|
| Thread: Meet your Meat |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted March 06, 2011 08:51 AM |
|
|
Quote:
See, most humans like you, don't have the racial (species) objectivity to consider there to be no difference. Well of course there's difference, a human is a human, and a cat is a cat, but so what, is it mental capabilities you are referring to? They are irrelevant to one's right to have a life. I respect my cat more than many people. And on the argument of animals also killing other animals, yes, but don't just unspecifically say anything from an ant to an elephant is an animal. Why is it ironically only the herbivores that are raised to be slaughtered? To tell you the truth, if crocodiles or sharks would be raised for meat I'd be less concerned, though still highly opposing, but I'm just trying to emphacise there isn't just two categories - humans, and all the remaining millions of species.
Oh, and I'm 100% sure humans could scientifically/synthetically conjure meat without killing animals, but it will never happen, because things as they are are "comfortable" and other stuff like pointless and costly space oddysseys or liposuctions for fat celebrities has higher priority than pursuing a way to go on a compromise; satisfy dietary preferences of people like you, AND save innocent cows. But nooo, not in this millenium. The Earth's sooner gonna blow up before some justice comes between people and other animals, and inbetween people themselves. 
This is just ranting.
Also, if a post in an internet forum starts with "most people like you", you can safely stop reading further.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2011 11:36 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Why would you try cooking it?
well, if I want pancakes, I use milk. 
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted March 06, 2011 04:13 PM |
|
|
@blizzardboy
Quote:
But I do believe a person that subscribes to a vegetarian diet is making a more responsible, and superior, choice. Good luck getting most omnivores to admit that.
I think you're completely right in this.
Quote:
I know all about death.
PLEASE TELL ME HOW TO STOP IT!!!
@Fauch
Quote:
Quote:
but they don't know they are living and fed only to serve as food
that works with humans too. and for some reason, we consider it wrong
Lool! You just ((From my perspective..)) made JJ come off similar to those who supports supremecy (not sure that's the right word though).
And I think you have a good point, actually.
The mental abilities, the perception of the world, it's all irrelevant. What matter is that we're dealing with something that's actually not just living, but alive.
Edit: The price for minced meat in Denmark is ~6.5 euro pr. kg // 3.25 euro pr. pound.
It's one of the most expensive elements of what I eat, and I buy the same amount of elements each time, so it's not because I need to buy it more often than other elements.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2011 05:28 PM |
|
|
Quote:
@Fauch
Quote:
Quote:
but they don't know they are living and fed only to serve as food
that works with humans too. and for some reason, we consider it wrong
Lool! You just ((From my perspective..)) made JJ come off similar to those who supports supremecy (not sure that's the right word though).
And I think you have a good point, actually.
The mental abilities, the perception of the world, it's all irrelevant. What matter is that we're dealing with something that's actually not just living, but alive.
Think about that next time you squash a bug.
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted March 06, 2011 05:35 PM |
|
|
I never squash a bug kill intentionally.
Edit: At least I hope so.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2011 06:26 PM |
|
|
Ah, okay. So you never squash a gnat.
And you don't have flea-collars for your pets either - if you have a pet.
And I suppose you wouldn't clean off mould either.
Right.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2011 07:24 PM |
|
|
|
So does it make you feel more "responsible and superior" compared with those who do squash a gnat or even a spider?
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2011 07:31 PM |
|
|
|
But you THINK you are acting more responsible and superior? I mean, you DID agree with blizzard, and you DID say, all that matters is that creatures are alive... And you DID point out that you NEVER squash anything.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2011 08:12 PM |
|
|
So, does that mean you look down on people who eat meat? After all they make inferior choices.
What about abortions?
In case you are not against abortions? How do you feel when confronted with people who think that abortionists are murderers and morally inferior?
And what about that supremacy thing you mentioned?
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2011 08:40 PM |
|
|
But that would mean that animals are the same thing as mentally ill humans.
What I meant, was the question whether YOU have just not stated that it is superior not to eat meat - that constitues the idea of supremacy.
When you say you do not look down on meat eaters - how come? I mean, if being vegetarian is superior, the vegetarians are the better humans, aren't they?
Constituting the idea of supremacy.
|
|
SkrentyzMienty
Famous Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2011 08:45 PM |
|
|
I, for one, DO look down at people who eat meat, and regarding abortions, I don't think there's anything wrong with them, given the are performed early.
To elaborate on this topic, I think Catholics are hypocrites by forbidding contraception, as by that they consequently lead to a bigger demand for abortions, which they ALSO forbid. If abortion is performed in the earliest stages of pregnancy, there's nothing wrong, as those fetuses don't have minds and are basically lumps of developing tissue.
Killing animals though, IS wrong (for me) and I will always look at people who conciously of the evil do consume meat, like on morally inferior beings.
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted March 06, 2011 08:47 PM |
|
|
And that makes you similar to the nazis, japanese, nearly all african tribes, medieval christians, fundamentalist jews and muslims.
How's that going for you?
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2011 09:24 PM |
|
|
Ohfor, you come across like Elodin, when he explains he loves everyone.
Quote:
The idea of supremecy, in the way I used it, means that due to differences, you can regard a range of living beings as having no value... I believe animals have the same values as humans in general.
Well, shouldn't you use the ideas in the way everyone else use them and not give them their personal meaning?
So you believe that animals have the same values as humans in general? I'd really like to see you explain to a mother that just lost her baby, why you rescued the 4 little kittens instead of her baby, because animals have the same value than humans and you went for 4 instead of just 1.
And what are "animals", anyway? Mammals? Rats are mammals as well? What?
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2011 10:19 PM |
|
|
|
shyranis
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2011 11:56 PM |
|
Edited by shyranis at 23:57, 06 Mar 2011.
|
Quote:
Nazis, British and Spanish slave traders, British slaughtering Native Americans to conquer their new land etc.
1: Godwin's law? Please try to find the strengths of an argument without dragging the nazis into it.
2: They didn't eat the people they conquered.
Personally, my family has always eaten meat, but my religion strongly suggests not eating it, and monks are absolutely forbidden from doing so.
I do find eating meat to be morally dark grey at best, but personally I believe it would be better if animals were treated better in the process. Maybe if all food animals were treated like Kobe beef. Loved, brushed, petted and fed beer and premium food every day it would be more of a middle grey for me.
I have tried very hard, but you just can't get the flavours you do from meat in anything vegan. At least, not without using so many chemicals it becomes worse than pigging out on chips all day. My sister, the biggest animal lover I know even eventually stopped being a vegan, it's as hard to be a vegan as it is to quit smoking and drinking cold turkey for lots of people apparently.
Still, as cruel as a fair number of abusive psycopaths are in our meat system, what I am told by Chinese friends is that it pales compared to their own country. That country has no animal cruelty laws, and it's just a normal everyday thing. Sick. Sick. Sick. My friend told me her family there likes tortured meat, and that's normal there.
____________
Youtube has terminated my account without reason.
Please express why it should be reinstated on
Twitter.
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted March 07, 2011 02:37 AM |
|
|
|
honestly having stopped on first page with baks post is everyone agrees the methods are not applicable to majorities moral choices. We would as majority choose to give back if such opportunity to pay a nicer source and facility to produce a suchu said dietary specific yet by humane terms of happiness in life
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 07, 2011 08:54 AM |
bonus applied by Mytical on 07 Mar 2011. |
|
Ohfor, you shouldn't have to ask, after reading your own post. And why I ask? Because to show inconsistencies in your position.
It is our right as a species to try and grab as much space as possible for us, logically inhibiting the others, since they get less room. Food has always been the major problem for a species to increase in numbers, that and natural enemies, and no matter what we eat, we need room to cultivate it.
Since we started as hunter/gatherer, being unable to breed crops, killing animals was a necessity to survive as a species (and some of us didn't make it along the way, for example the Neandertaler), and survival wasn't a piece of cake.
How can be morally wrong what made us survive as a species in the first place? It would mean, we had no right to exist.
So how about, well, killing animals WAS necessary once, but in the meantime we have developed and should stop this barbarian stuff. However, that wouldn't mean, you'd SAVE animals from dying. They just wouldn't be bred anymore and become extinct. If no one would eat chicken or eggs, no one would breed any chickens. There would be a couple of wild ones and that's it - always less, of course, since we are taking control over the land, and we need to plant crops and orchards to survive, with wild chicken probably living on seed, which we couldn't afford, so in the end it's more of us or more of them.
In fact, without even knowing it, we eradicate species all the time, by cultivating land for our purpose.
Obviously, that we do it at all, can't be debatable or morally wrong. So the questions are in the detail - the how.
With crops and fruit being easier to produce (more yield per ground used), our diet contains too much meat, considering the world is currently unable to feed them all.
This, however, is not a question of killing or not killing animals, but only a question of how many we should afford.
And this in turn is a political question. The encouragement within the rich countries to reduce meat consumption to a healthier level isn't loud enough, and prices do not support this as a societal goal.
Personally, I do not eat lamb, piglet, calf and so on, because I think, once an animal lives, it should be granted a certain time of living under decent conditions and not die as a child. I can afford this attitude, since I'm not poor, but it's my personal opinion. I wouldn't try to force it on onyone, and I don't think bad about people who do eat animal children.
In fact, I'm rather sure that it's just a working compromise I made with myself, and that it has a spark of hypocrisy in it - but I tend to go at things in a rational way, and the rational way says: we cannot leave everything untouched and wash it off.
Just by existing we make the living space for other species that much smaller. Life IS a selection process and lots of beings don't make it.
And we can't change the rules.
We can only try to make them more "human", but we can't make life and Earth a Garden Eden. Maybe we can, sometime in the future, but not now. It would need complete control, and I'm not sure whether that, then, would really be a garden Eden, but in the meantime it's a personal decision - like with abortion. If you eat meat, you do, if not, you don't.
And as with abortion we do not need people who aggressively defend the rights of the animals/unborn and try to tell people they are murderers and morally corrupt.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted March 07, 2011 11:47 AM |
|
|
If we wouldn't eat cows - in modern reality - the cows would go extinct in many places, since there's not enough habitat for wild cows.
Ironically, all those cows live because of humans who want to eat them.
If a cow had a decent life, I don't find it a big deal that it eventually gets electrocuted. After all, "naturally' it would be torn apart by wolves when old age, or something. Way better to die due to barbaric humans.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 07, 2011 11:50 AM |
|
|
Ohfor, I didnt misunderstand your post. I think you have a couple of misconceptions and no clear idea of some of the words and meanings you use.
You are judgemental (superior), but the question is, on what grounds. It seems to be a somewhat very general idea of absolute morals (killing is always bad) - which nature, life and survival instincts seem to contradict - that is based on the idea of what exactly? It can't be god, because he allows killing animals. So what absolute moral is it and where does it come from?
Moreover, you seem to somewhat prioritize life with what you define as consciousness - whatever that may mean for which animals are in and out here. Fish, for example...
So I miss a coherent position, which wouldn't be a problem as such, but having no coherent position AND swinging the Nazi concentration camp gassing hammer or agreeing with swinging it, is overdoing it and I more or less object automatically.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 07, 2011 01:14 PM |
|
|
Quote:
No. You wouldn't understand a coherent position if it hit you in the face.
Quote:
Am I wasting my time here?
If you want an example for an incoherent position, there you have one. You tell me that I have no idea - and yet you ask whether you waste your time?
You do. I'm not here to lecture you, even if you seem to expect that.
Asking questions is a sure way to find answers. Without questions - no answers.
If you don't like the questions, or if you have trouble to find answers - that's not the fault of the question. But if you don't have the answers, don't blame the questioner.
The trouble is, you don't really try to understand the questions - you just try to find an answer that fits ith your position, and when that's not possible you tap-dance around it.
The problem with swinging the Nazi hammer, on the other hand, is, that a lot of people who do swing the hammer, actually have no real understanding about what actually happend and why - you included, it seems. To give you at least some information - the Jews were gassed with the aim to EXTERMINATE them, since they were deemed "the evil of the world" - which had been made clear before that, although many wouldn't believe the Nazis were serious. Every human, once captured, being herded together, seeing how people are treated can imagine what happens to them and what will happen to him.
Cattle can't. Cattle is bred and, if the farmers keep the standards, have a normal life on a nice pasture, are free to wander around - until they are killed. They don't know that they will end in some slaughterhouse, not being allowed to live their natural span of time.
You couldn't do this with humans.
There's a Twilight Zone episode covering this, as early as 1962. "To Serve Man" (Pun INTENDED in the title). Aliens appear, seemingly without any evil intentions. However... 
Which seems to describe somewhat why humans are NOT like animals, and that consciousness is something else than SELF-consciousness. You just do not see cattle rebelling in abject terror against the fate they know awaits them and they want to avoid. They just live the day and sleep the night - and I suppose they are happy with it.
In no way this is having any consequences for the fact that everyone is free to chose their diet - with or without meat. I don't think that eating no meat is a superior choice - I DO think that eating a somewhat limited amount of animal fat is WISE in terms of health, but, heck, what IS wise in terms of health, anyway? I also DO think that, politically, since it would be wise indeed (and look at the action that is taken against smoking with anti-smoking campaigns and taxes on tobacco) to eat less meat for health AND an increase in overall and worldwide food production to 1) forbid the worst factory farming and 2) make meat more expensive therefore and vegetables, fruit and cereals cheaper.
Currently things are geared so everyone in the rich countries can afford meat each day which is definitely not right.
That, however, has nothing to do with the question whether it's right or not to kill and eat animals at all.
And, as Corribus has stated as well - I haven't seen any point so far that would support why it is wrong in general.
Now, I would prefer it, if you had something meaningful to say instead of complaining about being not understood, being asked questions for no apparent reason or people not studying your posts of the last 18 months or resorting to insults of the pattern, you wouldn't understand X if it hit you on Y.
|
| |
|
|
