"You can't love animal's if you're not a vegetarian"

Recommended Videos

ThrobbingEgo

New member
Nov 17, 2008
2,765
0
0
dyre said:
ThrobbingEgo said:
dyre said:
Well, I love dolphins, dogs, kittens, hamsters, and raccoons

I don't particularly love pigs, cows, and chickens

Don't really see a problem here...
Problem: Do you think that pigs are less intelligent or conscious than, say, dogs?
Nah, pigs are pretty smart. Smart enough to actually lose sanity from being penned up in those tiny cages (which means they had sanity to begin with). Sucks, really. The meat industry needs some, uh, humanitarian (animalitarian?) regulations.

I'm still going to eat them though :|

captcha: "It's Super Delicious"
(albeit it was a Kellogg's cereal captcha ad)
So you do care about pigs on the level of their psychological wellbeing, but don't mind utterly destroying them because you'd rather eat pork for dinner than lentils (which can taste awesome in their own right)? Don't you find that to be inconsistent?
 

ThrobbingEgo

New member
Nov 17, 2008
2,765
0
0
The Cool Kid said:
It doesn't occur in natural levels high enough to be considered enough - vegetations usually show a deficit in creatine. All meat contains creatine, so are you saying most health professionals tell you to not eat meat? Sounds like more pseudo-science.
Okay, if we ignore soya, what other sources of protein are there that have the same protein content, or higher, then meat, without high levels of carbs or fat? Answer: none.
Why the hell has everyone become so obnoxious on this site? Have you thought about what you use to farm? Heavy machinery. Also I'm guessing your level of education isn't sufficient to have learnt about the issue with carbon storage and how many plants aren't actually a solution to CO2 as when they die, CO2 is released, and if we consider the waste from things like soya, then you haven't solved shit. So no, I'm not high, just more educated on this topic thankyou very much.
I think you made a mistake, actually. Carnitine does occur in plants.

Also: if, for some reason you're trying to avoid carbs but want protein there's seitan, nuts, avocado, and plenty other plants-based foods that are very, very low in carbs yet high in protein. In fact, pretty much anything edible that isn't pure sugar or alcohol contains some protein.

As for CO2 emission, again, you do realize that animal agriculture requires feeding the bred animals (which release CO2) far more plants than humans could ever eat?

None of what you're saying meshes with reality.
 

ThrobbingEgo

New member
Nov 17, 2008
2,765
0
0
BNguyen said:
Growing a garden (with all that entails) or picking up enough greens at the store costs way more than a package of meat.
Are you suggesting that meat is a substitute for... greens? That's the most fucked up thing I've ever heard. If you substitute all your carrots and broccoli for beef, you're going to have a nutritional deficiency. While people can live entirely on a plant-based diet, you can't live entirely on meat. You'll die.

That reminds me of that scene in Food Inc where this family was comparing the cost of broccoli to Pepsi, marveling at how much cheaper Pepsi is than vegetables. It's fucking sugar water.

If you want a fair comparison, compare the cost of meat to legumes. Look at how cheap lentils are. Being a vegan can be very inexpensive.
 

RoBi3.0

New member
Mar 29, 2009
709
0
0
BNguyen said:
ThrobbingEgo said:
BNguyen said:
1) you only proved my point, we feed cows pretty much what we can eat. For cows to not starve, we'd be competing for the same food source, although we do have other options, cows still eat much more than we do and their diet could spill over into our food sources.
2) the market may adapt but the processes are not so quick as to just shut down and that'd be it, first, you have to create the market and introduce it in such a way as for everyone to want to switch over, to do so would take years
3) plenty of the animals we raise for food do not consume what we do, pretty much what we leave over from the plants, but what we are capable of eating and digesting from plants is so little that we would have to produce crops on a much larger scale to be able to feed everyone. You don't seem to grasp that we are not herbivorous and cannot completely digest entire plants, only a small portion of that is edible and even then we can't completely digest it.
4) I'm not just talking about farmed animals, I'm talking about every animal we work to control to prevent such events as population booms and starvation from occurring. Vegans and vegetarians want animals to live long and relatively comfortable lives (I use the word comfortable because we all know not every animal is born completely healthy and capable) and that's a fine notion, but if we were to let these animals continue on without control, we would be competing with them and ultimately having to remove them (possibly causing them to starve) in order to meet society's demands for an all plant diet.
5)again you missed my point that we evolved into what we are with the aid of our diet, which consisted of meat. It means that 1) we are capable of changing now due to the evolutionary changes we made in the past, 2)without those changes made in the past, we could not make the changes now. It is only a point, not truly an excuse
6) do you even check prices at the store? High quality vegetables and fruits cost way more than a package of meat. And with the economy as it is, not everyone can afford to just switch over like you would want them to do, so yes, this argument can apply to First World countries as long as there is a poor class which can't make enough money to feed their family.
Growing a garden (with all that entails) or picking up enough greens at the store costs way more than a package of meat.

Take into fact that growing crops is not as easy as raising animals.
You have to worry about disease, pests, fungus, rot, the fact that the earth might not have enough nutrients to produce quality and edible food.
You also have to supply fertilizer, supplimental nutrients for better growth (aside from fertilizer), sufficient amounts of water, pesticides, fungicides, and herbicides to prevent destruction of the crop, and sufficient amounts of land to produce enough food.

Raising animals on the other hand doesn't require as much since 1) the animals (not always) eat parts of plants and even whole plants that humans cannot, too many plants have silica in their foliage that would wear down human teeth
2) raising a flock or herd of animals is less time consuming and overall takes less effort to ensure a good end product than a crop

Most of the time, you have to wait several months to get food from a crop and it is not always guaranteed that the produce will be good, free of damage or poison, or even that the plant might produce at all
I support the eating of meat just so we are clear. What I can't stand is misinformation.

1)Um cows are feed mainly corn by the beef industry cause it make cows extra fat. This is not the food source the evolved to eat. Cows are meant to eat grass, Humans can not eat grass because you lack the physiology to do so. Therefore, humans would not be competing with cows over the same food source.

3) Uh what? This is just crazy talk. The main food source of hunter gathers was plant matter. We are capable of eating a stunning amount of plant matter. I could write a list a mile long of all the shit we can eat. The simple fact is growing vegetables for human consumption more effectively feeds people than growing food for livestock that is a fact. It takes 6 pounds of corn to produce one pound of beef. That is a horribly ineffective use of resources.

4) This is true. Goats are a great example of livestock that eats all kids of crazy plants that people can not eat. Unfortunately in the United States anyhow they are horribly under underutilized. It is also true that Human are not Herbivores, but you are completely and totally underestimate human ability to eat plants, and lack understanding of farming in general.

5) Fat obtained from animal products was what was important to early hominids. It provided the calories needed to fuel larger brains. The need for fat was a result of evolution. Eating meat did not make Hominid grow bigger brains. We are evolved to eat certain things I just don't think you understand how that process occurred.

6) I am not sure you check the prices at the store. At local stores high quality ground beef is around 4 dollars a pound. I can by quite a few more vegetables for the same cost. Now beef is actually high in my area but even at a more reasonable price of around 3 dollars a pound vegetables are still cheaper. Even whole chicken at a 1 or 1.50 dollars a pound are still not the cheaper option. Unless you have developed a way to eat bones 15 to 25% of a whole chicken is wasted.


Your closing statement is also utter nonsense. With a increase a mechanized farming it has become ridiculously easy to grow crops. It only takes 1 person to drive a combine harvester.

Also you claim that eating a lot of plants is bad for your teeth this is simple not true. There have been several studies that show that dental health is way worst in American and western European cultures then it is in Cultures that adhere to traditional hunter gather lifestyles. Diets of which contain mostly plant matter and is supplemented with animal product when available. This has to do with more then just the consumption of plant verse meat as western population also consume a lot of refined sugar and heavy processed food not avail to the tribal people surveyed, but it was concluded that tooth wear was actually beneficial as the process that causes it also keeps teeth naturally clean.

In conclusion it my opinions on eating meat verse not is simple. Eating meat is beneficial to humans but being a vegetarian has its perks as well. Doing one of the other is not better and doesn't make you morally superior.

My only problem with the current meat culture is that there is entirely way to much importance placed on meat. It is often seen as the cornerstone to a decent meal. This is a problem. In fact the modern dependance on fat salt and sugar is leading to several major health problems in the United Stated. Diabetes, Obesity, Heart Diseases are relatively new problem in the scope of human evolution. They are directly related to our overuse of meat and processed foods.
 

corvuscorrax

New member
Sep 20, 2012
66
0
0
I actually prefer to beat and torture the animals I intend to eat before actually killing them. I look deep into their eyes and I see fear and betrayal, you can't cook those expressions off you know.

I then use their blood to paint runic sigils on my chest and attempt to summon demons.

No success yet but will let you know when there is a break through.

On topic though vegatarians and vegans are just like any other hipster clique. They try and structure their life around some fairly unimportant life decision and then try to convince you that they're better than you for it.
 

ThrobbingEgo

New member
Nov 17, 2008
2,765
0
0
The Cool Kid said:
Not avoid carbs but simply eat a realistic amount that will be part of a balanced diet. Nuts and avocado are rammed with fat. Some protein just isn't enough with plant products.
The grain mountains is more to do with subsiding farmers rather then producing lots of food. I'm no farmer but I would be curious to know the land coverage required for grain and cattle vs soya.

What I'm saying meshes with reality just fine...why the bitchy comment? I will admit I stupidly forgot the cattle feed but if we consider the density of meat vs soya (100 grams of meat is a lot smaller then 100g of soya), I would have thought soya coverage would have to be phenomenal in order to replace meat.
Food goes into a cow. Not all the mass of the food stays inside the cow. Energy is burnt, vegetable protein does not magically all turn into cow mass, and cows produce bullshit. Much like the majority of your post.

How much food do you think vegans require? The RDA for protein is 56-70 grams a day. That's not a lot.

Here's a sample day that results in 73 grams of protien, not including protein obtained from amino acids in other vegetables eaten throughout the day.

Breakfast:
1 cup Oatmeal
1 cup Soymilk
1 Bagel
Lunch:
2 slices Whole Wheat Bread
1 cup Vegetarian Baked Beans
Dinner:
5 oz firm Tofu 11
1 cup cooked Broccoli
1 cup cooked Brown Rice
2 Tbsp Almonds
Snack:
2 Tbsp Peanut Butter
6 Crackers

http://www.vrg.org/nutrition/protein.htm


You claim to be really concerned about how allegedly unsustainable veganism is, but I'm going to throw out a guess that you're wasting quite a few more resources in animal protein above the RDA.
 

ThrobbingEgo

New member
Nov 17, 2008
2,765
0
0
The Cool Kid said:
Why the aggression? Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean you have to flip-out.

The RDA for protein is laughably low. If you were to eat that enjoy being overweight if you eat the recommended calories. Try eating a 40-40-20 diet of 2k, and then make it 3k. Vegetables aren't enough.
Funny. I don't know many overweight vegans. In fact, in 7th day adventists studies, vegans are consistently within healthy weights while vegetarians and meat eaters are on average over weight.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adventist_Health_Studies

Find me a study that shows that vegans are fat.
 

dyre

New member
Mar 30, 2011
2,178
0
0
ThrobbingEgo said:
dyre said:
ThrobbingEgo said:
dyre said:
Well, I love dolphins, dogs, kittens, hamsters, and raccoons

I don't particularly love pigs, cows, and chickens

Don't really see a problem here...
Problem: Do you think that pigs are less intelligent or conscious than, say, dogs?
Nah, pigs are pretty smart. Smart enough to actually lose sanity from being penned up in those tiny cages (which means they had sanity to begin with). Sucks, really. The meat industry needs some, uh, humanitarian (animalitarian?) regulations.

I'm still going to eat them though :|

captcha: "It's Super Delicious"
(albeit it was a Kellogg's cereal captcha ad)
So you do care about pigs on the level of their psychological wellbeing, but don't mind utterly destroying them because you'd rather eat pork for dinner than lentils (which can taste awesome in their own right)? Don't you find that to be inconsistent?
I care in a "that's rather distasteful (no pun intended)" sort of way, not in a "omg I'm offended" sort of way. Also, lentils taste like shit. I'd rather have tofu or eggs (you're not against eggs, are you?).

In the end, I only really have moral concern for human problems. I'm not saying vegetarians don't have a sound moral argument; it just doesn't have any internal appeal to me. Sort of like act utilitarianism sounds wonderful on paper, but in practice it is utterly unappealing and often disturbing.

You know what would be kind of funny though? If in a few decades or so, only-humans-matter attitudes no longer exist, and the word "humanist" takes on the same sort of connotation as "racist" does today :p

PS: I think torture is worse than murder, so it's not completely inconsistent!
 

ThrobbingEgo

New member
Nov 17, 2008
2,765
0
0
The Cool Kid said:
ThrobbingEgo said:
The Cool Kid said:
Why the aggression? Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean you have to flip-out.

The RDA for protein is laughably low. If you were to eat that enjoy being overweight if you eat the recommended calories. Try eating a 40-40-20 diet of 2k, and then make it 3k. Vegetables aren't enough.
Funny. I don't know many overweight vegans. In fact, in 7th day adventists studies, vegans are consistently within healthy weights while vegetarians and meat eaters are on average over weight.

Find me a study that shows that vegans are fat.
No need to try to be a smart-ass...is this something you are even aware of?
As for the vegans how much are they eating in terms of calories a day?
How am I being a smart ass? Try reading your own posts.

I'm easily getting more than 2000 calories a day and I'm not gaining weight. Maybe your trendy weight loss program isn't the only healthy diet? It's certainly not a sustainable one.
 

AngloDoom

New member
Aug 2, 2008
2,461
0
0
How has the thread gotten this far and hovered around this long?

Some people want to eat meat, such as myself.
Others do not wish to eat meat, such as my friends.

We still talk to each other civilly and we manage to get along just fine: now why is it that you have the same elements and you simply add "on the internet" and everything becomes a gigantic fireball in seconds?

All these sarcastic remarks, smarmy retorts, and aggressive rebuttals aren't going to make the other person go "gee, I was wrong" any more than my banging on about how much I hate [insert band here] is going to make a fan turn away from their preferences.

Can we just learn to get civil and get on? Bake some cakes or something? That's vegetarian, lets have some cake together, guys:

 

ThrobbingEgo

New member
Nov 17, 2008
2,765
0
0
dyre said:
I care in a "that's rather distasteful (no pun intended)" sort of way, not in a "omg I'm offended" sort of way. Also, lentils taste like shit. I'd rather have tofu or eggs (you're not against eggs, are you?).

In the end, I only really have moral concern for human problems. I'm not saying vegetarians don't have a sound moral argument; it just doesn't have any internal appeal to me. Sort of like act utilitarianism sounds wonderful on paper, but in practice it is utterly unappealing and often disturbing.

You know what would be kind of funny though? If in a few decades or so, only-humans-matter attitudes no longer exist, and the word "humanist" takes on the same sort of connotation as "racist" does today :p
In most cases, it'd probably be less cruel to cut to the chase and eat chickens instead of confining them for their eggs. It's truly gruesome stuff.

Luckily you have a world of other options: avocado, seitan, tempeh, tofu, and a fucking rainbow of legumes. Lentils aren't compulsory, though I'm puzzled that you don't like them.

As for the utilitarian bit, how's being a vegan disturbing? I don't use animal products and... there isn't a ethical downside here. It's not like I'm letting a baby drown so I can sell my expensive suit (instead of ruining it while rescuing the drowning baby) in order to save more babies.