Vegetarians and Vegans

[Devil-Dick Willie]

41 minutes ago, Danny said:

What are you waffling on about? You are not seriously comparing the animal kingdom to the ways in which humans carry out abusive and torture like farming practices all around the world are you?

Are you trying to compare the living conditions of animals to humans?

[Danny]

6 minutes ago, Devil-Dick Willie said:

Are you trying to compare the living conditions of animals to humans?

No but it wouldn't matter if I was

[Panflute]

I've been a vegetarian for about 10 years

[Honey Honey]

5 hours ago, Bluebird Hewitt said:

Pretty much this for me. Got no problems if they want to be a veggie or a vegan, but the smug attitude pisses me off.

Hell, they kicked off because the new five and ten pound notes contain the tiniest trace of tallow on them.

There might be overlap between the caricature of a hipster vegan and political demands of the state owned Bank of England, but the two are not exclusive. Vegetarianism is a political position and the two sides can only keep up the facade that it is a consumer one for so long.

Every now and then the mask slips. 

[Stan]

3 hours ago, Panflute said:

I've been a vegetarian for about 10 years

explains a lot tbf

[Cicero]

Vegans' main argument is the concept of morality. Will you go up to a cow and slit its throat? Most likely than not many people will say no, yet these same people will eat a hamburger from McDonald's. You pay for someone to kill your food. 

On a morality standpoint, you can't argue against Veganism. But like I've mentioned, we've come so far as a society where meat is a commodity, that it is virtually impossible to implement veganism into our daily lives without major catastrophes. 

[Inverted]

33 minutes ago, Cicero said:

Vegans' main argument is the concept of morality. Will you go up to a cow and slit its throat? Most likely than not many people will say no, yet these same people will eat a hamburger from McDonald's. You pay for someone to kill your food. 

On a morality standpoint, you can't argue against Veganism. But like I've mentioned, we've come so far as a society where meat is a commodity, that it is virtually impossible to implement veganism into our daily lives without major catastrophes. 

Tbf me, with no knowledge or experience, slitting a cows throat is different from it getting a rod shot into its brain by somebody who's killed hundreds of cows in his life. 

Im okay with animals dying, but even then I wouldn't like for an animal to die in a painful way when it's quite cheap and easy for it to be killed or stunned instantaneously. 

[nudge]

I wonder how long it will be until we get affordable, mass-produced lab-grown meat readily available in supermarkets. It actually raises an interesting question - what would be vegan/vegetarian stance on it?

[Honey Honey]

2 hours ago, nudge said:

I wonder how long it will be until we get affordable, mass-produced lab-grown meat readily available in supermarkets. It actually raises an interesting question - what would be vegan/vegetarian stance on it?

Lab meat isn't vegetarian and is unlikely to ever be. Looks more like a utilitarian reduction of harm which means it might be a question for meat eaters more than anyone.

[nudge]

1 hour ago, Kitchen Sales said:

Lab meat isn't vegetarian and is unlikely to ever be. Looks more like a utilitarian reduction of harm which means it might be a question for meat eaters more than anyone.

I was hinting at the morality as the key concept of vegan ideology more or less though. Those who don't eat meat because of health issues or because they don't like the taste/texture are unlikely to turn to lab grown meat, fair enough. What about those whose main (and only) reason of abstaining from meat is the issue of animal abuse and killing? 

[Guest]

On 16/01/2018 at 14:54, Kitchen Sales said:

I don't have the patience to wait longer than 15 minutes prep and cooking time for food to be ready so I've never been much of a foodie.

To be honest the average healthy breakfast and lunch aren't much different between vegetarians and non-vegetarians, the substitutions are easier, it's dinner time that sort of throws up the what do I do now to get the calories. I tend to go Italian if I want to load up on carbs and Indian for something more balanced.

If anyone finds any vegetarian/vegan meals that are 500-750 calories I'd like to see them, so many recipes out there are low calorie intended for stick thin girls. There is still this assumption that vegetarian means eating more vegetables in restaurants as well. I've been to restaurants where the portion looks massive but in reality you burn more calories chewing some veg than the veg actually gives you.

Are you s vegetarian for moral reasons or because you don't like meat?

[Guest]

On 16/01/2018 at 17:03, Happy Blue said:

39

Ha ha I use to think you were a kid

[Spike]

5 hours ago, Cicero said:

Vegans' main argument is the concept of morality. Will you go up to a cow and slit its throat? Most likely than not many people will say no, yet these same people will eat a hamburger from McDonald's. You pay for someone to kill your food. 

On a morality standpoint, you can't argue against Veganism. But like I've mentioned, we've come so far as a society where meat is a commodity, that it is virtually impossible to implement veganism into our daily lives without major catastrophes. 

Whose morality though? Vegans although they may believe themselves to be aren't the moral arbiters of reality. I'd have no issue with killing animals of I were to revert to an agrarian lifestyle.

16 hours ago, Spike said:

Only if you subscribe to moral objectivity is it not a luxury, and to subscribe to moral objectivity one must also adhere to or believe in a higher power that establishes said morality.

There is no moral objectivity without the belief in a higher power. I've no issues with a person's subjective morality with concerns towards veganism and vegetarianism but I don't buy that it is the objective moral law. To think otherwise is arrogance.

Edited January 17, 2018 by Spike

[Cicero]

8 minutes ago, Spike said:

Whose morality though? Vegans although they may believe themselves to be aren't the moral arbiters of reality. I'd have no issue with killing animals of I were to revert to an agrarian lifestyle.

There is no moral objectivity without the belief in a higher power.

They use that as their reasoning, even the morality is a completely subjective thing. 

The animals we eat are sentient beings. More so than not, vegans believe in speciesism. Why should a dog's life be seen higher than a pigs, when both show empathy and have feelings?

We eat them because we are a superior being and have chosen them to become a source of nutrition. So by that logic, if an alien race were to come down and enslave us, we should be ok with the logic of that. 

Edited January 17, 2018 by Cicero

[Spike]

3 minutes ago, Cicero said:

They use that as their reasoning, even the morality is a completely subjective thing. 

The animals we eat are sentient beings. More so than not, vegans believe in speciesism. Why should a dog's life be seen higher than a pigs, when both show empathy and have feelings?

We eat them because we are a superior being and have chosen them to become a source of nutrition. So by that logic, if an alien race were to come down and enslave us, we should be ok with the logic of that. 

Why should a dog's life be equal to a pig's? My life isn't equal to yours and the applies for every human. How can you arbitrarily apply value to a life? If all are equal as species then the dog that mauls children to death has equal value to pet turtle that lives in it's shell; if one has privilege to life so does the other.

Animals have, will and do eat humans. The alien hypothetical is pointless as nature has shown the law of survival of the fittest.

[Cicero]

1 minute ago, Spike said:

Why should a dog's life be equal to a pig's? My life isn't equal to yours and the applies for every human. How can you arbitrarily apply value to a life? If all are equal as species then the dog that mauls children to death has equal value to pet turtle that lives in it's shell; if one has privilege to life so does the other.

Animals have, will and do eat humans. The alien hypothetical is pointless as nature has shown the law of survival of the fittest.

And then a Vegan would say, So If I were to kill you, would that be fine? 

[Devil-Dick Willie]

1 minute ago, Cicero said:

And then a Vegan would say, So If I were to kill you, would that be fine? 

 

No. We have laws. His life has more value than that of a chicken or pig, as he just explained.

[Spike]

2 minutes ago, Cicero said:

And then a Vegan would say, So If I were to kill you, would that be fine? 

How often does a lion eat another lion? A ridiculous statement as mammals rarely their own species for sustenance, even when cannibalism has been observed by humans it has been on the fringes of societies practised by individuals or by remote cultures. Cannibalism is one of the most commonly reoccuring taboos throughout history observed throughout history. Man does not have an innate desire for the flesh of another man.

[Cicero]

18 minutes ago, Devil-Dick Willie said:

 

No. We have laws. His life has more value than that of a chicken or pig, as he just explained.

There were also laws where slavery was ok and for blacks to be considered less valuable than whites. 

13 minutes ago, Spike said:

How often does a lion eat another lion? A ridiculous statement as mammals rarely their own species for sustenance, even when cannibalism has been observed by humans it has been on the fringes of societies practised by individuals or by remote cultures. Cannibalism is one of the most commonly reoccuring taboos throughout history observed throughout history. Man does not have an innate desire for the flesh of another man.

How is it ridiculous?  You just said yourself nature has shown survival of the fittest to be a factual thing. Lions kill other lions all the time whether it be entering other territory or becoming the alpha. We are not talking about killing for just consumption, we are talking about needlessly killing because I am superior to you. 

 

Edited January 17, 2018 by Cicero

[Spike]

43 minutes ago, Cicero said:

There were also laws where slavery was ok and for blacks to be considered less valuable than whites. 

How is it ridiculous?  You just said yourself nature has shown survival of the fittest to be a factual thing. Lions kill other lions all the time whether it be entering other territory or becoming the alpha. We are not talking about killing for just consumption, we are talking about needlessly killing because I am superior to you. 

 

Blacks and whites are both humans, that is a false equivalency when interspecies. Humans are not equal and I fully reject any notion that implies that I am equal to a man that rapes children. To state all humans have equal rights within their societal contract is a far stronger statement and one that I can support;

You contradict yourself. First you state that lions kill other lions due to territorial and alpha assertion - both necessary for the survival of lions as their social structure and nature dictates it to be so. Then you make a statement on needless killing? So what is it, needless or necessary? Very few animals have been observed to kill for pleasure, humans, dolphins, and chimps. Survival of the fittest isn't you killing me for no reason as that would be recreational, that is a fundamental misunderstanding.  Killing me to increase chances of survival is.

As humans are social creatures, what civilisation, culture, or society has ever condoned needless killing of humans by other humans? The answer is none, there has always been some sort of push for survival, resources, or strength. For instance murder is to a degree an accepted norm in American gang culture as it is an assertion of strength and will to survive but that is a subjective moral limited to that subculture; as it condmened and against law the in larger American culture.

You start off this argument admitting to moral subjectivity but quickly fall into moral objectiivty as the basis for your arguements. 

Edited January 17, 2018 by Spike

[Cicero]

Or maybe I like playing devils advocate 

Edit. I'll reply later when I get home. 

Edited January 17, 2018 by Cicero

[Spike]

3 minutes ago, Cicero said:

Or maybe I like playing devils advocate 

Edit. I'll reply later when I have time. 

How do you I'm not playing devil's advocate as well!? 

[Toinho]

Seriously though marry me @nudge

[Honey Honey]

2 hours ago, Gunnersauraus said:

Are you s vegetarian for moral reasons or because you don't like meat?

Mixture. Never liked red meat in the first place and by the time I was 18 I probably already had a 95%+ vegetarian diet. Still consumed products that aren't vegetarian, like certain sweets, snacks and beers, still had leather shoes and belts.

It wasn't until about 26 years old that I took on all the trappings of vegetarianism properly. I don't tell people I am vegetarian until the last minute if necessary. I once told a girl 3 dates in and my best friend from school has no idea, despite all the times we went to McDonald's and I only bought fries he hasn't put 2 and 2 together 

[Happy Blue]

6 hours ago, Gunnersauraus said:

Ha ha I use to think you were a kid

I am   ..age is just a number if you look after yourself