Vegetarians, I don't get it

[Weirddave]

I know a lot of folks who are vegetarians. Many of them have chosen to eat this way because it is healthier, and this I understand completely, it is. There are others, however, that baffle me. These are the folks who refuse to eat meat because "it's cruel to the animals". I have never understood this attitude, it always has struck me as a manifestation of the same kind of thing as middle class white guilt, you know, people with the attitude "Oh, I'm so bad because I'm white and well-off, well-off white people have done terrible things!". Here's a clue: it wasn't you, buddy, let it go. "I can't eat poor animals, that's so mean!" is the same thing. Humans are omnivorous, what is so bad about recognizing that? Sure, animals are raised to be slaughtered, but is this any worse than being run down in the wild and eaten alive by a wolf? I don't think so. Some people just get wayyyyyy too wacky, like Paul and the late Linda McCartney, who would feed their carnivorous pet cats only non-meat based foods. Now it seems that they know better than God/Nature, who designed the cat to eat meat. Madness!

I do not mean these questions to be insulting or inflamitory, I am just honestly curious. Can any of the doper vegitarians help me understand?

[Opus1]

Umm, you do realize that there's a difference between feeling guilt about what people who lived hundreds of years earlier and happen to resemble you have done and feeling guilt over what you yourself are doing?

The fact that humans are naturally omnivorous is what's known as the "naturalistic fallacy." If we were to act like humans "naturally" act, we'd eat all our food raw and walk around naked.

Some people think that killing animals in order to eat them is cruel. And these are animals that would never exist if not for people wanting to eat them. It's not like some cow would be wolf-food out in the wild if not for us kind humans slaughtering it.

[Nefarious Chipmunk]

While I am not as extreme as the people you mentionned (my dog eat meat dog food) I think that I might be able to help. While I am not vegetarian only for the cruelty to animals aspect (it is part of my religion) I can understand where it is coming from. Have you ever seen Harris Ranch, or somewhere like it? At Harris Ranch, the cows are crammed into a field, about three to a square meter, for as far as the eye can see. There cows are not living a happy life. They can hardly move, and they will definately be slaughtered.

You say that animals in the wild would just get hunted and eaten anyway, but animals in the wild have freedom before that happens. They also are not gaureenteed to die that way. Many an animal lives to a ripe old age. These animals do stand a chance.

Hope that helps.

[Weirddave]

Originally posted by Opus1


The fact that humans are naturally omnivorous is what's known as the "naturalistic fallacy." If we were to act like humans "naturally" act, we'd eat all our food raw and walk around naked.



Sorry, I'm not quite understanding. We are designed to eat meat as well as veggies. How is this a "naturalistic fallacy"? It just...is. And what does that have to do with how we dress or cook? That strikes me as a straw man.

[Opus1]

Weirddave:

You seem to be arguing that because humans are "designed" to eat meat, it's illogical (or stupid, or whatever) to only eat veggies. This is fallacious arguing. By the same token, because sex is "designed" to lead to babies, homosexuality, birth control, and sex with sterile people are illogical.

The fact that our humanoid ancestors 2 million years ago ate both meat and veggies may just "be," but when you use it as argument as to what we should eat today, it is fallacious.

[OpalCat]

Whether we are "designed" to eat meat or not is rather irrelevant to me (we weren't "designed" to eat Peeps either, but we do, so obviously the design issue is a bit of a straw man, too.) We don't *need* to eat it now. I have a choice now, for my meals: A) eat a meal that required an animal to be killed or B) eat a meal that didn't. To me it's a no-brainer.

[ladyfoxfyre]

Weirddave, you seem to have opened up a thread and I believe you will regret doing so in the near future.
I predict this thread will be filled with vegetarians sharing with us gruesome tales of the "Life of a Cow/Chicken/Sheep/Pig/Baby Lamb" in most horrific detail, and in the end Weirddave's opinion will remain the same. Nothing will be accomplished with this bickering, because any argument or innocent question involving vegetarianism gets very ugly very fast.

[ladyfoxfyre]

You see, the first part of my last post started out as something else, but then I changed it to another thought but the wording sort of stayed the same. Allow me to fix it by saying, "Weirddave, you seem to have opened up a thread that may become very volatile, and I believe that you may regret doing so."
Thank you everyone, this is what happens when you post without caffeine.

[obfusciatrist]

Originally posted by OpalCat
I have a choice now, for my meals: A) eat a meal that required an animal to be killed or B) eat a meal that didn't. To me it's a no-brainer.

I agree. Regardless of whether you eat meat or not, it is best to avoid the brains.

[Kwyjibo]

Originally posted by OpalCat
We don't *need* to eat it now.

I agree with this, but we still need the nutrients that meat provides and I am not touching Tofu. Personal preference.

Now where as I know we were designed to eat meat, I believe we as a society, eat far too much of the damned stuff.


Besides, if God didn't want us to eat animals, he wouldn't have made them out of meat.
:: D&R ::

[yojimbo]

any argument or innocent question involving vegetarianism gets very ugly very fast.

Yep always happens. If they ate properly, veggie's would be less narky :p

d&r's

[Snooooopy]

Vegetarians will pay for their crimes. God hears the silent screams of the potatoes and cabbage and rutabagas.

[Weirddave]

If you eat a steak, a cow has died to provide it. If you eat a turnip, it has died as well. Why are animals inherently more worthy of not being killed than plants?

[Frodo]

IANAV but may be because the animal has a brain and can feel?

[GingerOfTheNorth]

Carrot Juice is Murder - Arrogant Worms.

[Nukeman]

What gets me is vegitarians that don't eat meat, because its cruel, still eat fish. Fish farms are just as cruel as other types of farm, I don't see the reasoning there. They also eat eggs, and everyone knows about the terrible conditions in battery farms. Free range? see below.

One other thing. Not eating meat does not STOP the animals from suffering. I understand the idea of protest against it by boycotting meat, but you can still eat organic or free range meat, eggs etc. If they are properly organised with humane transport and painless slaughtering methods, I dont see the problem.

[alice_in_wonderland]

Originally posted by Nukeman
What gets me is vegitarians that don't eat meat, because its cruel, still eat fish.

People who eat fish are not vegetarians. Last time I checked, a fish was not a vegetable.

I eat fish. I am not a vegetarian. Anyone that does eat fish and calls themselves a vegetarian is full of doo-doo.(This is MPSIMS people.)

Do not argue that a turnip is a sentient being, and worth inherently the same as an animal. There has been some wacky research about "Feeling Plants" and it has all been disproved.

If it makes it easier to understand, please try to picture going out to the dog house, and offing Rover, then roasting him and serving him up. Most people find this notion unappealing. Vegetarians apply this feeling to all animals. Easy. (At least I did when I was full on veggie. I don't know why it doesn't gross me out to eat fish anymore, but it doesn't).

Al. A fish eating, non-vegetarian.

[Miller]

Oh, good lord. Not another damn food fight.

Mark me down as one of the silent majority who doesn't give a shit what other people eat, or why.

[Weirddave]

Originally posted by alice_in_wonderland

Do not argue that a turnip is a sentient being

I don't, but a cow is not a sentient being either.

and worth inherently the same as an animal.

Why not?

[Arnold Winkelried]

Weirddave, the belief that animals are more worthy of good treatment than plants is not a new one. I'm surprised that this seems to befuddle you.

Look at the recent BBQ thread where some kids took a cat and burned it to death. Many people were incensed. If those same kids had taken out a carrot and burned it I am willing to bet there would have been no pit thread.

Animals are more capable of feeling pain in the way us humans understand it than plants do. Also they are evolutionary closer to us and it seems a natural instinct for humans to feel more empathy for creatures / other human beings that are more closely related to them.

[Arnold Winkelried]

Also if animals are not worth more than vegetables in your ethical system, are people worth more than animals? If so why?

[alice_in_wonderland]

Originally posted by Weirddave
Originally posted by alice_in_wonderland

Do not argue that a turnip is a sentient being

I don't, but a cow is not a sentient being either.

and worth inherently the same as an animal.

Why not?

Because a cow can look you in the face and moo, whereas a carrot is a lousy conversationalist.

[Arnold Winkelried]

Actualy Weirddave let me give you an example. Your neighbour owns both a fruit tree and a dog (amongst other things.) One day peering over the fence you see your neighbour's two children "playing" in the back yard. One of them is sawing a branch off the tree to see what the inside of a branch looks like. The other is sawing a leg off the dog to see what the inside of a dog looks like. What is your reaction? Do you ignore them and go back to what you were doing? Do you call the police or the animal protection society? Do you tell one of the children to stop and let the other children continue?

[VeraGemini]

Yep, humans are omnivorous. We're capable of digesting food from both animal and plant sources. Some of us choose not to eat meat. I don't want to eat another sentient creature, it feels wrong to me. Your opinion may differ, and that's fine, we all have to make our own choices.

I feed my cats meat. Why? Cats, more so even than dogs, are carnivores. (Although if I had a dog, the same would apply.) They can't really digest plant foods without massive chemical tinkering and supplementation of the food. They don't have the choice, I do. Simple as that. :)

(Previewing, I guess I should clarify my definition of "sentient" here. Animals can feel pain and some type of emotions. True, they aren't self-aware as humans are, but they do have a level of consciousness. Plants don't.)

[Fretful Porpentine]

I'm not a vegetarian, but I can certainly understand why people choose not to eat animals that are raised under commercial farming conditions, which are definitely not natural and not pleasant for the animals involved. If I had the money, I might make an effort to eat only free-range chicken and stuff, but it's not really possible with my current income.

OTOH, I don't think I would ever get too worked up over eating game or seafood that came from the wild -- heck, that deer probably had a perfectly decent life and a swift death, and that's all any of us can hope for. However, if other people don't want to eat it, they have every right not to.

[Nortia]

I don't know if this is just my weird way of thinking (probably :p) but I suppose I think of it as if I couldn't kill it myself then I don't eat it.

[OpalCat]

Originally posted by Kwyjibo
Originally posted by OpalCat
We don't *need* to eat it now.

I agree with this, but we still need the nutrients that meat provides and I am not touching Tofu. Personal preference.

For what it's worth, I haven't eaten meat in 15 years, but neither have I eaten tofu.

[Apollyon]

Originally posted by Weirddave
...a cow is not a sentient being either.

Errmmm... real life terminology or science fiction? Sentient means responsive to or conscious of sensation... and while cows are certainly none too bright they certainly sense. Sapient on the other hand means what sentient means to the sci-fi crowd.

'Course... we have a special term for humans that eat spaient beings. :)

[The Big Cheese]

I don't eat meat or fish, just chicken once or twice a year(no turkey today). I choose not to eat meat because I figure if I can live without killing something, why not do it? I feel for me it's not necessary to kill that cow, or deer or whatever animal it is just to live. If I can do it on vegetables, beans and fruit etc., then I'll do it. I simply don't want to kill another living thing. If you want to, go ahead, it's your right-I know I live in the real world. I won't preach and you don't have to tell me we are 'supposed to' because of the shape of a few of our teeth.

Am I a hypocrite for saying eating a carrot is not killing something? I don't think so, but feel free to call me one. I don't consider a carrot a living, breathing thing.

And lastly, I know I'm gonna make some of you laugh, but I put myself in the shoes of that cow and ask how would I feel if I was that cow. I'd say, "Hey! eat some veggies Big Cheese!" Weird, yea, maybe, but that's me.

[Larry Mudd]

10-year vegetarian here. I don't get too hung up on the "ethics" of it -- It's mainly about health & economy for me.

It's easy to understand why some people tend to empathize with cattle, though. Probably has a lot do do with those big, soulful eyes that cows have. Hell, we even tend to describe attractive humans by attributing bovine ocular characteristics to them:"She always looks as if she wanted to be kissed! Turning those big cow-eyes on every calf in town." -F. Scott Fitzgerald. Fish just don't grab you the same way. I fished for years, and didn't blink when the time came to bludgeon the catch and "clean" it. It may not be entirely coincidental that I stopped eating meat within a few years of my only hunting experience. You know, an eviscerated deer has the most unappetizing smell you'll ever get close to. That, combined with the "Oh my God, I killed Bambi" feeling may well have coloured the way I thought about meat after that. Who knows?

Weirddave: Sure, animals are raised to be slaughtered, but is this any worse than being run down in the wild and eaten alive by a wolf? I don't think so.First, I'd like to reiterate that I don't believe that eating meat is immoral. That being said, the conditions that many on the anti-cruelty front object to are pretty nasty, and far from necessary. Take a look at this study (http://www.news.cornell.edu/Chronicles/5.17.01/cattle_diet.html) at Cornell University, which addresses some of the negative effects of fattening up cattle with a high-protein, grain-based diet. Of course, there are specialty suppliers (http://www.americanpasturage.com/aboutus.htm) that raise beef cattle without feedlotting them, but by-and-large, that ain't how it's done.

Nobody likes a whiny vegetarian. Especially sensible vegetarians. I imagine that we feel similarly about them as feminists feel about the "All Men Are Potential Rapists!" camp, and Christians do about the "Keep Godless Evolutionism Out of the Schoolbooks" yahoos.

And then there are the militant carnivores (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=99342), who feel compelled to attack anything a vegetarian says, apparently simply because they're vegetarian. :rolleyes:

[TVeblen]

IANAV, though I eat that way more often than not out of honest preference.

Why is it suprising that food gets tied to morality, religion, beliefs, whatever? So do music, clothing, books, speech, etc. IMO it's futile to expect "rational" answers for something that's value driven. Maybe food's tricker than most because it's a biological imperative. Everybody HAS to eat to live. But look how the simple need to eat gets warped and whipsawed just by fashion, marketing, group-think, thinness, guilt, sin, whatever.

Maybe the whole issue's volatile as hell just because it IS so basic.

The cruelty to animals facet? Eating meat carries an inescapable fact: a living creature died to provide the meat. Everything else spins off from that, only conclusions differ. Without making any value judgements in any direction, it's very easy to buy a sanitary, neatly packaged roast, steak, etc. and ignore the realities of life, death and slaughter that provided it.

Reactions to that differ wildly, from total rejection, pragmatism, comfortable blindness and willful greed. But IMO the only real sin against food (grace) is ingratitude.

Veb

[Fred]

Originally posted by Opus1

The fact that our humanoid ancestors 2 million years ago ate both meat and veggies may just "be," but when you use it as argument as to what we should eat today, it is fallacious.

Dad: :) How do you like that burger that we human beings were biologically designed to eat, Son? :)

Son: :D It's fallacious, Dad! :D

[Larry Mudd]

TVeblen: ...IMO the only real sin against food (grace) is ingratitude.Amen!

[Nukeman]

Originally posted by Arnold Winkelried
Actualy Weirddave let me give you an example. Your neighbour owns both a fruit tree and a dog (amongst other things.) One day peering over the fence you see your neighbour's two children "playing" in the back yard. One of them is sawing a branch off the tree to see what the inside of a branch looks like. The other is sawing a leg off the dog to see what the inside of a dog looks like. What is your reaction? Do you ignore them and go back to what you were doing? Do you call the police or the animal protection society? Do you tell one of the children to stop and let the other children continue?

Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, its too dark to read.

[kabbes]

Weirddave - is there nothing that you do for your own, personal, ethical reasons?

Frankly, I'm surprised to see a MPSIMS thread about this. By it's very nature, it is an attack since there is a big implication that being vegetarian is irrational and stupid. You didn't say "tell me why you are vegetarian". No, you said I have never understood this attitude, it always has struck me as a manifestation of the same kind of thing as middle class white guilt, you know, people with the attitude "Oh, I'm so bad because I'm white and well-off, well-off white people have done terrible things!". Here's a clue: it wasn't you, buddy, let it goandSome people just get wayyyyyy too wacky, like Paul and the late Linda McCartney, who would feed their carnivorous pet cats only non-meat based foods. Now it seems that they know better than God/Nature, who designed the cat to eat meat. Madness!Then if you aren't being indirectly insulting, you're being argumentative - asking why a turnip doesn't have the same intrinsic worth as a cow and accusing Opal of presenting straw men.

If you want a debate, you're in the wrong place. If you want to present your opinion, you're in the wrong place. If you want to insult people, you're in the wrong place.

If you want MPSIMS, then just accept this: to some people, a cow does have more intrinsic worth than a turnip. And then let it go.

pan

[pennylane]

Weirddave, when a person changes their diet out of concern for animals, this can mean one of two things.

Firstly, they simply prefer to eat a meal which did not involve the killing of an animal. There are actually some people who extend this to any living creature. The Jains, in India, originally believed that it was wrong to end the life cycle of a plant, as well as an animal. They refused to eat vegetables and fruits that grow underground, as these had to plucked out, and thus destroyed, in order to be eaten. They subsisted on fresh fruits and vegetables which, ideally, had already fallen from the plant. Grains were obtained when the plants or the pods were dry and dead.

Most of us, however, make a distinction between animals and plants, as has already been described quite marvellously by Arnold Winkelried. Others make a distinction between mammals and birds or fish. Others draw the line at fish. This shouldn't be hard to understand since everyone draws the line somewhere. We don't eat human meat, and most of us wouldn't eat primates. This has little to do with the actual cruelty involved, as any animal could be killed in an equally humane way. It is simply a matter of one's personal values.

The second type of cruelty towards animals is less subjective. This is of the "Life of a Cow/Chicken/Sheep/Pig/Baby Lamb" variety that ladyfoxfyre mentioned. It is certainly true that many animals are bred in horrific conditions. Of course, anyone who feels the need to change their diet for this reason should really become vegan, as animals are bred in equally horrible conditions for cheese, milk and eggs. Also, there should be nothing wrong with eating free-range eggs, or even meat from animals which have been raised in humane conditions. I have been told that fish and other kinds of seafood are not harvested in the same way as other animal products and does not involve as much cruelty to animals, so perhaps this is acceptable also.

I feel that this is the only reason for becoming vegetarian which is actually somewhat noble, provided that the person is sincere and that there is no hypocrisy involved. For example, I can't claim to this reasoning myself as I continue to drink milk and eat cheese without a qualm. If I went around saying that I had given up meat out of pity for farm animals, it would be pretty hypocritical of me.

[Helen's Eidolon]

Here is a good answer I have gotten from my friend in the past:

It's not so much about guilt about killing animals. Though she doesn't like the taste of meat, it's not exactly that, either. She just doesn't feel comfortable eating something which used to be sentient.

[Kwyjibo]

Originally posted by LaurAnge
<snip>She just doesn't feel comfortable eating something which used to be sentient.

Mmmmmmm...Soylent Green.

[UncleBeer]

Moderator's Notes: Well. This is the least contentious thread on vegetarianism I've ever seen on this board. However,
If you want a debate, you're in the wrong place. If you want to present your opinion, you're in the wrong place. If you want to insult people, you're in the wrong place.
I couldn't agree more. Therefore, I'm gonna move this thing over to Czarcasm and TVeblen in IMHO, even tho' there was a rather recent thread on this topic there. The best comments in here seem to be suited to that forum.

[Edited by UncleBeer on 11-23-2001 at 12:09 PM]

[RickJay]

The food fight grows hot
Veggies versus meat lovers
Who gives a rat's ass?

[RTFirefly]

IANAV, but I strongly agree with at least one of the rationales for it. It doesn't bother me that a cow gets killed so that I might enjoy a juicy hamburger. What does bother me isn't the way animals die, but the way they live (see heraldgwena's post, for instance), so that we might eat meat cheaply.

My uncle used to be a rancher, before he decided that he could do better by running a pawnshop. At any given time, he had a few hundred head of cattle on two thousand acres in Kansas. I used to think most all animals raised for food, lived similarly comfortable lives before we put them on our table, and maybe back then, it was the truth. It isn't now. I don't believe it's necessary that we treat animals as well as we do our fellow human beings (not that that's always such a rigorous standard), but it strikes me as unnecessarily and unreasonably cruel when we raise cows and pigs and sheep in enclosures that are too small to allow them to even turn around.

[Weirddave]

Originally posted by kabbes
Weirddave - is there nothing that you do for your own, personal, ethical reasons?

Frankly, I'm surprised to see a MPSIMS thread about this. By it's very nature, it is an attack since there is a big implication that being vegetarian is irrational and stupid. You didn't say "tell me why you are vegetarian". No, you said I have never understood this attitude, it always has struck me as a manifestation of the same kind of thing as middle class white guilt, you know, people with the attitude "Oh, I'm so bad because I'm white and well-off, well-off white people have done terrible things!". Here's a clue: it wasn't you, buddy, let it goandSome people just get wayyyyyy too wacky, like Paul and the late Linda McCartney, who would feed their carnivorous pet cats only non-meat based foods. Now it seems that they know better than God/Nature, who designed the cat to eat meat. Madness!Then if you aren't being indirectly insulting, you're being argumentative - asking why a turnip doesn't have the same intrinsic worth as a cow and accusing Opal of presenting straw men.

<snip>
If you want MPSIMS, then just accept this: to some people, a cow does have more intrinsic worth than a turnip. And then let it go.

pan

#1. I don't think you're being quite fair to my OP here. I asked WHY, because it makes no sense to me. I got some very good answers too, feelings, pain, etc...although for myself, without that added jump of self awareness, it dosen't tip the scales. I see logic in using things as they are meant to be used. Cows, chickens, sheep etc..are herbevors, their place in the food chain is to be prey. Lions, wolves, etc...these are predators, their place is to eat the prey animals. Humans are both. Now, that being said, that is only how I feel, so I asked people who feel differently for their reasoning. I got them, thanks to all who have replied. I have no beef ( so to speak ) with anyone who choses not to eat meat. ( The exception would be people like the McCartneys, who seek to impose their beliefs on an animal (cats) and by doing so fly directly in the face of that animal's nature. Cats are carnivores, period.) I am also not saying that people shouldn't make value judgements between turnips and cows, but again asking for the reasons why. Think it through, and you will realize that the premise that it is OK for humans to eat meat itself is a value judgement favoring humans.


Did that answer your concerns?

[Weirddave]

#2. Aparently, there is no #2

[SPOOFE]

RTF...

What does bother me isn't the way animals die, but the way they live (see heraldgwena's post, for instance), so that we might eat meat cheaply.
I can see that as a valid concern. A question, though... would you be willing to pay significantly more for meat if it came with the guarantee that the animals it came from had better living conditions?

It would make meat more of a luxury item, that's for sure.

[tracer]

SPOOFE: Y'ain't never heard of "free range chicken"?

[SPOOFE]

Sure, Tracer, but I was referring more to beef, anyway.

[BiblioCat]

Originally posted by Larry Mudd
...It may not be entirely coincidental that I stopped eating meat within a few years of my only hunting experience. You know, an eviscerated deer has the most unappetizing smell you'll ever get close to. That, combined with the "Oh my God, I killed Bambi" feeling may well have coloured the way I thought about meat after that. Who knows?Even as I type, hubby is off on his annual Thanksgiving Weekend Hunting Trip with The GuysTM.
Count me in with WeirdDave. My experience with vegetarians is mostly limited to the militant type, who feel the need to berate me and call me a murderer for eating a hamburger, while wearing leather shoes and smoking pot.
I have a friend who has a sister who calls herself a vegan, but wears leather, drives a gas-guzzling & polluting SUV with leather seats, smokes pot and snorts cocaine, yet feels it is somehow her place to give other people shit about their "unhealthy" omnivorous lifestyle. She thinks wearing leather and eating meat are two completely separate issues. That's the part I don't get. If eating beef is bad, why isn't wearing leather bad?

[OpalCat]

I know plenty of vegetarians who won't wear leather, myself included. I get the creeps sitting on leather furniture at other people's houses or in their cars... I would never own such a thing. Gross. It just takes a little extra looking to find the same stuff without the leather. Check out http://www.veganstore.com for example:

Here are my Birkenstock sandals (http://www.pangeaveg.com/cgi-bin/miva?Merchant2/merchant.mv+Screen=PROD&Store_Code=Pangea&Product_Code=322&Category_Code=05s-birkenstock)

Here are my husband's steel-toed boots (http://www.pangeaveg.com/cgi-bin/miva?Merchant2/merchant.mv+Screen=PROD&Store_Code=Pangea&Product_Code=905&Category_Code=03s-unisexboots)

Even places like Nike make non-leather shoes like these (http://niketown.nike.com/pdp.jhtml?style=174317&categoryID=52782&jsessionid=RJY5VW3E1EMDOCQCGIUCFFIKAIZBKIV0&nikeLoggedIn=false&affiliate=)

I'm sure there are plenty of vegetarians who still wear leather, but don't assume that most or all are like that. There are plenty of us who most certainly do not!

[LorieSmurf]

OK. You guys have convinced me. Last night i decided to become vegetarian. And today was my first day. I'm doing pretty good, but I have this meat craving...LOL. My husband's going to try to cook vegetarian for me tomorrow, the darling. Mmmm...black bean chili...

Anyway, y'all brought up an important point...leather. I won't buy any more leather, but I have these favorite leather shoes...I've had them for several years. And I bought a leather jacket a couple of years ago that keeps me warm, that I spent a lot of money on. Do you think it's "wrong" for me to wear those now? Or is it ok, considering I already bought them in the past and it won't make a difference now anyway?

thanks!

[yosemite]

Leather can or cannot be part of a vegetarian's life. Vegetarianism is a diet, and as far as I know, you don't eat leather. Vegetarian Times did an article years ago where they interviewed "unique" vegetarians, who chose their diets for health reasons (or whatever). One of them was a furrier. So, my take on it is that vegetarians can (technically) wear fur and leather to their hearts' content - as long as they don't eat it!

I confess to having a pair or two of (rather beaten up) leather sandals. I think that is the only leather I own, unless you count the leather trim on my backpack, etc. I don't go out looking for leather things to own, that's for sure. My personal reasons for choosing vegetarianism are complex, (a lot of it has to do with health, and the feeling of being "off the hook" and not having to eat that damned meat anymore). So, for me, I don't have a huge problem with these old ratty sandals with their little strips of leather. I wouldn't feel right buying a leather jacket, or wearing a leather skirt, though. That's just me. YMMV.

By the way, congrats SuperLorie! Take it easy, it'll be fine. There are so many fantastic veggie dishes out there, you will see, you won't feel deprived!

[VeraGemini]

Originally posted by SuperLorie
Anyway, y'all brought up an important point...leather. I won't buy any more leather, but I have these favorite leather shoes...I've had them for several years. And I bought a leather jacket a couple of years ago that keeps me warm, that I spent a lot of money on. Do you think it's "wrong" for me to wear those now? Or is it ok, considering I already bought them in the past and it won't make a difference now anyway?

thanks!

That's totally up to you. If I was in your situation, I'd probably keep the shoes and jacket until they wore out. (That seems to be the decision most new vegetarians make on the various veg message boards I read.)

FTR, I don't wear real leather. But I love the look of fake leather.

[pepperlandgirl]

It may not be entirely coincidental that I stopped eating meat within a few years of my only hunting experience. You know, an eviscerated deer has the most unappetizing smell you'll ever get close to. That, combined with the "Oh my God, I killed Bambi" feeling may well have coloured the way I thought about meat after that. Who knows?

Wow. I grew up hunting and to me nothing in the world smells better than a freshly-gutted deer. I'm serious. I know that sounds really gross, and I really can't explain it, but that's what I miss most about hunting. (I don't hunt anymore because it's cause prohibitive and I live in So Cal)

I kinda get offended when people say things like, "Well, if you had to kill your own animal, you probably wouldn't eat it." As someone who has been an active participant during the "slaughter" of chicken, turkey, rabbits, cows, deer, and elk, I assure you that that statement simply isn't true. I was there when the animal died, in many cases I skinned or plucked the animals, cut it up, wrapped it up, and a week later, cooked it, and I never had any problems at all. Believe it or not, not all people find slaughtering to be an "icky" thing.


Besides, if I were to ever become a vegetarian, I'd starve. My personal policy is to never eat anything that is green. ;) :D

[pepperlandgirl]

It's also cost prohibitive.

[machnerschnell]

I have a problem with meat eaters who would be greatly disturbed by the slaughter and prep of meat were they to ever witness it (or think about it, for that matter). Spend a day at the local rendering plant or hog farm and then decide what's for dinner if you still have an appetite. Steak doesn't come from a plastic-wrapped styrofoam dish at the local gorcer, contrary to popular denial. Those who can hang with the killing, good for you. I'm not into it so I don't eat it.

But the U.S. social norm is to pretend that meat is a nice clean food far removed from nasty smells, grotesque imagery, and pools of toxic animal waste. Seems that veggies who question a carnivorous diet are just plain weird, eh? I know that I get questioned for it frequently. And no... I don't even let people know unless required because it often becomes contentious. Objectivity is a lost art.

Growing pork, beef or chicken for protein is *extremely* inefficient. Why waste the resources if it's not necessary? Thankfuly the majority of people on this planet don't consume the average European/American diet.

Anyhoo, interesting board. Just found it today and happy to see some intelligent discourse bantered about.

[butter pie]

I have found that I can't eat meat like I used to, red meat in particular. Mostly I eat any kind of meat except beef. I do find steaks and roasts to be too hard on my stomach, though I can eat poultry and fish all I like. Pork varies. I don't think I would ever completely go veggie, but I do find that I eat much less meat than I used to, and enjoy eating salads and dishes where there is little or no meat.

I used to work with a vegetarian girl at one of my old jobs, and since it was Minnesota and quite cold, I'd come in every day wearing a fur coat and leather boots and say "I'm going to go out for a big piece of meat now," whenever I went on lunch break. She didn't seem to appreciate it, but I started doing it only after she had subjected me to a few sermons about the error of my ways.

Also, one of my dreams is to taste cooked human flesh before I die. I have a list of animals I have eaten, and I want to eat one of everything except the "squishies" like oysters and slugs). I don't have to pig out on it; just eat a few bites so I can cross it off my list. If anyone knows a good way I could get human legally, without chopping off a limb, let me know. Also, if you live in Houston and want to feed me something bizarre, let me know. :D

[Kaitlyn]

Originally posted by machnerschnell
I have a problem with meat eaters who would be greatly disturbed by the slaughter and prep of meat were they to ever witness it (or think about it, for that matter). Spend a day at the local rendering plant or hog farm and then decide what's for dinner if you still have an appetite. Steak doesn't come from a plastic-wrapped styrofoam dish at the local gorcer, contrary to popular denial. Those who can hang with the killing, good for you. I'm not into it so I don't eat it.


I have a problem with fruit and vegetable eaters who would be greatly disturbed by the living and working conditions of migrant farm workers who pick fruits and vegetables were they to ever witness it (or think about it for that matter). Spend a day at the local migrant work camp or packing plant and then decide what's for dinner if you still have an appetite. Fruit and vegetables don't come from a bin at the local grocer, contrary to popular denial. Those who can hang with the inhumane conditions, good for you. :rolleyes:

We all have other people do things for us that we don't wish to do ourselves. Would I eat meat if I had to kill it myself? Nope. But the point is moot, as there is someone willing to do that job for me.

If a person chooses not to eat meat, I respect that as their personal choice, whatever the reason. I care not in the least what others choose to eat. When a person chooses to sermonize as to the moral reasons why I shouldn't eat meat or have a leather couch, (both of which have happened) it's intrusive and offensive.

Health concerns are somewhat a red herring. It is possible to eat a healthy diet that includes small to moderate amounts of meat, even red meat. It's excessive consumption that is unhealthy.

[Dale The Bold]

Well I grew up on a farm and have been to, and seen the living conditions among, hundreds of farms around the midwest. I have never seen anything I'd consider to be cruel toward the animals. In fact, they pamper them quite a bit as there is a huge investment in each animal. What happens is a lot of propaganda about the "factory farms" being cruel to animals. Actually, I have not been to many factory farms, but it seems just as illogical and pointless for them to be cruel. There may be people who do practice cruelty, but it must be a loud minority.

There are some common reactions and counter-reactions to the though of vegetarianism. The first is that vegetarians are just sissies when it comes to the idea of killing "anything with a face." The second reaction is that the rest of us are simply desensitized to it. However, being sensitive to it is a product of growing up in cities, away from animals, which to me is unnatural, IMHO. The result is the "humanization" of animals. I don't know if it comes from Disney films, but Bambi couldn't really talk if it were real life and sometimes a dog is just a dog (but that doesn't justify pointless cruelty).

[OpalCat]

Originally posted by pepperlandgirl

I kinda get offended when people say things like, "Well, if you had to kill your own animal, you probably wouldn't eat it." But you have to admit, that if the only way to get meat was to kill it yourself, a LOT fewer people would eat meat.

[kabbes]

Opal - I dunno about that but I do know that if the only way to get ANY food was to somehow raise/kill/pick it yourself, there'd be a lot less time-wasting on message boards.

Or to put it another way - if the only way to get furniture was to make it myself, I'd be sitting on the floor right now.

pan

[Justin]

MEAT ROCKS!!! MEAT ROCKS!!!!


I eat meat. I always will. I am a hunter, and i kill deer for my own food. They have looked me in the eyes before i shot them....it feels weird, and saddens me a little at times, but the enjoyment of providing my own food for the table overrides it. (also, it just tastes GREAT)

As long as the animal dies without enduring a long painful suffering ( I have family that work at slaughter houses....the veggie horror stories are B.S.) I have no problem with eating it.

A question for the veggies... DO YOU WEAR LEATHER SHOES? DO YOU WEAR A LEATHER BELT? DRIVE A CAR WITH LEATHER SEATS? CARY A LEATHER WALLET OR PURSE? WEAR MAKEUP? TAKE VITIAMINS? animals died for these too.
animals die. people die. sooner or later we are all going to die. Apparently, the purpose of some animals is to die to provide food. VERY little is wasted. the only part of a pig that is thrown away is the OINK. every part is used, including the bones.

...I think im gonna throw a steak on the grill....

[VeraGemini]

Originally posted by Justin
As long as the animal dies without enduring a long painful suffering ( I have family that work at slaughter houses....the veggie horror stories are B.S.) I have no problem with eating it.

It isn't the slaughterhouse conditions I (and most vegetarians) have a problem with so much as it is the conditions in the factory farms the animals are raised in. The "horror stories" are not "B.S.".

A question for the veggies... DO YOU WEAR LEATHER SHOES? DO YOU WEAR A LEATHER BELT? DRIVE A CAR WITH LEATHER SEATS? CARY A LEATHER WALLET OR PURSE? WEAR MAKEUP? TAKE VITIAMINS? animals died for these too.

Caps lock is your friend. Several vegetarians, including myself, that have responded to this thread have said that we do not wear/use leather. If you just want to amuse yourself by winding up the veggies, there are pit threads going. Trust me, we've heard it all before, but hey, might be a slow day.

[OpalCat]

A question for the veggies... DO YOU WEAR LEATHER SHOES?

No. I buy my shoes from http://www.veganstore.com and so does my husband.

DO YOU WEAR A LEATHER BELT?

I don't even own a belt, but if I needed one, I'd buy a synthetic one.

DRIVE A CAR WITH LEATHER SEATS?

Ewww! No. I hate leather seats anyway, they're so uncomfortable and they smell funny. I wouldn't drive a car with vinyl seats either.

CARY A LEATHER WALLET OR PURSE?

No. My purse and wallet are both synthetic.

WEAR MAKEUP?

On very rare occassions, and there are vegan cosmetics easily available.

TAKE VITIAMINS?

Check out Pangea's VeganLife Multivitamin at http://www.veganstore.com

By the way you were shouting your questions, I assume you thought "Aha!! I have got them now!!" sorry to disappoint you.

I'll leave the rest of the post alone, because you really don't want to hear my view on hunters.

[OpalCat]

Originally posted by kabbes
Opal - I dunno about that but I do know that if the only way to get ANY food was to somehow raise/kill/pick it yourself, there'd be a lot less time-wasting on message boards.

Or to put it another way - if the only way to get furniture was to make it myself, I'd be sitting on the floor right now.

pan

I'm not sure what your point here is. Time isn't the point here, if somehow you thought that it was. Many people wouldn't kill their own food even if it wasn't a time issue. If you went to a restaurant and had to go in the back and slaughter a pig yourself to get your ham sandwich... well some people would still do it but a lot of people wouldn't. I'm inclined to think that you are trying to throw up a straw man, though, rather than actually make a point.

[Justin]

Opal Cat, I already know you hate me,( from the mouse thread) so im not going to ask about your view on hunters.

Heres my question for the Vegans/veggies.
With all the animals we now have on farms to be used as food, if the whole world suddenly went vegan, what do you suppose we would do with all of them? Domesticated cows MUST be milked, no way around it. What do you suppose we do with all of the milk?

I never thought it possible to live life without any animal products whatsoever, but i guess it can happen. However, I still find it hard to belive.

My problem is not with vegans or veggies, my problem is those who feel that everyone who uses/eats animal producs is evil to the core and is going to hell.


I use CAPS as an attention getter, not as shouting.

I think that people that adhere too much to one particular diet or lifestyle are doing themselves harm in the long run.
I know somone that in their quest to learn about the best health food and veggie diets, came to belive that milk was the WORST thing you could feed to a baby. They also felt that they were supplying their body with vitamins by drinking their own urine. (thank God I talked them out of this) I asked them, "If urine is so healthy, why does your body dispose of it? I dont think you are actualy helping yourself by consuming a by-product of your on body?"

Also somthing for the vegans. Do you have to take any special vitamins or suppliments to maintain your health?
If you must do this, doesnt that seem to say that your lifestyle is unnatural? I dont know much about vegans so this info will be appreciated.

And for the people that think we are all naturaly vegaterian and humans were never intended to be omnivores from the begining, im afraid your wrong.
The types of teeth we have, and the legnth of our large intestine in relation to the legnth of our small intestine point to an omnivorious diet.

Also, here at college, i have noticed that nearly all of the Vegan foods offered at the Dining Hall are made to resemble meat. Whats up with that?

[OpalCat]

What's up with that is that a lot of people want to be able to eat the things they are used to but without the guilt or heath issues. I love garden burgers. I like them more than I ever liked hamburgers before I was a vegetarian, actually. Why should someone give something up for their beliefs if they don't have to? The 'fake meat' products out there are getting better all the time and some of them are really good. Morningstar Farms makes a vegetarian sausage patty that is just awesome. Sausage patties were one of the few meat foods that I ever missed, and now I don't have to miss them.

As for the vitamins, most vegans I know don't take supplements on a regular basis, but then, some do. Actually the people I know who are the most into vitamin/supplement are people who eat meat. As a vegetarian, I've never felt any negative heath effect from not eating meat.

As to your question about if the world suddenly went vegan... well that would never happen, so it's sort of a stupid question. Any global change like that would be gradual, and supply would decrease over time as demand decreased.

[VeraGemini]

About "fake meat"... There's a social aspect to eating too. Gardenburgers and the like provide a way for vegetarians and non-vegetarians to share in a cookout, for example. Some of the other fake meat products are convenience food. It's very easy to adapt a recipe that calls for ground beef to veggie burger crumbles, and the end result is a lot better than trying to substitute lentils or beans. Not every vegetarian is a kitchen chemist, nor wants to be ;)

As for me, I love Gardenburgers too. I like the taste of the traditional burger toppings, and just lettuce, tomatoes, onions, and pickles on a bun doesn't cut it.

[kabbes]

Opal - first things first, just in case you are unaware of it, I tend to be a pretty vigorous defender of vegetarianism despite not being one myself. My partner is a veggie (well, a pescinarian), a reasonable number of family are veggies and I personally have a deep respect for those who take what I see as a difficult decision.

So don't feel as if I'm questioning your vegetarianism!

But I don't agree with your general thrust of "if you had to do X yourself, you wouldn't do X". Modern society simply doesn't work that way. We all have specialised in our chosen fields simply so that we don't have to be a jack of all trades. So this has led to a distancing of ourselves from the food production process. So what? Of course many of us would find it icky. But I tell you this - I find the idea of vegetables coming out of the ground just as icky (which is to say, just a little bit). This is because I am simply removed from the reality.

Just because, to quote Blur, "modern life is rubbish", this is not a reason to assume that the fundamental idea of eating meat is hypocritical.

pan

[pennylane]

I think you're right, kabbes, the argument isn't really valid. Most of us wouldn't want to see everything that goes into the making of the things we use in our daily lives.

When I was fifteen I started getting interested in cooking. I accompanied my mother to the local butcher one day, followed by the place she buys chicken (where you choose the chicken yourself and watch as its neck is wringed and it is prepared for you). I felt sickened and disgusted. I didn't want to handle raw meat, so I wouldn't cook anything which involved this. Now it began to seem hypocritical to me to be able to eat meat which other people had killed and cooked when I was too sickened by this to do it myself.

As a result, even though I think the argument is not entirely valid, I find it slightly hypocritical when people eat things which would sicken or disgust them if they had to assist in the preparation. But of course we do all rely on other people doing the dirty work necessary to keep our modern lives running smoothly. So I think it's just a matter of one's personal limits as far as the hypocrisy of it is concerned.

[OpalCat]

Originally posted by pennylane
the place she buys chicken (where you choose the chicken yourself and watch as its neck is wringed and it is prepared for you).
:eek:

[pennylane]

Yep, OpalCat, that's the Third World for you. :)

[BiblioCat]

Originally posted by OpalCat
I'll leave the rest of the post alone, because you really don't want to hear my view on hunters. I'd kind of like to hear it, since my husband went hunting this past weekend and brought home a 70-pound deer. Isn't it more humane for him to kill it quickly, rather than letting it starve (Maryland is over-populated with deer) or let it get hit by a car?

[riserius1]

It has been proven that deer herds that are not thinned by hunters are more prone to disease and starvation(At least, the ones here in Ohio, anyway). And as far as the whole If-you-had-to-kill-them-you-wouldn't-do-it argument, if that were true, then this country would have died out about two hundred-odd years ago. I think it speaks more to the laziness of our culture that people don't want to kill for their meat. Can anyone find me an example of vegetarians from colonial times?

Chris W

[OpalCat]

Here is a site that has a lot of historical vegetarian information:


http://www.ivu.org/history/

The only one I can think of off the top of my head is Benjamin Franklin.

[OpalCat]

Originally posted by Kinsey
Originally posted by OpalCat
I'll leave the rest of the post alone, because you really don't want to hear my view on hunters. I'd kind of like to hear it, since my husband went hunting this past weekend and brought home a 70-pound deer. Isn't it more humane for him to kill it quickly, rather than letting it starve (Maryland is over-populated with deer) or let it get hit by a car?

Did your husband go after the weakest, the oldest, the sickly? Just curious.

As for overpopulation, that is humanity's fault for killing the natural predators of the deer. If we were to restore the balance, there wouldn't be nearly such a problem.

And since you asked... my personal opinion is that anyone who enjoys taking the life of an animal is sick in the head.

[Weirddave]

Hey, sometimes the animals get even. (http://channel.netscape.com/mynsnews/story.tmpl?table=n&cat=50900&id=200111260932000239215)

Just curious, Opal, but wouldn't humans be one of the "natural" predators of deer? If not, why aren't we?

[Justin]

deer never realy had a large group of natural predators. Where i live, the only ones they have are the red wolf and the panther. In all my years of hunting, ive only seen one panther, and no red wolves. I havent heard about anybody killing them either. Before the white and black man came to America and hunted deer, the Native Americans did. For thousands of years, man has been a natural predator of deer.

Look at the eskimo.....until the 1950s, when technology began seeping into the far north, meat was their only choice for food, except when they could gather some roots or berries in the short summer months.

Sure, the factory farm isnt all happiness and fun, they are quite crowded, and often get no sunlight.
Look at the US's large citys...crowded, people exposed to above normal polutants and chemicals, inner city areas often being dirty and to some extent, disease ridden. At least the pigs on a "factory farm" clean up after them selves.

Opal, the world revolves around money, and nothing else. Thats the reason the factory farm came into being.....to raise animals as quicly as possible in as little room as possible to maximise profit. If it were more profitable to grow free range meat, the factory farm would gradualy die out.

I have worked with Hispanic tenant farmers before. They are often hired during the summer to do things like pick fruit and vegetables, and crop tobacco. The conditions many of them live in is as bad or worse than that found in factory farms. I once knew of a group of aproxamately 50 who had only a small mobile home to live in. They slept in junk cars and camper tops in the front yard. Often they get no medical care, and due to their limited knoledge, STDs run rampant through their communities.

[VeraGemini]

Originally posted by Justin
Before the white and black man came to America and hunted deer, the Native Americans did. For thousands of years, man has been a natural predator of deer.

There is a world of difference between subsistence hunting with a bow and arrow or spear and "sport" hunting with a rifle and a scope. The reason deer have few natural predators now in many areas is because man has hunted or driven away those predators.

raise animals as quicly as possible in as little room as possible to maximise profit.

This somehow makes it less wrong?

STDs run rampant through their communities.

This strikes me as condescending. Migrant farm workers (not all of whom are Hispanic, BTW) may be poor, and their living conditions may not be the best, but it's a leap to imply that they're a bunch of amoral walking disease vectors.

[Justin]

[There is a world of difference between subsistence hunting with a bow and arrow or spear and "sport" hunting with a rifle and a scope. The reason deer have few natural predators now in many areas is because man has hunted or driven away those predators.]

If you eat what you kill, then it is no different. Contrary to what greenpeace and Disney want you to belive, most hunters do not kill only for the antlers and throw the carcas away.

...And this somehow makes it less wrong?....

Welcome to the real world!!

In the name of money, there are no morals. In our quest to maximise the profit of everything, humans have done much damage and destruction. we call it "progress". As long as the factory farm is the most profitable farm, it will continue to exist, whether it is moraly wrong or not.

Also, in our quest to maximise profitablility, you will soon be seing geneticly altered species of animals made only to supply the food market. Pigs the size of cows has already been tried, but the pigs went insane soon after achiving adulthood.

...and i would appreciate it greatly if you would use my whole sentence when quoting me....using only parts seems to change the meaning of what i said....

[Justin]

ohh, i forgot to add, about the tenant farmers.

i am not implying anything. NC has the largest tobacco production in the US, and has a large number of tenant farmers to acomplish this. I have worked along side them at many times in my life...... They arent realy poor. A good tobacco cropper can earn as much as $35.00 an hour, occasionlay more. during the winter, when they have went back to their home country, i have helped clean out the rented trailers. They are nasty. ALL furniture is uasualy distroyed, urine and fecees can be found in other places than the bathroom, and often drug pariphnailia is found laying around......now not all tenant farmers are like this, i have also worked with some very nice, respectable people.


I dont live in a city where i am cut off from reality. I dont have to watch the news, and stir in a cup of political correctness to decide whats wrong and right. I see evil and corruption every day. Trust me, there are more important things to worry about than how my hamburger spent the last two weeks of its life.
...if you want to know about them, just ask...

[Weirddave]

Originally posted by VeraGemini
There is a world of difference between subsistence hunting with a bow and arrow or spear and "sport" hunting with a rifle and a scope. The reason deer have few natural predators now in many areas is because man has hunted or driven away those predators.



I'm sorry, this just made me go "huh???". Does the deer think, as it shuffles off this mortal coil with an arrow through it's lungs, "Thank Goddess it wasn't a bullet?" "Subsistance" hunting isn't all rainbow and flowers, either, y'now. In certain parts of the country, Indian tribes would stampeed heards of prey animals off a cliff as the most efficent way of killing them. There would be plenty of waste at these times. Most hunters I know DO clean and dress their kills for meat, if I follow your arguement correctly, you are saying they shouldn't hunt, which would mean they would buy MORE meat from grocery stores, thus supporting modern ranching methods that you seem to find so abhorant. Isn't this a circular arguement?

[VeraGemini]

Weirdave: I was pointing out the inconsistancy in Justin's predation argument. It's inaccurate to call a modern hunter a "predator" of deer when technology makes things so unequal. Run down a deer and kill it with your bare hands or a knife, and then I'll call you a "predator". Otherwise, you're a hunter. I am part Native American, I do know something about the culture and hunting methods. And for the record, my objection to hunting is the same as Opal's. I think killing an animal for enjoyment is twisted.

Justin:...and i would appreciate it greatly if you would use my whole sentence when quoting me....using only parts seems to change the meaning of what i said....

I don't normally quote entire posts. I thought that since my reply was directly beneath your post, minimal quoting was needed. It was not my intention to skew your words.

[OpalCat]

Originally posted by Weirddave
Just curious, Opal, but wouldn't humans be one of the "natural" predators of deer? If not, why aren't we?

Well, could you run down a deer, catch it and kill it with your bare hands? If not then no, you're not a "natural" predator of deer.

[BiblioCat]

Justin said:
If you eat what you kill, then it is no different. Contrary to what greenpeace and Disney want you to belive, most hunters do not kill only for the antlers and throw the carcas away.
Yes, we eat what my husband kills. We would never throw away the meat. From the deer he got this weekend, we will get some a few roasts, some ground and some in little chunks that I make into a stew.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Originally posted by VeraGemini
There is a world of difference between subsistence hunting with a bow and arrow or spear and "sport" hunting with a rifle and a scope. The reason deer have few natural predators now in many areas is because man has hunted or driven away those predators.
My husband uses a rifle, but not a scope. He tracks the deer through the woods and finds one by using a deer call, looking for deer poop and looking for markings on the trees. I would think a quick bullet would be more humane than an arrow, which tends to wound rather than kill.

[Justin]

Oh, so now i have to run the deer down and bring it down with my bare hands to kill a deer now.

Let me break it down for your, nice, clean, and simple.
Every creature has a special feature that is nessesary for its life and distinguishes it from the other species.

For deer, its their speed, along with their excelent smell, hearing and eyesight, and their antlers that protect them from predators and help them find food.

Humans, on the other hand, cant run as fast as most animals.
we have borderline vision compared to animals.
our hearing and smell are nearly non existent.

But....but... we have the most advanced brain in the animal kingdom, and opposable thumbs....great for making tools that make our job easier.

and you cant tell me, that if indians had guns instead of bows, they wouldnt use them.....My room mate is an indian, and he never uses a bow, and he hunts all the time.

....rare exception... i ahve a cousin that once managed to kill a deer with a knife, but thats very rare....

Yall veggies should try hunting...even if you dont shoot, you will realize that its not as easy as you think it is. Deer are very well iquiped at avoiding potential predators, so most deer killed end up being a deer earned.

[Freyr]

The Big Cheese wrote:

Am I a hypocrite for saying eating a carrot is not killing something? I don't think so, but feel free to call me one. I don't consider a carrot a living, breathing thing.

Sorry, but I have to jump in here and say this is just plain wrong. By every definition of life in biology, a carrot is a living, breathing organism. It *IS* alive, just like everything in the plant kingdom is alive.

Now, does that carrot feel pain or have any sense of awareness? Good question. Probably not, but we just don't know. But please don't go saying plants aren't alive. There's a great difference between saying that something isn't alive and something doesn't have a sense of awareness or is capbable of experiencing pain as animals do.

[Nukeman]

Carrots don't breathe. Please be so kind as to point out where the lungs are on a carrot.

[OpalCat]

Originally posted by Justin
Yall veggies should try hunting...even if you dont shoot, you will realize that its not as easy as you think it is. First off, the suggestion that I try hunting is totally offensive. Would you tell a pro-life Christian that they "should try having an abortion"?

Second, I never said I thought hunting was easy. I said I thought that finding enjoyment in killing an animal was, in my opinion, sick.

[Freyr]

Nukeman wrote:

Carrots don't breathe. Please be so kind as to point out where the lungs are on a carrot.

Certainly carrots (and other plants) don't have lungs, but they do breathe. It's better to call it respiration; taking in gases needed for their metabolism and giving off waste products such at oxygen and water vapor. Now if you want to get into an argument about whether breathing is the same as respiration, well, let's save that or another thread.

This takes place in mainly in the leaves and stalks of the carrot plant. You know, the part ABOVE the ground. You can identify it by the green color.

[Nukeman]

right, respiration. There is no argument. Breathing is the process of taking air into the lungs and then expelling it, allowing the exchange of oxygen and carbon dioxide to occur. It only takes place in animals.

Respiration is the process that takes place in all living cells, by which [simply] glucose (or fatty acids) and oxygen are broken down into carbon dioxide, water and ATP (energy). Not oxygen, as you put it. You are thinking of photosynthesis, which does occur in plants. You confirm this when you say:

'This takes place in mainly in the leaves and stalks of the carrot plant. You know, the part ABOVE the ground. You can identify it by the green color.'

Respiration also occurs in the roots, (or the carrot. Thats the orange bit by the way, the bit BELOW the ground. ;) )

[mnemosyne]

[slight hijack]

I once had a vegetarian tell me that the land used to raise cattle and pigs and other animals for consumption would be much better put to use to grow things like corn and soy. Apparently the whole world could survive on that much available vegitarian food. I don't remember any cites from this person, but that was their contention.

I told them, sure, we could feed the world on that much land, but then, where would we put the cows?

They told me I was being unreasonable, and it wasn't worth discussing with me anymore.

[/slight hijack]

See, I eat meat. Most people I know do. Many people don't. So be it. I don't hunt, either. I consider it natural to eat meat for a variety of biological and historical (evolutionary?) reasons. To those who tell me it no longer is natural, and that I shouldn't do it, I ask them to give up their cars, their synthetic clothes, their houses with heat, electricity, air conditioning, the SDMB. I ask them to give up their refrigerated foods, their GardenBurgers,their Diet Coke (or Pepsi). I tell them that to do what is natural is now "unnatural" in today's world, and so to argue either way is kind of a moot point.

The way I see it, in the end, it comes down to an issue of right or wrong. I don't believe it's wrong to eat meat. If you do, then don't, but I will continue to do so. I also don't believe that most animals raised for consumption are in horrible "factory farm" conditions. This may not be the most educated opinion, because I admit that I don't know all the facts. But I've been to some farms, I've taken a class at school specifically about Animal Production Systems and Industry (capitalised cuz that was the name of the course), and I go to a school that also has on its campus a very well known and respected Agricultural college. I get the impression that horrible situations are a minority . Although these animals may live in minimal luxury, they receive what they need to be content - an unhappy, stressed animal won't eat, will lose weight, may get sick, etc, all of which can affect other animals in its vicinity, and would likely lead to a financial loss for the farmers/producers. They don't want this, so they give the animals what they need in order to get from them what is wanted.

Someone once worded their opinions to me this way : "I believe in animal welfare, not animal rights". Not a very powerful quote, but I think it helps describe how I feel.
In the cases where the animals are subjected to cruel situations, then these particular cases need to be dealt with. It's wrong to assume all farms are one way because a few are. Just as it's wrong to assume all people are one way because a few are.

BTW- The "if you wouldn't do it yourself" argument doesnt fly well with me, either. As someone in this thread pointed out, the world (developped countries in particular) has evoleved in such a way as to minimize the need for people to know how to hunt for themselves, and so it becomes a sport. Most people don't know how to garden, and so it's a hobby. I can't sew or knit, but I will still wear clothes because someone else enjoys it/is paid for it/will do it for me. Eliminate the comfy cozy society and life experience I suspect you've (we've) all had, since you had the freedom to make a choice about what you eat, and I suspect that you'd all very likely be sitting next to the camp fire gnawing away on that bone as much as the rest of us. Assuming we had the comforts of fire, of course. :)



Sorry if that was a bit disjointed....but, I just wanted to say something. :)

[Nukeman]

Originally posted by mnemosyne
[slight hijack]

I once had a vegetarian tell me that the land used to raise cattle and pigs and other animals for consumption would be much better put to use to grow things like corn and soy. Apparently the whole world could survive on that much available vegitarian food. I don't remember any cites from this person, but that was their contention.

I told them, sure, we could feed the world on that much land, but then, where would we put the cows?

They told me I was being unreasonable, and it wasn't worth discussing with me anymore.

[/slight hijack]



mnemosyne, thats correct. The reason behind it is that you get the energy more directly via this method. The theory is, all energy for life originally comes from the sun (ie sun -> photosynthesis in plants -> plants get eaten). Therefore, if you grow plants, but then let cows eat them you lose energy because the cows waste energy by releasing heat, not digesting everything completely etc. So you can theoretically feed more people with the plants. The idea is that they should grow a lot of soya in Africa in order to feed starving people better.
But, its not that simple. We can't survive on energy alone, we need protien, nutrients etc.
The main problem is what are called 'essential amino acids' (e.a.as). Amino acids are needed to make different protiens, but only certain ones are essential, they can be converted into the non-essential ones. Meat contains all the essential amino acids (plus most of the non-essential ones probably). One type of plant will not contain all the e.a.as. This is alright for veggies in western countries as they can vary the stuff they eat to incorporate all the e.a.as they need in their diet. Obviously, people in 3rd world countries find this a little more difficult, especially if they can only grow/get one type of plant.

Also, meat tastes better :p. Mmmm. Tasty cow.

[mnemosyne]

Nuke Did I make it sound like I was serious? That part of my post was meant more as a joke - I understand the concept of energy loss as you move up the food chain - My comment was mostly about the fact that this person was telling me specifically that turning all the cow fields to crop fields was kind of a "solution" to what was seen as the "problem" of meat eating. Literally, she wanted the fields near the school to be used for crops, not for the cows who were already there. So as a quick response, I said where would you put the cows? She got mad and stopped talking to me. I guess maybe it's not as funny in type. Or if you weren't there....:)

I never bothered to do the research to figure out how much of what crop would be needed to feed, for example, the population of Canada using only Canadian crops. I just think it would be kind of funny if it turned out that we'd bring cows to extinction by using their fields for crops in order to save the cows from slaughter :)

I also know all about the amino acids (Biochem Major here :)). It is a very valid point in that discussion, in that obtaining them all is not possible without access to specific sources of protein. I think that "obtaining them from alternate sources" is valid for the diet, but not as a defense of vegetarianism as a right/wrong thing. We are privileged enough to have the time to research sources of appropriate a.as, and to literally design foods and diets that contain them, only without meat. Because of the luxuries of this society and efforts made by people who have specialised in this research, and who have dedicated themselves to it. But those supplemented or designed meals aren't all that natural, maybe, or it took a lot of "animal" research to identify and understand a.as (essential ones in particular) and to determine adequate sources of such. I'm not really up on the history of all this, and I won't have time to look into any of it, but in the end what I think I'm trying to say is that the choice of vegetarianism for most people in this discussion, and indeed most people doing so for non-religious reasons, is just that - a choice. It was made available by people understanding what it took to stay alive, and that involved understanding the foods we ate,and, yes, killing, animals in the process. Same with makeup (there was a reference about that). Even all that natural makeup available today was made possible my Revlon, Maybelline (?) etc, who identified half of what NOT to include via animal testing.

Again, sorry if things are worded kind of funny - I'm not totally taking the time to think everything through completely at the moment - gotta get studying for finals.

Just to make it clear, I have nothing against vegetarians. Really just those that try to make my choices into wrong ones, especially for invalid reasons.