[QUOTE=dingdongpuddi;44777517]I'm not a vegan but a vegetarian (who cheats sometimes) but it is true that veganism or vegetarianism are way better for the environment, in terms of pollution and greenhouse gas output.
Do you know how much water and energy is required to raise these animals? Also cows farting so much green house gas is a legitmate problem lol.
Lastly, I'm gonna get cardboard-boxed for this, but the meat production industry is extremely cruel. None of us need meat to survive (and don't use the naturalistic fallacy either).[/QUOTE]
we don't need to live outside a cave.
we're evolved to live in the grass land plains of north africa. that means eating meat, and eating plants.
why would we drop one of those just "because"? it isn't anymore efficient to just grow plants, if scaled up to the same size as the meat industry it would probably take a lot of energy to manage.
[editline]11th May 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Mikenopa;44780020]Even if you have no morals, for the sake of the future everyone needs to go vegan. The amount of energy it takes to produce one pound of beef is insanely greater than the amount of energy it takes to produce a pound of plant matter.
I've been vegan for about 2 years now and have noticed no health improvements. I havn't noticed any health detriments either. I have always stayed healthy. I 100% believe that in the future being vegan won't be a choice, because of how inefficient it is to produce animal products.
You can laugh all you want and say that no "hippy vegans" are going to take away your burger, but you need to stop avoiding the big problem which is over population.
If everyone went vegan it wouldn't prevent world hunger, but it would definatley help delay world starvation.[/QUOTE]
No. Veganism won't ever take 100% hold over the world.
if anything, we'll all eat insects and bugs before we're all vegan.
[QUOTE=Mikenopa;44780020]Even if you have no morals, for the sake of the future everyone needs to go vegan. The amount of energy it takes to produce one pound of beef is insanely greater than the amount of energy it takes to produce a pound of plant matter.
I've been vegan for about 2 years now and have noticed no health improvements. I havn't noticed any health detriments either. I have always stayed healthy. I 100% believe that in the future being vegan won't be a choice, because of how inefficient it is to produce animal products.
You can laugh all you want and say that no "hippy vegans" are going to take away your burger, but you need to stop avoiding the big problem which is over population.
If everyone went vegan it wouldn't prevent world hunger, but it would definatley help delay world starvation.[/QUOTE]
I would sooner die than give up eating meat. Since I already intend to go hunt the animals myself in the future, I have no problem killing the animal myself if some idiot politician in the future decides to gut the meat industry, which would be a colossally stupid idea, since it would collapse the agriculture industry as a whole, since the vast majority of farming is done to provide feed to livestock.
Why is it so often glazed over how absurdly interconnected the agriculture and livestock industries are and just how much other stuff animal products are used for beyond food?
I don't think anyone should be FORCED to be vegan. I just think that in the future resources may become so sparse, that growing animal matter will be close to impossible. I think meat should be considered a luxury, like owning a car. I don't support the idea of meat being a staple part of the diet for no reason.
[QUOTE=Mikenopa;44783246]I don't think anyone should be FORCED to be vegan. I just think that in the future resources may become so sparse, that growing animal matter will be close to impossible. I think meat should be considered a luxury, like owning a car. I don't support the idea of meat being a staple part of the diet for no reason.[/QUOTE]
Vegan, no.
Vegetarian, maybe.
Reduced consumption of meat, yes.
[QUOTE=Mikenopa;44783246]I don't think anyone should be FORCED to be vegan. I just think that in the future resources may become so sparse, that growing animal matter will be close to impossible. I think meat should be considered a luxury, like owning a car. I don't support the idea of meat being a staple part of the diet for no reason.[/QUOTE]
"For no reason"? Meat isn't a staple of a diet for "no reason". It's due to our biological need for proteins. Meat is the best way to get the vast amount of your protein.
If everyone was eating like a vegan or vegetarian, do you not think food shortage would still be an issue?
[QUOTE=zombini;44776999]Your average slaughterhouse doesn't treat animals like shit, that not only degrades the meat quality, it makes the workers work harder because the animals are less likely to comply. Would you listen to someone if they kicked you in the side every time you stopped moving? Fuck no you wouldn't. It's difficult to explain, but that's how it is.
[/QUOTE]
That seems opposite to a response that would most likely decrease any undesired behavior when induced with punishment. If you aren't complacent, then you will get kicked in the side until you do.
[QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;44783253]Vegan, no.
Vegetarian, maybe.
Reduced consumption of meat, yes.[/QUOTE]
This is my favourite quote now.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;44783459]and that can often times just make people/animals more rebelious and harder to deal with.
raise a dog. see how much respect you get from that dog when he's been abused. compare that to a properly raised dog. violence doesn't put beings in line more often than not.[/QUOTE]
I see what you mean.
[QUOTE=Daemon;44783449]That seems opposite to a response that would most likely decrease any undesired behavior when enduced with punishment. If you aren't complacent, then you will get kicked in the side until you do.[/QUOTE]
and that can often times just make people/animals more rebelious and harder to deal with.
raise a dog. see how much respect you get from that dog when he's been abused. compare that to a properly raised dog. violence doesn't put beings in line more often than not.
Pound to pound meat has more protein than plants, but calorie to calorie plants have more protein than meat. Plant matter not only has fewer calories for an equal amount of protein, it also takes fewer calories to produce. Meat is not the best source of protein.
If everyone was vegan there would still be hungry people, but at least we wouldn't be wasting so many resources transporting, feeding, protecting, and overall raising animals. Not to mention all of the pollution produced from animals.
This is the worse thing I've ever seen. So they became vegan because they want to give other species a chance. Wtf did they snort?
Things like Cars, phones, computers and the list goes on uses electricity which comes from coal plants or other things that produce CO2 that then gets pumped in the air. Better stop using those also then....
[QUOTE=Mikenopa;44783552]Pound to pound meat has more protein than plants, but calorie to calorie plants have more protein than meat. Plant matter not only has fewer calories for an equal amount of protein, it also takes fewer calories to produce. Meat is not the best source of protein.
If everyone was vegan there would still be hungry people, but at least we wouldn't be wasting so many resources transporting, feeding, protecting, and overall raising animals. Not to mention all of the pollution produced from animals.[/QUOTE]
no we'd just be wasting them on a similar sized(probably larger) agricultural industry.
it's not going to get better just because people are vegan. Removing meat from our diet will not improve the situation in the way you seem to think it will.
People will be eating bugs, a form of meat, long before we're vegan.
People will lab grow meat long before we're vegan.
[QUOTE=Combine 177;44775526]How does going to vegan solve world hunger?[/QUOTE]
The area one cow (that feeds thirty people) needs could be used to grow food for three hundred people.
[QUOTE=Vilusia;44775510]Lol dat random "We can solve climate change"
wtf lol[/QUOTE]
An area often created by deforestation. A lot of cattle live in areas where rainforest has been burned, so that the cows can feed.
I'm not vegan, but I think it's important to cut down on meat. It's not a great industry.
Just went to check the link to see how becoming vegan solves climate change. The link does not take you to a website ABOUT FUCKING CLIMATE CHANGE. It takes you to sign a petition. That is really sad saying you have proof and you linked it. Then being an ass wipe and trying to trick people into a petition.
[QUOTE=Daemon;44782558]I don't understand whats so arbitrary between drawing a line from some grass and a lion. Yes you treat animals like commodities, like a piece of grass and you can't differentiate to what might be more of an issue and to what kind of scale it is happening. Some people are gonna argue from emotion but the bottom line is this is an intellectual argument and sentience things that feel are important. It can be harmed, it can be hurt and you don't cause something harm and hurt without some kind of good cause and thats the whole point of this subject. My [i]insult[/i] is underlying the futility of arguing with people who choose not to bother themselves with certain details and it seems the first argument to be had is one that can even get as far as to recognize it.[/QUOTE]
As an animal can be harmed, a plant can be, and a rock can be. That is my point, you've drawn an arbitrary line, and deemed it bad for only particular levels of intelligence. I'm not ignoring anything you are saying, this is, yes, being argued well so far, but you are dismissing me, for this point alone. In fact, this is my only point, so please don't reply again with another argument of personal incredulity.
Why does PETA hate Cows, Sheep, Chickens and Pigs?
These are all docile animals and none of them would survive in the wild. Humans are required for their species' survival, and we'll only raise them for farming.
[QUOTE=mochisushi;44787412]As an animal can be harmed, a plant can be, and a rock can be. That is my point, you've drawn an arbitrary line, and deemed it bad for only particular levels of intelligence. I'm not ignoring anything you are saying, this is, yes, being argued well so far, but you are dismissing me, for this point alone. In fact, this is my only point, so please don't reply again with another argument of personal incredulity.[/QUOTE]
The principle of the matter has little to do with how intelligent something is. We still set the standard for a human retard. We draw a line of reasonability and not use what we're not sure about as an escape clause to go out and mercilessly trample on everything. You give the same fairness of judgment for a rock as you do an animal so i don't feel this argument can progress any further.
[QUOTE=Daemon;44788164]The principle of the matter has little to do with how intelligent something is. We still set the standard for a human retard. We draw a line of reasonability and not use what we're not sure about as an escape clause to go out and mercilessly trample on everything. You give the same fairness of judgment for a rock as you do an animal so i don't feel this argument can progress any further.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Daemon;44788164]We still set the standard for a human retard.[/QUOTE]
You do, that is clear enough.
[QUOTE=Daemon;44788164]We draw a line of reasonability and not use what we're not sure about as an escape clause to go out and mercilessly trample on everything.[/QUOTE]
I treat humans with as much respect as plants, what stops me from trampling over them is the same reason I don't get out of my way to trample over rocks, it's tiring and serves little purpose to me, and in the case of trampling humans, results in me being incarcerated.
This argument can go no further, because you are not willing to even take what I'm saying seriously.
[QUOTE=Daemon;44788164] I mean if you don't give a shit about anything inside an ethical stand point, then no i don't think anything else will.[/QUOTE]
You don't think anything else will, you are assuming on my part. Really?
[QUOTE=Daemon;44788164] How do you encourage conversation, discourse and discussion if this is what people call an argument?[/QUOTE]
I'll leave your own words here.
[QUOTE=Vilusia;44775510]Lol dat random "We can solve climate change"
wtf lol[/QUOTE]
With all the methane they produce from all those beans, they're bound to make it worse.
[QUOTE=V12US;44789146]With all the methane they produce from all those beans, they're bound to make it worse.[/QUOTE]
No worries, animals will obviously survive global warming.
[sp]i suck at being sarcastic[/sp]
I watched this while eating a slice of Buffalo Chicken pizza.
No shame. No regrets.
[QUOTE=mochisushi;44789072]You do, that is clear enough.
I treat humans with as much respect as plants, what stops me from trampling over them is the same reason I don't get out of my way to trample over rocks, it's tiring and serves little purpose to me, and in the case of trampling humans, results in me being incarcerated.[/QUOTE]
Is facilitating the persecution, abuse, torture or suffering of animals for our convenience respecting everything else the same? Just because you would cage a human if you could, aren't you still respecting the principles of law? If plants and rocks do not have this feeling characteristic then they can't be mistreated. Is that being respected the same? If we didn't have laws, i wouldn't turn my back on you for a second because you would most likely want to turn me into a human desk.
[QUOTE=Daemon;44790042]Is facilitating the persecution, abuse, torture or suffering of animals for our convenience respecting everything else respecting the same? Just because you would cage a human if you could, aren't you still respecting the principles of law? If plants and rocks do not have this feeling characteristic then they can't be mistreated. Is that respecting the same? If we didn't have laws, i wouldn't turn my back on you for a second because you would most likely want to turn me into a human desk.[/QUOTE]
you have a terrible method of arguing.
animals that are bred for slaughter aren't tortured. they're not treated the best but they aren't tortured.
If plants turned out to have a basic idea of pain and suffering, would you still be 100% behind only eating plants?
This pork stir fry I'm eating tastes great.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;44790535]animals that are bred for slaughter aren't tortured. they're not treated the best but they aren't tortured. [/QUOTE]
Conditions vary in different countries on a broad spectrum. You never get to know your victim. You don't spend a day with your victim and see how their living and what their up to. How can it be an honest statement? Most people just walk up to the shelf and grab the cheapest produce they can find. They'll stay way far back and wash their hands of it. When any glimmer of truth emerged, our noses sort of had to be rubbed in it to actually see what was happening. They aren't treated the best so there you go that reinforces some level of acceptance.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;44790535]If plants turned out to have a basic idea of pain and suffering, would you still be 100% behind only eating plants?[/QUOTE]
If it was then the story of life on earth would be even more depressing than it is even comprehensible. but yeah whatever the rule would be don't walk over the grass and don't expend more than you need etc.
[QUOTE=Daemon;44791034]Conditions vary in different countries on a broad spectrum. You never get to know your victim. You don't spend a day with your victim and see how their living and what their up to. How can it be an honest statement? Most people just walk up to the shelf and grap the cheapest produce they can find. They'll stay way far back and wash their hands of it. When any realization of truth emerges, our noses sort of had to be rubbed in it to actually see what was happening. They aren't treated the best so there you go that reinforces some level of acceptance.
If it was then the story of life on earth would be even more depressing than it is even comprehensible. but yeah whatever the rule would be don't walk over the grass or don't expend more than you need etc.[/QUOTE]
We will always live at the expense of other organisms. If you want to live in "harmony" or whatever with all life on the planet, I suggest you leave your first world apartment or house, and all your clothing and exist in the woods and try your best to subsit off of nuts and berries and wild herbs. Alone, by the way, as a group of people will always upset that eco system.
There is no such thing as balance in nature, creatures die and species die on a rapid basis. An unimaginable amount of life forms and varieties of life existed on this planet throughout the 360 million plus years of life. More than 99% are gone forever.
I've been to a slaughterhouse, I've read a fair bit of literature and seen "exposes" on the horrors of the meat industry. I'm still eating meat and still not exactly seeing why we must live in harmony with all life on earth in some sense. We need to not destroy the ecosystems and destroy the planet, but do you think we can sustain 7.2 billion people today if we just retooled to an agrarian economy? Really?
We have the intelligence to know that there are always predators in nature, that there's always loses and species destroyed over the course of history. We have the intelligence to do our best to maintain both ourselves, and our ecosystem. I don't think this means that we need to stop eating meat because of suffering or some idealism like that. The human race is suffering in massive quantities and yet you'd rather talk about retooling the worlds economy to a more inefficient system that would cost a lot of human lives. If we can't eat anything that's capable of some form of suffering, we will go extinct. We will. Goodbye humanity, the only sentient race that we know of. I just can't understand how you see this as a positive for humanity. We either live a cavemans life, in "harmony" with nature, or we do what we're doing now and get better at doing it without ruining environments.
[QUOTE=Daemon;44790042]Is facilitating the persecution, abuse, torture or suffering of animals for our convenience respecting everything else respecting the same? Just because you would cage a human if you could, aren't you still respecting the principles of law? If plants and rocks do not have this feeling characteristic then they can't be mistreated. Is that respecting the same? If we didn't have laws, i wouldn't turn my back on you for a second because you would most likely want to turn me into a human desk.[/QUOTE]
Laws are an intrinsic property of a social system. If there weren't any, you couldn't be around for me to turn you into a desk. Anyway, that would be extremely tiring, and the result would be no better than a desk made out of wood.
[QUOTE=Flameon;44775609]Grain and corn that goes to animals could, instead of becoming processed animal feed, go to people.[/QUOTE]
A lot of people misunderstand this, because this isn't true. Take for instance grain.
Yes, animals eat grain. but they eat the part of the grain which WE can't eat. Only a certain percentage of grain can be used to make bread. The rest is waste for us, but animals like pigs love it.
And there are a lot of other example's.
The meat industry recycles food waste to meat! So please, stop spreading this misunderstanding.
[QUOTE=thermobaric;44791161]A lot of people misunderstand this, because this isn't true. Take for instance grain.
Yes, animals eat grain. but they eat the part of the grain which WE can't eat. Only a certain percentage of grain can be used to make bread. The rest is waste for us, but animals like pigs love it.
And there are a lot of other example's.
The meat industry recycles food waste to meat! So please, stop spreading this misunderstanding.[/QUOTE]
Much of the meat industry is fed using waste and recycled products. It's very ingenious actually as those animals have digestive systems much different than ours that can and will eat that food readily.
The only greens I eat is Marijuana.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;44791094]
We have the intelligence to know that there are always predators in nature, that there's always loses and species destroyed over the course of history. We have the intelligence to do our best to maintain both ourselves, and our ecosystem. I don't think this means that we need to stop eating meat because of suffering or some idealism like that. The human race is suffering in massive quantities and yet you'd rather talk about retooling the worlds economy to a more inefficient system that would cost a lot of human lives. If we can't eat anything that's capable of some form of suffering, we will go extinct. We will. Goodbye humanity, the only sentient race that we know of. I just can't understand how you see this as a positive for humanity. We either live a cavemans life, in "harmony" with nature, or we do what we're doing now and get better at doing it without ruining environments.[/QUOTE]
Without going too deep into this, I'm an anti natalist which means i value as such that coming into existence is a harm of sorts and it would be better if as a result of there being [b]no new people[/b], humanity became extinct (even animals). Whatever small progresses we make may be deemed better but considering our prosperity arises billions more harm and deaths of all sentience and is an ongoing dilemma as a consequence, maybe it isn't such a better thing after all.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
