Veganism

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by BlueTangerine, 24 Sep 2015.

  1. smudgedj

    smudgedj

    Joined:
    28 Jun 2009
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    São Paulo
    OK Then. The fowl I keep are better off dead than laying eggs for me to eat. I think I'll just shake my head and move along.
     
  2. MellowJoe

    MellowJoe

    Joined:
    29 Dec 2016
    Gender:
    Male
    Perhaps best you should. Nobody said anything like that. Now whether or not it's a good idea to create a fowl, so you can eat its eggs, is another question. I would say no, which is why I have no objection to a graceful extinction for our cognitively humble cousins.
     
  3. west didsblue

    west didsblue

    Joined:
    2 Oct 2011
    So you're happy to support animal experimentation to develop drugs to prevent them breeding and then watch them all die of old age. That's just weird.
     
  4. MellowJoe

    MellowJoe

    Joined:
    29 Dec 2016
    Gender:
    Male
    I didn't say I was for it, but I predict that that is what will happen. We have a Reverence for Life, and the fact that the universe doesn't appear to really be in the life-making game, I think future humans will want to keep some diversity on the planet. I am for what I just said to smudgej, a graceful extinction.
     
  5. Juan King

    Juan King

    Joined:
    14 Feb 2011

    Not sure about your argument about what is a natural diet. In the past people would have got B12 from soil bacteria which they would have ingested when they pulled plants out of the ground. I prefer to take a tablet or use fortified products such as Almond milk. You may get B12 from animal products but you also get a load of other things which aren't very healthy, like hormones, saturated fat that increases cholesterol & antibiotics that have been fed to the animals, to stop them getting ill because they are packed into cramped spaces with other diseased animals. Eating meat full of antibiotics isn't natural, I'd rather avoid that & take a B12 tablet, but each to their own.
     
    Last edited: 11 Jul 2017
  6. mancityvstoke

    mancityvstoke

    Joined:
    15 Apr 2009
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    fuck all to do with you
    Location:
    CHARLESTOWN Stop taking me seriously Back in 212
    saw a program on telly the other night

    The scientist was doing fecal transplants....ffs I nearly threw up

    I watch some weird stuff me
     
  7. casualdeyna

    casualdeyna

    Joined:
    24 Aug 2010
    Location:
    Withington
    Won't someone think about the poor lettuces?

    They could be running round free, holding hands and enjoying the smell of their own farts, but no you selfish vegan **** cut them down in their prime just because it says it is OK to do so on a vegan website because they aren't "sentient"

    You should take a good long look at yourselves while I go on all high and mighty about the latest fad.
     
  8. che_don_john

    che_don_john

    Joined:
    7 Nov 2011
    Gender:
    Male
    It's a difficult question and one I've wrestled with a lot. Back when I was a masters student I specialised in what 's termed 'the rights of non-persons' (i.e. animals and foetuses) and since then I've fought an internal battle between a consideration for sentient animals vs my preference for eating meat.

    The problem with the debate - and I've seen it just within a few pages of this thread - is that meat eating is a social norm that has always and still does fit within current values. I've read a lot on the topic and I've yet to see a conclusive argument that meat eating should even be an ethical question. Ethics and morality represent the values that we should live by, which are fluid and have shifting parameters (culture, time, etc.). They kind of develop organically and can't just be created (although totalitarian and theocratic regimes have tried). Today especially, people or groups label behaviour as unethical simply because they do not personally agree with it (probably as a way to protect their own views from critique and dissection). Some animal rights activists (well, PETA, mainly) and vegans are often guilty of this. A preference or behavior shouldn't become an ethical question just because certain people want it to be so; that's just bad philosophy.

    The two best thinkers on this subject are Peter Singer and Tom Regan, but even they have struggled for conclusive answers or to produce water-tight theories. If they can't do it, then it just goes to show just how much meat-eating is a personal thing and not something over which people can claim ethical superiority or give others a hard time about. And it's also worth mentioning that animal welfare and meat eating are two very different topics; the former has very convincing arguments in favour of it from a wide range of ideological positions and is definitely an ethical/moral issue. Again, your self-righteous, dogmatic vegans/animal rights proponents will usually lump the two together either out of ignorance or as a means to protect and enforce their own personal preference.

    My position is this. I'm an animal. Many animals eat other animals and don't seem to have a problem with it; nor do we have a problem with them doing it. So, I don't see any problem with me, as an animal, eating other animals. I am a huge advocate of animal welfare and I love nature (it's my job), and there is no conflict of interest between that and me being a meat eater. I don't have any issue at all with someone wanting to be vegetarian or vegan, but if they hold it over me or try to make it an issue of moral and ethics then I'll call them out for it.
     
  9. MellowJoe

    MellowJoe

    Joined:
    29 Dec 2016
    Gender:
    Male
    Everything is a personal choice. We have the right to err. It's not against the law to slaughter an animal because it's tasty. Seeing as though most people grant animal sentience, that they are in fact subjects of experience, that they can (just like us) experience good sensations and bad sensations, that they have 'the will' to live then that's where the rights have to come in. Of course it's not the physical act of eating meat that is the problem, that would be silly. It's the killing and harming, it's the paying for it; it's like holding your hand up and saying 'Yes, this is fine by me' - doing so you are actively supporting the industry. A purchaser of meat is not doing something benign. Vegans/ethically minded people condemn it, and right they should. It's not 'the meat eaters are doing/perpetuating something trivial and I don't like it so I'm gonna shout at them' - we are talking about something rather serious here (though the glibites will never understand. - Singer and the like have written some great stuff but you can't watertight anything because we don't share values - all you can do present the argument and hope some of it sticks.

    The 'it's fine because it's natural' is a major rationalization on your part. Some people do have problem with with animals eating other animals, the nature of predator/prey life. It can been seen as a tragedy.

    Dawkins - “The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute that it takes me to compose this sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive, many others are running for their lives, whimpering with fear, others are slowly being devoured from within by rasping parasites, thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation, thirst, and disease. It must be so..”
     
  10. Southern

    Southern

    Joined:
    9 Aug 2015
    Gender:
    Male

    Is Dawkins therefore a proponent of veganism?
     

Share This Page