If you eat meat, would you be willing to kill an animal to continue to be able to?

[Saya]

Originally Posted by Joker_in_the_Pack

Saya, shut up, you're making the other vegans look bad.

If you think you know what another animal is capable of thinking, you're just as arrogant as those fuckheads who thinks we're the chosen species.

All I'm saying is that evidence more than suggests that a lion cannot philosophize why killing a gazelle might be questionable, "lions eat gazelles" is a pretty annoying point and yeah I probably don't address it the best way possible and I shouldn't even bother, but to say that an animal is capable of understanding Socrates is really weird especially coming from people who eat them. No I don't think it has anything to do with the matter at hand, because the value of a life isn't based on what the individual can or cannot understand, but their ability to understand ethics does come into play when people say "well they do it", and I'd have a similar response if someone says "well my toddler covered the wall in shit, must be natural, why can't I?" It would also come into play with "well if animals have rights, then they are morally accountable and can be prosecuted for crimes." Its pretty important for their own sakes to establish what they are capable of.

[JCC]

Originally Posted by Joker_in_the_Pack

Veganism is not a biological or natural choice. Anyone saying so is full of it, even if you say it Dick, but I think you'll agree. Veganism is a moral choice. End of. I could throw out scientific data supporting Veganism until I grow a beard that reaches my nuts, but that doesn't change that, at its core, veganism is a moral decision.

Yeah, I certainly didn't become vegan because I thought it was natural, I didn't really care. If veganism was decidedly unnatural, I would still stick to it. It's just that a lot of people don't like to just come right out and say "I've got no problem with killing", so it's always, "it's natural" or "lions do it and therefore so should we", and that's why the discussions nearly always end up that way; it's false science or the **** of common sense and I feel like I have to address it. It does become less of a debate about animals than just dispelling misconceptions, granted.

[KontanKarite]

I have no problem with killing animals for the nutrition of our species. I've done it before and I'll do it again, I assure you.

I hate using this argument... I know of a certain member who's notorious for it, but:

Even with killing animals, we STILL can't seem to feed the world. Think about that. Children of our own species are going hungry right this very second and vegans want to rally support to protect the animals? How about we try to prioritize a little bit first? How about we work together as a species to be okay in our own god damned skins before we start worrying about our dominance over the food chain?

We have people right now who would rather ask for your spare change to get their next crack fix instead of eating a god damned thing. We have people KILLING each other over something as stupid as the color of your skin, age, religion, political leaning, and gender. It doesn't even stop there. We as humans can't even allow each other to be even slightly different without the threat of violence. How many people have been killed over the color of their clothes in the United States? In Europe, some kids got murdered for being goths. In Iran, you can be imprisoned for something as silly as a haircut.

We are our worst predators and we harm ourselves far worse than we would ever harm another animal. We can't even be at peace with ourselves and of all things, vegans seem to think that their cause is so noble that they'd rather limit our hungry's options of nutrition despite location or climate allowances. NO FISH FOR YOU, STARVING CHILD!

So yes, allow me to perhaps show a bit of priority for my own species and suggest that we find out how we can best take care of ourselves in the most peaceful and autonomous way we can before we start worrying about how a Chicken might feel about us taking their precious baby eggs and feeding our hungry children. The state of humanity is MORE IMPORTANT than the state of humanity's dominance over the animal and plant kingdom.

[Underwater Ophelia]

Yeah, I'll come out and say it, too.
I have no problem with animals dying so that I can eat them.

[JCC]

Originally Posted by KontanKarite

I have no problem with killing animals for the nutrition of our species. I've done it before and I'll do it again, I assure you.

I hate using this argument... I know of a certain member who's notorious for it, but:

Even with killing animals, we STILL can't seem to feed the world. Think about that. Children of our own species are going hungry right this very second and vegans want to rally support to protect the animals? How about we try to prioritize a little bit first? How about we work together as a species to be okay in our own god damned skins before we start worrying about our dominance over the food chain?

Production of animal products is incredibly inefficient in comparison to production of plant foods. I remember reading that an acre of agriculture yields ten times more protein than an acre dedicated to cattle. Regardless of which, we have more than enough food in the world to feed everybody, but it's improperly distributed. I can assure you that food shortage has nothing to do with not killing enough animals.

[KontanKarite]

A small part of my argument was isolated. However, it doesn't debunk the actual crux of my post. Allow me to clarify it even more. Priorities.

[Solumina]

Originally Posted by JCC

Production of animal products is incredibly inefficient in comparison to production of plant foods. I remember reading that an acre of agriculture yields ten times more protein than an acre dedicated to cattle. Regardless of which, we have more than enough food in the world to feed everybody, but it's improperly distributed. I can assure you that food shortage has nothing to do with not killing enough animals.

It was already stated but I will say it again: there are many places where the plant matter is incredibly difficult, if not impossible, for the human digestive system to handle but it is very easy for say a goat to digest. What is so wrong with people in those conditions to raise goats and drink their milk?

[JCC]

Originally Posted by Solumina

It was already stated but I will say it again: there are many places where the plant matter is incredibly difficult, if not impossible, for the human digestive system to handle but it is very easy for say a goat to digest. What is so wrong with people in those conditions to raise goats and drink their milk?

I don't think that humans should use animals for their own purposes.

[Solumina]

So people should die a slow painful death instead of coexisting with animals in a symbiotic relationship?

[JCC]

Originally Posted by Solumina

So people should die a slow painful death instead of coexisting with animals in a symbiotic relationship?

I think that the use of farm animals can only be parasitic and exploitative, therefore if someone has chosen to live somewhere where there is absolutely nothing to eat without that parasitic symbiosis, they ought to resign themselves to the fact that they chose a shitty place to live and move on. After all, it is incredibly doubtful that they would last long on a diet of exclusively goat's milk anyway; if, for the sake of argument, it was possible, the goat would have to be constantly pregnant anyway, or else its masters would, as you say, suffer slow and painful death. Unless they've chosen a symbiotic relationship with one hell of a horny goat, it would still be a miserable life of coercion for that animal.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Originally Posted by Solumina

It was already stated but I will say it again: there are many places where the plant matter is incredibly difficult, if not impossible, for the human digestive system to handle but it is very easy for say a goat to digest. What is so wrong with people in those conditions to raise goats and drink their milk?

I'll say this from an economic point of view.

We live in a world market. Your argument is that people would struggle to survive in non agricultural landscapes, therefore they should raise animals to eat.
But this is still a big struggle for nourishment as the landspace is still sparse of vegetation for the animals.

It would be much much better for everyone if the world went vegan as staple grains and vegetables much more nutritious than meat become abundant and so cheap that anyone in the world will be able to trade their own local resources for a much more diverse and nutritious diet and for much cheaper cost of labor.

[Nike]

For those of you, whose metabolism allows veganism - good for you, enjoy it, and be happy about it. But you should try to respect that not everyone is the same, and that for some people, your diet is not healthy.

Personally, I have a problem if I have to leave all animal products away for a longer period. I don't eat meat, but I do consume milk products and eggs.
What I can control very easily in this case is where I buy them. And I am absolutely ok with buying milk and cheese from cows and sheep that spend all day outside if they want to and that move freely in the mountains all summer (winters are too cold).

Also, if you're really leaving away all animal products in your food because you care so much about animals I think that's only one side, a tiny glimpse of the problem.

I hope you're consequent enough not to wear leather boots. And I hope you don't ignore the fact that arable farming and fruit and vegetable plantages aren't really what one would call a mild impact on nature, too - it changes and destroys biotops, which led and still leads to extinction of species. Pestizides and fertilizers might have been improved over the years, but they still aren't harmless.

Ever been close to cotton fields? I have, and I saw a lot of dead animals near by. Do you make sure that every single piece of cloth you own is from an ecologically sustainable production?

I think eating meat or eating animal products or not isn't really the question, if you really care about animals and nature in general, I think it's more important to emphasize the importance of supporting ecologically sustainable agriculture and production in all fields - if you eat meat, try to make sure where it comes from and what a life the creature you eat had, if you eat crop, soy, vegetables, fruit etc. it's quite the same - only that it isn't that single creature you care for, but the whole context of production. Same goes for almost everything, from clothes to computers... if you want to protect animals, saying I don't eat meat isn't enough.

[Solumina]

Hey Nike! How have you been?

[honeythorn]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

I'll say this from an economic point of view.

We live in a world market. Your argument is that people would struggle to survive in non agricultural landscapes, therefore they should raise animals to eat.
But this is still a big struggle for nourishment as the landspace is still sparse of vegetation for the animals.

It would be much much better for everyone if the world went vegan as staple grains and vegetables much more nutritious than meat become abundant and so cheap that anyone in the world will be able to trade their own local resources for a much more diverse and nutritious diet and for much cheaper cost of labor.

Except people still live in environments that are pretty much non agricultural. For the most part I'm talking about certain parts of Africa, where the climate is so hot and dry, and water so scarce that growing crops is pretty difficult at the best of times, let alone growing enough crops , and in enough diversity to feed everyone in that community and keep them healthy on a vegan diet.

There are communities/tribes that rely heavily on the farming of goats and native cattle for milk and meat. Now I know what you're going to say, if they can't grow crops what are the goats and cattle eating? Goats and cows have tough digestive systems, and they can ( and do ) easily graze on native vegetation that the people cannot eat. I saw a documentary on TV about a group who live in such a dry area that they bleed their cattle ( leaving them alive ) and drink the blood when water is scarce.

These people are hardly going to up and leave their homes and cultures because a few people who have supermarkets and stores to buy their vast range of veg and soy products think it's morally wrong to kill something.

Even those communities who still live in jungle and tropical areas who can grow crops , supplement their diets with hunted meat, as the nutrients provided by that meat cannot always be found in the range of crops they are able to grow.

Different plants and vegetables require different climates, and growing a diverse enough range of vegetation in quite a few areas of the world is simply not possible to maintain a vegan diet in a large or global community.

Are you suggesting that all human beings on earth crowd into those areas where such diverstity of vegetation can be produced? It wouldn't work. There are too many people on the planet and we are already losing thousands of acres of wild land and forest to crop production as it is.

Whilst raised animals take up a lot of grazing space, rotational grazing ensures that those areas can grow back whil the animals graze a different area. With crop raising, you can only grow so many types of vegetation in an area of land for so many years before you eventually exhaust the nutrients in the soil. What then? You'll end up with great areas where you can't grow anything.


What about droughts and bad rains and frosts? If weather and climate changes ruin your crops one year, what the fuck are all these people going to eat? Animals can get moisture from grass and other vegetation even in hot dry weather, and can eat plants humans cannot, in essence, they can survive drought and bad weather a hell of a lot longer than crops will . Basic fact. When you have little or no harvest, or not enough to feed everyone, sooner or later someone somewhere, is going to decide that cow looks pretty fucking juicy.

[korinna5555]

Alan.. so it's better to dam a river for irrigation than to eat the animals adapted to live in the natural environment?

[Godslayer Jillian]

Read that again, because both of your posts raise problems that were addressed by mine.

[Cicero]

Originally Posted by honeythorn

I saw a documentary on TV about a group who live in such a dry area that they bleed their cattle ( leaving them alive ) and drink the blood when water is scarce.

This is actually really common in the arid parts of Africa. Some tribes do this instead of eating their cattle at all, and save meat for times of great celebration and/or desperation.

And I agree with pretty much everything else you said.


And with the 'whole world going vegan' idea... Has anyone ever thought of the sort of globalised cultural assimilation that'd be required for that? To a lot of indigenous cultures their food is intrinsic to their identity and way of life, and taking it away from them, even just to live as substistence farmers, would be devastating (as it already has been for many tribes in 'developing' areas). You could never keep the Penan from hunting or the Maasai from herding their cattle, and if you did I'd be game to call it a human rights violation.

I'm not against veganism at all, more power to you if you can keep it up. It's just ridiculous to think of it as an actual possibility for the whole human population when there's so much environmental and cultural variety you'd have to take into account.

[Saya]

Yeah but no one here ever said to force veganism on other people, if people in Africa were to find a way to eat vegan all the power to them, but I'm not going over there and forcing it on people for whom it is very difficult, I'm far more concerned about everyone here for whom it is more than easy for them to go vegan. The only people who bring up world dominion is the omnis, none of us are naive enough to think that, I know myself I'm more concerned with making a difference where I am. Whats right and whats wrong isn't invalidated by what other people in the world in far different circumstances do, especially when those other people do not have the means.

[JCC]

I don't think that we have ever mentioned global veganism. Honeythorn just keeps popping in and trying to pretend that we did.

[honeythorn]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

It would be much much better for everyone if the world went vegan

Originally Posted by Saya

And lastly, I think if all the world would go vegan..

Wrong JCC. Wrong.

As I have said many times, in areas where a wide enough range of vegetation can be grown to feed a community, veganism can indeed work. But globally it cannot, since there are many areas of the world where growing a diverse enough range is simply impossible not to speak of the aforementioned climate based problems you may be faced with. There's nothing post apocalyptic about it as Saya keeps saying. Droughts, floods, frosts ect are causing people to starve in numerous areas of the world right now.

[Saya]

Thats pretty dishonest honeythorn since I was replying to Seidre:

Originally Posted by Seidre

As you said, I highly doubt they would exist in such high numbers unless humanity suddenly went vegetarian right now. In that case, they would have very few natural predators to curb their population, as Honeythorn pointed out with her deer example (only moreso because human intervention has already gotten these mammals to such a high population). With that being said, my major is in theatre. I know very little about such things and am therefore willing to concede defeat on this matter if the facts are against me.

And its still not a worry where we live, I'm not talking about Africa I'm talking about where we are, we have droughts and such yes but we still have enough food to fatten up billions of livestock and ourselves. We live in a place where we have more food than we need, we throw edible food out in tons. Its not a realistic worry for us. And I think if there were such a big serious famine a lot of us would die in the food riots and not be able to debate this anyway.

[honeythorn]

There's nothing dishonest about it dipshit. JCC said global veganism had not been mentioned, I know for a fact it has, and I quoted the posts it was mentioned in. Who you were replying to has fuck all to do with it .

If you're going to get on the moral highground and state that you think killing animals is wrong, and mention you'd like global veganism, then you should be including people all over the globe who use animal meat and products regardless of where they live.

[Solumina]

Originally Posted by Saya

Yeah but no one here ever said to force veganism on other people

No you just vilify people who eat animal products, that is so much better.

[Saya]

Yeah but we're not the ones who brought it up, its the people who think we really are The Secret Society Of Vegans and must be stopped who keep bringing it up. And its useless to bring those places up since that does not apply to any of us here and none of us here really know enough to say much about it.

And Solumina, of course we can't say its wrong and not say you're wrong for doing it, there's no way to say "Oh okay yeah you think violent murder for pleasure is fine, I respect your opinion." Despite that I still like you, and I think overall you're a pretty cool person, I just can't respect that part of you.

[Solumina]

You can't respect the fact that I don't want to die of malnutrition? I do like you as a person but you get rather belligerent when you talk about being vegan, you even went so far as to say that you knew better than both my doctor and nutritionist and that they were wrong. I understand your viewpoint I just don't understand why you feel the need to attack others to get it across.