Veganism

[BlueTangerine]

People tend to laugh at this, and I don't really see what's funny.

I feel like once you know the facts of your existence, you are logically obligated to not eat meat or dairy/perpetuate suffering you know is happening. In basically the same way you wouldn't yourself want to be farmed, tortured, live a miserable life, and have a miserable death. Vegans cause less harm, that's just how it is.

Life arose in a cesspit billions of years ago and has been evolving ever since with no intelligence or any compassion for sentient life whatsoever. Life is imposed, so you have no choice in playing the game, you just suddenly arrive on planet Earth. We grow up seeing nature at work, and some people think it's beautiful, which is strange because we all know the miseries that happen to sentient creatures every second. Most of which we can nothing about, but the bit we can do something about though (because we're smart) is the harm that we cause.

I am utterly ashamed when I think of all the meat I've eaten and how unquestioning and selfish I was. In what world, when there is plenty of stuff to eat, (and no, I am not having it that a lettuce has the capacity to feel pain like animal does) does it make any sense to exploit others?

Would beings more intelligent than ourselves cause needless suffering? I don't think so.

Can someone rationally justify themselves eating meat? Or are you forced to admit that you are just an ignorant/selfish person?

 

[denislawsbackheel]

The holier than though arrogance of the vegan all there in one paragraph.

You live your life the way you want to

And keep your reasons to yourself.

 

[KenTheLandlord]

Good post, BT.

 

[Sir peace frog]

YOU DONT WIN FRIENDS WITH SALADS.

Like it or not, plants are also living organisms that respond to stimuli like light, gravity and touch. In fact, some groups even believe plants can feel pain.

Take the Ethics Committee on Non-Human Biotechnology, for instance. This Swiss group recently came out in defense of our leafy green friends in a report on “the dignity of the creature in the plant world.” They argued that plants deserve respect and that killing them arbitrarily is morally wrong.

 

[Metal Biker]

People are so precious these days!

 

[Mustard Dave]

If we weren't supposed to eat animals, they wouldn't make them out of meat.

 

[newposter]

I agree but I wouldn't stop eating meat.

 

[Damocles]

People tend to laugh at this, and I don't really see what's funny.

I feel like once you know the facts of your existence, you are logically obligated to not eat meat or dairy/perpetuate suffering you know is happening. In basically the same way you wouldn't yourself want to be farmed, tortured, live a miserable life, and have a miserable death. Vegans cause less harm, that's just how it is.

Life arose in a cesspit billions of years ago and has been evolving ever since with no intelligence or any compassion for sentient life whatsoever. Life is imposed, so you have no choice in playing the game, you just suddenly arrive on planet Earth. We grow up seeing nature at work, and some people think it's beautiful, which is strange because we all know the miseries that happen to sentient creatures every second. Most of which we can nothing about, but the bit we can do something about though (because we're smart) is the harm that we cause.

I am utterly ashamed when I think of all the meat I've eaten and how unquestioning and selfish I was. In what world, when there is plenty of stuff to eat, (and no, I am not having it that a lettuce has the capacity to feel pain like animal does) does it make any sense to exploit others?

Would beings more intelligent than ourselves cause needless suffering? I don't think so.

Can someone rationally justify themselves eating meat? Or are you forced to admit that you are just an ignorant/selfish person?

I consider animals a lower form of life than us as they lack consciousness and even rudimentary intelligence. They're essentially walking plants who we prescribe human values and behaviours to because it satiates our nurturing desire, biologically programmed to release endorphins and happy thoughts into us so we don't just leave our kids in the middle of a bush somewhere. The science behind what animals we find cute and not cute, edible and inedible is mostly about how they share similar characteristics to children.

I'm absolutely a speciest. I'd wipe out every white tailed deer in the world if it cured cancer and do it without a moment's hesitation.

The biggest evolutionary benefit to an animal now is to be useful to humans. That isn't even a debate, it's a fact as anybody who has looked at global chicken and populations or the decline of the global horse population over the past 100 years will attest to. We keep them and breed them in order to satisfy our hunger. The ones that irritate us are generally wiped out on a global scale unless they serve some purpose that we have identified.

Too many humans think they're above nature and because they have developed consciousness the rules just don't apply any longer. I say that's nonsense and a look at the ecological record shows it to be ignorant nonsense. We're still under the development of evolution, we're still shaping nature to fit us and adapting to the new conditions no different from any other animal on the planet. Animals constantly and consistently uproot and wipe out populations of other animals. We're just better at it then they are.

I don't have compassion for animals because I don't have compassion for bacteria, or viruses, or plants and see them ranked along the same lines. This doesn't mean I don't love my dog or have a collection of cat skulls in my basement, it means that although I love my dog I recognise it as ultimately inferior to every human being alive by almost every metric apart from my own sentimentality borne out of what is essentially my own invention.

 

[york away to this!]

I bet you mow the grass, you murdering bastard...

 

[Gelsons Dad]

I consider animals a lower form of life than us as they lack consciousness and even rudimentary intelligence. They're essentially walking plants who we prescribe human values and behaviours to because it satiates our nurturing desire, biologically programmed to release endorphins and happy thoughts into us so we don't just leave our kids in the middle of a bush somewhere. The science behind what animals we find cute and not cute, edible and inedible is mostly about how they share similar characteristics to children.

I'm absolutely a speciest. I'd wipe out every white tailed deer in the world if it cured cancer and do it without a moment's hesitation.

The biggest evolutionary benefit to an animal now is to be useful to humans. That isn't even a debate, it's a fact as anybody who has looked at global chicken and populations or the decline of the global horse population over the past 100 years will attest to. We keep them and breed them in order to satisfy our hunger. The ones that irritate us are generally wiped out on a global scale unless they serve some purpose that we have identified.

Too many humans think they're above nature and because they have developed consciousness the rules just don't apply any longer. I say that's nonsense and a look at the ecological record shows it to be ignorant nonsense. We're still under the development of evolution, we're still shaping nature to fit us and adapting to the new conditions no different from any other animal on the planet. Animals constantly and consistently uproot and wipe out populations of other animals. We're just better at it then they are.

I don't have compassion for animals because I don't have compassion for bacteria, or viruses, or plants and see them ranked along the same lines. This doesn't mean I don't love my dog or have a collection of cat skulls in my basement, it means that although I love my dog I recognise it as ultimately inferior to every human being alive by almost every metric apart from my own sentimentality borne out of what is essentially my own invention.

Is the correct answer.