We Are Supposed to Eat Animals !

[maskedmelon]

So, this vegan mother in Pensylvania like proponents of every other ideology decided it was a good idea to impose her delusions upon her baby, feeding him nothing but fruits and nuts. The child's father (he and the mother are separated of course) rescued the baby before it was too late and the woman is now being charged with child endangerment.

Basically plucked straight from the article below because it was too short to develop anything better and the topic just irritated me, squelching any creative inspiration...

Source (http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/vegan-mom-fed-her-11-month-old-only-fruit-and-nuts-now-she-faces-child-endangerment-charges/ar-BBx7ghw?li=BBnbfcL)

[Nihilist_santa]

Yeah these people are a bit whacked. It becomes this whole identity to be forced on others. I remember maybe a year or so ago there was someone on reddit that had posted a pic of their dog that they put on an all vegan diet. The dog looked miserable and several people and vets were railing on the owner in the comments. I wish I could find the post or the pics of the dog.

[Pokesan]

Yeah these people are a bit whacked. It becomes this whole identity to be forced on others. I remember maybe a year or so ago there was someone on reddit that had posted a pic of their dog that they put on an all vegan diet. The dog looked miserable and several people and vets were railing on the owner in the comments. I wish I could find the post or the pics of the dog.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkR2XEYEFgk

[Nihilist_santa]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkR2XEYEFgk

Ha nice. Pretty much that though. I found the info for the reddit post above which was apparently addressing a tumblr post.

The poster was like "someone looks excited" or some shit. This dogs eyes look sunken and his color seems off to me and clearly not excited.

http://i.imgur.com/blNy5xV.jpg

Here is a site talking about it with images of the vets convo with owner. I couldnt find the original post.

http://distractify.com/animals/2016/06/23/vegan-dog-owner-gets-owned

[Pokesan]

that sounds like someones art project attempting to make a point about human veganism

poor dog :(

[maskedmelon]

Poor doggy :c I understand not wanting to kill anything, but people just aren't designed to function naturally without meat. Yeah, it can work, but only with a lot of dietary care and subsidy. I'd eat a lot less animals if I couldn't buy them all chopped up into hardly recognizable chunks. I mean, I don't think I could even kill one. I can do fish, but still feel bad. So, yeah, I'd probably die in the wild, but whatever. Of course we're not in the wild, we are a part of society, so I don't have to kill animals, i can contribute in other ways ^^

I am just thankful for each animal who has given their life to sustain mine. Sure, maybe they'd have been happier eating a few more blades of grass or couple more worms before ending up in my tummy, but those blades of grass and worms might have enjoyed soaking up a few more days of sunlight or eating whateverthefuck worms eat before ending up in his tummy.

[Spyder73]

Higher cognitive functions require immense energy- turns out meat is the perfect source for this and carrots are not a replacement.

Scary thing is if we ever meet Aliens, they will most like be meat eatters (otherwise they would not have developed gud brains) so they will most likely be a warrior culture like Humans. Not going to find a spaceship full of smart cows, more likely scenario is the Predator movies

[Sodors Finest Poster]

Higher cognitive functions require immense energy- turns out meat is the perfect source for this and carrots are not a replacement.

Scary thing is if we ever meet Aliens, they will most like be meat eatters (otherwise they would not have developed gud brains) so they will most likely be a warrior culture like Humans. Not going to find a spaceship full of smart cows, more likely scenario is the Predator movies

Aliens will likely study our planet first and encounter people who stare at pixel walls for 16 straight hours. They will come to the conclusion that if we are slaves to pixels we can easily become slaves to their intergalactic empire.

[mickmoranis]

We came from the ocean but I dont breathe water anymore... Veg is healthier but I aint going to tell anyone outside of my children to eat it and it only.

Lab grown meat one day will solve all our problems. The dumb folks can eat it and feel self empowered and the smart folks can continue eating the super foods that gives them that inflated sense of self esteem.

[maskedmelon]

If they are advanced enough to reach us from another solar system, I don't think they would be inclined to eat or enslave us. They very likely would be unable to eat us anyway, ya know? That doesn't mean they wouldn't kill us to harvest resources from the earth. Maybe they eat dirt and rocks and stuff and would see us just as pests contaminating their mineral mills. They would have to be very smart and as a result have less regard for us. I do t think they would exterminate us entirely though, because as a super smart creature they would be very interested in us and curiosity would ensure they'd at least keep a few of us in a glass jar or maybe a few square miles of planet that the carve out for us. I do t think it would be unreasonable to assume they might transplant us to a new planet either (assuming the earth is their food and thy need to clean it up) where they could continue to observe us. They may or may not be long lived but would undoubtedly want to do lots of experiments on us to and would probably poke and prod us in all sorts of ways and fill us full of aphrodisiacs so that we produce lots and lots of babies for them to experiment on. They'd of course quickly sequence and catalogue our genome and be able to create random versions of us, but would keep us around in quarantine to study our behaviors and work to refine genes and produce better people which they could redolent on earth or maybe some other planet it if they instead eat all of it. Those people would retain the legacy from those of us who were kept as study pets, but would be disease resistant, smarter, stronger and of course free of nastiness like toe thumbs or turkey necks since only the best specimens would have been retained for study. Those people would then go on to make lots of babies as their and rebuild civilization erecting massive structures in reference to the 'gods' who created them. ***edit*** I suppose it is equally plausible that they might utilize us as incubators, depositing their young within our bodies for nourishment until they mature. There are all sorts of ways this might be done, but I suspect it would be done on a genetic level such that even with our current technology (which would be gone of course post-reintroduction) we'd not be able to readily identify their foreign nature. As highly advanced creatures, they would have awareness and knowledge of dimensions behind which only manifest to us as thoughts or ideas, which would be a direct representation of the creatures as they grow feeding on our extraplanar energies and attributes of which we are aware. The relationship would not necessarily be parasitic though. It could be symbiotic with them essentially functioning as our drive our ambitions or will, so we would seek and maybe even attain greatness thanks to their influence. In fact our identities would be inteinsically tied to their existence and without them we might not have any more awareness than a head of lettuce or a cow, which are really not very different at all except one smells and moves more than the other and requires more resources to grow. So I guess overall I am on the fence about aliens. They'd have to be advanced to get here and would regard is as primitive, but I don't know for certain what they'd do with us. I would not be happy to be ripped from my current life or have my planet eaten, but if it means the creation of a better more advanced, more perfect human, the. I guess it is ok. I don't know, what do you guys think?


Had to delete and repost because took too long w/ edit.

[Karkona]

I find the concept odd that we must consume other living creatures or living plants to keep ourselves alive. I guess God thought this was the best way to sustain an existence. I personally would have chosen some other way of making up the rules.

[mickmoranis]

I find the concept odd that we must consume other living creatures or living plants to keep ourselves alive. I guess God thought this was the best way to sustain an existence. I personally would have chosen some other way of making up the rules.

The irony is the fruit (apple) was a metaphor for meat (things with feelings) that god didn't want us to eat, but the devil tricked us all.

Now we are a world of sinners walk'n around pointing the finger at "scientists".

[big_ole_jpn]

If they are advanced enough to reach us from another solar system, I don't think they would be inclined to eat or enslave us. They very likely would be unable to eat us anyway, ya know? That doesn't mean they wouldn't kill us to harvest resources from the earth. Maybe they eat dirt and rocks and stuff and would see us just as pests contaminating their mineral mills. They would have to be very smart and as a result have less regard for us. I do t think they would exterminate us entirely though, because as a super smart creature they would be very interested in us and curiosity would ensure they'd at least keep a few of us in a glass jar or maybe a few square miles of planet that the carve out for us. I do t think it would be unreasonable to assume they might transplant us to a new planet either (assuming the earth is their food and thy need to clean it up) where they could continue to observe us. They may or may not be long lived but would undoubtedly want to do lots of experiments on us to and would probably poke and prod us in all sorts of ways and fill us full of aphrodisiacs so that we produce lots and lots of babies for them to experiment on. They'd of course quickly sequence and catalogue our genome and be able to create random versions of us, but would keep us around in quarantine to study our behaviors and work to refine genes and produce better people which they could redolent on earth or maybe some other planet it if they instead eat all of it. Those people would retain the legacy from those of us who were kept as study pets, but would be disease resistant, smarter, stronger and of course free of nastiness like toe thumbs or turkey necks since only the best specimens would have been retained for study. Those people would then go on to make lots of babies as their and rebuild civilization erecting massive structures in reference to the 'gods' who created them. ***edit*** I suppose it is equally plausible that they might utilize us as incubators, depositing their young within our bodies for nourishment until they mature. There are all sorts of ways this might be done, but I suspect it would be done on a genetic level such that even with our current technology (which would be gone of course post-reintroduction) we'd not be able to readily identify their foreign nature. As highly advanced creatures, they would have awareness and knowledge of dimensions behind which only manifest to us as thoughts or ideas, which would be a direct representation of the creatures as they grow feeding on our extraplanar energies and attributes of which we are aware. The relationship would not necessarily be parasitic though. It could be symbiotic with them essentially functioning as our drive our ambitions or will, so we would seek and maybe even attain greatness thanks to their influence. In fact our identities would be inteinsically tied to their existence and without them we might not have any more awareness than a head of lettuce or a cow, which are really not very different at all except one smells and moves more than the other and requires more resources to grow. So I guess overall I am on the fence about aliens. They'd have to be advanced to get here and would regard is as primitive, but I don't know for certain what they'd do with us. I would not be happy to be ripped from my current life or have my planet eaten, but if it means the creation of a better more advanced, more perfect human, the. I guess it is ok. I don't know, what do you guys think?


Had to delete and repost because took too long w/ edit.

i think in all likelihood we would be more valuable to interstellar species alive and untouched merely to study our progress, but how many of us would be taken and what those might suffer depends on whether their sexual drive was such that they found us amusing. :)

the entire "species" could be an outcast Mormon style tribe of the mother civilization run by a sick sex pervert who climbed the top of the cult hierarchy, achieved immortality thru technology and took control of everything computerized/robotic simply to maintain harems of sentient beings to torture! We could all be rendered immortal or immensely long lived and raped for eternity!

Better hope aliens aren't too similar to humans.

[Csihar]

It is a bit of strawman argument. Or a false dichotomy? There are, sadly, a lot of people who feed their children (and themselves) a poor diet, including vegans, but that doesn't mean the child's life was in danger because of a vegan diet. If you have a vegan diet wherein you don't consume vitamin B12 then you're not going to be very healthy and you will suffer. Eventually you'll suffer irreparable damage and die.

If you look on sites that advocate a vegan diet that actually know what they're talking about there will be a section dedicated to vitamin B12. Nuts and fruits will never take care of your nutritional needs.

So, was this child's life brought in danger because of a vegan diet or because of a very bad vegan diet? The article clearly agrees with the latter. The woman seems crazy and crazy is not synonymous with or limited to veganism.

In a "jungle" setting, sure, we need animal products. But you can live very healthily with a vegan diet in the modern world. Veganism isn't a delusion. The woman's particular ideas, are. Water and sunshine? ....

[skarlorn]

And animals are supposed to eat us

[maskedmelon]

My issue is that rather than accepting responsibility for one's nature and be thankful of the sacrifices necessary to sustain it, people adopt these sorts of practices as a method of placating conscience. If everyone adopted vegan diets and enforced them upon all other creatures, animal populations would explode and become unsustainable in very short order.

As food supplies for prey animals dwindled, they would begin to starve and suffer. Predator populations would follow suit as their food supplies (prey animals) diminished.

The alternative of course would be selective culling to maintain sustainable populations, but if nobody eats meat then the animals' deaths are less purposeful because their essence is discarded. Being eaten sustains a predator's life while sparing fellow prey lives from starvation due to over population. It is dual purposed.

One day we might possess the technology to be able to manage the population of small species in labs, denying natural reproduction by sterilizing all animals, but until that day, vegans may only practice veganism because others eat animals.

That is the issue that I have with it. Yes, killing animals is sad and I couldn't kill most, unless maybe they attacked me, but would still have a hard time. But that doesn't make denying ones role in an system that's developed over millions of years any more virtuous. We are supposed to eat animals.

It is a delusion in the sense that one is doing something virtuous because if everyone were equally 'virtuous' all would suffer catastrophe.

[Jarnauga]

meat in itself is not needed, it's more how you get the proteins that you do need for a healthy diet.

Once you find a way to get proteins without eating meat (eating soja and derivatives, seitan, etc) it's not that different. I have a vegetarian friend (ie no meat or fish, but still consume eggs and milk) who didn't eat any meat since 14 years and he's perfectly healthy.

thing is i dont think you can give tofu through a baby bottle lol. She should have breastfed him and that's it. dumbass.

[Vaye]

everyone is an expert when it comes to nutrition and politics lul.

if eating animals is so "natural" then why do humans have to use all sorts of tools to kill, cook, and flavor it to make it palatable? do you see any other species that does this? do you naturally salivate at the thought of ripping through your live prey's flesh, enjoying chewing through the fur and blood and all? because any other species that was designed for killing has those types of natural responses. none of you meat eaters would be willing to be faced with that reality. in fact, someone who did this would be sent to a mental institution.

this topic also triggers you because you know it's wrong, which is why you're so defensive and feel the need to make this thread and talk down to someone about their life choices which are different from your own. i'm confident with my own choice to be a vegetarian, so i don't have this insecurity where i need to convince other people i'm right so i'm okay about it.

what about all the american moms that feed their kids these mcdonalds diets who become blimps? which is worse? and who are you to decide how a mother is to raise her child. you need to just mind your own business.

[Saludeen]

This is a slippery slope into getting people to accept a 1984 style regulation of our children. "You fed your kid fruit and nuts, hand them over to the government because you're unfit as a parent in our opinion, and we make more money selling you supplements and baby food". That doesn't mean a diet of fruits and nuts is healthy for an infant, but what about all the parents who feed their kids fast food thats literally killing them? I also didn't see any science in that article to prove that the rash was related. And its ironic that they suggest soy while soy is terrible for you because its GMO and causes estrogen problems.

Best diet is fruit, nuts, fish, meat, eggs; a variety of REAL food with no additives. Perhaps thats paleo. And breastmilk for infants. And you may not need meat to be healthy but you'd need another source of zinc like oysters.

[Whirled]

I heard a rumor that soylent green... was...people
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IKVj4l5GU4

[Evia]

I'm vegetarian. I haven't eaten meat in 11 years. While I may personally believe eating animals is cruel and disgusting (that's a fucking corpse in your mouth,yo!) I'd never consider only feeding my kid fruits and nuts. You still need a variety of vegetables, fruits, grains, and alternative forms of protein.

[Barkingturtle]

The OP is a fat person, likely suffering severe depression, whiling 12-16 hours a day on this most derivative forum in an attempt to form social bonds. Take its dietary and lifestyle advice at your own peril, imo.

[maskedmelon]

everyone is an expert when it comes to nutrition and politics lul.

if eating animals is so "natural" then why do humans have to use all sorts of tools to kill, cook, and flavor it to make it palatable? do you see any other species that does this? do you naturally salivate at the thought of ripping through your live prey's flesh, enjoying chewing through the fur and blood and all? because any other species that was designed for killing has those types of natural responses. none of you meat eaters would be willing to be faced with that reality.

There are lots of people who would and do kill animals. So the last part of your argument is just silly ^^ I wouldn't, but I've already admitted that ^^ As for preparation, I imagine you just pull your potatoes straight out of the ground and pop them in your mouth? Cooking was a pivotal advancement toward civilization. You know why? It takes less time to consume & process nutrient dense flesh when it is cooked.

this topic also triggers you because you know it's wrong, which is why you're so defensive and feel the need to make this thread and talk down to someone about their life choices which are different from your own. i'm confident with my own choice to be a vegetarian, so i don't have this insecurity where i need to convince other people i'm right so i'm okay about it.

what about all the american moms that feed their kids these mcdonalds diets who become blimps? which is worse? and who are you to decide how a mother is to raise her child. you need to just mind your own business.

What frustrates me is when people's delusions foster misery. Veganism/vegetarianism is largely harmless, but when a mother endangers her own child because of a ridiculous sense of moral piety derived from a practice that if made universal would result in widespread misery as I've explained above. But of course you're right, the fact that other people do stupid and irresponsible things excuses this particular stupid and irresponsible thing.

I battle delusion wherever I encounter it because it is in the interest of humanity.

Compassion in the absence of reason is only by accident ever more than selfishness.

[maskedmelon]

The OP is a fat person, likely suffering severe depression, whiling 12-16 hours a day on this most derivative forum in an attempt to form social bonds. Take its dietary and lifestyle advice at your own peril, imo.

lol

[Vaye]

I battle delusion wherever I encounter it because it is in the interest of humanity.
gee, how righteous. and ironic that you don't see how delusional it is yourself to think that your ignorant posts on an elf simulator forum are actually going to do anything to improve humanity. solid.

[Csihar]

everyone is an expert when it comes to nutrition and politics lul.

if eating animals is so "natural" then why do humans have to use all sorts of tools to kill, cook, and flavor it to make it palatable? do you see any other species that does this? do you naturally salivate at the thought of ripping through your live prey's flesh, enjoying chewing through the fur and blood and all? because any other species that was designed for killing has those types of natural responses. none of you meat eaters would be willing to be faced with that reality.

this topic also triggers you because you know it's wrong, which is why you're so defensive and feel the need to make this thread and talk down to someone about their life choices which are different from your own. i'm confident with my own choice to be a vegetarian, so i don't have this insecurity where i need to convince other people i'm right so i'm okay about it.

what about all the american moms that feed their kids these mcdonalds diets who become blimps? which is worse? and who are you to decide how a mother is to raise her child. you need to just mind your own business.

You raise good points. I would point out though, in all fairness, that we did evolve eating meat and it would be a necessity if we couldn't fortify foods with vitamin B12. All the other nutrients can be found in plant-based food. To call us carnivores is retarded but despite the fact that it's odd that we need tools to eat meat, we ultimately did use tools and we now have a need for B12.

We can now use other tools to fortify food with B12. And that's why people who eat meat but have a vitamin B12 deficiency due to differing reasons can be helped (and not by "eating more meat!") and don't die.

I dislike the discussion because I've seen every argument a hundred times. If meat was somehow an inconvenience and tasted like broccoli we wouldn't be having this discussion. Less than 0,01% of the population eats meat because "they need it". They eat it because it tastes good and because it's convenient. That 0,01% accounts for people with specific intestinal disorders.

Personally I don't think it triggers maskedmelon because he knows it's wrong. Not at all. I think it's due to a bunch of reasons. First, some vocal vegans/vegetarians are really, really annoying and self-righteous. I do want to mention that I think this is often overstated. We all have our subconscious image of a "normal person" (and subconsciously normal = good) and any action by someone that deviates from this "normal person" is much more noticable. If your "normal person" image is that of a white male heterosexual then some gay guy being an ass will make you think "God, gay people are asses" whereas if a white male heterosexual was being an ass you just think "God, people are asses". Every time a vegan says something annoying it stands out more. Nonetheless, some really are annoying.

Secondly, and more importantly eating meat is normal and natural. Your entire life you are indirectly or directly told and shown that people eat meat. It's imprinted in our image of cavemen. When someone comes along and says something you have held as a normalcy your entire life, partake in every day, see happening every day etc. is something they don't do for ethical reasons and even say that it's wrong... this tends to cause cognitive dissonance. The explanation that "we need meat" yada yada is just a post hoc rationalisation of that dissonance. Not a reaction of stupidity or something that we all know deep down inside is wrong.
This doesn't justify eating meat in the modern world though. Need to remember that "natural = good" is a logical fallacy and that normal is not synonymous with good.

Thirdly, veganism is associated with a bunch of weird shit people do and think. In Dutch there's a word which directly translates as "floaty", referring to people who for example like to refer to themselves as spiritual people. People who get high on life, mother natures heals all their wounds, crystals influence their emotions etc.
These people are annoying (my emotional response) and can be dangerous. Veganism when associated with these lot is seen as some new age horseshit. It is, of course, seperate but I get that people get trigged by people like this woman. "Sunshine and water". Good God, man!

How wrong am I, maskedmelon?

[AzzarTheGod]

meat this, meat that. hit me with a wiffle ball bat

lets talk about the finer points of dust instead. any dustologists here

[maskedmelon]

gee, how righteous. and ironic that you don't see how delusional it is yourself to think that your ignorant posts on an elf simulator forum are actually going to do anything to improve humanity. solid.

The exchange of ideas is valuable ^^ Whether you are able to learn from it or not, there is a chance that I may, or someone else may ^^. And even if nobody learns anything there is a chance it will lead to another exchange of ideas.

[maskedmelon]

You raise good points. I would point out though, in all fairness, that we did evolve eating meat and it would be a necessity if we couldn't fortify foods with vitamin B12. All the other nutrients can be found in plant-based food. To call us carnivores is retarded but despite the fact that it's odd that we need tools to eat meat, we ultimately did use tools and we now have a need for B12.

We can now use other tools to fortify food with B12. And that's why people who eat meat but have a vitamin B12 deficiency due to differing reasons can be helped (and not by "eating more meat!") and don't die.

I dislike the discussion because I've seen every argument a hundred times. If meat was somehow an inconvenience and tasted like broccoli we wouldn't be having this discussion. Less than 0,01% of the population eats meat because "they need it". They eat it because it tastes good and because it's convenient. That 0,01% accounts for people with specific intestinal disorders.

Personally I don't think it triggers maskedmelon because he knows it's wrong. Not at all. I think it's due to a bunch of reasons. First, some vocal vegans/vegetarians are really, really annoying and self-righteous. I do want to mention that I think this is often overstated. We all have our subconscious image of a "normal person" (and subconsciously normal = good) and any action by someone that deviates from this "normal person" is much more noticable. If your "normal person" image is that of a white male heterosexual then some gay guy being an ass will make you think "God, gay people are asses" whereas if a white male heterosexual was being an ass you just think "God, people are asses". Every time a vegan says something annoying it stands out more. Nonetheless, some really are annoying.

Secondly, and more importantly eating meat is normal and natural. Your entire life you are indirectly or directly told and shown that people eat meat. It's imprinted in our image of cavemen. When someone comes along and says something you have held as a normalcy your entire life, partake in every day, see happening every day etc. is something they don't do for ethical reasons and even say that it's wrong... this tends to cause cognitive dissonance. The explanation that "we need meat" yada yada is just a post hoc rationalisation of that dissonance. Not a reaction of stupidity or something that we all know deep down inside is wrong.
This doesn't justify eating meat in the modern world though. Need to remember that "natural = good" is a logical fallacy and that normal is not synonymous with good.

Thirdly, veganism is associated with a bunch of weird shit people do and think. In Dutch there's a word which directly translates as "floaty", referring to people who for example like to refer to themselves as spiritual people. People who get high on life, mother natures heals all their wounds, crystals influence their emotions etc.
These people are annoying (my emotional response) and can be dangerous. Veganism when associated with these lot is seen as some new age horseshit. It is, of course, seperate but I get that people get trigged by people like this woman. "Sunshine and water". Good God, man!

How wrong am I, maskedmelon?

You're spot on Csi ^^

[Whirled]

meat this, meat that. hit me with a wiffle ball bat

lets talk about the finer points of dust instead. any dustologists here

I'm not a germ doctor but I may have played one on TV.
http://www.plentyair.com/germguardian-ac4825/
Just dont go broke buying filters. Maybe Dyson is better with those wipe off types

[Csihar]

The exchange of ideas is valuable ^^ Whether you are able to learn from it or not, there is a chance that I may, or someone else may ^^. And even if nobody learns anything there is a chance it will lead to another exchange of ideas.

This is why I like you. Also, the reach-arounds.

[maskedmelon]

This is why I like you. Also, the reach-arounds.

Well... I'll not ask you to choose between the two.



^.~v

[AzzarTheGod]

I'm not a germ doctor but I may have played one on TV.
http://www.plentyair.com/germguardian-ac4825/
Just dont go broke buying filters. Maybe Dyson is better with those wipe off types

Nice. Actually this is very helpful. I needed a small unit for my bedroom, its the biggest problem area and this looks perfect.

Now I just need to find a good priced vacuum cleaner that has disposable bags you can throw away and I'll be on my way to great health again circa 2011.

[Vaye]

The exchange of ideas is valuable ^^ Whether you are able to learn from it or not, there is a chance that I may, or someone else may ^^. And even if nobody learns anything there is a chance it will lead to another exchange of ideas.

yea b/c coming into a discussion telling someone they're wrong and delusional is such a productive and healthy way of exchanging ideas. 10/10

[Pokesan]

Welcome Vaye! loudly advertising your incognizance is a pretty solid posting style more please

it takes awhile to "get" mm, he's usually up to something when he posts

[skarlorn]

Yes I eat meat

Yes I eat pussy

Non meat eaters should be tolerated as long as they aren't prosthelytizing (sp? On phone). Vegan hipster scene Lords deserve to be mashed into chicken nuggets and served to the dogs they once looked after in the local shelter

[maskedmelon]

yea b/c coming into a discussion telling someone they're wrong and delusional is such a productive and healthy way of exchanging ideas. 10/10

I didn't tell anyone they were wrong or delusional ^^ I said the woman discussed in OP and by extension veganism is delusional and I explained why I thought so. So far the counter arguments have been that I am fat, depressed, ignorant and generally unpleasant in addition to there be many people who poorly care for their children in other ways.

In response to the title that "people are supposed to eat meat!" We've had people point out that you can live healthily on a vegan diet.

Nobody however has addressed my point that while eating animals may be mean or nasty, abstaining from doing so is not necessarily a good thing for reasons I have demonstrated.

I raise this point (placating conscience) regularly because it is an unpleasant conclusion with very broad application and I would very much like it to be wrong. I don't like being wrong. Nobody does, but I appreciate it when someone is able to show me where I am wrong so that I can be right the next time.

[Patriam1066]

Yes I eat meat

Yes I eat pussy

Non meat eaters should be tolerated as long as they aren't prosthelytizing (sp? On phone). Vegan hipster scene Lords deserve to be mashed into chicken nuggets and served to the dogs they once looked after in the local shelter

10/10

[Csihar]

Nobody however has addressed my point that while eating animals may be mean or nasty, abstaining from doing so is not necessarily a good thing for reasons I have demonstrated.

I missed that. Can you explain what you mean though? It's not clear to me. Also good in what sense? People can be vegan for health reasons and/or ethical, which one are you talking about?

[Nihilist_santa]

Are Jains vegan or vegetarian? I worked with a Jain girl once and she had never eaten meat in her life nor her whole family but I would imagine groups like Jains still derive fats and such from milks and cheeses? I knew some Hare Krishna fellas and they consumed a lot of dairy products so I am curious if any cultures outside of the modern vegan movement were able to develop healthy children without fats?

[Csihar]

What do you mean by fats? Fatty acids? Because that is abundant in a lot of plant-based food.

[Nihilist_santa]

I thought the issue was that childrens brains need fats to develop. 50% of breast milk is fat. Children need high fat diet in the first 2 years.

[Csihar]

Infants don't actually require food. It's a myth created and perpetuated by the meat and diary industry to make money.

Source: I used to have 9 kids.

[Jarnauga]

You guys reminded me of my favourite cooking channel on youtube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeZlih4DDNg

[skarlorn]

What really grinds my gears is ppl who eat meat and think hunting is bad

[skarlorn]

What really grinds my gears is ppl who eat meat and think hunting is bad

Or does it grind my beef? :cool: ;):D

[Csihar]

Come on tranny, you're supposed to be in support of fringe groups, damnit!

[R Flair]

Meat is good. Apply fire, it tastes good with nothing else. It also provides a shitton of nutrients and fat necessary for people. Anyone that thinks we're not supposed to eat meat is a moron.

Take a person eating just vegetables, and one eating just meat, and you can observe, quite scientifically, which one is more healthy.

[Lune]

The meat industry is highly unethical, but this is one area where my lust for meat trumps my morality.

Yes, vegans who do their thing for ethical reasons are better people than you or I in that regard. Vegans who do it solely for nutritional reasons are... misguided (chicken and fish can be stupidly healthy).

The ideal is humanely raised and harvested lifestock, but that's never going to happen because the price of meat wold increase 1000% and people are fat and selfish.

As an addendum, it doesn't matter whether we evolved to eat meat or not. Humans have a higher ethical responsibility, and we're perfectly capable of being healthy without slaughtering animals for meat. And that's ignoring the ethical issues that stem from the fact that industrialized meat production is a large contributor to the destruction of the biosphere by atmospheric modification.

[Ahldagor]

Anyone else eat bone marrow?

[skarlorn]

"quite scientifically"
:o
@r_flair

[entruil]

Didn't read much...

You cannot survive without meat/fat if you don't visit a supermarket with the monoxide'd meat ... all this crap people say is because of global warming and pollution... If we were on mars everyone would be cannibal i mean meat eaters... thanks for your time... now kindly f-off heheh jk /shrug im bored...

[big_ole_jpn]

My ancestors believed in wasting nothing that's why I always tape each pair of steaks together and use them as a fleshlight before cooking steaks for my family

[entruil]

My ancestors believed in wasting nothing that's why I always tape 2 steaks together and use them as a fleshlight before cooking steaks for my family

You make me not feel bad for drunk spergin all over the place... lmao

[myriverse]

Anyone else eat bone marrow?
I'm usually too lazy to gnaw on a bone, but nothing adds the flavour to a dish like marrow.

The woman in that article reported wants to live on water and sunlight. This can be accomplished, if she's really determined. Just die and have someone plant a tree on her corpse. The circle of life's a bitch and half death.

[Jarnauga]

The meat industry is highly unethical, but this is one area where my lust for meat trumps my morality.

Yes, vegans who do their thing for ethical reasons are better people than you or I in that regard. Vegans who do it solely for nutritional reasons are... misguided (chicken and fish can be stupidly healthy).

The ideal is humanely raised and harvested lifestock, but that's never going to happen because the price of meat wold increase 1000% and people are fat and selfish.

As an addendum, it doesn't matter whether we evolved to eat meat or not. Humans have a higher ethical responsibility, and we're perfectly capable of being healthy without slaughtering animals for meat. And that's ignoring the ethical issues that stem from the fact that industrialized meat production is a large contributor to the destruction of the biosphere by atmospheric modification.

One good reason is also the ecological impact of meat, other than that i pretty much agree with you

[entruil]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methanotroph

and... grow your own meat source...

*warning contains pictures of meat*
Is America Ready for Farm-to-Table Guinea Pig? (http://modernfarmer.com/2015/12/cuy/)

[Tasslehofp99]

I had a science teacher in middle school or highschool once tell me that humans are, on a biological level, predatory in nature. Something about having both of our eyes on the front of our head or something.

I always thought it made sense. Humans evolved hunting for their food. Nowadays we get everything off of a shelf. Probably why there is so much violence and mass shootings etc, lol.

[Farzo]

The OP is a fat person, likely suffering severe depression, whiling 12-16 hours a day on this most derivative forum in an attempt to form social bonds. Take its dietary and lifestyle advice at your own peril, imo.

[big_ole_jpn]

weed is medicinal thus I am always sick

[Lune]

I had a science teacher in middle school or highschool once tell me that humans are, on a biological level, predatory in nature. Something about having both of our eyes on the front of our head or something.

I always thought it made sense. Humans evolved hunting for their food. Nowadays we get everything off of a shelf. Probably why there is so much violence and mass shootings etc, lol.

Eye orientation isn't really a valid indicator of predatory nature.

Panda bears eat nothing but fuckin plants, then you have the primates (bonobos, chimps, lemurs, gorillas) that eat like 90% plants, insects, eggs, shit that's easy to catch... fruit bats, etc

Again, what we supposedly "evolved to eat" has ZERO RELEVANCY to this discussion. It was only within the last 100 years that access to extremely good nutrition, driven largely by widespread access to protein-rich animal products (milk, eggs, meat) has contributed to a boom in height and IQ (and probably also cancer & heart disease). If we evolved to eat meat, we were doing a pretty shitty job of it up until the last century.

The important consideration is that we don't need to brutalize animals to live a healthy life. We just do it because it's efficient.

[Nihilist_santa]

Eye orientation isn't really a valid indicator of predatory nature.

Panda bears eat nothing but fuckin plants, then you have the primates (bonobos, chimps, lemurs, gorillas) that eat like 90% plants, insects, eggs, shit that's easy to catch... fruit bats, etc

Again, what we supposedly "evolved to eat" has ZERO RELEVANCY to this discussion. It was only within the last 100 years that access to extremely good nutrition, driven largely by widespread access to protein-rich animal products (milk, eggs, meat) has contributed to a boom in height and IQ (and probably also cancer & heart disease).

The important consideration is that we don't need to brutalize animals to live a healthy life. We just do it because it's efficient.

Why wouldn't the evolution of diet matter? Its obvious we ate meat because plants would not have been plentiful enough and agriculture had not been developed. Maybe I am misunderstanding.

ETA : I agree on all your issues about humane treatment btw.

[entruil]

weed is medicinal thus I am always sick

Caskey - Why I smoke (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JF3qNdWQ70)... Peace.

... shit... left to be unsaid...

[big_ole_jpn]

Why wouldn't the evolution of diet matter? Its obvious we ate meat because plants would not have been plentiful enough and agriculture had not been developed. Maybe I am misunderstanding.

ETA : I agree on all your issues about humane treatment btw.

"natural" is arbitrary. It's meaningless to bring up and if anyone ever mentions the word "natural" in the context of discussing biology, it is because they are idiot retards. Saying "we evolved to eat meat" as an argument is essentially making this argument, aka the i am too stupid to learn critical thinking or basic scientific literacy so i just accept the biggest argument from authority in existence, "god made us to do like dat", also global warming is a lie thesis

us evolving with meat as a major component of our diet is meaningful only insofar as meat is rich in nutrients we gotta identify and make sure we are getting from other sources if we aren't eating hyper-rich flesh nutrative concoctions. and in truth there are very few bottleneck nutrients that a reasonably diverse plant-only diet needs to take into consideration. in conclusino, if ur making the evolution argument dont ask me for advice ask your naturopath.

[Lune]

Why wouldn't the evolution of diet matter? Its obvious we ate meat because plants would not have been plentiful enough and agriculture had not been developed. Maybe I am misunderstanding.

ETA : I agree on all your issues about humane treatment btw.

We were most likely omnivores like bears, where the vast majority of our diet was some combination of fruit, nuts, grains, and foragables like eggs/honey/accessible seafood, with some smaller amount of meat. It probably varied considerably by culture and location.

It's just that what we ate 500,000 years ago has no bearing on what is ethical to eat today. We have gained the ability to get all our nutritional needs without the brutalization of animals, we just choose not to. Whey isolate, milk, cheese, genetically engineered plants, etc.

[entruil]

My Bull done, Shit. can't even read cuz...

[AzzarTheGod]

Eating animals makes me violent.

[entruil]

Eating animals makes me violent.

defeat your High City and this will be a positive statement.

[Nihilist_santa]

"natural" is arbitrary. It's meaningless to bring up and if anyone ever mentions the word "natural" in the context of discussing biology, it is because they are idiot retards. Saying "we evolved to eat meat" as an argument is essentially making this argument, aka the i am too stupid to learn critical thinking or basic scientific literacy so i just accept the biggest argument from authority in existence, "god made us to do like dat", also global warming is a lie thesis

us evolving with meat as a major component of our diet is meaningful only insofar as meat is rich in nutrients we gotta identify and make sure we are getting from other sources if we aren't eating hyper-rich flesh nutrative concoctions. and in truth there are very few bottleneck nutrients that a reasonably diverse plant-only diet needs to take into consideration. in conclusino, if ur making the evolution argument dont ask me for advice ask your naturopath.

I didn't mean evolution in the biological sense really. I just meant that to say we arent meant to eat meat is ridiculous since we have been doing it for as long as can be remembered and it had to have preceded any worthwhile plant harvesting. Watch those survival shows and see how much plant food they can survive off of without agriculture. The vegetarians usually have a hard time on those shows and usually end up having to eat meat or suffer(this is assuming most of the show isnt staged).

I understand this idea about the ethical harvesting of meat and I agree. I was a vegetarian for around 4 years for ethical reasons. If we all became vegetarians tomorrow we would still have to slaughter most of the animals that are stored. They dont serve any real purpose and take up a lot of space and resources. I think animals would still be harvested for stuff like pet food, leathers, glues, and other products that animals are used for besides meat.

Some of those stats people tout about water consumption and shit seems kind of misleading. Plant based replacements would surely require as much or more water consumption correct? Then land would be another issue it would require far more land and power for grow lights and things. The conservative in me says we do things a certain way as it has been worked out to be the most efficient and because overhauling becomes too costly or resource intense.

On a side note I was in a discussion with someone earlier who believes in the "singularity" and how technology is going to solve everything and shit. He was going on about those solar powered road tiles that are being developed. He just never understood my points about the cost of overhauling the US road system with an electronic replacement. He cant grasp the size and the resources needed. He just thinks the tech will solve everything on its own. Not to mention shit like the lobbyist from power companies and such that wouldn't want to be replaced. Anyways end of that tangent.

[mickmoranis]

We evolved from the sea, doesn't mean I want to breathe water.

[bdastomper58]

"natural" is arbitrary. It's meaningless to bring up and if anyone ever mentions the word "natural" in the context of discussing biology, it is because they are idiot retards.

outstanding

[entruil]

I didn't mean evolution in the biological sense really. I just meant that to say we arent meant to eat meat is ridiculous since we have been doing it for as long as can be remembered and it had to have preceded any worthwhile plant harvesting. Watch those survival shows and see how much plant food they can survive off of without agriculture. The vegetarians usually have a hard time on those shows and usually end up having to eat meat or suffer(this is assuming most of the show isnt staged).

I understand this idea about the ethical harvesting of meat and I agree. I was a vegetarian for around 4 years for ethical reasons. If we all became vegetarians tomorrow we would still have to slaughter most of the animals that are stored. They dont serve any real purpose and take up a lot of space and resources. I think animals would still be harvested for stuff like pet food, leathers, glues, and other products that animals are used for besides meat.

Some of those stats people tout about water consumption and shit seems kind of misleading. Plant based replacements would surely require as much or more water consumption correct? Then land would be another issue it would require far more land and power for grow lights and things. The conservative in me says we do things a certain way as it has been worked out to be the most efficient and because overhauling becomes too costly or resource intense.

On a side note I was in a discussion with someone earlier who believes in the "singularity" and how technology is going to solve everything and shit. He was going on about those solar powered road tiles that are being developed. He just never understood my points about the cost of overhauling the US road system with an electronic replacement. He cant grasp the size and the resources needed. He just thinks the tech will solve everything on its own. Not to mention shit like the lobbyist from power companies and such that wouldn't want to be replaced. Anyways end of that tangent.

holy fucking shit dude... what did you expect ME to do with that shit... granted I am just as bad as others....

.. I will read and probably love and hate and real... holy fuckin' shit dude.


funny tho' and didnt read.

[big_ole_jpn]

1 time i ate canadian bacon on acid and i seriously felt an urge to kill. felt like a vampire. i was playing symphony of the night tho

[Daywolf]

http://i.imgur.com/478i7Cm.jpg

[fash]

Vegan fanatics branding themselves with hot irons: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-QaGzenEaQ

[AzzarTheGod]

1 time i ate canadian bacon on acid and i seriously felt an urge to kill. felt like a vampire. i was playing symphony of the night tho

I eat steak every day I feel so violent man. I'm a criminal, I'd feel guilty participating in the political process.

going to abstain this election until I can address my violent criminality.

[Pokesan]

eat human flesh (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xp6T0ZMyUUk)

[R Flair]

Grilled steak for dinner. Was off the hook. Feel sorry for dumb plant eaters. Feel even more sorry for people around them that have to smell all the greenhouse gas emissions they produce.

[myriverse]

Eating 4 kinds of animal right and totally zen.

And Brussels sprouts, cuz I pretend they're eyeballs.

[GradnerLives]

There is no reasonable scientific or moral defense for continuing to eat meat in a society where other options exist. It is unconscionable and unsustainable.

Eating meat is like smoking cigarettes. You can try to justify it 100 different ways, but in the end the reason why you're still doing it is because you can't be bothered to stop.

ITT: people with quite literally next to 0 idea about nutrition, the evolution of species and the nature of conciousness defend the easiest course of action because it's easy.

[mickmoranis]

There is no reasonable scientific or moral defense for continuing to eat meat in a society where other options exist. It is unconscionable and unsustainable.

Eating meat is like smoking cigarettes. You can try to justify it 100 different ways, but in the end the reason why you're still doing it is because you can't be bothered to stop.

ITT: people with quite literally next to 0 idea about nutrition, the evolution of species and the nature of conciousness defend the easiest course of action because it's easy.

Said it b4 and Ill say it again.

The apple is a metaphor for meat. Its easy to obtain, its juicy, it tastes great and it comes with great consequence.

You wont get into heaven if you kill animals to eat food while you live in Eden.

[Malk]

Higher cognitive functions require immense energy- turns out meat is the perfect source for this and carrots are not a replacement

Hmm not really, the human brain is mostly fed with glucose - when meat brings mostly proteins with some fat mixed in. Yeah neoglucogenesis can provide that glucose from fat intake but it's a tad easier to do it straight from glucose intake.

[mickmoranis]

As soon as I try a good veggie burger, veggie hotdog, and veggie steak, I'll consider it. Until then, nope.

You think the grass Adam & Eve had to eat under that apple tree tasted any good? ITS THE WHOLE POINT OF THIS STRUGGLE.

[GradnerLives]

Because I'd rather put an animal in my mouth than sip Whey protein shakes. I prefer shit that isn't man made. I don't give a fuck if they come out with a vitamin that does everything for you. I want my body to get my macros and micros. Humans didn't climb to the top of the food chain to eat a fuckin carrot bro

Right, you do it because it's easy and you like it. That's fine.

Just don't mention the shape of our teeth, history of hunting or the necessity of B12 in order to tell me how humans should and shouldn't eat and we're all goog.

[Baler]

I'm having a nice Beef soup with noodle base tonight.
Yummy cow :)

Not to mention the 2 eggs I had for breakfast.
Delicious!

[entruil]

I don't believe in fairy tales breh.

what about figs, do you believe in figs?

I believe in figs. I used to run around chasing these massive beasts' migrating patterns... shit wuz real, then i found out about figs...

soon as i realized and learnt about figs, there was a huge rumbling, don't know if it was earthquakes,volcanos, meteors, or all of them ........

now there is just a pile of water with huge salt deposits where the figs were...

I'm having a nice Beef soup with noodle base tonight.
Yummy cow :)

Not to mention the 2 eggs I had for breakfast.
Delicious!

hell yea... i just ate some steak and mushrooms and onions and brussel sprouts and asparagus...

[maskedmelon]

It is every man's sacred duty as a creature of inescapable selfishness and insecurity to embrace those most trivial of practices from which he might derive the most satisfaction for the least contribution. Be it by abstinence from food or from drink or from sex or from flesh or fidelity to dubious truths or as champion of inconsequence, he is, each and every one, in his pursuit of virtue, bound in shared delusion of purpose, the proposition that his life matters to another or even at all.

[maskedmelon]

what about figs, do you believe in figs?

I believe in figs. I used to run around chasing these massive beasts' migrating patterns... shit wuz real, then i found out about figs...

soon as i realized and learnt about figs, there was a huge rumbling, don't know if it was earthquakes,volcanos, meteors, or all of them ........

now there is just a pile of water with huge salt deposits where the figs were...



hell yea... i just ate some steak and mushrooms and onions and brussel sprouts and asparagus...

lol ^^ this made me smile.

[big_ole_jpn]

I don't believe in fairy tales breh.

woke levels 100000

[mickmoranis]

I don't believe in fairy tales breh.

the apple is a fairy tale, its a metaphor for reality which is, if you eat meat you are going to burn in hell for being a murderer.

Also FYI if you ate garden burgers long enough, the idea of eating meat would be as repulsive as eating garden burgers seems now.

Its all about routine and perspective, thats all we are, were like dogs.. able to surivive happily in a wide array of environments.

Just think about how disgusting most Chinese, like REAL Chinese food is.. they love that shit.

[GradnerLives]

It is every man's sacred duty as a creature of inescapable selfishness and insecurity to embrace those most trivial of practices from which he might derive the most satisfaction for the least contribution. Be it by abstinence from food or from drink or from sex or from flesh or fidelity to dubious truths or as champion of inconsequence, he is, each and every one, in his pursuit of virtue, bound in shared delusion of purpose, the proposition that his life matters to another or even at all.

That's a real roundabout way of saying "Fuck it".

I like it, but you could have just said "Because: Fuck it".

[entruil]

The human body is capable of many great feats. You can feed someone lard every day let's call it Hot Cheetos for now, and still live. The fact remains, those vegan companies are just making bank off you while the corporate execs fill their bellies with burgers. I think Vegans are cool , but like Christians - they seem to try to convert way to many and have big mouths

rancid, rotting meat diet for better health -extreme food nutrition supplement documentary delicious (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmAraNvDnRg)*contains graphic pictures of meat Supermarket shoppers Beware*


Hmm not really, the human brain is mostly fed with glucose - when meat brings mostly proteins with some fat mixed in. Yeah neoglucogenesis can provide that glucose from fat intake but it's a tad easier to do it straight from glucose intake.

is this like in the movie Lorenzo's Oil? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorenzo%27s_oil

I'm okay with that. You see I know a lot of people that believe just like you. I don't particularly like them. If being in hell means not being in heaven with those people. Fuck sign me up immediately.

You can interchange God with Nature when i refer to it if it helps ease your mind.

lol ^^ this made me smile.

My work here is done. Peace.

[mickmoranis]

The human body is capable of many great feats. You can feed someone lard every day let's call it Hot Cheetos for now, and still live. The fact remains, those vegan companies are just making bank off you while the corporate execs fill their bellies with burgers. I think Vegans are cool , but like Christians - they seem to try to convert way to many and have big mouths

well its just so hard to go on being normal when you know everyone around you is going to burn in hellfire for all eternity cus they like the taste of hamburger

[mickmoranis]

I'm okay with that. You see I know a lot of people that believe just like you. I don't particularly like them. If being in hell means not being in heaven with those people. Fuck sign me up immediately.

This is a common missconception most people in my church dont understand.

Its heaven cus all the people we dont like are burning in hell while we enjoy watching them toil from above.

They think its some magic place.

No its just we won and that is, heavenly.

When will people learn.

[maskedmelon]

well its just so hard to go on being normal when you know everyone around you is going to burn in hellfire for all eternity cus they like the taste of hamburger

It is not your burden to carry, friend. Bound for the spit of Tartarus is he who turns a deaf ear to witness of his own wickedness, for he is deserving. Verily time knows no end to his misery.

Or maybe we just all be raped eternally by meat demons for this transgression.

[Daywolf]

It is not your burden to carry, friend. Bound for the spit of Tartarus is he who turns a deaf ear to witness of his own wickedness, for he is deserving. Verily time knows no end to his misery.

Or maybe we just all be raped eternally by meat demons for this transgression.

Most likely it is this: https://youtu.be/29t-p0YIhCc?t=50 time marker from 50s-55s. There is often some truth in a lie. And the entrance to it is from this: https://youtu.be/h8mwhm0PoKc but all of them put together or as they merge at the end of the universe. That's a lot of years trying to create a plant to chew on that they just don't have the power to do nor could ever develop.

[GradnerLives]

Most likely it is this: https://youtu.be/29t-p0YIhCc?t=50 time marker from 50s-55s. There is often some truth in a lie. And the entrance to it is from this: https://youtu.be/h8mwhm0PoKc but all of them put together or as they merge at the end of the universe. That's a lot of years trying to create a plant to chew on that they just don't have the power to do nor could ever develop.

What the actual shit does this post mean?

[R Flair]

Right, you do it because it's easy and you like it. That's fine.

Just don't mention the shape of our teeth, history of hunting or the necessity of B12 in order to tell me how humans should and shouldn't eat and we're all goog.

My teeth chew flesh perfectly thank you.

Do some real research about what meat provides and how out of your way you have to go to supplement those vitamins and fat. I also recommend looking into the negative long term effect of being a vegetarian, particularly a vegan. There are plenty of documentaries and testimonies that will enlighten you.

Heres a good one to start with
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZSz4AmaMcs

[Daywolf]

What the actual shit does this post mean?
https://youtu.be/9jPglNrZhkA

[mickmoranis]

It is not your burden to carry, friend. Bound for the spit of Tartarus is he who turns a deaf ear to witness of his own wickedness, for he is deserving. Verily time knows no end to his misery.

Or maybe we just all be raped eternally by meat demons for this transgression.

It is nice that the all mighty gave us the minds that would think it better to risk an eternity of meat rape over eating healthy for a sliver in time.

[GradnerLives]

Don't link me Lierre Keith speaking on an alt-right garbage-blog youtube channel and act like you're taking the reasoned intellectual high road here, dude. Cringing hard.

[R Flair]

in other words, if it doesn't support your non-fact based opinion, it must be wrong.

Steven Crowder couldn't be further from "alt-right" by any definition

laughing hard

[GradnerLives]

Non-fact based is Lierre Keith's modus operandi.

Look it up.

[Ahldagor]

You should eat stuff that provides you nutrition. Novel concept of choice ya morans. Credit to op for kicking it off.

[bdastomper58]

in other words, if it doesn't support your non-fact based opinion, it must be wrong.

Steven Crowder couldn't be further from "alt-right" by any definition

laughing hard

fans of steven crowder are the only thing more embarrassing than being steven crowder

[GradnerLives]

Steven Crowder couldn't be further from "alt-right" by any definition


http://i.imgur.com/vxsVdmj.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/dLfPsSw.png

[mickmoranis]

Its simple math, in the end we gonna find out this was all a big test and everyone but the dirty hippies failed. sad really.

[R Flair]

because being a conservative is automatically alt-right

whatever you do make sure you breeze over the leftist people has has on his program, feminists, blm activists and everything else

Just stop and take self-inventory and confront your dishonesty. Be free.

[mickmoranis]

wait eating meat is for conservatives? im telling you youre going to go to hell for eating meat, this is obviously technically a conservative value, how have we let the gorgons that have taken control of america convinced us to all be so mixed up?!

[Pokesan]

steven crowder is less fringe and more completely unfunny crap

[GradnerLives]

because being a conservative is automatically alt-right

whatever you do make sure you breeze over the leftist people has has on his problem, feminists, blm activists and everything else

Just stop and take self-inventory and confront your dishonesty. Be free.

Was all of your "Real Research" done on youtube channels that feel the need to hashtag "SJW" on half of their videos, invite gavin mcinnes to anything and photoshop hillary clinton to look like adolph hitler or - in your gallant pursuit of higher truth - did you manage to accidentally stumble into a book?

[mickmoranis]

I dont know why im being ignored here I feel like there is a chance I can save all of you

[Daywolf]

Don't link me Lierre Keith speaking on an alt-right garbage-blog youtube channel and act like you're taking the reasoned intellectual high road here, dude. Cringing hard.
You fail at you psychic powerererers, it was a song link. As always, if the song fits, hear it. Well I link song answers where I can anyway, not that the songs are 100% correct.

As for alt-right, you don't even know what that is. Actually about no one does since the left pretty much made up the word, as they make up most words they say, and change them at will. They probably think everyone not on the left is alt-right, apart from neocon RINO's as if they are the mainstream right lol which are pretty much no different than the left in their votes and actions.

[GradnerLives]

You fail at you psychic powerererers, it was a song link. As always, if the song fits, hear it. Well I link song answers where I can anyway, not that the songs are 100% correct.

As for alt-right, you don't even know what that is. Actually about no one does since the left pretty much made up the word, as they make up most words they say, and change them at will. They probably think everyone not on the left is alt-right, apart from neocon RINO's as if they are the mainstream right lol which are pretty much no different than the left in their votes and actions.

I was responding to Ric Flair.

Meat Puppets are dope as hell.

[GradnerLives]

Also, it's not the politics that bother me, it's the presentation.

Click-bait is Click-bait. It should not inform your personal policies with regards to health, diet, morality and science.

[Daywolf]

I was responding to Ric Flair.

Meat Puppets are dope as hell.
ah, k. Meat Puppets II. I use to listen to the original in the day, which was a punk band.

But alt-right, yeah, me thinks they put everyone under that tag apart from people like the Bush's (neocons) which hardly differ from their own global position. I mean they say different things, but their actions head into the same direction. Such as wars over land and oil, power and control, or however they spin the wars for war sake. They just got us all arguing words with each other while they run with their actions. Jokes on us.

[mickmoranis]

http://i.imgur.com/LpApwBL.gif

I tried but enjoy that bubbling cauldron.

[R Flair]

Alt-right is pretty simple. It was originally a nonfactor white nationalist group that specialized in memes and trolling. As the left is so prone to do, they began to throw that tag at republicans and run of the mill conservatives as an alternative to their favorite word - racist. Now its being used by the democratic party as a scare tactic and to demonize as many right wing voters as possible and in so doing has legitimized the use of the word to refer to any patriotic republican.

For thinking people, its also become an easy way to spot braindead degenerate leftists and sjws who use it derogatorily.

[Pokesan]

the beta male hoots wildly about SJWs while boasting of his intellectual superiority

[Doors]

Staunch Conservative Christian here and definitely voting for Trump. With that said Gradner just dunked so hard on this dude the backboard shattered.

[fash]

Steven Crowder couldn't be further from "alt-right" by any definition

Are you kidding? Have you seen any of his recent shows or tweets?

http://i.imgur.com/YGQZMDs.jpghttp://i.imgur.com/FKJLygn.jpghttp://i.imgur.com/D7RVtlt.jpg

White Power Crowder is the de facto the leader of the alt-right. He's fucking hardcore. The alt-right doesn't call him Turn the Jews into Clam Chowder Crowder for nothing. His views are just racist and in bad taste. He needs to take it down a few notches.

[big_ole_jpn]

Are you kidding? Have you seen any of his recent shows or tweets?

http://i.imgur.com/YGQZMDs.jpghttp://i.imgur.com/FKJLygn.jpghttp://i.imgur.com/D7RVtlt.jpg

White Power Crowder is the de facto the leader of the alt-right. He's fucking hardcore. The alt-right doesn't call him Turn the Jews into Clam Chowder Crowder for nothing. His views are just racist and in bad taste. He needs to take it down a few notches.

epic (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldK1gQSSTSo) /POL bro

[R Flair]

Staunch Conservative Christian here and definitely voting for Trump. With that said Gradner just dunked so hard on this dude the backboard shattered.

someone participated in meatless monday and is running low on brain power

[AzzarTheGod]

Just realized there's rap lyrics of songs that run through my head that I listened to in 2005-2010 that would absolutely get me on a surveillance list or worse.

Pretty funny how musicians can get away with bullshit lyrics like "I'll go to war for anyone who believe in Islam" spoken by a wildly popular fat white Italian rapper from Philly suddenly isn't "cool" tough guy talk anymore in 2016.

This rapper had a whole Islam extremist gimmick 5 years ago just to sell records back when it was "cool" to support Muslim's.

Now you won't hear him uttering anything to do with his so-called religion. Funny how bitch artists get when Shit gets real eh??

From superthug toughguy 5% thug to complete white emo scene kid nerd in just a few short years.

^ I call that the Edward Snowden Effect after a complete 180 like that.

Damn I'm woke. Explained to you nerds how snowden had direct impact on the goods we choose to consume year to year.

[R Flair]

Speaking of things that would get you arrested in 2016, go back and watch the very first episode (or any really) of Chapelle's show. The black white supremacist bit in particular.

Things have really gone downhill at breakneck speeds in the last decade.

[Daywolf]

http://i.imgur.com/FKJLygn.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/2bNhmiX.jpg

:p
Wow you got a quadruple score there! Even a 2 in 1 symbol out of the three.

[AzzarTheGod]

Speaking of things that would get you arrested in 2016, go back and watch the very first episode (or any really) of Chapelle's show. The black white supremacist bit in particular.

Things have really gone downhill at breakneck speeds in the last decade.

You know Oprah and Loius Farrakhan were instrumental in getting Chapelle show taken off the air right?

They said it was setting people back. They couldn't get to Comedy Central, so they got to Dave Chapelle personally and held an intervention for him. They basically made him so guilty he ran to Africa for a religious retreat.

The Nation was putting heavy pressure on him to cease and desist, what with Nation members appearing on the set of the show in weird positions like assistant key grip, assistant errand boy, cinematographer.

If you ever wanted the blanks filled in on what the whole "walk away from 50-70 million dollars for 1 season and skip out to South Africa to hide" was all about.

Oprah and Farrakhan caused him to have a nervous breakdown after the intervention.

Not sure you know how "powerful" Oprah is (rather, she's more instrumental than powerful) but she is the one who was there when they first told Barrack 0Bama he had to run for president while he was in the Senate. She was in the room. That's a fact.

[Daywolf]

Not sure you know how "powerful" Oprah is (rather, she's more instrumental than powerful) but she is the one who was there when they first told Barrack 0Bama he had to run for president while he was in the Senate. She was in the room. That's a fact.
Well she's not referred to as The Church of Oprah just for no reason. She was part of the messianic association of 0bama from the start https://youtu.be/oF3U7XTKJCw
It's pretty thick.

[AzzarTheGod]

I assume Oprah is CIA affiliated or works with CIA consultants at the very least, just based on the fact she was instrumental in telling Barrack he needed to run. Think about why a single black woman, no matter how much of an ego she had, or how highly she thinks of herself...telling a Senator that he "NEEDS" to run for President. Especially after only 1 year in the Senate.

This is the same woman who was denied a television network channel. (She was given a piece of shit channel after crying racism for 5 years straight, they said ok shut up take Oxygen we'll assign you a number for broadcast space). So she isn't that powerful, she knows that. She and her investors were denied a network buyout. Straight up denied.

She has cried foul over business deals with the major networks and cable distribution rings.

Again, you nerds likely aren't very woke on who Oprah really is. Shes like a Farrakhan type, pretty influential in the black community with connections. Shes like Al Sharpton except on steroids and she is pretty damn American to boot.

A single woman, billionaire or not, would never tell a person to run for president. Not unless she had special interests or good people backing her and advising her on it. Most likely consultants.

[R Flair]

Thanks for informing us that richest black american in the world with her own tv channel has influence.

[AzzarTheGod]

Thanks for informing us that richest black american in the world with her own tv channel has influence.

honestly not sure u are woke enough to realize Oprah shut down chapelle show.

im going to question ur woke over the next few days until I see some evidence to the contrary.

[R Flair]

I'm just clowning you. I know he was shut down or "pressured off" for sure. His show took place at the height of positive race relations in the US (1995-2005) and that really puts a damper on the communist agenda and their dialectical materialism.

As to it being Oprah's doing specifically, not so sure of that. I mean, he appeared on Oprah (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StNiRDQkBtI) to tell at least some of his story after his sabbatical, so I find it a little hard to believe he ran straight back to the one that drove him away. Maybe tho...

[AzzarTheGod]

I'm just clowning you. I know he was shut down or "pressured off" for sure. His show took place at the height of positive race relations in the US (1995-2005) and that really puts a damper on the communist agenda and their dialectical materialism.

As to it being Oprah's doing specifically, not so sure of that. I mean, he appeared on Oprah (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StNiRDQkBtI) to tell at least some of his story after his sabbatical, so I find it a little hard to believe he ran straight back to the one that drove him away. Maybe tho...

Woah woah woah slow down.

The Nation is the one who applied the pressure, the bad cop.

Oprah was the good cop....both work for the same team. You get the gist, so while Oprah helped take Chappelle off the air, Dave Chappelle would personally only see Oprah trying to help him spiritually and religiously and "advise" him as a dear friend..help him "make the right choice"...

Same as she advised Barrack.

I bet you think the modern mafia goes around just tossing death threats at people saying Im gonna kill you if you don't do X Y Z too.

Im questioning ur woke pal

[Daywolf]

Again, you nerds likely aren't very woke on who Oprah really is. Shes like a Farrakhan type, pretty influential in the black community with connections. Shes like Al Sharpton except on steroids and she is pretty damn American to boot.
hah you and your deletes and reposts, but looks better than two in a row :)

I've followed/looked into her political activism, but a lot more into her religious side of things as she presents it. All of it imo really really lines up with your run-of-the-mill globalist, just as much as 0bama is. So yeah, she looked to 0bama as someone that could fit her idea of a leader like most globalists hold to coming one day. I'm sure she wasn't alone in that assertation, but just that she had the money, exposure and followers to see it presented to the masses. After all, they do use the media heavily to shape opinions.

What's in the other camp though? I mean it freaked me out as it seemed to be like a replay of what Oprah did but with Cruz by Glenn Beck. I mean he went off doing the same thing from a position of media exposure/power declaring Cruz as some sort of messianic figure. He was going on about the white horse prophecy from his mormon book. But Cruz was eating it up, that's some serious face palm there.

Why can't we just have noormal people for leaders? We don't even really need leaders, not with this much power anyway. Big govt so we need big leaders? Good old idiom: the bigger they come the harder they fall. Oh, and best they eat meat :D

[AzzarTheGod]

Well she's not referred to as The Church of Oprah just for no reason. She was part of the messianic association of 0bama from the start https://youtu.be/oF3U7XTKJCw
It's pretty thick.

See Rick, Trey Smith here is woke enough.

hah you and your deletes and reposts, but looks better than two in a row :)



Additional woke in this post.

[R Flair]

The details are interesting and all, but the threat presented by Chapelle's show was something I was "woke" to a decade ago when you were probably still popping pimples. It was never a mystery that I had to wonder about, despite not knowing the specifics.

[AzzarTheGod]

The details are interesting and all, but the threat presented by Chapelle's show was something I was "woke" to a decade ago when you were probably still popping pimples. It was never a mystery that I had to wonder about, despite not knowing the specifics.

Respectable reply. I'll settle on it. You're an honorary Trey Smith.

[Daywolf]

Chapelle, who's that? hah! never really bothered with him though. A fox guy and then on Becks show a lot. Only thing on fox I really had anything to do with was watch Snow, Red Eye and Hannity sometimes (He's better on his radio show). Watched Beck on there early on, until I got tired of watching all the flies landing on his face. He was kind of sensible to start. Just went downhill from then on. Red eye turned suckage too. Snow died, but had already left for that other job heh.

[R Flair]

Beck still melting down. Can't stop laughing every time this guy comes up.

https://www.facebook.com/GlennBeck/posts/10154622008673188

[Ahldagor]

Beck started tv on cnn

[maskedmelon]

Dave Chapelle, Oprah and Glen Beck all eat aminals.

[Daywolf]

Beck started tv on cnn
Yeah I know, I never saw him there though, since I never watched CNN except on some special coverage. I meant early on fox I guess. Back then he was sort of more like AJ, maybe a little more tame. I didn't watch him for long, I have enough sources, and his theories were sometimes problematic in a lot of ways; a little too tangled and not leading to the way I have seen things for a lot of years. But I listened for a time. And where that path lead to, hey, he can kiss Zuckerberg's butt all he want's, he aint doing it on my behalf :rolleyes:

Dave Chapelle, Oprah and Glen Beck all eat aminals.
Each other :D

[R Flair]

Just ate a pound of cheeseburgers. It was glorious. Confirmed fat.

[big_ole_jpn]

Oprah posts got me #swole lot of insight

[entruil]

Bacon.



"Not talkin' 'bout rich, I'm talkin' 'bout Wealthy" - Chris Rock

Oprah still had to give away free cars++ to maintain her Pseudo-Influence... I wouldn't put to much credence into the fact that she murdered Tupac and Biggie.

[Evia]

As soon as I try a good veggie burger, veggie hotdog, and veggie steak, I'll consider it. Until then, nope.

Field Roast makes a bomb diggity veggie burger and hot dog. I still haven't found a good alternative to steak though.

[myriverse]

There is no reasonable scientific or moral defense for continuing to eat meat in a society where other options exist. It is unconscionable and unsustainable.

Eating meat is like smoking cigarettes. You can try to justify it 100 different ways, but in the end the reason why you're still doing it is because you can't be bothered to stop.

ITT: people with quite literally next to 0 idea about nutrition, the evolution of species and the nature of conciousness defend the easiest course of action because it's easy.
The idea that vegetarianism is a healthier option has been debunked by everyone. And there are no morals.

[GradnerLives]

The idea that vegetarianism is a healthier option has been debunked by everyone. And there are no morals.

Surprisingly, there really aren't any major studies that have been done that have provided any conclusive evidence that a vegan diet is more or less healthy. I never argued that it's healthier, just that it's not less healthy and that the fact that it "Goes against nature" is a stupid defense given how many things technology has allowed us to do that "Go against nature".

Human teeth are shaped like an omnivore's. So what? The human body can also only survive between 4 and 35 degrees celsius, should we stop using AC and furnaces because it's "Unnatural"? We do what we need to do, technologically, to continue to thrive and if we don't continue to make progress in providing alternative diets that don't rely on meats we can't keep up with the demand. Meat production is unsustainable given our current projected population growth and there aren't really any credible sources that refute that.

As far as morality is concerned, the meat industry tortures living things. You can wax relativist on it and start talking about the differences between an animal's experience versus a human's or you can try to discuss the cruel realities that exist in nature. You can even get real first year philosophy major up ins and suggest that morality is completely subjective but that line of thinking is useless at best, pretty damn dangerous at worst.

None of that changes the fact that humans, as highly developed analytical creatures with the ability to adapt to external pressures and internal preferences, have a choice to allow it to happen or allow it to stop (to whatever extent an individual can impact that). Opting out has value and while it's debatable what sort of moral value the decision has in the long run, there's not much point arguing that less death and torture is a bad thing objectively.

[Spyder73]

Reading back over this thread, it has taken some interesting twists and turns. I feel/hope it's about to come full circle back to Aliens

[maskedmelon]

Surprisingly, there really aren't any major studies that have been done that have provided any conclusive evidence that a vegan diet is more or less healthy. I never argued that it's healthier, just that it's not less healthy and that the fact that it "Goes against nature" is a stupid defense given how many things technology has allowed us to do that "Go against nature".

Human teeth are shaped like an omnivore's. So what? The human body can also only survive between 4 and 35 degrees celsius, should we stop using AC and furnaces because it's "Unnatural"? We do what we need to do, technologically, to continue to thrive and if we don't continue to make progress in providing alternative diets that don't rely on meats we can't keep up with the demand. Meat production is unsustainable given our current projected population growth and there aren't really any credible sources that refute that.

As far as morality is concerned, the meat industry tortures living things. You can wax relativist on it and start talking about the differences between an animal's experience versus a human's or you can try to discuss the cruel realities that exist in nature. You can even get real first year philosophy major up ins and suggest that morality is completely subjective but that line of thinking is useless at best, pretty damn dangerous at worst.

None of that changes the fact that humans, as highly developed analytical creatures with the ability to adapt to external pressures and internal preferences, have a choice to allow it to happen or allow it to stop (to whatever extent an individual can impact that). Opting out has value and while it's debatable what sort of moral value the decision has in the long run, there's not much point arguing that less death and torture is a bad thing objectively.

Why is the life of a lettuce any less than that of a snail, or a duck, or a cow, or a man? Each is nothing more than a collection of cells, why are larger more diverse collections anymore valuable than smaller more specialized ones?

Life requires death. Even plants, the most innocent of living things would cease without the time worn carcasses of their predators to sustain them. We can delude ourselves into believing we have attained some degree of righteousness for choosing to devour the most vulnerable of life in lieu of the lives of their aggressors, those that more closely resemble our selves, but in the end all we have done is deny the intermediaries a purposeful existence.

That said, many steps can certainly taken to make harvesting of animals a more humane.

[Lune]

Why is the life of a lettuce any less than that of a snail, or a duck, or a cow, or a man? Each is nothing more than a collection of cells, why are larger more diverse collections anymore valuable than smaller more specialized ones?

Life requires death. Even plants, the most innocent of living things would cease without the time worn carcasses of their predators to sustain them. We can delude ourselves into believing we have attained some degree of righteousness for choosing to devour the most vulnerable of life in lieu of the lives of their aggressors, those that more closely resemble our selves, but in the end all we have done is deny the intermediaries a purposeful existence.

That said, many steps can certainly taken to make harvesting of animals a more humane.

You can't exactly torture a lettuce... or even a snail really. But when you get into higher orders of mammals, you get creatures that have an internal life and are capable of experiencing both mental and physical anguish. I shouldn't have to explain to you why you wouldn't want to cause something pain. You could probably rationalize it, but I think that's part what separates good people from bad people, is an inherent internal aversion to causing pain in others.

And no, you're completely wrong, photoautotrophs are perfectly capable of existing without the decay of animal life. There would be a radical reshuffling of the biosphere and likely less inorganic carbon available to plants, but our primary producers (plants) don't need us to survive.

[Csihar]

Why is the life of a lettuce any less than that of a snail, or a duck, or a cow, or a man? Each is nothing more than a collection of cells, why are larger more diverse collections anymore valuable than smaller more specialized ones?

Life requires death. Even plants, the most innocent of living things would cease without the time worn carcasses of their predators to sustain them. We can delude ourselves into believing we have attained some degree of righteousness for choosing to devour the most vulnerable of life in lieu of the lives of their aggressors, those that more closely resemble our selves, but in the end all we have done is deny the intermediaries a purposeful existence.

That said, many steps can certainly taken to make harvesting of animals a more humane.

You don't apply this train of thought to any other part of your life. Why here?

This argument is the end station of the logical and rational person that doesn't want/can't take the leap.

Also, this thread only has about 7 (?) "lolz I just had a meats" comments. Pretty impressive level of maturity, it's usually a lot more.

[Csihar]

You can't exactly torture a lettuce...

Actually, Lune...

http://www.epicthings.com/sorry-vegetarians-study-shows-plants-can-hear-you-eating-them/

You know it's a good article when it starts off with "sorry vegetarians".

[GradnerLives]

Why is the life of a lettuce any less than that of a snail, or a duck, or a cow, or a man? Each is nothing more than a collection of cells, why are larger more diverse collections anymore valuable than smaller more specialized ones?

Life requires death. Even plants, the most innocent of living things would cease without the time worn carcasses of their predators to sustain them. We can delude ourselves into believing we have attained some degree of righteousness for choosing to devour the most vulnerable of life in lieu of the lives of their aggressors, those that more closely resemble our selves, but in the end all we have done is deny the intermediaries a purposeful existence.

That said, many steps can certainly taken to make harvesting of animals a more humane.

Central nervousness provides the capacity for pain and suffering, it's kind of a prerequisite. I'm honestly not really sure if you're being purposefully obtuse, but my argument is not so much that life should all be preserved, but that inflicting suffering is cruel. In order to experience suffering, you need to be a conscious living thing.

Focusing on more humane farming practices would be good, but it's even less sustainable and requires substantial oversight to ensure that these practices are upheld. It's also kind of like saying we should make bombs that kill people quicker. They inflict less suffering, which is better, but it doesn't really address the root problem.

[Lune]

Actually, Lune...

http://www.epicthings.com/sorry-vegetarians-study-shows-plants-can-hear-you-eating-them/

You know it's a good article when it starts off with "sorry vegetarians".

Simple chemical response to a stimulus is a much different thing than a centralized nervous system perceiving pain.

The clickbait article is strongly implying the plants are 'feeling' something to trick those who don't know any better. It's just not true.

[entruil]

Simple chemical response to a stimulus is a much different thing than a centralized nervous system perceiving pain.

The clickbait article is strongly implying the plants are 'feeling' something to trick those who don't know any better. It's just not true.

is feeling so important to a sentient being though?

Tree's in Africa emit a chemical(?) to warn other tree's of the incoming invasion of locusts(?). etc...

(kinda buzzed but not arguing with u lune, quoted cause chemical response..)

also, crow species(?) are known to have ~77 or so dialects....


who is to say, any life is anything, without any knowledge of anything, only a fleeting example set by tawdry logic and spilt trial...

[big_ole_jpn]

is feeling so important to a sentient being though?

Tree's in Africa emit a chemical(?) to warn other tree's of the incoming invasion of locusts(?). etc...

(kinda buzzed but not arguing with u lune, quoted cause chemical response..)

also, crow species(?) are known to have ~77 or so dialects....


who is to say, any life is anything, without any knowledge of anything, only a fleeting example set by tawdry logic and spilt trial...

crows have a CNS

trees are clockwork entities that are sending some kind of signalling that causes their treebrothers to carry out some biological process that defends against locusts. it's a rube goldberg machine.

hope this helps

[entruil]

crows have a CNS

trees are clockwork entities that are sending some kind of signalling that causes their treebrothers to carry out some biological process that defends against locusts. it's a rube goldberg machine.

hope this helps

'A Rube Goldberg machine is a contraption, invention, device, or apparatus that is deliberately over-engineered to perform a simple task in a complicated fashion, generally including a chain reaction.'

am I misinterpretting "deliberately over-engineered"?...


I don't think we have valid claim to say one way or the other how the earth/evolution/creation breathes...

search for &alien& life leaves this question open to a point?... I still think we are the masters of earth's inhabitants and that my life is more important than a gorilla's... I just hope in that situation that the sustenance gathered is of significant value to the point I can placate my emotional(a trait of my rube goldberg?) reaction...


I recognize that most people (myself included) are desensitized to the killing of livestock(animals) because we buy the meat in neat packages and are not the butchers.


more on-topic ... is it possible for a vegan to get the necessary components to live a healthy life? a vegetarian? a omnivore? a carnivore?...

Is it possible that the OP's subject is just a failure of veganism? or is it that veganism is the failure? maybe i should read thread... /facepalm... adding... is breastmilk against vegan ways??

[maskedmelon]

And no, you're completely wrong, photoautotrophs are perfectly capable of existing without the decay of animal life. There would be a radical reshuffling of the biosphere and likely less inorganic carbon available to plants, but our primary producers (plants) don't need us to survive.

Oh really? I'd have never guessed ^^ But it is those things, most peaceable and humble of all life, which are most deserving of death?

Why are our responses to stimuli any more important than a plant's? Because ours are more elaborate?

Why is a cow's more important than a lettuce? Because a cow is more like us than a lettuce?

The miraculous accident of life is precious however simple or complex, but all life does demand death. Even plant life ^^

Everyone has raised valid points with regard to necessity and I agree that cruelty is something we ought to reject. I guess I question more the premise that eating animals is cruel and I consider the source of excessive guilt with regard to their consumption a symptom of thanklessness, which is really no one person's fault. It is more a problem of culture.

The Japanese have an expression spoken before each meal. For many, if not most, it is little more than custom, but it's meaning is important. It is an expression of gratitude, to those who prepared the meal and those who are the meal, for the sacrifice of their life for the recipient's.

Of course when I am thrust into the position of actually seizing that life, I find my thankfulness woefully inadequate to enable that action. That does not mean though that once it has been taken, I'll permit the sacrifice to be wasted.

All things die, why is purposed death less valuable than a meaningless one?

[maskedmelon]

'A Rube Goldberg machine is a contraption, invention, device, or apparatus that is deliberately over-engineered to perform a simple task in a complicated fashion, generally including a chain reaction.'

am I misinterpretting "deliberately over-engineered"?...


I don't think we have valid claim to say one way or the other how the earth/evolution/creation breathes...

search for &alien& life leaves this question open to a point?... I still think we are the masters of earth's inhabitants and that my life is more important than a gorilla's... I just hope in that situation that the sustenance gathered is of significant value to the point I can placate my emotional(a trait of my rube goldberg?) reaction...


I recognize that most people (myself included) are desensitized to the killing of livestock(animals) because we buy the meat in neat packages and are not the butchers.


more on-topic ... is it possible for a vegan to get the necessary components to live a healthy life? a vegetarian? a omnivore? a carnivore?...

Is it possible that the OP's subject is just a failure of veganism? or is it that veganism is the failure? maybe i should read thread... /facepalm... adding... is breastmilk against vegan ways??

Agree with all this. The thing that frustrates me about OP article was that the woman endangered the life of her child in a self gratifying pursuit. Sure she could have gone about it differently, but the point is she could have killed her baby because she'd rather see meat in a dumpster than deal with the guilt that her life was dependent on the sacrifice of another creature similar to her.

[entruil]

Agree with all this. The thing that frustrates me about OP article was that the woman endangered the life of her child in a self gratifying pursuit. Sure she could have gone about it differently, but the point is she could have killed her baby because she'd rather see meat in a dumpster than deal with the guilt that her life was dependent on the sacrifice of another creature similar to her.

just read most of source link after reading this post(did not crawl into source's source links however)... so sorry for my bliss.. thank you for your patience...

this shit has me outrage'd as well with a lack of legal creative response so I have to muddy the waters in my mind's eye... /bow.


*
2Pac - Troublesome '96 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdX79pwyBII)
Interpretation's gained... Peace.*Interpretations

[Lune]

Oh really? I'd have never guessed ^^ But it is those things, most peaceable and humble of all life, which are most deserving of death?

Why are our responses to stimuli any more important than a plant's? Because ours are more elaborate?

Why is a cow's more important than a lettuce? Because a cow is more like us than a lettuce?

Just gonna ignore these questions because they are silly.

I consider the source of excessive guilt with regard to their consumption a symptom of thanklessness

The guilt is over the massive amount of pain the industrialized meat industry causes to complex mammals, that are very capable of experiencing that pain on a level close enough to humans for it to be atrocious.

And it's not excessive. Very few people feel an appropriate amount of guilt for how disgusting this really is. I know I don't.

That part of Japanese culture is silly: "Oh thank you Chicken for living your entire life in a dimly lit 3x3 foot wire cage, I'm so thankful we threw you into the shredder so I can enjoy these chicken nuggets". Whether you think that death had a purpose or not doesn't matter, what I'm talking about is abusing that fucking chicken while it was alive, which is wrong.

[R Flair]

Surprisingly, there really aren't any major studies that have been done that have provided any conclusive evidence that a vegan diet is more or less healthy. I never argued that it's healthier, just that it's not less healthy and that the fact that it "Goes against nature" is a stupid defense given how many things technology has allowed us to do that "Go against nature".

Our teeth break meat apart perfectly fine. We possess both the sharpness and the strength in our teeth to easily chew and grind meat to make it easily digestible by our bodies.

Beyond that, we also possess the capacity to cook food which makes it even easier to eat. Perhaps that had something to do with the shape of our teeth. Like a warning, its easier if you cook it.

Human teeth are shaped like an omnivore's. So what? The human body can also only survive between 4 and 35 degrees celsius, should we stop using AC and furnaces because it's "Unnatural"? We do what we need to do, technologically, to continue to thrive and if we don't continue to make progress in providing alternative diets that don't rely on meats we can't keep up with the demand. Meat production is unsustainable given our current projected population growth and there aren't really any credible sources that refute that.
Not true in any way. This kind of propaganda is put out by the same people that claim there is man-made global warming and endorse eugenics, but has been debunked on every level by tens of thousands of scientists.


As far as morality is concerned, the meat industry tortures living things. You can wax relativist on it and start talking about the differences between an animal's experience versus a human's or you can try to discuss the cruel realities that exist in nature. You can even get real first year philosophy major up ins and suggest that morality is completely subjective but that line of thinking is useless at best, pretty damn dangerous at worst.

None of that changes the fact that humans, as highly developed analytical creatures with the ability to adapt to external pressures and internal preferences, have a choice to allow it to happen or allow it to stop (to whatever extent an individual can impact that). Opting out has value and while it's debatable what sort of moral value the decision has in the long run, there's not much point arguing that less death and torture is a bad thing objectively.

Its sad that animals suffer. You are right, they should do something to prevent that. That isn't an argument why we aren't supposed to eat meat though.

[Lune]

Its sad that somebody raped your wife. You are right, she should do something to prevent that. That isn't an argument why we aren't supposed to rape people though.

That's what you sound like. The only difference is you're causing pain to an organism that can't defend itself.

[Patriam1066]

That's what you sound like. The only difference is you're causing pain to an organism that can't defend itself.

Eating meat is the same as rape. Heard it here first folks

Hillary 2016
Boots on the ground

[Patriam1066]

crows have a CNS

trees are clockwork entities that are sending some kind of signalling that causes their treebrothers to carry out some biological process that defends against locusts. it's a rube goldberg machine.

hope this helps

Hahaha

[R Flair]

That's what you sound like. The only difference is you're causing pain to an organism that can't defend itself.

Closer comparison would be it sucks that you were raped by your father, but that doesn't mean people shouldn't have sex.

[entruil]

Heard it here first folks
Hillary 2016
Boots on the ground

we so fawked...


Hahaha

now we can add meat to our hillary trump steaks... mmmmm.

[Lune]

Eating meat is the same as rape. Heard it here first folks

Hillary 2016
Boots on the ground

It's called an analogy.

You know, where we compare two things that are conceptually similar but not quite the same or sometimes not even close in magnitude.

[maskedmelon]

Just gonna ignore these questions because they are silly.



The guilt is over the massive amount of pain the industrialized meat industry causes to complex mammals, that are very capable of experiencing that pain on a level close enough to humans for it to be atrocious.

And it's not excessive. Very few people feel an appropriate amount of guilt for how disgusting this really is. I know I don't.

That part of Japanese culture is silly: "Oh thank you Chicken for living your entire life in a dimly lit 3x3 foot wire cage, I'm so thankful we threw you into the shredder so I can enjoy these chicken nuggets". Whether you think that death had a purpose or not doesn't matter, what I'm talking about is abusing that fucking chicken while it was alive, which is wrong.

Then you're not talking about eating him at all ^^ You just the authority on silliness tonight though, huh?

[Patriam1066]

It's called an analogy.

You know, where we compare two things that are conceptually similar but not quite the same or sometimes not even close in magnitude.

It was a good one and clearly not hyperbolic

[Lune]

It was a good one and clearly not hyperbolic

Choose whatever magnitude you think fits, it is meant to highlight a blatant blase attitude toward right and wrong, and it serves that purpose. If not rape, then stealing, kicking a dog, locking a human in a cage, whatever.

Then you're not talking about eating him at all ^^ You just the authority on silliness tonight though, huh?

I had to force myself to write silly and not 'fucking retarded' out of respect for the fact that you're always civil and respectful. It was difficult but I did it

[entruil]

I had to force myself to write silly and not 'fucking retarded' out of respect for the fact that you're always civil and respectful. It was difficult but I did it
sry to spam but ''preciate the respect shown there I deleted a binge'filled retort to the first part.... indirect miscount of punctuated truth lead to indiscriminate recognize of real... "Time will reveal" - Bootleg

[Ahldagor]

Any of you ever slaughter your own food? It's humbling.

[Daywolf]

Any of you ever slaughter your own food? It's humbling.What's to slaughter in Huston? ...and that is humbling?
Ohhh you city peeps :o

Bad news for vegetarians – Plants Can Hear, Feel, Scream Out and Defend Themselves When THEY ARE BEING EATEN (http://www.aartiinformatics.com/health/bad-news-for-vegetarians-plants-can-hear-feel-scream-out-and-defend-themselves-when-they-are-being-eaten/)

http://i.imgur.com/FsY5WVl.jpg

STOP THE MADNESS!!!

[GradnerLives]

Our teeth break meat apart perfectly fine. We possess both the sharpness and the strength in our teeth to easily chew and grind meat to make it easily digestible by our bodies.

Beyond that, we also possess the capacity to cook food which makes it even easier to eat. Perhaps that had something to do with the shape of our teeth. Like a warning, its easier if you cook it.

Not true in any way. This kind of propaganda is put out by the same people that claim there is man-made global warming and endorse eugenics, but has been debunked on every level by tens of thousands of scientists.



Its sad that animals suffer. You are right, they should do something to prevent that. That isn't an argument why we aren't supposed to eat meat though.

I feel like you read like 3 words in my post, got bored and then just made up your own arguments but sure, I'll play ball.

I actually agreed about the teeth thing. We have the teeth of an omnivore. It's true. They've evolved to be good at processing meat. That also doesn't matter at all though. What we evolved to do and what we have the ability to do with technology are completely separate things.

Humans live in a lot of environments we shouldn't, we've extended our lifespans far beyond what should be typical in 'nature', we've treated genetic ailments allowing them to perpetuate through our species rather than being culled as part of the evolutionary process. How is the shape of our teeth an argument for or against what we do with them? It's completely asinine. Why ignore so many other inherent traits of our species but suggest that this one is so important that we better leave it alone?

Climate change is a consensus fact in the scientific community. That's only part of the sustainability argument, but if you're going to argue that the reality of anthropogenic climate change has something to do with a eugenics conspiracy (?), I don't really want to even start that conversation with you.

The moral argument is the one I always found most compelling. Not really sure how you're attempting to refute it there, but yes, it is sad that we choose to allow animals to suffer for the sake of our convenience. I agree that we should do something about that.

As for the guy worried about lettuce feelings, I'm not even going to bother, dude.

[Daywolf]

http://i.imgur.com/Ae8iaGM.jpg

[Daywolf]

http://i.imgur.com/FCjk2v6.jpg

[skarlorn]

this thread is like gospel to he who shant b namedeth

[AzzarTheGod]

may he never be named again *folds hands in prayer*

[Csihar]

Simple chemical response to a stimulus is a much different thing than a centralized nervous system perceiving pain.

The clickbait article is strongly implying the plants are 'feeling' something to trick those who don't know any better. It's just not true.

'twas sarcasm, my good man.

[Ahldagor]

What's to slaughter in Huston? ...and that is humbling?


You can buy anything in a city. Suckling pig for a smoker, and it was delicious. The blood and the screams. A sound and a fury.....

[Malk]

Any of you ever slaughter your own food? It's humbling.

Actually yes, mainly chickens, lambs and pigs. If you're good enough, there's very few pain involved (yes, even for pigs).

[maskedmelon]

Any of you ever slaughter your own food?

Nope, I get upset just fishing and tended to annoy my parents when I was little insisting we release the fish that I'd catch because "he looked sad." Needless to say I was only taken fishing a handful of times ^^

It's humbling.

This is my point. Be thankful for the sacrifice^^

[big_ole_jpn]

'A Rube Goldberg machine is a contraption, invention, device, or apparatus that is deliberately over-engineered to perform a simple task in a complicated fashion, generally including a chain reaction.'

am I misinterpretting "deliberately over-engineered"?...


I don't think we have valid claim to say one way or the other how the earth/evolution/creation breathes...



quoted the part i read up 2

you're right trees are not deliberately over-engineered because they're not deliberately engineered at all. butt single cells, and even most multicellular organisms, are nothing more than extremely complex chemical clockworks. Consciousness and the capacity for a subjective experience are emergent properties of a central nervous system; if you are claiming trees or plants whose response to stimuli are all mediated by clockwork chemical mechanisms incidentally evolved the ability to experience reality subjectively on some level beyond human understanding you are a stupid as shit hippie, meat eating f*ggot contrarian, or other anti intellectual piece of trash.

Before the CNS, there were self-replicating little bundles of chemical. a (intelligent) Dahmer type could light 6 billion of those on fire in a void and not get a lick of pleasure from the suffering generated because there is none. Do these retards sometimes get worried that their computer or car have secret interior monologues and feelings they don't know about?

The injun "everything has a spirit" thing is great and all cuz we should respect the earth, but i dont think they were literally saying that while making arrowheads from a stone that they were chipping brutally away at a conscious entity's body.

^not sure why i wrote all that, pretty sure nobody here actually believes this shit

[maskedmelon]

So, a bit of a tangent, since the moral argument is based on inflicting pain and has nothing to do with taking life or destructive behavior in general, what if we were to engineer animals incapable of feeling pain or numbe them. Would it be acceptable to eat them then? What about eating them alive?

Intuition tells us the last part is fucked up, but working from the argument for Veganism, there would be nothing wrong with it and it is the reason why many vegetarians have no qualms about eating certain shellfish.

[big_ole_jpn]

So, a bit of a tangent, since the moral argument is based on inflicting pain and has nothing to do with taking life or destructive behavior in general, what if we were to engineer animals incapable of feeling pain or numbe them. Would it be acceptable to eat them then? What about eating them alive?

Intuition tells us the last part is fucked up, but working from the argument for Veganism, there would be nothing wrong with it and it is the reason why many vegetarians have no qualms about eating certain shellfish.

meat cultures are essentially this fully realized. And meat made this way is going to be way more expensive than just raising live animals probably for the extent of our lifetimes. Bigtime luxury item.

As for breeding lobotomized animals, please no. Don't need "lobotomized" human pleasureslaves.

[GradnerLives]

meat cultures are essentially this fully realized. And meat made this way is going to be way more expensive than just raising live animals probably for the extent of our lifetimes. Bigtime luxury item.

As for breeding lobotomized animals, please no. Don't need "lobotomized" human pleasureslaves.

Exactly. Why synthesize the whole cow without feelings when all you need is the T-bone?

That said, "not in our lifetime"?

I mean maybe a perfectly synthesized kobe beef filet mignon with every possible texture and flavour indistinguishable from the original, sure. Not at a reasonable price within our lifetime.

Fakesteak with all of the same nutritional value (probably better) and a flavour/texture close enough to be negligible to the mass market will absolutely be available at a reasonable price within the next decade.

Most meat that's consumed is ground, processed and re-formed into something that only vaguely resembles the real deal anyways.

To answer the tangent though, it certainly muddies the water of the moral argument, but it doesn't eliminate it.

If you could create a pill that turns anyone into a sadomasochist and then give it to someone who would otherwise have an aversion to pain, just so that you could torture them for your own pleasure, that's still a problem even if they're begging you to do it, right?

[Saludeen]

quoted the part i read up 2

you're right trees are not deliberately over-engineered because they're not deliberately engineered at all. butt single cells, and even most multicellular organisms, are nothing more than extremely complex chemical clockworks. Consciousness and the capacity for a subjective experience are emergent properties of a central nervous system; if you are claiming trees or plants whose response to stimuli are all mediated by clockwork chemical mechanisms incidentally evolved the ability to experience reality subjectively on some level beyond human understanding you are a stupid as shit hippie, meat eating f*ggot contrarian, or other anti intellectual piece of trash.

Before the CNS, there were self-replicating little bundles of chemical. a (intelligent) Dahmer type could light 6 billion of those on fire in a void and not get a lick of pleasure from the suffering generated because there is none. Do these retards sometimes get worried that their computer or car have secret interior monologues and feelings they don't know about?

The injun "everything has a spirit" thing is great and all cuz we should respect the earth, but i dont think they were literally saying that while making arrowheads from a stone that they were chipping brutally away at a conscious entity's body.

^not sure why i wrote all that, pretty sure nobody here actually believes this shit

If consciousness is an emergent property of mindless mechanics then everyone would have the same exact response to stimuli like programs / robots do, but we don't. Our consciousness is a significant threshold above what we can do with AI, not just a gradient. Meaning, robots are limited to "if > then". But we're a level above that. And to assume that you know the type of consciousness plants have is conjecture and means you have no base to be arrogant towards people who think they might be aware of more than we think. We also don't know the boundaries of consciousness so it could pervade all matter despite you an I having a barrier between our minds.

[big_ole_jpn]

If consciousness is an emergent property of mindless mechanics then everyone would have the same exact response to stimuli like programs / robots do, but we don't.

really really stupid

[Lune]

really really stupid

[GradnerLives]

really really stupid

[Patriam1066]

If consciousness is an emergent property of mindless mechanics then everyone would have the same exact response to stimuli like programs / robots do, but we don't. Our consciousness is a significant threshold above what we can do with AI, not just a gradient. Meaning, robots are limited to "if > then". But we're a level above that. And to assume that you know the type of consciousness plants have is conjecture and means you have no base to be arrogant towards people who think they might be aware of more than we think. We also don't know the boundaries of consciousness so it could pervade all matter despite you an I having a barrier between our minds.

Explain Alzheimer's in your own words

I'd love to hear what you think causes the changes in personality, memory, and cognition as a result of that disease

[Ahldagor]

The technology will get cheaper and then attempt to expand the market. Advertising the product effectively will take some investments.

[Saludeen]

really really stupid

Yeah, you'd have to be pretty stupid to not understand the basic concept of if / then.

[Trungep99]

I'm not a vegan or vegetarian but there are safe ways to raise children with such diets. There are entire Indian cultures that raise their neighborhoods being vegan

[R Flair]

Bet their men are 20% weaker than my mother.

[entruil]

quoted the part i read up 2

you're right trees are not deliberately over-engineered because they're not deliberately engineered at all. butt single cells, and even most multicellular organisms, are nothing more than extremely complex chemical clockworks. Consciousness and the capacity for a subjective experience are emergent properties of a central nervous system; if you are claiming trees or plants whose response to stimuli are all mediated by clockwork chemical mechanisms incidentally evolved the ability to experience reality subjectively on some level beyond human understanding you are a stupid as shit hippie, meat eating contrarian, or other anti intellectual piece of trash.

Before the CNS, there were self-replicating little bundles of chemical. a (intelligent) Dahmer type could light 6 billion of those on fire in a void and not get a lick of pleasure from the suffering generated because there is none. Do these retards sometimes get worried that their computer or car have secret interior monologues and feelings they don't know about?

The injun "everything has a spirit" thing is great and all cuz we should respect the earth, but i dont think they were literally saying that while making arrowheads from a stone that they were chipping brutally away at a conscious entity's body.

^not sure why i wrote all that, pretty sure nobody here actually believes this shit

cool ... don't know how to respond yet but still typing this... bleh.

will add native american spiritual sensitivity is a nice wormhole to recognize breathe.

prefer word other than magic but ble gh

http://i.imgur.com/VE4np0N.jpg

[Trungep99]

For the record. I was referring to certain cultures and religions from india, not native Americans

[maskedmelon]

The injun thing is actually an interesting point, because whether they believed the rock was alive or not, they'd still do it. They would just be thankful for its sacrifice, just as they were for that of the prey they hunted, very similar to Japanese in that regard, but no surprise really given that Shintoism holds similar beliefs that God is everywhere in everything.

I am kind of surprised though that consensus (lack of opposition suggesting there is none, or everyone has tired of the conversation ^^) appears to be that it would be perfectly acceptable to eat animals (even alive) if they didn't experience pain. It follows the vegan argument, it just surprises me that people would think its ok. Seems arbitrary. Gonna have to think on this more.

[big_ole_jpn]

The injun thing is actually an interesting point, because whether they believed the rock was alive or not, they'd still do it. They would just be thankful for its sacrifice, just as they were for that of the prey they hunted, very similar to Japanese in that regard, but no surprise really given that Shintoism holds similar beliefs that God is everywhere in everything.

I am kind of surprised though that consensus (lack of opposition suggesting there is none, or everyone has tired of the conversation ^^) appears to be that it would be perfectly acceptable to eat animals (even alive) if they didn't experience pain. It follows the vegan argument, it just surprises me that people would think its ok. Seems arbitrary. Gonna have to think on this more.

is it really arbitrary to want to cause a minimum of suffering? being concerned with the subjective experience of other feeling beings seems like a prerequisite for seeking happiness as a human and not just living as a tortured sadist.

If an animal couldn't experience pain then causing it pain would not be an issue. It would be an "animal" in the sense that a bacterium is. It's not arbitrary at all. Would be like eating a plant (vegans are eating microscopic animalia as they do so, but bacteria can't experience reality subjectively so it doesn't matter).

I don't think you could guarantee an animal is not experiencing pain without shutting down its cognition completely though. GMO lobotomized animals may be a really fucking disgusting thought but it would never be more efficient to feed animals by IV than to just do what we're already doing until meat cultures. If we ever start breeding animals that are conscious and feed themselves but retarded such that they don't respond to pain stimulus as a "less-cruel" alternative I will immolate myself on the White House lawn in sheer horror (unless the entire nervous system is synthetic and built with just life support functions and programs for eating, but we will be beyond this petty argument when we can do that).

[big_ole_jpn]

btw gradner, ur new at this if you actually believe meat cultures will have trumped traditional farming 1 measly decade from now. Even if the raw materials -> production ratio exceeded traditional farming efficiency today (and they may), the human capital required to manage such production is going to remain way more expensive than the difference in efficiency offsets. Needs fully automated production facilities.

I'd be willing to concede we may see the scale tip and meat culture farming becoming the higher profit-margin choice in our lifetimes, but you're a real Kurzweil if you're going to stand by that 10 year prediction boy. You can just pay a bunch of brown slaves virtually nothing to do the work and have your operation cost 50% more calories in grain instead of investing hundreds of millions in a giant robot meat culture facility for efficiency increase. 100 year minimum for meat culture farming to outproduce traditional farming globally.

[GradnerLives]

Meat cultures seek to replicate the structure of the meat maybe a bit closer than I'm saying would be necessary to create an alternative that would be acceptable to the mass market.

Within a decade, the difference will be negligible, within our lifetime the difference will be impossible to discern without lab tools, within 100 years there will be no difference.

[big_ole_jpn]

Meat cultures seek to replicate the structure of the meat maybe a bit closer than I'm saying would be necessary to create an alternative that would be acceptable to the mass market.

Within a decade, the difference will be negligible, within our lifetime the difference will be impossible to discern without lab tools, within 100 years there will be no difference.

o okay i was talkin past u, sorry buddy

im with ya

[maskedmelon]

is it really arbitrary to want to cause a minimum of suffering? being concerned with the subjective experience of other feeling beings seems like a prerequisite for seeking happiness as a human and not just living as a tortured sadist.

If an animal couldn't experience pain then causing it pain would not be an issue. It would be an "animal" in the sense that a bacterium is. It's not arbitrary at all. Would be like eating a plant (vegans are eating microscopic animalia as they do so, but bacteria can't experience reality subjectively so it doesn't matter).

I don't think you could guarantee an animal is not experiencing pain without shutting down its cognition completely though. GMO lobotomized animals may be a really fucking disgusting thought but it would never be more efficient to feed animals by IV than to just do what we're already doing until meat cultures. If we ever start breeding animals that are conscious and feed themselves but retarded such that they don't respond to pain stimulus as a "less-cruel" alternative I will immolate myself on the White House lawn in sheer horror (unless the entire nervous system is synthetic and built with just life support functions and programs for eating, but we will be beyond this petty argument when we can do that).

No, not arbitrary at all to want to minimize suffering. I just meant it was an odd line to draw as you illustrated with your example of farming animals that function normally, but do not experience pain. Sure, they aren't suffering because they feel no more pain, but they are no less alive than a lettuce and still experience a subjective reality as you've pointed out.

Also, I acknowledge that doing away with farming would immediately yield an appreciable decrease in suffering following the final harvest/cull because at that point there would be fewer animals overall. But from there their population would be largely managed by natural predators such as wolves, cougars and disease. Only occasional intervention might be needed by man to prevent overcrowding and starvation. I question though whether death by wolf/cougar/disease/starvation would be preferable to a swift death by a normal man.

Honestly makes me wonder how many prey animals such as deer or rabbits die peacefully being taken swiftly by old age as they graze tranquilly in safe green pastures.

[maskedmelon]

To clarify, I am not suggesting that animals die by nature so it is ok for us to kill them. What I am saying is that current farm animals exist only in domestic environments. If we wish to end the current situation, we can either kill them all (eradicating the species) or cede their lives to the brutality of nature.

How is fating those creatures to be eaten alive or starve to death minimizing suffering? Is it because there would be fewer creatures?

[GradnerLives]

The animals we farm are so far from what existed in nature due to selective breeding and other practices meant to increase yield that ceding them to nature is no longer a humane option.

Culling or sterilizing them would be sad, but the guilt wouldn't come from ending the cycle, it would come from having created it in the first place.

The goal isn't to minimize the suffering of all animals in the world, lowering some kind of 'net suffering' score. Vegans don't walk around scolding wolves and lions for being so immoral (ok, some do, but I think they're as nuts as you do). It's about choosing not to be the cause of suffering to others since we have the mental capacity to identify and stop it.

[mickmoranis]

The animals we farm are so far from what existed in nature due to selective breeding and other practices meant to increase yield that ceding them to nature is no longer a humane option

This is so true that I have always felt that eventually we will like meat grown in a lab far more than that grown in the wild.

Not yet, but soon.

[Evia]

It's about choosing not to be the cause of suffering to others since we have the mental capacity to identify and stop it.

Bingo.
I've never heard a good reason to eat meat. People try to justify it through religion, god, vitamin or nutritional intake, top of the food chain mentality, ect.

The fact is we as human beings are fully able in this day and age to live healthy and productive lives while abstaining from it. If you're eating meat because the bible or your God tells you it's okay, maybe you should be looking at what kind of God you're worshipping.

I have far more respect for someone who is just straight about it and say they enjoy the taste if flesh and end the discussion right there. So many people want to justify eating it though, and no matter their reasonings, it always comes across as self-centered, barbaric, or ignorant.

I'm all for living and letting live though. The majority of my friends and family eat meat and that's cool if it makes them happy. My views are my views, they do what they do.

[Pokesan]

i don't think the bible or god has anything to do with it.
i do think you're an idiot for suggesting so.

[Zill]

So any and all moral arguments aside, the best diet for a human organism to maximize its life expectancy and functionality is a pescatarian diet.

That is, most meals consist of vegetable protein sources, vegetables and fruits and grains, but also featuring a good quantity of different kinds of fish for extra energy and protein supplement.

All conversations over, just trust me on this shit you idiots. I mean, eat what you want for pleasure but thems the facts if we're talking about min-maxing diet.

[maskedmelon]

The animals we farm are so far from what existed in nature due to selective breeding and other practices meant to increase yield that ceding them to nature is no longer a humane option.

Culling or sterilizing them would be sad, but the guilt wouldn't come from ending the cycle, it would come from having created it in the first place.

Exactly ^^ This is the best course of action because the consequence is our own (guilt), whether we perverted their genomes with centuries of selective breeding in domestication, or not. I think most of the participants in this thread would agree with your conclusion no matter how bitter it may be, but most vegans would not.


The goal isn't to minimize the suffering of all animals in the world, lowering some kind of 'net suffering' score. Vegans don't walk around scolding wolves and lions for being so immoral (ok, some do, but I think they're as nuts as you do). It's about choosing not to be the cause of suffering to others since we have the mental capacity to identify and stop it.


We must never be blind to consequence because our world is not static and our actions and inactions are have effect. No matter how noble we might find an action today, neglecting consideration of, or worse yet, ignoring, the consequence of tomorrow is as worthy of rebuke as anything.

Simply abstaining from participation in a morally objectionable act is inherently selfish because at the end of the day the only one who benefits from the abstinence is the one who abstains. By placating one's own conscience one absolves oneself of guilt thereby garnering emotional satisfaction in one's own virtuous nature, while having done nothing to right the wrong.

Choosing not to participate in something is not the same as stopping it.


Evs, our very special ability to reason allowing us to act contrary to carnal impulse is the very reason we ought to question our feelings rather than permit them to rule us. They are neither rational, nor prescient. They seek only to extricate us from the source of our discomfort as quickly as possible, often leading to embrace of ineffective or otherwise less than ideal resolutions.

Problems are not solved by avoiding them.

[Whirled]

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQijECzhakzG-wdTiLFQqRuu-SdgoDUOdE7jE_tP3oUJMnORYoE
I ate a salad for lunch. I feel.......
.....still hungry... =/

[GradnerLives]

Exactly ^^ This is the best course of action because the consequence is our own (guilt), whether we perverted their genomes with centuries of selective breeding in domestication, or not. I think most of the participants in this thread would agree with your conclusion no matter how bitter it may be, but most vegans would not.

[/b]


We must never be blind to consequence because our world is not static and our actions and inactions are have effect. No matter how noble we might find an action today, neglecting consideration of, or worse yet, ignoring, the consequence of tomorrow is as worthy of rebuke as anything.

Simply abstaining from participation in a morally objectionable act is inherently selfish because at the end of the day the only one who benefits from the abstinence is the one who abstains. By placating one's own conscience one absolves oneself of guilt thereby garnering emotional satisfaction in one's own virtuous nature, while having done nothing to right the wrong.

Choosing not to participate in something is not the same as stopping it.


Evs, our very special ability to reason allowing us to act contrary to carnal impulse is the very reason we ought to question our feelings rather than permit them to rule us. They are neither rational, nor prescient. They seek only to extricate us from the source of our discomfort as quickly as possible, often leading to embrace of ineffective or otherwise less than ideal resolutions.

Problems are not solved by avoiding them.

Most vegans would agree that opening the gates of the cow pasture and walking away would be a negative course of action and that a final culling or sterilization for any farm animals that won't be kept as pets would be a positive course of action. Ceding them to nature is inhumane, but using that as a defense of just carrying on the status quo - as it seems that you're trying to do - is just being willfully ignorant.

Choosing not to participate in something and having conversations like these with other people solves it. Walking around smacking McChickens out of peoples' hands might work, but would be a pretty strange approach. I can try to convince others, but I can't force action from others, I can only choose for myself.

It's not just for the peace of mind of the abstainer. It's for the animals that they would have eaten that they haven't. It's for the people who they speak to about it that change their mind and the animals affected by those proxy decisions. The decision affects more than just the abstainer so your "Problems aren't solved by avoiding them" argument is pretty weird.

If you're suggesting that there are moral consequences to the "Inaction" of not trying to stop animals from eating animals or not trying to burn down butcher shops, stop it.

You're reaching, man.

[AzzarTheGod]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkR2XEYEFgk

Good dunks in review.

Melon you did it bb, 23 pages. Upboats fired.