Vege

[Dis]

I used to be a bit squeemish about eating animals when I was a kid.

I used to hate those tendons and things that were in chicken legs.

but when I hit puberty and beyond, my appetite needed meat to feel satisfied.

Chicken

[Dis]

and didn't I see some recent research that plants do indeed feel pain.

Face it, if you want to avoid causing pain to other living beings, your best bet is to kill yourself.

[Meticulous Man]

Dissident: plants don't have a nervous system so maybe the researchers meant that plants feel pain in some metaphorical sense. Link?

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by mrmitchell
Osweld, what makes animals any better than plants, to eat, ethics-wise?

Are you equating yourself to a potato? There is an obvious difference between animals and plants, hopefully you don't need me to hold your hand and explain it to you.


But I have already covered this, anyways. A vegetarian diet also kills less plants than a meat eating diet does. If you hold the view that life is not to be squandered, a vegetarian diet is the best and most efficient choice.

Humans are superior in our eyes, the eyes of humans, not generally "superior". There is noone to judge the later, the former is rather obvious.

As I said in the start... it is either through a belief that humans are superior or for sheer selfish reasons. Apparently you eat meat for selfish reasons. Although, since you are a communist, I have a hard time believing that you maintain a consistently selfish perspective.

And you are making an arbitrary definition, as I mentioned before. Humans = worth. Why? Because we are human.

It's the same logic that says caucasians are all that matter to caucasians, ect... If we can't get them to "behave like you", as you say, then they are below you.


Eitherway, there is not any more sense in arguing vegetarianism to someone who is completely self absorbed then there is to someone who is devoid of any morality, like our Borg friend over there.

[Rogan Josh]

Originally posted by General Ludd
Are you equating yourself to a potato? There is an obvious difference between animals and plants, hopefully you don't need me to hold your hand and explain it to you.

The only pertinent difference is that animals have a central nervous system, and can thus feel pain. But if an animal is killed painlessly, what difference is there?

If you could somehow ask a plant if it wanted it be killed or not, I am sure it would say 'no'. Don't plants have a 'right' to live too, even though they can't look at you with sad, doleful eyes?

Look at it this way: imagine that you were starving and you had two things you could kill and eat. One is a cow, and the other is the last carrot on the planet. If you don't eat the carrot it could go on to 'father' lot of little carrots (I am not expert on carrot reproduction - work with me here). If you eat the carrot, then carrots are gone forever. Which would you rather eat, the cow or the carrot (assume you could kill the cow instantly and painlessly)?

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Rogan Josh

Look at it this way: imagine that you were starving and you had two things you could kill and eat. One is a cow, and the other is the last carrot on the planet. If you don't eat the carrot it could go on to 'father' lot of little carrots (I am not expert on carrot reproduction - work with me here). If you eat the carrot, then carrots are gone forever. Which would you rather eat, the cow or the carrot (assume you could kill the cow instantly and painlessly)?

If all that is left is a cow and a carrot, how is the cow alive?


You completely ignored the fact that a meat eating diet kills more plants then a vegetarian diet. I do not want to squander plant life, either - even though they do not feel pain, as you say.

[Provost Harrison]

Omnivorous, but I won't eat icky bits of animals. Livers, dried blood, kidneys, brains - all out. I eat seafish but don't like really oily, strong tasting ones, or ones which are recognisable as whole fish, eg, sardines or pilchards where they are picked apart with all manner of stringy bits left hanging out, ewwww...

Vegetables I am fine with, although the traditional 'boil to a mush' British way of cooking vegetables, especially cabbage and sprouts, really turns my stomach. They are like eating ectoplasm

[Rogan Josh]

Originally posted by General Ludd
If all that is left is a cow and a carrot, how is the cow alive?

He ate the second last carrot.

[Boris Godunov]

I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian because I hate vegetables.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I think Ludd ignores the fact that human beings ARE superior. We can do this thing call reasoning. I haven't really seen dolphins build 50 story skyscrapers, melting down iron ore and turning it into steel. I'd say that makes us superior.

Besides, bears eat other animals. Lions eat other animals. Why can't we?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I haven't really seen dolphins build 50 story skyscrapers, melting down iron ore and turning it into steel.

Would you be able to do that with flippers?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well, you'll never know, now will ya?

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I think Ludd ignores the fact that human beings ARE superior. We can do this thing call reasoning. I haven't really seen dolphins build 50 story skyscrapers, melting down iron ore and turning it into steel.

Like Europeans ARE superior to africans, native americans, ect...

But, as I've already said, fascists are excluded. That means you. You can live with your arrogant and self-absorbed views. Vegetarianism alone isn't enough to change that in a person.

Besides, bears eat other animals. Lions eat other animals. Why can't we?

That's the natural role of bears and lions. But humans aren't carnivores.

It seems that you have done a 360 in your view, though, when you are justifying your actions through that of a supposedly lesser or savage species.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Like Europeans ARE superior to africans, native americans, ect...

Where your argument fails is that you CAN'T DEMONSTRATE that Europeans are superior, because every human being can reason and has used his/her reason. Animals have not shown themselves to be capable.

That's the natural role of bears and lions. But humans aren't carnivores.

Yes, we are omnivores. Our teeth are made for either flesh and plantlife. So our natural role is also to eat meat, but not solely meat. If we were not meant to eat meat, we would not be able to.

It seems that you have done a 360 in your view, though, when you are justifying your actions through that of a supposedly lesser or savage species.

If we are animals, then why be held to a higher standard in terms of food? Or the contrary is that we aren't the same as other animals and thus can eat lower species.

It's called covering both sides of argument and getting you in a trap that you cannot hope to get out of.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by General Ludd
That's the natural role of bears and lions. But humans aren't carnivores.

First, define "natural" and explain why that (as you seem to be saying) is an absolute concept.

Second, humans aren't "naturally" carnivores any more so than they are "naturally" vegetarians. They are "naturally" omnivores, as anthropology tells us. So this point is moot.