Veganism/vegetarianism and "ethical" lifestyle choices

[Ninae]

Ninae, you keep making this assumption that meat eaters are all eating shitty quality meat products from fast food joints and it is irritating to say the least.

No, I was just talking about the average person who mostly eats shitty unhealthy food, meat or no meat. Of course there are exceptions and I can't possible know how someone in particular eats. But it's a miscomprehension to feel you will necessarily be deprived if you exchange your diet for high-quality vegetarian food.

There are also some very good meat-substitutes which are better than most meat you can get as most can't afford to eat steak or chicken all the time. Walnut-roast, used as a whole or as a mincemeat substitite is one (it's tastier than a lot of meat and just as good as mincemeat). Grilled cheese is another one, which can be as good as ham, or bacon. And broccoli heads boiled in cream and salted and peppered is a gourmet delicatesse which can be compared to beef and is also more flavourful than most meat when done well. It's a simple dish, try it with some spring onion.

But I guess it's easier if you enjoy creative cooking, which I always have done.

 

[murphythecat]

I hope you are absolutely sure that its the right choice because the choices we make in life defines our reality.

Ok, so I have a choice. I choose to eat meat. Why is that choice wrong when I am designed quite perfectly to eat and process meat? If the animal has not suffered during its life and died instantly then where is the moral quandary to be had? I do not see how that creates suffering nor do I subscribe to the idea it necessarily promotes violence. Killing does not have to involve lack of compassion and violence by default.. that's your subjective interpretation.

Why kill when I can eat a pure veg diet? The question really for me is, why should I forcefully limit my dietary options when I am designed to eat meat and I don't believe it's a crime to kill another organism? I agree about the factory farming part and so forth, as mentioned numerous times. But the killing.. I fail to see an issue here.

 

[turkalurk]

Well, I have to thank you for this, probably the highest level of appreciation I've received on this board.

I am glad you appreciate my sentiments, you beautiful thang you!

 

[What 23]

take some shrooms

I have probably consumed more psychs than you. If it were my family having a meal to keep their strength up, and nothing else was in range, or not, I would even slaughter you.

And right now I kind of want to kill an animal right in front of you.

Don't get me wrong. I have felt. I cried for a day the first time I killed a bird, having shot it without any planning as to what I would do if it actually died. I built it a shelter of bricks like a tomb hoping it just needed to rest and it would be healed. It was stiff when I checked later. Cry cry cry cry. It didn't stop for that entire day. I went to sleep crying.

Many years later, I had a dream about flying over a pyramid, and woke up and in MS paint I illustrated it. I wrote of it and included the picture in my blog. Then, a girl I didn't know, with this bird's name, Robyn (the bird was a robin) contacted me, telling me I am Quetzalcoatl, or Pahana more specifically. She was a Hopi, and they were waiting for the man who that was supposed to be.

She is why I went vegetarian for 7 years. He was allegedly a vegetarian and a lot of it- the story and resonances fit... Such as removing my 'mask' in the 'plaza' after dancing in front of 'uninitiated' children.

I don't know what to tell you. Your example of slaughtering the cow, appealing to my empathy, won't work. You may get me to feel, but I am a killer, and I have come to terms with it. I try not to kill, where ever possible. But as I have told you countless times though I'm sure you doubt, I am allergic to most food (and as I say this I am watching the show, House, and someone asks "how can she be allergic to everything?!"). And I can eat chicken. So fuck off.

Along with plenty of other reasons.
I really don't mean to hinge my view on my condition. Veganism is not natural for humans. Or well, there is that tricky word again- natural. In the wild, I would eat meat. It would come naturally.

 

[swilow]

^You're such a hostile guy, telling people to fuck off and to kill themselves. I don't get it. You act like you are enlightened and can see the truth and yet you very rarely post or contribute anything that has any substance or connection to the thread you are posting in. I find it strange TBH.

WTF is turkalurk hitting on Ninae for? :D

Killing animals for sustenance is not murder, you do it to survive.

Just to clarify, do you hunt and kill your own food?

you must see this argument can be reduced down to show quite clearly the ridiculous notion that killing is wrong. Animals do it all the time.

See, I don't agree with Murphy that killing is inherently wrong. I dislike absolutes really. But you need to find a better reason then "animals do it all the time". Humans are animals yes, but animals are not humans. It is illogical to make claims about the natural world and our role in it when we are barely talking about the natural world at all here. We are talking, by and large, about mass-farming, a completely unnatural and environmentally destructive practise, which is what I am deeply opposed to.

SS, your are presenting some absurd arguments, such as the one where you claim that animals exist specifcally to be eaten by another animal. That's not true, that is simply an inherent by-product of being alive. The mouse did not evolve to be eaten by the cat; the cat has evolved to be well suited to eating mice. This demonstrates a deep misunderstanding of evolution on earth.

 

[Ninae]

I don't know about these sayings that "I am happy to accept my place as a top predator or my place at the top of the food chain".

I don't know if it was a place given to us, exactly. More like we snatched it with force and cunning. If we were to go by the laws of nature you'd have to say tigers and lions are the superior predators to us under normal circumstances without the support of the civilisation we've made. So would it be right to say we just have to accept our fate and that it's their (God-given or otherwise) right to rend us to pieces?

This is where these type of arguments don't hold up, they can never be logically followed all the way through. That, and how the goal-posts are changed all the time when you hit a dead-end. At least go with one version of reality if you want to be taken seriously. Know what your stand is at least and don't just grasp for any straw as you run out of ideas.

 

[swilow]

I don't know if it was a place given to us, exactly. More like we snatched it with force and cunning.

I think that is how the natural world operates. Supplant the word force with 'strength' and cunning with 'intelligence', and that is essentially how animals come to live within nature, including humans. I think we absolutely did take our place through violence and force, but that is almost irrelevant. Now that we are here, we don't really need to do that any longer. I don't think the sheep are going to rise up against us any time soon.

"I am happy to accept my place as a top predator or my place at the top of the food chain".

I find this reasoning odd too. You here of people describing humans as the apex predator whilst they head down to the shops to buy their bread and sausages. I think most humans today would die within days if they were forced to actually fend for themselves. An apex predator is thought to be essential to an eco-system in regulating distribtuion of resources within it (look at the reintroduction of the grey wolf to Yellowstone where decrease in grazing animals has lead to an increase in certain plants and trees), but its hard to see that from human behaviour. I think that we are no more an apex predator then a shark is an accomplished poet.

People might use this idea of apex predator to defend their behaviour as 'natural', forgetting that it is unnatural to house and treat animals the way we have been. I can't really handle the hypocrisy of claiming 'natural law' as a defense of practises never before seen on earth ever. It is perfectly natural to eat meat, completely unnatural to source it in the way that we have been... And the world will pay for this sadly.

 

[Ninae]

And we're only the "top predators" over weaker mammals, not other predators. And we're a mix of both. We're not even that predatory, many of us are unsuited or unwilling to live like that, and rational thought and co-operation are only some forms of strength.

Sharks, crocodiles, snakes, tigers, lions, bears, woolfs, scorpions - not so strong now are we?

I would happily admit a tiger has the right of "survival of the fittest" over me. It's his natural place in the eco-system. But I'm not sure I would be so happy about me (or my children) ending up as his prey and there's no reason to think animals, especially other mammals, feel any different.

I think that we are no more an apex predator then a shark is an accomplished poet.

LOL. We're wussies.

I actually have a bit of a killer instinct. But it was a long time to come as I was born and raised to be so altruistic. But by now I've been pushed past my limit so it has aroused my survival-instinct and I'm quite happy to let people know I'm prepared to turn my energies against them.

 

[swilow]

^I guarantee you that most humans would beat sharks at a game of chess. The intellect is our only strength and it has a value greater then any other type of physical strength.

 

[What 23]

I think our hands and bipedalism put us pretty high up there. I would argue that it is THE physical 'strength' that means the most here. That amounts to the most.

It is this form that allows our intelligence, as it is.

 

[-=SS=-]

Just to clarify, do you hunt and kill your own food?

See, I don't agree with Murphy that killing is inherently wrong. I dislike absolutes really. But you need to find a better reason then "animals do it all the time". Humans are animals yes, but animals are not humans. It is illogical to make claims about the natural world and our role in it when we are barely talking about the natural world at all here. We are talking, by and large, about mass-farming, a completely unnatural and environmentally destructive practise, which is what I am deeply opposed to.

SS, your are presenting some absurd arguments, such as the one where you claim that animals exist specifcally to be eaten by another animal. That's not true, that is simply an inherent by-product of being alive. The mouse did not evolve to be eaten by the cat; the cat has evolved to be well suited to eating mice. This demonstrates a deep misunderstanding of evolution on earth.

No I don't. I'm a student living in an urban environment. I've often thought about purchasing an air rifle and hunting wood pigeons though.. there is an abundance of them, total pest to crops and other birds. I've watched a friend skin, gut and prepare them though.. was a trained Italian chef. Very tasty meal he made.

I think the reason "animals do it all the time" is entirely sufficient. We are animals, 'human' is a label of self-importance nothing more. We have language and atom smashers but, we're still just animals. We have been discussing killing animals for food, not just industrial farming. As I have stated numerous times industrial farming sucks but good old fashioned farming where animals are taken care of and slaughtered cleanly is completely fine.. however there are people here arguing that all killing is wrong, but I have been arguing is nonsense.

Your point countering my cat-mouse argument is merely one angle of seeing how things are and I don't subscribe to it being the only interpretation of evolution, but the evolution story is way off course for this thread so I'll leave my point there.

 

[ForEverAfter]

I applied for a job cleaning up after-hours in a slaughter house, in part due to this thread.
If I get the job, I figure that it will be eye-opening and prevent me from relapsing.

 

[Journyman16]

Not at all. The hatred comes from humanity. The earth is full of love. The plant kingdom is full of a love and peace that is perceptible. The animals act on instinct and don't have free will like we do. They're innocent. And if humanity changed the way we relate to each other and the rest of the earth the animals would also change. We are the ones who set the tone or create the consciousness for this world.

You can laugh off this all you want but it's true. To begin with this world was a paradise and it was first when humans started to turn against one another that the animals changed. There was no murder in the Garden of Eden. If it had been it wouldn't have been a paradise. Stop trying to make up excuses to defend evil. It's depressing and degrading to your spirit.

Well it is debatable (in a literal sense) as to whether we actually have free will. Physics tends towards the 'No' response.

I'm unsure why you think that hominids didn't murder. Chimps do and they are closer to hominids than we are. There seem to be a number of fossils clearly predating modern humans that show evidence of violence, even among themselves. Lots of animal fossils show evidence of cuts and wounds that are clearly from weapons.

Also you probably shouldn't use myth to argue a point. There is no evidence there was ever a Garden of Eden. And if you are going to use such backing for your PoV then it ain't our fault anyway - God made us like this. He also gave us all the animals, fish and birds. Chapter 1 of Genesis that's all he gives, chapter 2 is when the plant stuff comes along.

Chap 1:26
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Chap 2:16
And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

Now you may interpret that however you like but in plain language it seems clear that first Man was given all the critters and only after God made Adam did anything about the Garden come along.

It also seems clear that perhaps we shouldn't be eating vegetables and grain, if we wish to live according to the myth - they don't grow on trees. :D

As for the world being a paradise, you might want to talk to the prey of Tyrannosaurus - pretty sure they'd disagree about any paradisiacal claims. :D

 

[What 23]

Nicotine is an insecticide.

And THC

"THC and the other cannabinoids have quite a few protective qualities. They have antibiotic and anti-fungal properties as well. The physical quality of the resin and its placement in glands protruding from the leaf and flower tissue acts as flypaper, capturing some small pests in its stickiness. The cannabinoids have a profound affect on birds and mammals that might eat the substances, producing an intoxication that they may not find pleasant."

Thank God for demons. Cure my sons demons!

This is just to say, it is not peaceful. It is war. Peace is certain death. Like nirvana? We need both.

 

[swilow]

No I don't. I'm a student living in an urban environment. I've often thought about purchasing an air rifle and hunting wood pigeons though.. there is an abundance of them, total pest to crops and other birds. I've watched a friend skin, gut and prepare them though.. was a trained Italian chef. Very tasty meal he made.

But, so far, you have made it without having to kill for food, so this has nothing to do with survival.

I think the reason "animals do it all the time" is entirely sufficient. We are animals, 'human' is a label of self-importance nothing more. We have language and atom smashers but, we're still just animals. We have been discussing killing animals for food, not just industrial farming. As I have stated numerous times industrial farming sucks but good old fashioned farming where animals are taken care of and slaughtered cleanly is completely fine.. however there are people here arguing that all killing is wrong, but I have been arguing is nonsense.

Yeah but you can't claim to be following your animal nature in the modern world. In the way we cultivate and consume, we are completely different to all other animals and I think claiming to be part of the natural world whilst doing something utterly unnatural is pointless.

As much as we are animals, we are also something entirely different that has never been seen before. We, unlike all other animals, appear to have the ability to step apart from nature and observe it objectively. We can see the consequences of our actions and let that insight inform our decisions. I truly believe we are simply animals with a large brain, but that large brain has set us almost entirely apart from the natural world. I don't see any animal artists, poets, scientists, madmen, trippers, etc. We came from the same place; but we came to somewhere utterly different to everything else. Our behaviour is different to the rest of the animal kingdom. We put ourselves outside it, and I think that this loss is perhaps the greatest loss of all..

The universe needs hostility, war, sickness... Flame, imbalance, death.

The universe doesn't really need anything, or at least, the one I reside in doesn't. Again, these are human values that are completely irrelevant to the the overwhelmingly vast 'rest-of-the-universe'.

Earth needs balance. It is fragile and impermanent and likely to kick us off it shortly to try and re-establish balance. The physical universe requires nothing from us whatsoever. IMO. That is the danger of hurting our heritage. So yeah, there is rightful resentment towards those who do not wish to preserve our planet from those who do.

 

[What 23]

I just shook my head.

 

[ForEverAfter]

Perhaps you should do that more often, rather than rambling incessantly.

...

Whether or not there was a literal Garden of Eden is irrelevant.
There was a time before murder, when we belonged to the animal kingdom.
Chimps kill. They do not murder. Same goes for sharks.

God made us like this, yes.
He also made us question what we are doing and what we should be doing.
We have been taken way off track, so that we realize we're off track and realign accordingly.

Well it is debatable (in a literal sense) as to whether we actually have free will. Physics tends towards the 'No' response.

Since quantum field mechanics proves that there are multiple possible outcomes to every situation, it seems that - perhaps - our decisions dictate whether or not we travel in one direction or another... I'm not entirely convinced of this, but I don't think you can say that the entire field of physics indicates that we don't have free will. You're not a physicist and there hasn't been an overwhelming consensus that I'm aware of.

I guess what you mean is your interpretation of modern physics (or your selective readings) indicate - to you - that free will doesn't exist? You don't really speak for the international scientific community... In fact, you commonly disagree with the global consensus.

 

[What 23]

Round and round it goes.

willow- as for balance and imbalance, I believe that imbalance is part of balance. It is a word somewhat open to interpretation, I think. Imbalance can be a result of trying to find balance...

Spending time on boats, I dealt with imbalance (or being unbalanced), for me. At first, I didn't quite have my sea legs. My legs may have been sore dealing with instability. But I balanced myself, and I was better for it. I became more balanced, certainly. Stronger. And even the waves are a result of nature trying to find balance. Going toward it.

But if the ocean and life didn't have the moon to unbalance- to perturb, and pull the tide... life as we know it may not exist.

This is where I get the fire. Etc. Certainly you must have known that is what I was talking about. Balance as we know it does require some imbalance, or for something to unbalance "balance". Life would die in stagnancy. But, certainly, "balance" is something we should strive for.

A page back or so I did say we were out of balance, in a negative context. I know it renders me an ugly person, because I see another misanthrope lately talking about the same, and I shake my head at him... but if I could I really would make the choice to send 99.93% of us away, and give the Earth a chance to rebound. ...I don't really have a faith in humanity turning it around.

 

[ForEverAfter]

I don't really have a faith in humanity turning it around.

That's just an easy way to justify not contributing to the turnaround.

 

[turkalurk]

WTF is turkalurk hitting on Ninae for? :D

To try and put a smile on a compassionate girl's face. To show how there is no hostility or anger, but the opposite. To express my genuine feelings so she knows that she doesn't have to feel defensive, because I like her.