Any Vegetarians on This Board?

[Solidus]

You're talking to someone from farm country so

Crows' time would be better spent talking to food. Like how I talk to my steak whenever I eat it. Burgers too. "mmm, so good", "tasty", "you succulent *******s!", "get into my food hole" .

 

[The Ween]

Bully or not, they're acting very immature about a serious issue. Not that it bothers me, just lets me know who you can debate and who's not worth your time..



I gave up on devil. No point in debating someone like that.



Well I personally don't eat fruits only and not saying you should substitute meat for watermelons. Though, there are people who are thriving on a frugivorous diet which amazes me still to this day that it's possible. I was just saying that yes, while we do enjoy many bad things and hate good things, there are good things we like as well. And in my case, watermelons are more tasty than meat. Though I wouldn't call meat tasty, it's addictive. But without any spices, herbs, sauces.. well anything made by plants to add flavor to it, it's not that great really.

I use certain dressings that are vegan, but I don't only eat salads. Sometimes I eat the vegan versions of the food I grew up liking. Spaghetti with minced beans or meatless-meatballs, burgers, pizza, hot dogs, falafels (love falafels haha) etc. I used to eat them a lot when I made the transition into vegetarianism and later veganism. We try to make homemade food as much as we can. The vegan cuisine is so much more than just fruits and salads. It's a combination of fruits, nuts, seeds, legumes and vegetables. There so many recipes out there you're sure to find something that you'll like as much as you did with non-vegan foods.



Go against nature? What's so natural about factory farming? And you're basically saying that we are there to fill in a balance of a problem that we caused in the first place.



It wouldn't be great. Killing animals when it's not necessary can never be great. But I would agree that it would be less awful.



He's presenting facts and making rational arguments and you call him tin-foiled vegie? Talk about being close-minded.

Dracula.......we've been through this "debate" hundreds of times on this board. It all bowls down to this....Some are going to eat meat, some aren't and no one is going to change anyone's mind. After awhile people start getting testy and others just stop taking it seriously.

Also, you haven't been in a lot of non-toy threads if you don't know where some posters are coming from or what they're all about.

 

[Lejuan]

....Some are going to eat me, some aren't

Ooo, Ween's on the menu!

 

[Wulf]

It would be great in the sense that people wouldn't take meat for granted. People see a burger and to them it's just like seeing a potato or something. They don't think of all the work behind it. We are like that as people. I love to take everything for granted.

If people had to raise and kill their own cows I doubt they would waste them on burgers like that. Of course people would still be eating meat but it wouldn't be as wasted as it is now. Seriously there is so much waste of meat that goes on, it is ridiculous

Yes with that I can agree with. But then we would be conditioned to kill animals and perhaps become apathetic to the killing of them like butchers and slaughterhouse workers, we would be so used to doing it we wouldn't even shed a thought on the ethics of it.

Seriously there is so much waste of meat that goes on, it is ridiculous

It's us against the animals; eat or be eaten. Whenever I sink my teeth into a delectable, medium-rare steak, I have remind myself that this animal's descendants (hundreds of thousands of years into the future) may evolve into man-eating minotaurs - hell bent on making human dairy farms, and interbreeding with our women for human-bull hybrids. And who the hell wants that?!

Pheew! You're just trolling (or joking as some of you call it) and not being serious. I was about to refute all that nonsense but thanks you saved me some time there. But I wouldn't be surprised if people really thought like that.

 

[The Ween]

Ooo, Ween's on the menu!

Dammit! I tried to fix that before someone seen it!

 

[fosing]

i remembered that leia down chick from yesterday....she's raw vegan.

but she eats man's accessory organ..."meat".

 

[Wulf]

no one is going to change anyone's mind.

I suppose you're right.

 

[Solidus]

Pheew! You're just trolling (or joking as some of you call it) and not being serious. I was about to refute all that nonsense but thanks you saved me some time there. But I wouldn't be surprised if people really thought like that.

No, no, I'm being serious. Do you want your children's children's, children, etc, etc, etc, etc^100... to be sacrificed to the bellies of blood-thirsty minotaurs? I'm doing a public service by eating these things, to ensure that their evolutionary development is stagnated. It's called being responsible .

 

[SnakeDoctor]

Death is not a punishment. It is a prevention of future crimes.
A punishment would need to be something the punished can experience to have a negative outcome. Death ends ALL experience, so the person killed experiences nothing, thus negating punishment. The rack is punishment because it is painful and the person lives to remember it. Execution ends experience so the person can't remember it.

"It's a hell of a thing, killing a man. Take away all he's got and all he's ever gonna have." -- Will Munny, Unforgiven

That's the idea. If that's not a punishment, I don't know what is. Saying death is no penalty at all is strangely devaluing of human life (which is particularly odd in a thread where people are arguing that killing a cow for its meat unfairly penalizes the cow).

If a man's life has value ... taking it away is certainly a punishment.

SnakeDoc

 

[Blackthornone]

Well, why should we take the blame for being humans, and give the farting, polluting cows a pass? If you believe in evolution, then you should accept that nature engineered us this way - to propagate our species, and to use our god-like intelligence to seek the most efficient means of survival (which also, includes food production). Quite frankly, I enjoy being human, and being at the top of the food chain where I can eat an abundant source of animals that were produced from industrial farming. Thank you, nature!

Just remember, if the roles were reversed, the cows would be eating us.

Meat production isn't the most efficient. It uses up too much water and topsoil. 16 pounds of grain for one pound of meat. The rate at which water and topsoil is being used up is totally unsustainable.

Unsustainable is NOT efficient. Efficient is making the most economic use of resources.
Cows are herbivores, so they wouldn't be eating us. Alligators, Crocodiles and mountain lions WOULD, however.

 

[Blackthornone]

we earned the right to be on the TOP of the food chain.
if something happens and we are no longer on top of the food chain.....the human race is on the menu.

i hope i wont see that in my life time.

"its a COOKBOOK!!!!!"




facts? rational arguments? you honestly believe a tin foil nut could produce that? LOLz....i call that one sugar coating bullcrap.

A Big Mac would cost $50 without government subsidies.

The fact it costs so little to the consumer means people eat more.
Because people eat more, more is produced, and a lot more water is used.
All that water used is causing drought.
Research it yourself if you doubt this.

 

[Blackthornone]

It's us against the animals; eat or be eaten. Whenever I sink my teeth into a delectable, medium-rare steak, I have remind myself that this animal's descendants (hundreds of thousands of years into the future) may evolve into man-eating minotaurs - hell bent on making human dairy farms, and interbreeding with our women for human-bull hybrids. And who the hell wants that?!

What is the precedent? I think you've been watching too many science fiction movies.

 

[Solidus]

And what's the precedent for anything you say? The $50 cost of a Big Mac without government subsidies? The un-sustainability of planet earth unless we all go vegan? More slippery slope arguments?

 

[Blackthornone]

"It's a hell of a thing, killing a man. Take away all he's got and all he's ever gonna have." -- Will Munny, Unforgiven

That's the idea. If that's not a punishment, I don't know what is. Saying death is no penalty at all is strangely devaluing of human life (which is particularly odd in a thread where people are arguing that killing a cow for its meat unfairly penalizes the cow).

If a man's life has value ... taking it away is certainly a punishment.

SnakeDoc

I would argue that life in general has low value for criminals, and hence, their own lives must lack value to THEM as well. That is why death isn't really a punishment to them. Torture is a punishment. Reparations is a punishment. Enslaving criminals is a punishment.

 

[toylion]

Ooo, Ween's on the menu!

 

[Blackthornone]

And what's the president for anything you say? The $50 cost of a Big Mac without government subsidies? The un-sustainability of planet earth unless we all go vegan? More slippery slope arguments?

Actually what I said was Earth would become unsustainable unless meat consumption was dramatically reduced. That doesn't necessarily mean vegan. At least people should pay the true cost of meat at the restaurant or store to help set realistic, sustainable levels of meat consumption. If each individual can't afford beef without subsidies, then the environment can't sustain it either.

The high cost of meat before subsidies used to prevent drought by reducing the economic demand for meat by keeping the cost of production reflected in the purchase price.
Now that meat has been made artificially cheap by government subsidies, more meat is produced than the aquifers can sustain producing, causing drought.

If you took the time to know about this you would then know what you are talking about.
You have been raised on cheap animal products to expect them, believe it is normal and the real cost, whereas in reality it has always been an illusion.
It's like living on credit and finally not being able to make the payments anymore, and you go into bankruptcy.

Here are some references.
The word you are looking for is PRECEDENT, not president.
https://usmfreepress.org/2013/04/29/meat-subsidies-strip-other-food-industries-to-the-bone/

"Would you go into a fast food restaurant to order a hamburger if you knew it would cost you over $50? Would you order steak in a fancy restaurant if you knew it was going to cost you over $200? In truth that’s already what you are paying. When is the price you pay not the price you pay? When the government helps to foot the bill.

The U.S. government subsidizes the beef industry. The government subsidies are for corn to feed the animals and water and land for them to graze on. If the beef industry had to pay fair market value for these resources, a Happy Meal would turn into an Unhappy Meal very quickly. Those subsidies are funded by taxes collected from the American taxpayer – that’s you and me. And it doesn’t matter whether you are vegetarian, vegan, pescetarian (those who eat fish, but no other meats) or belong to any sect, creed, religion or faith that prevents eating certain kinds of meat, you are not exempt: if you live in the U.S and pay taxes here, you’re paying for that big, juicy, $50 Big Mac along with the rest of us.

Sixty three percent of the U.S. government food subsidies go directly or indirectly to subsidize the meat and dairy industries. Less than 1 percent goes to fruit and vegetable cultivation. Less than 2 percent goes to nut and legume cultivation. Stopping meat subsidies would raise meat prices dramatically. If I cannot afford meat I will not buy meat; However, I could buy fruits and vegetables if the decreased governmental subsidy for meat is used to subsidize fruits, vegetables, nuts and legumes. Shifting subsidies will help provide healthy and affordable diet choices for all Americans.

America needs to reallocate its food subsides. Now that America is struggling to provide health care for its disadvantaged populations, it is time to focus on the cause of health problems. Poor diet causes problems such as hypertension, heart disease and, most alarmingly, the high rate of obesity and type two diabetes that is increasingly affecting our youth. The better our diet, the healthier we are and the less we will desperately need that health care. Shifting our food subsidies will help ourselves and the environment, and help to safeguard the health and future of the next generation of Americans.

In this tough economy people buy the food they can afford instead of making healthy and environmentally sound choices. In a country like the U.S., healthy foods should not be a luxury. Our tax money should not be used to harm us. If the subsidies to the beef industry were ever cut so that we would get a more accurate sense of what things should cost, we would see Ronald McDonald would go out of business or quickly be replaced by Ronald McHealthy."


https://www.naturalnews.com/033011_beef_cost.html

"What that beef really costs: While many consumers just don't know it, most American farmers are subsidized by the government. In fact, more than half of an American farmer's earnings come from the United States government: 62 percent to be exact. Suddenly, a consumer might realize that the $10 per pound steak should more accurately be well over $20 a pound, and that's just actual, tangible costs. What other hidden costs are there?

Water subsidies are one. Again, more than half of the water in the United States is used in the production of beef, and if this water wasn't subsidized with taxpayer dollars, the cost of beef would rise astronomically. It would be unaffordable to all but the wealthiest Americans."

Learn more: https://www.naturalnews.com/033011_beef_cost.html##ixzz38tsZJmyW

https://www.care2.com/causes/the-true-cost-of-meat-demystifying-agricultural-subsidies.html

" the industries which are most land and resource intensive required the highest subsidies to support them, with the beef and veal industry sucking up 18 billion dollars, the milk industry 15.3 billion, and the pig meat industry 7.3 billion.

These costs are only based on direct subsidies paid to farmers in OECD countries, for animals and feed, and do not account for the countless other ways in which the industries are being indirectly funded through lower tax rates, assisted transport and shipping costs, and enhanced localized infrastructure being provided to ensure operations are successful."

Read more: https://www.care2.com/causes/the-tr...ing-agricultural-subsidies.html#ixzz38ttblbbX


https://sustainabilityandlaw.com/20...lity-in-the-cattle-industry-by-marie-burcham/

 

[ExMem-LarjaThwei]

Cows are destroying the environment because of their abundant amounts of flatulence that contributes to greenhouse gas. In the absence of a natural predator, man is there to fill in the balance - to eat their delicious meat and to make soft, subtle leather from their hide. It's the way how nature intended it . And do you want to go against nature? Well, do ya?

Well wouldn't there be less cows if there was less of a demand to eat them?

On the topic of cows I saw a cute wittle baby calfy cow jumping around playfully while it's (I assume) mommy was soaking in a pond today.

Made me feel bad about eating that beef enchilada earlier...

 

[SnakeDoctor]

I would argue that life in general has low value for criminals, and hence, their own lives must lack value to THEM as well. That is why death isn't really a punishment to them. Torture is a punishment. Reparations is a punishment. Enslaving criminals is a punishment.

For people who don't value their lives, death row inmates seem to spend a lot of time filing appeals trying to get off death row. In either case, who cares what a criminal values? We don't issue punishments based on the individualized value judgments of the criminal. We punish based on what society values. If a criminal doesn't value money, we still fine 'em. If they don't value freedom, we still imprison 'em. If they don't value their life, we should still kill 'em.

It is a strange turnabout when a death penalty supporter is arguing the value of a criminals life, and an anti-death penalty one is arguing that their life is without value. We should take the life of a murderer precisely because it has value.

Do you figure a cow values his life more or less than a criminal values his?

SnakeDoc

 

[Blackthornone]

For people who don't value their lives, death row inmates seem to spend a lot of time filing appeals trying to get off death row. In either case, who cares what a criminal values? We don't issue punishments based on the individualized value judgements of the criminal. We punish based on what society values. If a criminal doesn't value money, we still fine 'em. If they don't value freedom, we still imprison 'em. If they don't value their life, we still kill 'em.

It is a strange turnabout when a death penalty supporter is arguing the value of a criminals life, and an anti-death penalty one is arguing that their life is without value. We should take the life of a murderer precisely because it has value.

Do you figure a cow values his life more or less than a criminal values his?

SnakeDoc

To me, the death penalty just makes sure the criminal won't do any more crime in this life. Real punishment is making him suffer while he lives. Death itself isn't the punishment. The ANTICIPATION of death is the punishment.
I figure a cow values his life more than most criminals, yes.

 

[crows]

i remembered that leia down chick from yesterday....she's raw vegan.

but she eats man's accessory organ..."meat".

yeah if she asked me to turn vegan.... hell yeah in a second

Well wouldn't there be less cows if there was less of a demand to eat them?

r...

That's kind of the point. There is too much demand for it. More than normal, Thats why I said that we waste too much meat. A lot of meat never gets sold or goes bad and it ends up in the trash.

we definitely have and demand more meat than we need, no one should be eating meat every single day.