vegans

[benoitms]

Hello all:
This is my first post here. I'm really glad to find this league! Before starting this post I will present myself. I'm an agnostic, French, English is actually my third language. I have been looking a lot of videos on youtube about religion and have been touched by a lot of them. I particularly don't like the idea of religion been the only morale ground.

But by now I have another subject that bugs me quite a lot: Vegans. The glass was full when I received an invitation to participate at a vegan association who claims it will turn human kind to vegans any day soon... The words where quite close to the famous "Have you heard the good news?" from our Sunday morning Jehovah witnesses friends...

The reason I don't like them are the following:

-Vegans assume eating meat is like murder or rape. This 2 ones are in there mind very commune in the past but have nothing to do with a modern society. I'm surprise, murder and rape have always been considered felonies. And why compared a natural process like eating to a morally wrong act? Why not sleep is like sloth and should be forbidden?

-They pretend to care for animals and don't want to use them in any way. If you look back in time animal products have been part of human society sins the beginning. I rather use a leather jacket who will last a life time than a synthetic material jacket. even in a pollution perceptive it's better. And what about eating. We know that humans are omnivorous creatures like a lot of our closest related cousins. Coking meat it's one of the trigger that made us evolve and survive back in the early days of human kind. Try to find a native tribe who is vegetarian... Ask the Inuits

-They even came with a name for that "bad" behave: Speciesism. And here is where there logic fall big time: For them if you use an animal: eat it, skin it..., you are an animal "racist". because you are an equal to them you can't use them in any way. But if we are equal to them what about carnivorous and omnivorous animals? Don't we have the same right to them to be what we are? And second, why a carrot have less right to live than a rabbit? because it scream less when killed? Any living thing deserve equality and respect, to put down a line between 2 kinds (animals, plants) is already an arbitrary decision. By the way, in there youtube site, comments have to be approved before posted... It's kind of reminds me some other youtube channels...

-And finally they pretend they are write and the rest of the people are wrong. It's became a sect: with videos like "can you date a non Vegan?". I'm speechless when I see that...

Don't get me wrong, I don't advocate "kill as many animals as you want, who cares?". I prefer to know that people eat meat, use animal product, been aware of it origin. It's one of the most beautiful part of shamanic tribes, they respect there prays and thanks them for the benefit they have give them. Imagine the face they did when white men came and shoot as many bison as they could aim... I think that everything is on the respect you give to the animal. I prefer to use natural product, animal and plants alike for several reasons: Respect of the earth: Why use more synthetic hard to recycle products when you have a natural product who is usually of better quality, will last much longer and it's organic? Remember our grandfather leather shoes? The 100% wool sweater? I stile have clothes in my wardrobe witch are 50 years old and stile in great shape. All of them are 100 organic: linen, wool and more.
The fact is that the problem is not there: It's on the greed, people will do very stupid things to win some more money: feed cows with seeds and mutton carcasses powder, use dangerous pesticides, confine chickens in small cages. dangerous genetic modifications. The things that got lost where respect and reason. We should encourage the organic products what ever they are (yes organic meat does exist) and the respect of the animal when killed. Yes I know I have a little "back to nature" side....

I hope to start a debate about that and have some other opinions on the subject.
best regards
Benoit

 

[ImprobableJoe]

The Vegans are right... we are discriminating against other species by eating them when we don't eat each other.

So, let's roast up some Vegans!! :lol:

 

[benoitms]

LOL.... Great answer. The Mayas would be happy!
Benoit

 

[Marcus]

To be fair, all the vegans I know aren't dicks about it. They've made their choice, but they don't go around calling carnivores murderers. Which is good, because a meal isn't a meal unless an animal has died to make it!

 

[salko7]

i don't have much to say on this topic just that we became smarter first we win...now we eat you MUAHAHAHAHA :twisted:
any way... you might find this video interesting Peter Singer interviewed by Dawkins (43 min vid)

 

[ilikeost]

To be fair, all the vegans I know aren't dicks about it. They've made their choice, but they don't go around calling carnivores murderers. Which is good, because a meal isn't a meal unless an animal has died to make it!

All the vegans and vegitarians I know calls eating meat murder and they try to claim some fucked up moral highground, I cant stand them.

 

[Ciraric]

Most vegans wouldn't survive if it weren't for vitamin supplements. Supplements that were created by the modern medicine industry that evolved out of a necessity on animal experimentation.

So yeah. They're douches.

 

[benoitms]

Most vegans wouldn't survive if it weren't for vitamin supplements. Supplements that were created by the modern medicine industry that evolved out of a necessity on animal experimentation.

So yeah. They're douches.

Don't forget that they prefer highly non environmental synthetic products so animals and humans can be equal in front of earth contamination...
Benoit
Remember this add some time ago "Meat is murder"?

 

[borrofburi]

I've met some fair vegans. Their reasons were: health, they thought it was healthier not to eat animal products; sustainability, namely that you have to feed an animal for more energy than you get out of it, so a sustainable reality required veganism.

 

[benoitms]

Well have you ever been to Argentina? To make very good quality meat you just need grass and open fields... Of course then you have to bring it here... Organic meat requires much less energy than industrial meat.
Benoit

 

[Cygnus]

The reason I don't like them are the following

You may disagree with someone, but unless they're disrespectful bigots, then you shouldn't dislike people based solely on their beliefs. We're all in this together, and should use our disagreements to work towards beneficial solutions to all parties.

-Vegans assume eating meat is like murder or rape.

Where are you coming up with this notion that this type of thinking is merely an 'assumption'. In the same way that many atheists thought long and hard about their 'religious' views, many vegetarians and vegans invest a lot of time and thought into their ethical framework and decisions.

This 2 ones are in there mind very commune in the past but have nothing to do with a modern society. I'm surprise, murder and rape have always been considered felonies. And why compared a natural process like eating to a morally wrong act? Why not sleep is like sloth and should be forbidden?

There are more than a few justifications for vegetarianism and veganism that only exist because of the nature of modern society.

And few vegan/vegetarians hold to 2000 year old religious notions, so the analogy would seem to be flawed.

Morality can be determined any number of ways, I'm (essentially) a preference utilitarian with sentience as my criteria for moral significance. What that means is, murder can be viewed as unethical for any number of reasons, and extended to any number of groups. Simply because you've grown up in a society that only extended the notion of murder to humans, doesn't mean that it can't be extended to non-humans as well.

-They pretend to care for animals and don't want to use them in any way. If you look back in time animal products have been part of human society sins the beginning.

What humans have done in the past would seem to have little bearing on what they should do in the future. We live in an era where we have the ability to act differently than our ancestors. Unless there is a significant advantage in using animals for food or consumer goods, then there is little reason to invest a greater amount of resources in an ethically questionable activity.

I rather use a leather jacket who will last a life time than a synthetic material jacket. even in a pollution perceptive it's better.

Why do you have that personal preference? And what is your ethical justification for putting your preference ahead of the life of a sentient being?

And no, real leather is not better then synthetic leather in terms of environmental impact.

And what about eating. We know that humans are omnivorous creatures like a lot of our closest related cousins. Coking meat it's one of the trigger that made us evolve and survive back in the early days of human kind. Try to find a native tribe who is vegetarian... Ask the Inuits

As I mentioned before, what humanity has done in the past has little bearing on what they should do in the future.

-They even came with a name for that "bad" behave: Speciesism.

The notion of speciesism is the exact same as that of sexism, racism, etc. etc. etc. All it means is that discrimination of some kind is occurring based on differences between individuals, in this case, the criteria being whether or not one is 'human'. There is no value judgement being made.

And here is where there logic fall big time: For them if you use an animal: eat it, skin it..., you are an animal "racist". because you are an equal to them you can't use them in any way.

Many vegetarians and vegans do not consider 'animals' to be the equals of humans- simply that sentient being deserve the same fundamental rights you or I possess. That is, not to be tortured or murdered.

But if we are equal to them what about carnivorous and omnivorous animals? Don't we have the same right to them to be what we are?

What other animals do to one another has no bearing on what course of action humanity should take.

And second, why a carrot have less right to live than a rabbit?

For someone who has a problem with biblical morality, you seem to have no developed ethical system of your own to fall back on. There's any number of really obvious answers to this question, and I'm sure you can figure it out on your own.

Any living thing deserve equality and respect, to put down a line between 2 kinds (animals, plants) is already an arbitrary decision.

You're absolutely correct. ALL living things deserve equality and respect, without regard to arbitrary criteria.

By the way, in there youtube site, comments have to be approved before posted... It's kind of reminds me some other youtube channels...

So one group of people censors and just generally sucks. They don't speak for all vegetarians/vegans, just as the youtube creationist community doesn't speak for all of christianity.

-And finally they pretend they are write and the rest of the people are wrong.

Pretend? No. They believe they're right, just as you believe you're right. No one is 'pretending' they are right about anything. We are each holding our own viewpoints and trying to work towards a beneficial state of society.

It's became a sect: with videos like "can you date a non Vegan?". I'm speechless when I see that...

We're social creatures, and we all form groups of like minded individuals to provide support to one another.

Those same types of threads get started on 'atheist' forums, 'religious' forums, 'political' forums, etc.

Don't get me wrong, I don't advocate "kill as many animals as you want, who cares?". I prefer to know that people eat meat, use animal product, been aware of it origin. It's one of the most beautiful part of shamanic tribes, they respect there prays and thanks them for the benefit they have give them. Imagine the face they did when white men came and shoot as many bison as they could aim... I think that everything is on the respect you give to the animal.

If your species was being slaughtered for food, would you think that the actions of the slaughterers were ethical because of the 'beauty' of their rituals and the 'respect' they gave the members of your species who had been killed? Of course not.

I prefer to use natural product, animal and plants alike for several reasons: Respect of the earth: Why use more synthetic hard to recycle products when you have a natural product who is usually of better quality, will last much longer and it's organic? Remember our grandfather leather shoes? The 100% wool sweater? I stile have clothes in my wardrobe witch are 50 years old and stile in great shape. All of them are 100 organic: linen, wool and more.

Organic products are oftentimes worse for the environment then synthetic products. Especially when it comes to agriculturally produced goods, where the 'non-organic' alternatives are genetically engineered to lesson their environmental impact.

The fact is that the problem is not there: It's on the greed, people will do very stupid things to win some more money: feed cows with seeds and mutton carcasses powder, use dangerous pesticides, confine chickens in small cages. dangerous genetic modifications.

You're right. There are problems with how we're treating the animals we raise for food, but treating them nicely wouldn't make it ethical to kill them anyway.

I hope to start a debate about that and have some other opinions on the subject.
best regards
Benoit

I too hope we can have a civil debate.

 

[Aught3]

I hope to start a debate about that and have some other opinions on the subject.

Good because I have some criticism of your arguments

Vegans assume eating meat is like murder or rape. This 2 ones are in there mind very commune in the past but have nothing to do with a modern society. I'm surprise, murder and rape have always been considered felonies. And why compared a natural process like eating to a morally wrong act? Why not sleep is like sloth and should be forbidden?

Here you are claiming that the difference between eating meat and murder/rape is that one is natural and the other is not. How could murder and rape be anything but natural? There are plenty of examples of each occurring in nature. Male lions will kill the offspring of their new lionesses and rape is rife among some bird populations. There is no reason a natural act, such as eating meat, could not become a moral reprehensible action. This is called the naturalistic fallacy btw.

They pretend to care for animals and don't want to use them in any way. If you look back in time animal products have been part of human society sins the beginning. I rather use a leather jacket who will last a life time than a synthetic material jacket. even in a pollution perceptive it's better. And what about eating. We know that humans are omnivorous creatures like a lot of our closest related cousins. Coking meat it's one of the trigger that made us evolve and survive back in the early days of human kind. Try to find a native tribe who is vegetarian... Ask the Inuits

The question is not "did we ever need meat to survive?" but rather do we need to meat to survive now. In our modern convenient society the answer is no, at least for most people. There is no problem if someone needs a bit of meat for dietary reasons and sensible vegetarians/vegans are not advocating for starving Africans to lay off the meat. The point is societies evolve and an argument from tradition is not a particularly good one.

They even came with a name for that "bad" behave: Speciesism. And here is where there logic fall big time: For them if you use an animal: eat it, skin it..., you are an animal "racist". because you are an equal to them you can't use them in any way. But if we are equal to them what about carnivorous and omnivorous animals?

Yeah the charge of specieism does seem a little outrageous but I think it's just because vegetarians/vegans are used to the only arguments from non-vegans boiling down to humans deserving special consideration over the other animals. The argument most vegans will make involves decreasing the amount of suffering in the world. If you accept this goal then both humans and other animals have to be considered. If practical we should avoid causing suffering to animals and instead consume food where no harm, or as little harm as possible is done. Humans are not the only animal worthy of consideration on this basis and to claim that they are is a form of specieism.

why a carrot have less right to live than a rabbit? because it scream less when killed?

Yes, rabbits can feel pain and probably fear, carrots cannot. Therefore less suffering is caused if I kill and eat a carrot as opposed to a rabbit. Also many fruits actually 'want' to be eaten in order to spread their seeds - apples, strawberries, and so on. Many carnivores actually need to eat meat in order to survive (e.g., cats) we don't.

Just to be clear I wouldn't ever call someone who eats meat a murderer, that would be stupid.

 

[benoitms]

OK here is my answer to the last 2 long posts:

Do we need meat to survive now days? I think yes, but much less than eaten nowadays, we could easily cut down about 80% on adults and 50% on growing kids. Why do we need to compensate instead of using the meat? OK modern world gives you the choice but it's gives you many others: Would you never ever conceive a normal child (I mean the old fashion way with sex) and instead use in vitro to the sure of the probabilities to be pregnant?

The notion of 2000 years old vegetarian societies, so quite young, have been prove to be strange: many vegetarian societies can be some of the most cruel and blood thirst. Just look the mass murders and family burnings in India to get the picture.

About meat eating, it's not just just the proteins but as well our need to feed the little predator on us. And I don't mean funnily, but it's truly a need .

"real leather is not better then synthetic leather in terms of environmental impact. " Really? I'm quite surprise, how come a leather (not treated with heavy chemicals) have the same impact on nature than a fake leather made with polymers that can survive hundreds of 1000 years? Or you mean fossilization? In that case everything have a 10.000.000 years impact.

speciesism is a vague word made up with little meaning: Where do you draw the line? Do you know how many bugs you kill every time you scratch? What about animals they are the worst speciesistes ever!

An animal is not murdered, except in very precise cases. The kill for food is the second motor of life after reproduction. EVERYTHING you ever eat was alive. And yes what other animals do to each other have a great impact on us, because we are and always be animals.

"For someone who has a problem with biblical morality, you seem to have no developed ethical system of your own to fall back on. There's any number of really obvious answers to this question, and I'm sure you can figure it out on your own." Thanks for the attack on my biblical morality problem but here it's you who have a problem: everything is alive so every time you you eat a vegetable you kill him. he may not suffer, may not show it but the result is exactly the same: The end of life for a living creature.

"Pretend? No. They believe they're right, just as you believe you're right. No one is 'pretending' they are right about anything. We are each holding our own viewpoints and trying to work towards a beneficial state of society." The problem is that, here we have quite a lot of Vegans and they clearly state to try to forbid meat eating, so it's not a question of choice it's a question of the will to impose there ideas to the rest...

"If your species was being slaughtered for food, would you think that the actions of the slaughterers were ethical because of the 'beauty' of their rituals and the 'respect' they gave the members of your species who had been killed? Of course not" Not many societies have been cannibal, the only advanced civilization who turned cannibal , if I remember correctly, where the MAYAS and it was a religion madness going one and nothing to do with plain food supply. Not many animals are cannibals and some of them have dame good reasons to be so: Spiders, crocodiles...

"Organic products are oftentimes worse for the environment then synthetic products. Especially when it comes to agriculturally produced goods, where the 'non-organic' alternatives are genetically engineered to lesson their environmental impact." Sorry but that's is completely wrong! Organic products are especially made to be healthy and have the less environmental impact, look at the EUROPEAN RULES about them. Monsanto gave a great example of non environmental impact products this last years. And second the companies who make GMO don't really care about nature at all: Destruction of native plant due to GMO invasions, questionable second effects with the intensive use of GMO...

"You're right. There are problems with how we're treating the animals we raise for food, but treating them nicely wouldn't make it ethical to kill them anyway." And apparently here we will never be agree... I don't think ethic have something to do with food supply on the idea of killing animal=murder.
Benoit

 

[borrofburi]

quote="benoitms"]The reason I don't like them are the following[/quote]

You may disagree with someone

I was so confused, until I realized that "beoitms" =/= "borrofburi". Good thing too, I was worried that my mind had gone from fake memories and a generally poor memory to writing entire posts without informing me.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

There's something a little obnoxiously elitist and out of touch about the vegan bullshit. I've never met a poor vegan, from a poor family. It is something that only seems to exist among upper middle class folks who have lots of time and money on their hands. That just makes it worse when they go after other people for not being vegan, because there is an element of class-based discrimination wrapped up in it.

 

[Cygnus]

Do we need meat to survive now days? I think yes

You're quite simply wrong. We do not need meat to survive.

OK modern world gives you the choice but it's gives you many others: Would you never ever conceive a normal child (I mean the old fashion way with sex) and instead use in vitro to the sure of the probabilities to be pregnant?

Does sex involve the slaughter of sentient beings?

The notion of 2000 years old vegetarian societies, so quite young, have been prove to be strange: many vegetarian societies can be some of the most cruel and blood thirst. Just look the mass murders and family burnings in India to get the picture."

This matters because?

About meat eating, it's not just just the proteins but as well our need to feed the little predator on us. And I don't mean funnily, but it's truly a need .

Yes. We all feel the need to go out and slaughter things.

Really? I'm quite surprise, how come a leather (not treated with heavy chemicals) have the same impact on nature than a fake leather made with polymers that can survive hundreds of 1000 years? Or you mean fossilization? In that case everything have a 10.000.000 years impact.

Yes really. Waste disposal is a non-issue compared to the environmental problems brought on by the raising and transportation of cattle for leather and food.

Many of those evil polymers can be recycled, and will be as it becomes economical to do so.

speciesism is a vague word made up with little meaning

To you, perhaps. Here's the precise definition.

"By analogy with racism or sexism, the improper stance of refusing respect to the lives, dignity, rights or needs of animals of other than the human species."

http://www.answers.com/topic/speciesism

Where do you draw the line?

That's a really good question with any number of answers. I can't possibly go into enough depth here to do the question justice, so I suggest you purchase any number of books on ethics as well as animal rights and come to your own conclusions.

As far as where I personally draw the line, it has been stated earlier in this discourse, so I'm sure you can find it if you're curious.

What about animals they are the worst speciesistes ever!"

What animals do or do not do is entirely irrelevant.

An animal is not murdered, except in very precise cases.

Murder has an interesting definition rooted in the societies in which the concept arose. It's a simple matter, once you have developed ethics, to modify the definition.

The kill for food is the second motor of life after reproduction.

That's an interesting statement to make, but one which once more has little merit considering your following comment.

EVERYTHING you ever eat was alive.

That's nice. The point you're dancing around in saying this was addressed by another poster, and implicitly addressed by myself already.

And yes what other animals do to each other have a great impact on us, because we are and always be animals.

Wait, why does it matter? Because we share the same arbitrary category?

Thanks for the attack on my biblical morality problem but here it's you who have a problem: everything is alive so every time you you eat a vegetable you kill him. he may not suffer, may not show it but the result is exactly the same: The end of life for a living creature.

This point has already been addressed.

The problem is that, here we have quite a lot of Vegans and they clearly state to try to forbid meat eating, so it's not a question of choice it's a question of the will to impose there ideas to the rest...

ONE group of people with a radical agenda does not speak for me.

Not many societies have been cannibal, the only advanced civilization who turned cannibal , if I remember correctly, where the MAYAS and it was a religion madness going one and nothing to do with plain food supply. Not many animals are cannibals and some of them have dame good reasons to be so: Spiders, crocodiles...

I've never seen someone miss the point so badly.

Sorry but that's is completely wrong! Organic products are especially made to be healthy and have the less environmental impact, look at the EUROPEAN RULES about them.

http://www.ninjavideo.net/video/33915

That particular video is fairly concise and to the point. If you want to, we can go into more detail on the problems with organic foods, but if we do that, we'll be moving away from the original discussion. But the bottomline is this, and a great many environmental scientists will tell you the same thing, organic products take more resources to produce- reducing the resource supply- which is especially harmful in the third world, they have lower yields- meaning that growing completely organic will leave us unable to provide enough food for a population that may reach 12 billion within our lifetime. Organic crops are sprayed with pesticides that are oftentimes less effective and more dangerous than their modern counterparts. Organic food is no healthier than GM crops, and perhaps less healthy considering that many GM crops now and in the future will produce nutrients that there organic counterparts do not.

The real issue here, however, is organic animal raising vs. the modern factory farm. On that side of things, you have a much stronger case. But let's not kid ourselves, meat is still an inherently inefficient and environmentally unfriendly venture, no matter how it is raised.

And apparently here we will never be agree... I don't think ethic have something to do with food supply on the idea of killing animal=murder.

If you have a strong case, I'll have to agree with you. The problem is that you aren't presenting any sort of case. You're simply saying 'ethics have nothing to do with it'- and then making value judgments of your own. These value judgements, which are seemingly arbitrary constructs, then form the basis for the entirety of your position. That's a very poor rational, one I hope you will take some time and reexamine.

 

[Cygnus]

There's something a little obnoxiously elitist and out of touch about the vegan bullshit. I've never met a poor vegan, from a poor family. It is something that only seems to exist among upper middle class folks who have lots of time and money on their hands. That just makes it worse when they go after other people for not being vegan, because there is an element of class-based discrimination wrapped up in it.

The reason you'll see fewer poor vegans/vegetarians, despite it's likely benefits to specifically those people, is because lower class individuals may not be prone to investing time and money into a cause like veganism, or simply reexamining their ethical systems. In the case of the latter, we see it all the time with the religious. For the most part, religious people aren't prone to simply picking up and reexamining their core beliefs. So why would we expect individuals to examine their core lifestyle choices?

The upper and middle classes, however, do have the money to invest in an education, and oftentimes it is that education that will spark the reexamining of one's lifestyple. Beyond that, the upper/middle classes also have a greater amount of consumer freedom to invest in specialty products. They have the luxury of a choice whereas many others don't.

It isn't, however, a conscious choice to engage in 'class discrimination', it's simply a by product of other social factors that tends to segregate the various groups.

Rather than discuss the 'vegans' themselves, it's probably a more beneficial course of action to examine the ideas behind 'veganism', and see whether there is validity there or not.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

The reason you'll see fewer poor vegans/vegetarians, despite it's likely benefits to specifically those people, is because lower class individuals may not be prone to investing time and money into a cause like veganism, or simply reexamining their ethical systems. In the case of the latter, we see it all the time with the religious. For the most part, religious people aren't prone to simply picking up and reexamining their core beliefs. So why would we expect individuals to examine their core lifestyle choices?

The upper and middle classes, however, do have the money to invest in an education, and oftentimes it is that education that will spark the reexamining of one's lifestyple. Beyond that, the upper/middle classes also have a greater amount of consumer freedom to invest in specialty products. They have the luxury of a choice whereas many others don't.

It isn't, however, a conscious choice to engage in 'class discrimination', it's simply a by product of other social factors that tends to segregate the various groups.

Rather than discuss the 'vegans' themselves, it's probably a more beneficial course of action to examine the ideas behind 'veganism', and see whether there is validity there or not.

Thank you for proving my point about elitism.

 

[Cygnus]

Thank you for proving my point about elitism.

I suppose you're assuming an underlying value judgment was present, when I was simply trying to point out a possible cause for the demographics.

For the record, I don't give a rats ass how much you make, whether you eat meat or not, whether you attended a big name university or dropped out of high school. All that matters is the quality of your thoughts.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

I suppose you're assuming an underlying value judgment was present, when I was simply trying to point out a possible cause for the demographics.

For the record, I don't give a rats ass how much you make, whether you eat meat or not, whether you attended a big name university or dropped out of high school. All that matters is the quality of your thoughts.

I didn't assume it... it was right there, out in the open. Those poor and uneducated people, and their unexamined ethics, just aren't as good as you. I know it wasn't conscious, and I know you didn't mean it that way... maybe you should take out your own ethics every so often, and give them a good once-over?