performance, representation, pronunciation, etc.: The tenor murdered the aria.

The only one that one can argue is murder is number 5, but even then it depends on the person you brought the meat from. So saying eating meat is murder must seems to mean that everybody tortures animals before eating them, not including that animals that are tortured and not eaten can be left outside an eaten by other wild animals.

Just my 2 cents.

You are attempting to use facts and logic when dealing with religious fanatics. Veganism is not based on anything but feels. Even a cursory knowledge of human anatomy reveals we are omnivores and any argument against this is no longer based in the real world.

I agree that it's totally a moral philosophy. I'm one of the first people to jump on idiotic pseudoscience claims about what humans are "supposed" to eat when it comes to health and nutrition. Like PETA's latest craziness suggesting a link between milk and autism. Nonsense. But being able to consume animal products doesn't mean we have to. Many people love as close to a plant based lifestyle as one reasonably can and they're not only surviving but thriving. I've been eating plant based for over 7 years and I'm doing fine.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-06-2014, 12:49 PM
Would you rather be a vegan or a vegetarian
(25-06-2014 12:40 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(25-06-2014 12:35 PM)KyleRuby Wrote:  Do they feel threatened by people who have decided to reject the status quo for a stronger moral foundation?

Perhaps it's the self-righteousness of those who wander in and claim the mantle of a stronger moral foundation, despite there being no bases on which to plant such a claim, that is slightly annoying?

That's not a particularly winning attitude when theists do it, either.

I certainly wouldn't characterise my single post in this thread as "raging", either; so there's that

I'm not sure who you're referring to. I made a sarcastic joke saying "this is true" in response to a quote and video that is also meant to be a joke. Who was being self righteous? Who was on the offensive here?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-06-2014, 12:51 PM
RE: Would you rather be a vegan or a vegetarian
(25-06-2014 12:39 PM)KyleRuby Wrote:  
(25-06-2014 12:29 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Anyone who thinks there can be a meaningful distinction drawn between the effect on non-human lives of a single person's life in modern society depending on whether or not they eat direct animal products is either uninformed or just doesn't care. The difference is immaterial.

Most veganism is based on very shallow and emotive reasoning.

Could you rephrase this? It's worded strangely. So, I'm not exactly sure what you mean. Distinction between what and what?

I thought it was clear enough.

Taking our assumption that veganism is predicated on a desire for "animal welfare" (an extremely vague and fuzzy term), we can look at the impact a human life has on general animal welfare.

The distinction between one who consumes animal products directly (this "directly" is a very important word - does it include apples pollinated by domestically-kept bees? there's no possible clear distinction) and one who does not - but who still participates in society - is immaterial.

All human agriculture, all human industry, all human migration; these things have far, far greater effect on "animal welfare" than whether or not you pour cow milk, goat milk, soy milk, or almond milk on your wheaties in the morning.

One can (I would even say should) work to minimise those impacts. But that's hardly the point at hand.
(but it's also of note that the lower impact and more environmentally friendly methods are almost entirely less efficient, and thus cannot be scaled up as replacements - but that's a complicated problem far beyond the scope of how baseless veganism is)

Someone like me would certainly agree that large parts of society eat too much meat, because of its historical links to prosperity and masculinity. But the lunatic fringe overcorrection (not "less" but NONE EVER) doesn't seem warranted.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cjlr's post
25-06-2014, 12:52 PM
Would you rather be a vegan or a vegetarian
(25-06-2014 12:40 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(25-06-2014 12:35 PM)KyleRuby Wrote:  Do they feel threatened by people who have decided to reject the status quo for a stronger moral foundation?

Perhaps it's the self-righteousness of those who wander in and claim the mantle of a stronger moral foundation, despite there being no bases on which to plant such a claim, that is slightly annoying?

That's not a particularly winning attitude when theists do it, either.

I certainly wouldn't characterise my single post in this thread as "raging", either; so there's that

Also by stronger moral foundation I meant one that they perceive to be stronger than the one they already had. Of course I think I am living a more ethical lifestyle now than I was before I went vegan. That's why u did it. I also quit drinking because I realized that booze turns me into an asshole. That too was a moral choice for me. I don't want to hurt others for my personal enjoyment. That's all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-06-2014, 12:54 PM
RE: Would you rather be a vegan or a vegetarian
(25-06-2014 12:49 PM)KyleRuby Wrote:  
(25-06-2014 12:40 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Perhaps it's the self-righteousness of those who wander in and claim the mantle of a stronger moral foundation, despite there being no bases on which to plant such a claim, that is slightly annoying?

That's not a particularly winning attitude when theists do it, either.

I certainly wouldn't characterise my single post in this thread as "raging", either; so there's that

I'm not sure who you're referring to. I made a sarcastic joke saying "this is true" in response to a quote and video that is also meant to be a joke. Who was being self righteous? Who was on the offensive here?

I could hardly care less about that particular post. My response was addressing the comment of yours I replied to and emphasized.

That rhetoric - "rejecting the status quo in favour of a stronger moral foundation" - is almost singularly unproductive, and very rarely comes close to being warranted.

EDIT:
(25-06-2014 12:52 PM)KyleRuby Wrote:  Also by stronger moral foundation I meant one that they perceive to be stronger than the one they already had. Of course I think I am living a more ethical lifestyle now than I was before I went vegan. That's why u did it. I also quit drinking because I realized that booze turns me into an asshole. That too was a moral choice for me. I don't want to hurt others for my personal enjoyment. That's all.

I appreciate the clarification. That's a far more reasonable way of putting things.

Kind of tautological - people very rarely do things because they think of it as morally inferior! - but fair enough so far as it goes.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cjlr's post
25-06-2014, 01:02 PM
Would you rather be a vegan or a vegetarian
(25-06-2014 12:51 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(25-06-2014 12:39 PM)KyleRuby Wrote:  Could you rephrase this? It's worded strangely. So, I'm not exactly sure what you mean. Distinction between what and what?

I thought it was clear enough.

Taking our assumption that veganism is predicated on a desire for "animal welfare" (an extremely vague and fuzzy term), we can look at the impact a human life has on general animal welfare.

The distinction between one who consumes animal products directly (this "directly" is a very important word - does it include apples pollinated by domestically-kept bees? there's no possible clear distinction) and one who does not - but who still participates in society - is immaterial.

All human agriculture, all human industry, all human migration; these things have far, far greater effect on "animal welfare" than whether or not you pour cow milk, goat milk, soy milk, or almond milk on your wheaties in the morning.

One can (I would even say should) work to minimise those impacts. But that's hardly the point at hand.
(but it's also of note that the lower impact and more environmentally friendly methods are almost entirely less efficient, and thus cannot be scaled up as replacements - but that's a complicated problem far beyond the scope of how baseless veganism is)

Someone like me would certainly agree that large parts of society eat too much meat, because of its historical links to prosperity and masculinity. But the lunatic fringe overcorrection (not "less" but NONE EVER) doesn't seem warranted.
Thank you.
I disagree. Reducing or minimizing our impact especially where it's easy and within our means to do so is exactly the point for me. I've decided to do my part to reduce demand on a less efficient and sustainable method of food production which also depends on killing and sometimes torturing that animals that become its product. I don't have to be a nut about it and walk on my tippy toes every time I go outside to avoid stepping on ants. It's funny when people so often talk about how unreasonable Veganism is while simultaneously placing extremely unrealistic expectations on Veganism.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-06-2014, 01:06 PM
RE: Would you rather be a vegan or a vegetarian
(25-06-2014 01:02 PM)KyleRuby Wrote:  
(25-06-2014 12:51 PM)cjlr Wrote:  I thought it was clear enough.

Taking our assumption that veganism is predicated on a desire for "animal welfare" (an extremely vague and fuzzy term), we can look at the impact a human life has on general animal welfare.

The distinction between one who consumes animal products directly (this "directly" is a very important word - does it include apples pollinated by domestically-kept bees? there's no possible clear distinction) and one who does not - but who still participates in society - is immaterial.

All human agriculture, all human industry, all human migration; these things have far, far greater effect on "animal welfare" than whether or not you pour cow milk, goat milk, soy milk, or almond milk on your wheaties in the morning.

One can (I would even say should) work to minimise those impacts. But that's hardly the point at hand.
(but it's also of note that the lower impact and more environmentally friendly methods are almost entirely less efficient, and thus cannot be scaled up as replacements - but that's a complicated problem far beyond the scope of how baseless veganism is)

Someone like me would certainly agree that large parts of society eat too much meat, because of its historical links to prosperity and masculinity. But the lunatic fringe overcorrection (not "less" but NONE EVER) doesn't seem warranted.

I disagree. Reducing or minimizing our impact especially where it's easy and within our means to do so is exactly the point for me. I've decided to do my part to reduce demand on a less efficient and sustainable method of food production which also depends on killing and sometimes torturing that animals that become its product. I don't have to be a nut about it and walk on my tippy toes every time I go outside to avoid stepping on ants. It's funny when people so often talk about how unreasonable Veganism is while simultaneously placing extremely unrealistic expectations on Veganism.

Yabut, your protein is not as good as meat.

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-06-2014, 01:10 PM
RE: Would you rather be a vegan or a vegetarian
(25-06-2014 01:02 PM)KyleRuby Wrote:  I disagree. Reducing or minimizing our impact especially where it's easy and within our means to do so is exactly the point for me.

Indeed. But only a Sith deals in absolutes.
(hint: vegans are absolutists)

Impact by what standard? Ecological? That's actually arguable. Subjectively emotive? No so much...
(and it's the far more common, when it comes down to it)

(25-06-2014 01:02 PM)KyleRuby Wrote:  I've decided to do my part to reduce demand on a less efficient and sustainable method of food production which also depends on killing and sometimes torturing that animals that become its product.

Did you not hear what I just said?

All human food production kills huge numbers of animals.

Plus, "torture" is a very emotive and unsubstantiated descriptor. That generally doesn't help.

(25-06-2014 01:02 PM)KyleRuby Wrote:  I don't have to be a nut about it and walk on my tippy toes every time I go outside to avoid stepping on ants.

No, and there's a reason conservationist publicity only deals with charismatic megafauna.

So already, in practice it's a matter of caring about some animals under some conditions some of the time.
(so much for the absolutes! but then, why maintain the rhetoric?)

(25-06-2014 01:02 PM)KyleRuby Wrote:  It's funny when people so often talk about how unreasonable Veganism is while simultaneously placing extremely unrealistic expectations on Veganism.

Unrealistic expectations like actually following the letter of their self-proclaimed tenets?

You're free to do whatever you like, but self-applying an unhelpful and essentially meaningless term might not be the best course of action.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cjlr's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: