I'm a vegan and I come in peace...

[guyy]

http://web.archive.org/web/20041107084521/http://eesc.orst.edu/agcomwebfile/news/food/vegan.html

And there you go vegans, millions of animals die to feed you so now your high horse comes tumbling down.

Guess you don't have a moral high ground at all.

I don't really want to get involved here (famous last words), but I need to address this, because I hear it all the time, and it's just so damn ridiculous.

Yes, some insects and rodents probably get killed when crops are harvested. I guess if you wanted to claim that being vegan makes you a perfect saint towards all animal life, this would be a problem, and you'd have to just eat nothing but self-grown food or something. But...most feed animals (including cows, unless you buy the expensive meat that isn't factory-farmed) are fed those same crops. Factor in the huge loss in efficiency between the animals eating the grain and you eating their meat years later, and eating meat is much worse in this regard.

Also, animals tend to run away from noisy harvesting machines. A population reduction doesn't necessarily mean they were killed. Besides, avoiding unintentionally killing animals through highly indirect means is pretty much impossible if you want to participate in modern society at all. Factory farming and its Godwin's-Law-invoking amounts of animal abuse is the bigger problem, in my opinion.

By the way, I don't eat meat. I don't think, if you do eat meat, that I'm better than you. I'll save that thought for the sources of the most thoroughly insulting comments. (Has anyone said "I'll eat three animals for every one you don't eat" yet? That one's a classic.)

 

[Furioso]

Based on that logic humans don't need to eat plants to survive, why do we think it's ok to kill hundreds of thousands of plants just for their leafy flesh? Not that I have a problem with your stance, but it goes both ways

 

[mcnally86]

Hi forum!

After watching MovieBob's recent Big Picture episode on the PeTA/Super Mario controversy, I'm curious about people's stance on animal rights here. What I found curious is that Bob asserted he supports animal rights, in that he abstains from products like fur and boycotts companies that test on animals. On the other hand though, eating animals does not seem to be problematic for him.

Just to be clear, I'm vegan myself and a very strong believer in animal rights, but I'm not a fan of PeTA and I absolutely agree with Bob's disapproval of their hysterical and sensationalist publicity work. Also, while I feel that being vegan is the most ethical way of living with animals, I do not view myself as being better than meat-eaters, nor do I think that eating meat makes you a bad person. Please don't see my opinion as an affront to your lifestyle and worldview. I don't mean to be hostile. My goal is to make people question some things we have been taught about the animals we eat, without shoving my own morality down their throats.

So let me just very briefly outline why I chose to become vegan:

Human beings are omnivores, which means that we can eat almost anything. There are many divergent nutritional studies and opinions out there, but the gist seems to be that we can get by equally well on meat- or plant-based diets or any combination thereof, as long as we spend some time thinking about what nutrients we need and where to get them.

This means that there is no biological need for us to eat meat. We simply feel like eating it.

Therefore, whenever we kill an animal for food, we are essentially deciding that our appetite is more important than that creature's life. We are inflicting deadly violence on a defenseless being, simply for our own pleasure. Personally, I don't think that's ethical behavior.

Now, many people say that nature isn't ethical, that animals brutally kill and eat other animals all the time. That's true, but we are not animals. We are not lions or sharks. Lions or sharks cannot choose *not* to eat meat because they are natural carnivores and couldn't survive on a herbivorous diet. Humans, on the other hand, can. We are moral beings and as a result of our morality, we place innumerable restrictions on ourselves for the greater good: We prohibit or disapprove of theft, murder, rape, deception, defamation etc.

So why do we think it's okay to deprive an entire species of their liberty and kill them for their flesh?

To sum it up: Just because we *can* eat anything, doesn't necessarily mean that we *should*.

What do you think? I'm very curious to know.

I think Bob does not like killing pretty things. He wasn't against cow leather jackets just fuzzy cute dead animals. Also it could be an anti hunting thing on his part I don't know. I can understand fur. It really does keep you warm and in the days before synthetics you couldn't keep warm with fake fur or polyester. Weather we need it now? Well that depends if we use the fox meat to make jerky I'm fine with it. As long as nothing of the animal is wasted. And for testing on animals I am for that to. Its better then testing on people first. Now if its really making the animal suffer don't keep subjecting it to tests over and over that's mean.

Animals are our oldest form of refineries. They could turn inedible grasses into edible meats and wearable leather. Now does this practice need to continue? Do we still need to process things this way? I would say yes, but we will eventually get to a point we don't have to kill to live. I mean we make so many things with cow byproducts still dyes, rubber for tires, insulin, antibiotics, gelatine, hormones, glass, water filters, the list goes on http://www.rense.com/general6/cow.htm .

I for one can not stop eating animals. Now I would if someone gave me money. I cannot afford to buy the foods I would need to eat to live a vegan lifestyle. You can buy synthetic b-12 or you can get chicken while on sale. I'm too poor to not eat cheese.

 

[Black-6]

I am a believer in the food chain.

 

[Xorph]

Well, from what I can remember certain nutrients (protein, maybe iron) are found in higher amounts in meat than in plants. So, since getting a hold of meat tends to be easier (and IMO tastier) than getting high-protein plant based foods (like tofu), we tend to just eat meat instead.
Also, the animals that we kill to eat tend to be less "I love you so much owner person lets be best friends" and more "mmmmm. grass. I think I'll stand here and chew grass for a few hours". If fact, if we one day decided to stop eating, say, pigs forever, we would have literally no reason to continue to breed pigs, and as a result the global pig population would plummet. Same goes with cows, exept we would still keep a decent number for production of milk.

 

[Sampler]

I believe in the right to life that's why I eat meat, I don't enjoy it, steak is pretty damned disgusting, but do you think as many cows would be alive today if it weren't for consumption - imagine wild bulls and the threat they'd pose to human life?

Millions upon millions of animals get a chance at life that they would not otherwise have had if it weren't to be destined to end up on a plate - those born into "intensive" farming methods may not have a great life, but they still lived.

Also bacon...

 

[Dys]

Being Vegan is a gesture, I understand that. I just think it's pointless claim to boycott all animal products when it's an impossibility to do so. We use animal product in more than just food and clothing, and I struggle to differentiate why it's inherently crueler to eat bacon than to use medicine/adhesive products or what have you. In fact, if the animals are not mistreated, I don't see how anyone can claim there's an ethical dilemna in eating animals. Yes, they are alive and they are bread and raised for the purpose of feeding us, but if they live comfortable lives (often more comfortable than their wild counterparts, nature doesn't give two shits for our human morality) then I just don't see it.

Worse still, I see a lot of vegans rocking their iphones (HTC phones are also somewhat popular with the kind of people that tend to declare themselves vegan for some reason). 5 Minutes of research (or paying any attention to tech news) will reveal a horrible trend of slavery and sweatshops in the technology industry. I'm a bit sick of people talking about how they make "ethical" decisions based on what they eat (a fundamental necessity to survive) but not with the bullshit toys they buy (smartphones are by no stretch needed, ever. They are cool and convenient and all that, but not a single person on the planet needs one).

 

[RamirezDoEverything]

Last time I checked, animals aren't intelligent. There's no reason why we shouldn't eat them.

Mentally handicapped people aren't intelligent, should we eat them?

OT:
You bring up a very good point, after seeing Food Inc, I've been thinking of switching to vegetarian.

I guess the only reason I continue to keep eating meat is because my parents cook the majority of the time.. laziness I guess.

If I didn't work a part time job, go to school, do debate, whine, whine, cry, cry, I'm really busy, I guess I'd take the time to eat vegetarian.

 

[TheRundownRabbit]

I support animal rights, but not to the point were I will toss out a nice steak dinner. Long story short, I eat what tastes good.

 

[RichardThompson]

I dunno, I've been outsmarted by a cat many's a time and I'm studying medicine in university now.

I bet cats could perform major surgery if they think hard enough about it.

I do have quite a high moral high-ground

I've yet to meet a vegetarian or vegan who doesn't.

Also it still seems to be a sort of taboo to be vegetarian, don't know if anyone else has noticed? The sooner that blows over the better, but people still seem to freak out when I offer them vegetarian food when they're over at my house.

How would you feel if you went to someones house and they failed to take into account that you're a vegetarian?

I can't even tell whether you're argueing for or against here ._.

But my morals aren't restrictive to animals if that's what you're getting at?
And you did read my original post right? I do eat meat, it's just i prefer not to. It was like sentence 2.

Last time I checked, animals aren't intelligent. There's no reason why we shouldn't eat them.

Mentally handicapped people aren't intelligent, should we eat them?

Huh, that was actually brought up in an ethical guidance lecture yesterday

 

[Orekoya]

5 Minutes of research (or paying any attention to tech news) will reveal a horrible trend of slavery and sweatshops in the technology industry.

God knows I don't want to defend vegans but doing any more than 5 minutes of research will also uncover that, as deplorable sweatshops are compared to our standard of living, for their culture it is still a vital necessity to their lives. Often the children working there are homeless, and more often than not, don't have options of orphanages to live at. The choices in their young lives are working to make a stable means to live, stealing and possibly suffer their society's disproportionate justice system, or starving to death. They're still third world nations, and if you paid attention in History class, no nation has ever got to be first world nations on the backs of the well-paid. It's a sad fact of our civilizations.

 

[ReinWeisserRitter]

Because It Needs Saying:

I'm calling every carnivore out right now by saying if you post here intending to belittle, demean or deface this thread or the OP in any way I will not stand for it. I'm appalled and shocked at the treatment I've seen here. I think all of you carnivores who are demeaning Vegans should be ashamed of yourselves for flaming this thread.

Why is it that, out of every argument I hear people make against Vegans it sums up to "Because eating meat makes me better than you."
It's like there's some corollary to eating meat that says "I must be a dick about it or I forfeit my fight to eat meat."
As a blanket point for everyone saying any variation on either "Whats wrong with meat, meat tastes good." or "LOL vegans are dumb." need to put on some stronger pants and just deal with it.
Everyone is entitled to eat whatever they please and veganism is no exception. The need to inflate your ego is neither greater than nor equal to another person's life choices. You can, respectully, go someplace else. I'd be less kind here, but I'm trying to keep my patience.

To the rest of us with coherent arguments; It's good you are thinking about it and questioning why you do what you do but keep from straying into the "it's normal" territory and think about Vegans as people, not social deviants.

"I will not stand for it"? Really? I'm sure that's deterred absolutely any untoward commentary.

Here we have a guy who's barely read any of the posts in the topic, thus having no clue what people are actually saying, and then demonstrating himself as bad as what he's criticizing by being every bit as biased and prejudiced. This is what we want not to do in a discussion, kids.

 

[crudus]

What I was getting at is that there are some unique traits that set us apart from almost all other animals, and that is our capacity for complex reasoning and self-reflection. While I don't think this makes us superior (in fact, our intellect has led us to some pretty unintelligent things, like invent the nuclear bomb or design an economic system that is now melting down in our hands)

Well we have vastly different things of "unintelligent things". Nuclear fission is quite a boon to society. I don't disagree that it has been misused at times, but it has done more good than harm at this point. The economic system being broken isn't the economic system, but the people in charge of it. Greed has broken the system. The system wasn't made broken.

That would be a strange situation to be in, but yes, I'd certainly kill and eat the rabbit. However, these extreme hypothetical scenarios aren't applicable to everyday life. If it's either starvation or eating meat, obviously go for the latter, but how often do we actually face such a choice? At least in Western society, eating meat isn't about survival, but about taste and convenience.

I just wanted to define rough bounds on your morals. It is sort of along the lines of a George Bernard Shaw quote.

Spoiler: This one specifically

He was at a party once and he told this woman that everyone would agree to do anything for money, if the price was high enough.
`Surely not, she said.'
`Oh yes,' he said.
`Well, I wouldn't,' she said.
`Oh yes you would. For instance,' he said, `would you sleep with me for... for a million pounds?'
`Well,' she said, `maybe for a million I would, yes.'
`Would you do it for ten shillings?' said Bernard Shaw.
`Certainly not!' said the woman `What do you take me for? A prostitute?'
`We've established that already,' said Bernard Shaw. `We're just trying to haggle on price now!'

Now, if you said "no" then I wouldn't have ever responded to you again. Anyone who says no is quite unreasonable and really isn't someone I would want a discussion of philosophy with. Even if it was just to swap views.

Morality is one way in which we have taken up that responsibility. I must say, I'm quite baffled by a lot of people here who openly denounce morality as naive, idealistic, scientifically baseless or even useless. Without morality, there would be no society. Society began when two cavemen met and suddenly realised that perhaps they shouldn't clobber each other over the head and explore ways of working together. Every law, every social norm, every collective achievement is based on a set of morals that governs how we treat one another. Without morality, we'd live in an anarchic wasteland and spend our days fighting for our lives... in fact, much like animals do in the wilderness.

Also, while I agree that moral nitty-gritty varies across cultures, families and individuals, basic morals are not subjective, but quite universal. As I wrote in my earlier post, there is no culture that allows arbitrary violence. We always demand a moral justification for violence: We send the criminal to prison to protect society. We shoot the gunman because he was taking aim at an innocent civilian. We wage war because someone, somewhere thinks this is a good idea that in the end will relieve more suffering that it creates. We also think it's just and moral to kill animals for food.

It's those last two examples that I think merit discussion.

And thanks!

Morality it a bit older than that(depending on how you define morality of course). You can see piranhas don't eat each other. Army ants are blind and kill everything in their path, but not each other. That also isn't the point of this.

Subjective morality also only goes so far on how detailed you want to get it. Killing someone is moral, if it is in self-defense. Stealing to feed a starving family is even a gray area. Another example is killing a neighboring village for their resources is/was regarded as an ok thing to do(imagine about 5000 years ago for that one). The people who committed the 9/11 attacks thought they were doing something morally right. The higher Nazis (Godwin's law!) thought they were doing right by purging the "unclean" races. I would call those last two incidences arbitrary violence. If you want to define your morals to exclude very specific examples then yeah morality would be objective (and each moral law would be a paragraph or two long).

 

[TD5160]

Therefore, whenever we kill an animal for food, we are essentially deciding that our appetite is more important than that creature's life. We are inflicting deadly violence on a defenseless being, simply for our own pleasure. Personally, I don't think that's ethical behavior.

You had me til there. Have a nice day veggie.

I'm gonna go cook up the calf liver in my fridge.

 

[Racecarlock]

Tell you what, mr. vegan. I'll stop eating meat when you show up with an army attachment at my door with ak47s pointed at my face. Until then, I'm going to eat meat, and I'm going to enjoy it, and you're not going to stop me. Don't bullshit me about morality. Morality is the reason I can't swear in public even if I get hurt badly. Morality is the reason games keep nagging me to be a good little boy and never kill any of the mindless clouds of data that live in my gun sights. Morality is the reason there's a bunch of bullshit decency laws that prevent public nudity by making it an arrestable offense. I'm not going to give up eating bacon because you say it's wrong. Churches think masturbating is wrong, but I still god damn do it.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

snip

You seem to have quite a hard-on for animals. Maybe you're hiding something, hmm? What you presented in those videos is not intelligence. Hell, I can teach my cat to shake hands but that doesn't mean she's on the same level as I am.

Mentally handicapped people aren't intelligent, should we eat them?

You missed the part where even a human of low intelligence is still a human.

 

[Spleencheese]

I won't eat any animal that proves it is sentient to me. However, if it is not, I am afraid it is fair game. Human beings spent a long time getting to the top of the food chain and I am going to enjoy it!
The main issue I have with most Vegans who refuse to eat meat because they are against animals being killed. They usually still consume things that also result in animals being killed such as grains and wheat, which results in tons of animals being killed during the harvesting process.
They also purchase and use things that result in animals being killed. It just seems hypocritical to me. If you really don't want to harm animals then you have to go live in a cave and just grow all your own food.
This may not describe you but I find many of them to be massive hypocrits who just like to push their agenda on me. I also find many Vegans to be more anti-capitalist than anti-killing animals.

'Sentient' does not mean 'intelligent'. All animals are, in fact, sentient. Sentient life is conscious life. Plants are not sentient, but animals are, as they are conscious, capable of making decisions (however limited their ability to do so).
I think the word you are looking for is 'sapient'. Sapient life forms are intelligent. Humans are the only sapient species known to exist.
'Sapient' and 'sentient' are so often confused as many science fiction writers don't know the difference, and so 'sentient' has become synonymic with 'intelligent' in popular culture.

OT (finally): I personally do not have an issue with eating meat. If I had to kill every animal I ate myself, then I might get a little squeamish, though.
Also, you mention that animals that are naturally carnivorous should not be demonised as there is no other way for them to survive. What about bears, racoons and all other types of naturally occurring omnivorous species? Most omnivorous species are capable of surviving on a plant-only diet. Do you think we should hate them?
Thirdly, which species do we deprive entirely of its liberty? I realise that we have bred many animals for consumption, but I can not think of a single species that is used only for meat, or that hasn't had individuals become feral.

 

[juniorlee]

In every way possible I will try to cut down on my meat consumption. I know about PETA but that is as far as it goes. Although the vegan idea is often brushed aside by friends who is about my age saying that it's not cool, I have to disagree. It's our self conscious rights and respect for all living beings.

 

[Khada]

snip

You seem to have quite a hard-on for animals. Maybe you're hiding something, hmm? What you presented in those videos is not intelligence. Hell, I can teach my cat to shake hands but that doesn't mean she's on the same level as I am.

Mentally handicapped people aren't intelligent, should we eat them?

You missed the part where even a human of low intelligence is still a human.

I wasn't trying to prove intelligence on the same level as a humans. I was disproving your theory that animals are driven by instinct alone. The videos show that this is clearly not the case. So again, unless your going to explain it all within the scope of animal instincts (and distinctly out of the scope of human behavior) then that point is just going to have to go to me I'm afraid.

Not that is seems to matter to you whether or not the creature is intelligent, seeing as you go ahead and throw that argument away in your response to RamirezDoEverything.

Here's an idea. Why don't you explain -clearly- what it is that separates humans from animals (might be tough seeing as we all share the same heritage), supply some proof of that distinction and then extrapolate from that the justification for torturing, killing and eating them when there is absolutely nothing we get from meat (that we need) that can't be gotten just as easily from somewhere else?

I eagerly await your response.

Edit: And when I said "(might be tough seeing as we all share the same heritage)", that was in relation to the entire paragraph. I'm not saying there are no differences, but that there are none that fill all the requirement as explained.

 

[sora91111]

I refer to the science episode, I'll probably never give up meat, but I do care about animals. So am I a hypocrite, probably, but I don't feel guilty for eating meat.