Vegans and Vegetarians butthurt over £5 note containing trace elements of tallow. - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Aztec;51448594]Barring biodiversity I don't really get why domestic cows going extinct would be bad for anyone assuming there was a replacement for them. Cows don't care that their species is going extinct. Most cows don't even get to raise their own young let alone ponder about the continuation of their race.[/QUOTE] Well if we go that way it's not particularly amoral to kill animals to eat them either, since that's what happens to most of them in the wild anyway. The ecological consequences of breeding and feeding large amounts of farm animals always seemed a more convincing argument for veganism than the ethical side to me.

[QUOTE=Bertie;51449972]Why the hell would you have animal fat in your pound bills in the first place? It's not difficult to understand how Vegans who are ethically against supporting the meat and dairy industries are disturbed by this.[/QUOTE] Plastics. People are working on developing algae that could produce the requisite biomaterials instead, but the tech is still developing and we'll have to get past the hate boner a lot of people have for GMOs. Vegans ought to be gung-ho about GMOs and mussel/oyster aquaculture. Designer algae could readily support a ton of our needs, and eating aquacultured mussels might well constitute an ethical necessity based on many of the ethical tenets of veganism. They're essentially sessile. Their nervous system is so rudimentary that they are by all modern metrics incapable of suffering. Aquaculturing mussels, scallops, and oysters clean up pollution and provide some food for more complex aquatic life. They act as excellent environmental monitoring systems. Propping up the industry would help us combat global warming and ocean acidification through economic pressures as mussels are considerably sensitive to the latter. They're also pretty rich in protein, function as a source of B12, PUFAs, and are tasty as hell.

[QUOTE=Vegetable;51448817]I'm a vegan. Been a vegan all my life. I was brought up that way, and I'll die that way. No, I'm not burning all my notes over this, but nevertheless I am a little disturbed. I mean, I'm not gonna go into detail because I don't really wanna get into any fights with non-vegans (and the majority of people here, I somehow get the feeling), but in short, if I've spent literally my whole life standing up to something I feel so strongly against, and to discover the amorality is in something I use everyday, then I'm gonna be at least a little upset. Regardless of what it is, it would upset anyone who cared.[/QUOTE] It's no one's fault but your own that you've been ignorant to like 70℅ of the things we use animal products for bub.be 'disturbed' if you want but you just look the part of a fool

[QUOTE=No Party Hats;51450585]It's no one's fault but your own that you've been ignorant to like 70℅ of the things we use animal products for bub.be 'disturbed' if you want but you just look the part of a fool[/QUOTE] It's like saying that people who try to avoid companies with unethical supply chains and labor just look like fools for not being avoid to avoid it completely.

[QUOTE=Marbalo;51450533]It has never been proven that cows feel pain nor show any signs of having an intelligence, capable of perceiving danger or suffering beyond primal instincts. [/QUOTE] it has been proven as much as possible that most animals feel pain [QUOTE=Marbalo;51450533]A dog being thrown off a bridge might illicit some mild response from me, but seeing a baby being torched alive is a lot more distressing, to me personally. For a lot of people - it's the other way around. Why?[/QUOTE] i mean, people are very vocal about animal cruelty but i very highly doubt there are a lot of people that would be less distressed by that

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;51450591]It's like saying that people who try to avoid companies with unethical supply chains and labor just look like fools for not being avoid to avoid it completely.[/QUOTE] No, you look like a fool for not -informing- yourself, we've been saying all thread it's impossible to avoid this shit, idk why those of us who decide to live normally are somehow more researching on our shit than most vegans here but it certainly puts you guys in a clearer light

[QUOTE=No Party Hats;51450627]No, you look like a fool for not -informing- yourself, we've been saying all thread it's impossible to avoid this shit, idk why those of us who decide to live normally are somehow more researching on our shit than most vegans here but it certainly puts you guys in a clearer light[/QUOTE] "it's impossible to avoid this shit" just like how it's impossible to avoid businesses with bad business practices. Only the craziest of the crazy of vegans will think that you can 100% avoid it at present, they want to reduce it. also im not a vegan. I'm one of those who decide to "live normally."

[QUOTE=Marbalo;51450533]The core ideology of veganism is absolutely absurd. Who ever said that "murdering" cows, chickens, etc, is bad? It's such perplexing thing to me, because a majority of vegans place no value in human life, and would soon mourn over the death of a kitten than the death of a human baby, for example. This probably stems from the perspective that animals are purer and guilt-free, and because of this, their death is far more tragic than the death of an otherwise conscious or sentient human. And I just cannot wrap my head around this very popular notion. It has never been proven that cows feel pain nor show any signs of having an intelligence, capable of perceiving danger or suffering beyond primal instincts. Why then, do vegans feel the need to be outraged on their behalf? And are there not far more pressing issues to be concerned about than slaughterhouses? Issues where, you know, your fellow species are in actual pain and are experiencing actual suffering as we speak in many corners of the world? This kind of misguided sympathy for animals is gaining a lot of traction in recent decades and I cannot for the life of me understand that extreme point of view. A dog being thrown off a bridge might illicit some mild response from me, but seeing a baby being torched alive is a lot more distressing, to me personally. For a lot of people - it's the other way around. Why?[/QUOTE] It's not the other way around by any stretch of the imagination. Animal death is no more tragic than human death in similar circumstances, except the difference is that we continue to forcibly breed and kill billions of animals in concentration camps yearly. At the same time, we abhor human genocide. Everyone who consumes animal products has the ability to reduce animal genocide. For example, printing money with animal byproducts means the government contributed to the unnecessary death of who knows how many cows, whereas there are far more plastics available to use that are ethically sound. Animals do feel pain. Try kicking a cat or stabbing a horse or cutting off a cow's leg and I'm 100% certain they'll react fearfully. A cow's intelligence doesn't matter when deciding to kill it or not. They feel pain, and that's reason enough to not want to contribute to it. By choosing not to consume animal products I reduce the load on slaughterhouses and by basic supply and demand the slaughterhouses slaughter less. The reason vegans and vegetarians do what they do is because animals in farms don't have the agency to speak for themselves. It's hardly an extreme point of view.

[QUOTE=Marbalo;51450533]The core ideology of veganism is absolutely absurd. Who ever said that "murdering" cows, chickens, etc, is bad? It's such perplexing thing to me, because a majority of vegans place no value in human life, and would soon mourn over the death of a kitten than the death of a human baby, for example.[/QUOTE] I've not seen much of that myself. Vegans/vegetarians restricting their diet for environmental reasons might even argue they care [I]more[/I] about humans than those that do not precisely because they are trying to preserve an environment humans thrive in. [QUOTE] This probably stems from the perspective that animals are purer and guilt-free, and because of this, their death is far more tragic than the death of an otherwise conscious or sentient human. And I just cannot wrap my head around this very popular notion. It has never been proven that cows feel pain nor show any signs of having an intelligence, capable of perceiving danger or suffering beyond primal instincts.[/QUOTE] Cows have nociceptors, opioid receptors, and fairly complicated neural anatomies. They can definitively feel pain and suffer, and even ancient peoples recognized this. Ritual slaughters usually required obtaining the "consent" of the animal, and they usually took measures to minimize pain and suffering. [QUOTE] Why then, do vegans feel the need to be outraged on their behalf? And are there not far more pressing issues to be concerned about than slaughterhouses? Issues where, you know, your fellow species are in actual pain and are experiencing actual suffering as we speak in many corners of the world?[/QUOTE] Reducing beef consumption frees up resources that could be better utilized by other humans to tackle issues like hunger and environmental destruction. [QUOTE]This kind of misguided sympathy for animals is gaining a lot of traction in recent decades and I cannot for the life of me understand that extreme point of view. A dog being thrown off a bridge might illicit some mild response from me, but seeing a baby being torched alive is a lot more distressing, to me personally. For a lot of people - it's the other way around. Why?[/QUOTE] It isn't necessarily the other way around. Additionally, comparing the suffering of a baby and a dog might not be the best comparison depending on your reasons for valuing life. Infants are considerably less developed neurologically than grown dogs. While they usually have the capacity to develop into fully cognisant human beings, they are not so during infancy, where as an adult dog is more than likely self-aware. If you value human life for the sake of it being human life, that's fine, but I think it's better to value sentience in general over a specific species. A human on life-support in a totally vegetative state that's neurally dead is still human by definition, but they've lost the thing that made them exceptional compared to many other living things. I'm far more concerned with a dog than a husk of a human in that case.

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51450426]If cattle industry were to crash, a lot of cattle would be murdered anyway, bankrupt slaughterhouses are not gonna release into wild or preservations or something.[/QUOTE] That's fine by me. Most vegans would be totally OK with all cattle (and all factory animals) dying off. Killing animals is bad, but breeding/raising animals animals to be killed year after year is horrible.

[QUOTE=Disseminate;51450689]That's fine by me. Most vegans would be totally OK with all cattle (and all factory animals) dying off. Killing animals is bad, but breeding/raising animals animals to be killed year after year is horrible.[/QUOTE] What about mussels and oysters?

[QUOTE]For example, printing money with animal byproducts means the government contributed to the unnecessary death of who knows how many cows, whereas there are far more plastics available to use that are ethically sound.[/QUOTE] You really think cows are slaughtered for the express purpose of making £5 bills? They're being bred and killed for their meat in the first place, the government only put to use byproducts that wouldn't be used otherwise, they don't contribute to the demand. You think wasting animal materials would be more ethically sound? [QUOTE=Disseminate;51450670]It's not the other way around by any stretch of the imagination. Animal death is no more tragic than human death in similar circumstances, except the difference is that we continue to forcibly breed and kill billions of animals in concentration camps yearly. At the same time, we abhor human genocide.[/QUOTE] You can't put animals and humans in the same moral framework. The reason killing humans is considered immoral is because empathy towards other humans is what helped build society to what it is now. Save for a handful of domesticated ones, that's not the case for animals, and in the wild there isn't any notion of morality, so why should we project our human notions on non-human beings? If you subscribe to the notion of morality being universal, then every being should not only benefit from the rights it grants but also be ascribed to the duties it requires. It means that if you consider killing an animal to eat it to be immoral, then you have to impose that rule to every animal, which includes predators (some of which even hunt just for fun, like cats). And no, not having sufficient intelligence to understand that something you do is wrong doesn't make it right. If that were the case we wouldn't consider mentally ill people who murder others to be in the wrong. We may not prosecute them, but we still commit them to mental health institutes to ensure they don't continue harming people. Do you think that's something we should enforce on natural predators? Isolate them from the rest because they don't have the mental capacity to overcome their instincts? [QUOTE=Disseminate;51450689]That's fine by me. Most vegans would be totally OK with all cattle (and all factory animals) dying off.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]The difference is that we continue to forcibly breed and kill billions of animals in concentration camps yearly. At the same time, we abhor human genocide.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]Everyone who consumes animal products has the ability to reduce animal genocide.[/QUOTE] Uuuh... Which is it? You criticize people for only caring about human genocide and you want to reduce animal genocide yet you don't care about animal genocide? [QUOTE]Animals do feel pain. Try kicking a cat or stabbing a horse or cutting off a cow's leg and I'm 100% certain they'll react fearfully. A cow's intelligence doesn't matter when deciding to kill it or not. They feel pain, and that's reason enough to not want to contribute to it.[/QUOTE] You know what the point of pain is, right? To be able to detect and avoid dangerous situations and eventually propagate your genetic legacy. Same reason animals (and us) have a reproductive instinct. If you don't care about preserving the species you want to protect, what's the point of caring about their pain in the first place? That's like saying forcibly getting into a stranger's house isn't breaking and entering if you bypass the alarm. [QUOTE]By choosing not to consume animal products I reduce the load on slaughterhouses and by basic supply and demand the slaughterhouses slaughter less. The reason vegans and vegetarians do what they do is because animals in farms don't have the agency to speak for themselves. It's hardly an extreme point of view.[/QUOTE] You say you act in the stead of animals who can't speak for themselves, yet you support their species' extinction. Do you really think that's to their benefit? Isn't forced sterilization considered a human rights abuse? If you think we should consider animals to be as or almost as morally deserving as we are, why do you support something that would basically have the same result? Your ethical reasoning is all over the place. I'm fine with people doing things based on their personal beliefs, and I have nothing against veganism and even agree with the environmentalist arguments for it, but don't go around saying people support animal genocide and concentration camps when the logic behind your saying so is inconsistent.

[QUOTE=Marbalo;51450828]Why is it bad that we breed animals in order to kill them and consume them?[/QUOTE] It's usually more of a question of how we breed and raise animals and at what cost, rather than it inherently being a bad thing. [QUOTE] Why do you place animals on the same moral level as humans? Do you justify the reasoning with that vague "all life matters no matter what" rhetoric?[/QUOTE] Since you didn't respond to my post before, I'll ask you what is it about human life specifically that you value? Does a baby with a horrible genetic disease with no real chance of neural development matter more than say a full-grown elephant? What do you even define as a human life? I think eggs from responsibly raised chickens aren't a moral or ethical issue much in the same way that I think human sperm or eggs being unused isn't much of an issue. [QUOTE] And no, by choosing to not consume animal products you are not reducing the load on slaughterhouses. Slaughterhouses dont supply meat based on individual demand, they supply it commercially based on quotas. The meat you chose not to buy for example is still processed and made regardless, except it's thrown in mass disposal dumps instead of actually going to good use afterwards. You are merely partaking in feel-good activism.[/QUOTE] That might be the case in the short-term, but a lot of vegans seem to be trying for the long-game where the demand for meat is reduced sufficiently that slaughterhouse quotas are reduced, fewer cattle are raised, and people shift their patterns of consumption in a meaningful way. [QUOTE] What? No they wouldn't, that literally goes against one of the core principles of Veganism. What are you talking about?[/QUOTE] I'm not sure which variety of veganism you're referring to, but it's possible people would be ok with it from an environmental perspective, or if they truly believe that cattle are in a constant state of suffering. I'd call the latter mad personally, but things are a little more complex than you're seemingly painting them as. [QUOTE=_Axel;51450943] You can't put animals and humans in the same moral framework. The reason killing humans is considered immoral is because empathy towards other humans is what helped build society to what it is now. Save for a handful of domesticated ones, that's not the case for animals, and in the wild there isn't any notion of morality, so why should we project our human notions on non-human beings?[/QUOTE] Some whale species have been reported to display behaviors suggesting both empathy and altruism in the wild. I'm fairly certain the same can be said about elephants. [QUOTE]Your ethical reasoning is all over the place. I'm fine with people doing things based on their personal beliefs, and I have nothing against veganism and even agree with the environmentalist arguments for it, but don't go around saying people support animal genocide and concentration camps when the logic behind your saying so is inconsistent.[/QUOTE] This I soundly agree with. There are lots of interesting discussions to be had on the nature of intelligence and sapience, and the ethical conundrums that arise from such complexities. These discussions are usually put on the sidelines in favor of general shit flinging. I think most implementations of veganism are reactionary in nature and logically inconsistent, but so are many of the ways people respond to vegans and vegetarians. Most people would probably do well to be more mindful of what they eat and how that affects their environment and the well-being of others.

[QUOTE=Disseminate;51450689]Killing animals is bad, but breeding/raising animals animals to be killed year after year is horrible.[/QUOTE] Would be a shame to stop killing animals though. Some places and species actually [URL="http://conservationmagazine.org/2014/01/can-trophy-hunting-reconciled-conservation/"]benefit from it[/URL] [QUOTE]Leader-Williams describes how the legalization of white rhinoceros hunting in South Africa motivated private landowners to reintroduce the species onto their lands. As a result, the country saw an increase in white rhinos from fewer than one hundred individuals to more than 11,000, even while a limited number were killed as trophies.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=gokiyono;51451102]Would be a shame to stop killing animals though. Some places and species actually [URL="http://conservationmagazine.org/2014/01/can-trophy-hunting-reconciled-conservation/"]benefit from it[/URL][/QUOTE] Would also be a shame to stop killing child rapists, serial killers, and terrorists tbh.

[QUOTE=gokiyono;51451102]Would be a shame to stop killing animals though. Some places and species actually [URL="http://conservationmagazine.org/2014/01/can-trophy-hunting-reconciled-conservation/"]benefit from it[/URL][/QUOTE] Pretty sure the same was true with American bison. Bee keeping isn't exactly killing animals, but in Africa it also promotes biodiversity. It does this by incentivizing environmental protection from logging and the pollination activities of the bees. It also keeps elephants away from farm fields, which protects them from being killed off and treated like pests keeping both elephants and humans safe.

[QUOTE=GhillieBacca;51451129]Would also be a shame to stop killing child rapists, serial killers, and terrorists tbh.[/QUOTE] I can make an epic zinger too, look: "It wouldn't be a shame to stop killing in revenge." I can also come with some [URL="http://www.criminaljusticedegreesguide.com/features/10-infamous-cases-of-wrongful-execution.html"]actual points[/URL], like how people can be affected socioechonomically, or how people never [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dewey_Bozella"]get[/URL] [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Marshall,_Jr."]wrongly[/URL] [URL="http://www.nbcnews.com/id/44389156/ns/us_news-9_11_ten_years_later/t/rightly-or-wrongly-thousands-convicted-terrorism-post-/"]convicted[/URL] or accused. Though, if history (as it usually does) repeats itself, you'll probably ignore it. (That last comment wasn't aimed at you specifically, it was aimed at the usual pro death penalty super pathos crowd. Sorry if it seemed that way)

[QUOTE=gokiyono;51451102]Would be a shame to stop killing animals though. Some places and species actually [URL="http://conservationmagazine.org/2014/01/can-trophy-hunting-reconciled-conservation/"]benefit from it[/URL][/QUOTE] not that im super anti hunting, but you realize they only got to those low populations from hunting in the first place, right?

[QUOTE=Shadaez;51451333]not that im super anti hunting, but you realize they only got to those low populations from hunting in the first place, right?[/QUOTE] You mean poaching? That's not the same thing as trophy hunting at all. Trophy hunters pay a lot to the locals to be able to hunt, which in turn helps develop conservation efforts and incentivize locals to protect the species from poachers and mind the impact they have on the environment, since trophy hunters won't pay them anything if there isn't anything left to hunt. Poachers actually benefit from endangering species since the ensuing rarity in the materials they harvest jack up the prices.

[QUOTE=_Axel;51451425]You mean poaching? That's not the same thing as trophy hunting at all. Trophy hunters pay a lot to the locals to be able to hunt, which in turn helps develop conservation efforts and incentivize locals to protect the species from poachers and mind the impact they have on the environment, since trophy hunters won't pay them anything if there isn't anything left to hunt. Poachers actually benefit from endangering species since the ensuing rarity in the materials they harvest jack up the prices.[/QUOTE] It's still hunting it's just not legal hunting, and this strange situation of legalized trophy hunting is undoing the damage of it. If it wasn't a problem, the latter wouldn't have to exist.

[QUOTE=Shadaez;51451333]not that im super anti hunting, but you realize they only got to those low populations from hunting in the first place, right?[/QUOTE] Yes, [I]poaching[/I]. The difference being that poachers don't give a shit about anything other than money, and (if you read the source) the trophy hunters do care. Why do you think it matters to state that though? You aren't doing much other than stigmatizing a practice that has managed to increase populations

the poaching was legal hunting until relatively recently and the massive decline of population was while it was legal, it just feels wrong to me to claim hunters as saviors when they started the problem in the first place [editline]30th November 2016[/editline] i mean you came in here saying killing animals is good because some more rhinos exist, but there wouldn't have been a problem had we not killed them in the first place, so the point doesn't work

Personally I don't give a fuck what the next guy chooses to eat, why do most vegans come across as holier than thou whiny, preachy cunts?

[QUOTE=Shadaez;51451719]the poaching was legal hunting until relatively recently and the massive decline of population was while it was legal, it just feels wrong to me to claim hunters as saviors when they started the problem in the first place [editline]30th November 2016[/editline] i mean you came in here saying killing animals is good because some more rhinos exist, but there wouldn't have been a problem had we not killed them in the first place, so the point doesn't work[/QUOTE] The people who poach and those who do trophy hunting are two very different kinds of people. And yeah it's not really a good point I guess since trophy hunters could just donate the money to take pictures instead of hunting if they were completely good-willed but it's a means to an end. If you want a better example of hunting being useful, sometimes culling a portion of an herbivore's population can help prevent them from dying en masse because they over-consumed their local sources of food.

[QUOTE=Shadaez;51451719]the poaching was legal hunting until relatively recently and the massive decline of population was while it was legal, it just feels wrong to me to claim hunters as saviors when they started the problem in the first place [editline]30th November 2016[/editline] i mean you came in here saying killing animals is good because some more rhinos exist, but there wouldn't have been a problem had we not killed them in the first place, so the point doesn't work[/QUOTE] First of all, I'm not claiming the hunters as saviours. I'm not really claiming anything as the saviour at all. Secondly, I'm not saying that killing animals is good. I'm saying that the system that that has increased the population of certain species by use of limited trophy hunting for a huge price that helps buying and maintaining land for both the animals and the native human population works. If they had a system that worked where no animals had to be killed, I would cheer for that instead.

[QUOTE=Exploders;51446795]Found the vegan[/QUOTE] This insult is basically on the level of calling someone a "cuck"

[QUOTE=gokiyono;51451771]First of all, I'm not claiming the hunters as saviours. I'm not really claiming anything as the saviour at all. Secondly, I'm not saying that killing animals is good. I'm saying that the system that that has increased the population of certain species by use of limited trophy hunting for a huge price that helps buying and maintaining land for both the animals and the native human population works. If they had a system that worked where no animals had to be killed, I would cheer for that instead.[/QUOTE] I think a lot of vegans would actually be with you if they were shown the evidence. They wouldn't like it, but I'd have to imagine most of them would say "well, they're in this situation, so at present it's a necessary evil."

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;51451799]I think a lot of vegans would actually be with you if they were shown the evidence. They wouldn't like it, but I'd have to imagine most of them would say "well, they're in this situation, so at present it's a necessary evil."[/QUOTE] Given the choice of killing a few to save a species (while having the locals benefit too,) and not killing anyone to let the species die out to poachers paid by pseudoscientifical nutters (to no benefit of the locals), I think it's pretty easy to take a position [editline]30th November 2016[/editline] As you said, it's an necessary evil

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;51451799]I think a lot of vegans would actually be with you if they were shown the evidence. They wouldn't like it, but I'd have to imagine most of them would say "well, they're in this situation, so at present it's a necessary evil."[/QUOTE] Not really evidence per se, but the sources are cited within the video. [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUA8i5S0YMU[/media]

[QUOTE=_Axel;51451843]Not really evidence per se, but the sources are cited within the video. [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUA8i5S0YMU[/media][/QUOTE] They can also be [URL="http://www.trutv.com/shows/adam-ruins-everything/blog/adams-sources/adam-ruins-animals.html"]found here[/URL]