We Are Supposed to Eat Animals !

[Lune]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You can't exactly torture a lettuce...

Actually, Lune...

http://www.epicthings.com/sorry-vege...u-eating-them/

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

[GradnerLives]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by Csihar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Actually, Lune...

http://www.epicthings.com/sorry-vege...u-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]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by entruil [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by big_ole_jpn [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by entruil [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

'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.