Look familiar? It ought to. You quoted it your own damn self EARLIER!!!
Jesus FUCKING Christ!!
You’ve got to be kidding. That’s it? That’s your “explanation” as to why Opal and the rest of us are “dangerous” to you, personally? Because I already told you once, it won’t wash. Didn’t you read my response? You obviously noticed that I quoted your comment - you mean you didn’t see my response directly under that?
By your criteria, ALL of us are potential crackpot Jack Chick fans, because we ALL have “ignorant” ideas (at least ideas that would be considered “ignorant” by some segment of the population.) So all of us are nuts, all of us are “suspect”. And we can be here ALL frickin’ day, picking at each other. We can never cease getting into each others’ faces over every trivial “ignorant” thing we imagine we see in each other, and that we imagine we are entitled to bitch about.
You’ll have to do better than that. Please, one more time - why are Opal, pl, and the rest **DANGEROUS TO YOU??? **
Implying that we’re “dangerous” because we don’t eat something for a reason that doesn’t satisfy you isn’t going to hack it.
You are vegetarians for ignorant, ill-informed reasons. ANY ignorance is dangerous, both to you and to the people around you. (Why do you think Cecil writes his columns? For the money?)
I see no reason to be more specific than that. If that is not good enough for you, tough shit!
I won’t be back till tomorrow.
What’s the average human life expectancy now? About (yes, “about” is accurate enough) 75 years?
Eat, live, and IF you achieve the “86” percentile age… well, you had a pretty good run. Don’t get greedy.
Quibbling over “chickens or carrots” just isn’t that big of a factor in the road of life. Eat healthy stuff and enjoy life until you’re dead; “it” happens regardless of your choice in this discussion.
Yosemitebabe:
I have never known a group of people who held beleifs who did not either overtly or simply by example seek to spread their belief system.
If it’s one based on ignorance, it’s silly and dangerous.
I’ve already given my Vegans and bees example.
Yosemitebabe, thanks for articulating a vegetarian position, and taking the time (I don’t have) to keep at it. It is curious why people pick on vegetarians like we’re a threat to the normal dietary choice of most Americans. Dangerous? I’d think we’re less dangerous because the vegetarian choice often has an underlying respect for life, and doing the least damage one can in order to live. For me, at least, that carries over to respecting every individual’s needs in determining their own lives. Belittling another’s choices is as abhorrent as taking their flesh to suit my own needs.
The choices I’ve made, including a veg diet and Buddhism, were a natural fit for me. Not causing any more suffering than I have to, and constantly re-examining that stance, ain’t really an easy row to hoe. I know very well the natural order of things on this planet, biologically. My Dad is a shark expert, and I was alerted early on to how savage nature can be, and the progression of the food chain. I don’t get all weepy and horrified. A main Buddhist tenet is that “All life is suffering”. Yep, it is. Every second of the day critters are being ripped apart, caught in webs, juices sucked, devoured, laid eggs upon and eaten inside out, dragged screaming to lairs, etc, etc, etc… I realized pretty early on that I don’t have to do that. Quite simple, my rational decision; no judgement on anyone who chooses differently. In what way can that possibly be construed as Dangerous???
Elelle:
What you are describing is a religious choice, as such it needn’t be rational to be justified.
:rolleyes:
Sez you. Who are you anyway, to decide that our reasons are “ignorant”? There are two sides to this story, and both sides have people who are not stupid, and yet they believe dramatically different things.
Besides, do you even know what my reasons for being vegetarian are? I think all I’ve said on this thread is that “I don’t want to” eat meat. Why isn’t this a good enough reason? How is this “ignorant” and “ill-informed”?
And then we’re all ticking time bombs, full of dangerous ignorance. I am sure many Democrats believe, with all the fiber of their being, that Republicans are “ill informed” and ignorant. And many Republicans believe the same of Democrats. So, depending on who you ask, (going by your criteria) Republicans and Democrats are “dangerous”. Same goes for Pro-Life, Pro-Choice, Creation, Evolution, Christian, Muslim, Atheist, Agnostic, Mac, PC, boxers, briefs, and so on. Everyone is bound to feel that the people on the “other side” are ignorant and ill informed. So we’re all ticking time bombs of IGNORANCE. We’re ALL dangerous. Is this the point you’re trying to make? Whoop-de-doo.
You “see no reason” to be more specific than that, because your argument doesn’t hold water. That’s how I’m taking it, anyway.
Huh. But if someone is vegetarian because of religious beliefs, that’s suddenly OK? Why? Some religious people (not you, elelle) can be very “in your face” with their beliefs, trying to preach to everyone around them. So why aren’t you railing on them, telling them they are “dangerous” for not eating something because of their religion? Are they less apt to “spread their belief system”?
And, please, please, please. Show some substantive evidence where pldennison, Opal, Spider Woman, or any of the rest of us have tried to “spread our belief system”. (Other than daring to admit we’re vegetarians.) What about the time that pldennison paid for Satan and Drain Bead’s meat dinners, is that an example of trying to “spread the belief system”? I fix meat dishes all the time for other people (I work with developmentally disabled people, I cook their meals.) Is this an example of me trying to “spread my belief system”?
Just because you think it’s silly and ignorant, doesn’t make it so. A lot of other well-educated people disagree. I am sure many liberal thinking people here think your more conservative leanings are “silly” and “ignorant”. So - you’re DANGEROUS, Scylla!
Run! Run! Run everyone! Scylla’s dangerous!!
:rolleyes:
Elelle, nice to see you here, thanks for the kind words. 'Uigi, thanks for the nice laid-back attitude. What a nice breath of fresh air you are right now! 
Scylla: My vegetarianism actually preceded my Buddhist path by a good decade. I was more of a cantankerous atheist then. The decision not to eat meat, and perhaps the atheism, too, was more of a direct result of seeing the savagery of nature in all it’s technicolor glory at a young age (child of biologists, which I’ve said all too often here).
It wasn’t a religious choice then: more a direct observation and rational choice to alleviate my subjective response to perceived pain to others. Buddhism has opened my eyes to how those perceptions have been viewed by much wiser folks than myself, but it’s still about making rational decisions.
Well, let me try to jump back into this somewhat.
yosemitebabe, the real people who “bother” me are the ones who say that it is a personal choice, but for moral reasons that could be applied externally to myself.
To explain further how I see the slippery slope working:
-
Person believes “Meat is murder. It is cruel and barbaric to eat meat. Eating meat does not fit into my value system.” OK, cool. Come over to my house and have some eggplant instead.
-
Person takes the next step. “You know, I really need to tell people that what they are doing is wrong. Meat is murder. Animals deserve life and and freedom from abuse and pain.” OK, cool. Educate me, I’ll listen.
-
Person takes the next step. “I don’t know how a civilized society allows these sorts of abuses to continue. Meat is murder. This is a crime against nature. I need to put a stop to this.” Uh…wait a minute here, what happened to each of us having our own set of values…
-
Person says “Your values are obviously evil and corrupt if you want to perpetrate murder. I will work hard for legislation to stop your immoral actions.” Wait…wait…
-
“President X signed into law today a bill which makes eating of meat a Federal Crime, punishable by 10 years in prison, a $10,000 fine, or both…” Well honey, I’m off to meet my dealer to score a pork chop. I hope it’s not a bust.
If one truly believes meat is murder, then why should a meat-eater expect that that person will continue to sit idly by, while the rest of society commits what is in their mind “immoral acts”. If one believes animals have a right to be free from slaughter, why is a meat eater unjustified in their worry that a person who believes that also would work towards imposing their morals and value system on the meat eaters of the World?
That is where the fear arises from, I believe. And that is why vegetarianism is considered “dangerous” by some. By myself…no, not really. Because I truly expect vat-grown meat in 20 years time, and the whole “meat is murder” issue to vanish like morning fog.
Yes, I understand the “slippery slope” thing. There are “in your face” extremists in everything. Religion, politics, even vegetarianism. And I am as irritated by them as the next person. I’ve stated that several times. But you can’t lump extremists in with other people who just wanna do their own thing, and seem consistent in that. I mean, after all the years I’ve been a veggie, if I were going to be extremist, I would have shown my true colors by now. I’m sure the same goes for most other veggies here. I’ve been veggie for 15 years. If anything, I’ve mellowed out through the years. I have been no “threat” to the meat-eating world in 15 years, I see no reason to believe I’ll start being a risk any time in my lifetime.
So - do you see any “extremists” here on this board? I mean, if some of us veggies really thought meat was so evil, would we be paying for other people’s meat-filled meals, or fixing them meat dishes? Does that not show that we are respectful of other people’s beliefs, while simultaniously holding different personal beliefs? Is it so hard to believe that many, many vegetarians just want to follow their own path, eat what they want, not eat what they don’t want, and be left alone with it?
I think that some people worry too much about what a person (who they don’t even know, who has shown NO tendency for extremism) “might” do something, “maybe” at some later date. And that strikes me as a little like “thought police”.
It’s almost as if they are wanting to say, “You are thinking wrong. And while you are doing nothing to harm me or anyone else now, you might some day. Even though you say you won’t, even though you’ve given no evidence that you have such tendencies to be extreme or intrusive. You might. So, I’ll be a complete pain in the ass towards you, bug you, pester you, and tell you how silly and dangerous you are for a personal choice that is ultimately none of my business.” That’s screwed up. That’s intrusive, presumptuous, and at the very least, obnoxious.
Well said, yosemitebabe. Anthracite - you, I’m sure, have a personal ethical philosophy. I’m sure there is at least one thing in there that I don’t agree with. Well quick - let’s get it out into the open! Then I can attack it again and again and again and again just in case you ever decide to try to campaign to force us all to obey it (even though it could clearly never remotely become law anyway).
Honestly.
Fiver “action” is a perfectly good verb too, even if you personally don’t happen to like it. Oh no! You might force me to stop using it! Quick, I better make sure I start a pit thread about people not using the word “action”!
Scylla - reasoned arguments? It is to laugh! All you’ve presented are your opinions. Well your opinions are indeed valid, and by your philosophy there is nothing stopping you eating meat. But all I’ve seen from you is an attempt, basically, to say that “nature is suffering” and a lameass attempt to deny all links between artificial cattle feed and disease.
How dare you take offence at “emotional rebuttal”. After all, emotion is exactly what we are talking about!. We’re talking about people’s personal ethics - and that is emotion.
I’ll say it again - putting a steak on pld’s plate is like serving up dead baby on yours. I’ll even tell you that the baby died of natural causes. Why won’t you eat it? But it won’t harm you! But the baby was dead anyway! But there’s nothing you can do to stop baby death!
These arguments are horseshit. You don’t want to eat it because the idea of it repulses you. That’s it. Any attempt to pursuade you otherwise is, to use yosemitebabe’s expression, obnoxious.
And jab - you really must be desperate when you start telling us what’s natural. Good god - I thought we were long past the stage where we were slave to instinct and following the laws of the jungle.
pan
Hm. On this thread, Scylla says
As I told you on the other thread, it could be taken that your “belief system” is that you think some vegetarians’ reasons are “silly” and “flawed”. You say that they are dangerous, because ALL “ignorance” is dangerous. And yet you insist that you really won’t try to force us to change? Why not? We are so ignorant and dangerous, after all. I see no reason to believe that you REALLY don’t want to stop us from being vegetarians. Taking the “slippery slope” argument seriously, you’d almost HAVE to try to stop us, wouldn’t you? How can you just stand by and watch us be so dangerous?
So, why should we believe you? Why should we believe you really endorse our right to choose?
After all, you don’t seem to want to believe us when we tell you that we don’t want to get people to adhere to our “belief system”.
<sneaks into secret Conspiracy mode>
Look here, see, Vegetarians have been identified as the newest threat to the good ol’ American public. It turns out that people who engage in veganinataitirism don’t get fat. They have smaller butts than everyone else! And this be dangerous.
With them smaller butts, they fit in smaller seats, so we don’t need to spend millions of dollars revamping sports stadiums to accomodate the ever-wider ass of sports fans. That’s a direct assault on tax-avoiding business types!
Them smaller butts go hand in hand with a tendency to shop at <ooh. ick> thrift stores. They actually buy clothes that somebody else wore:eek: Which means they ain’t shopping at the Gap, Old Navy, or anywhere else that exploits Third world sweatshop workers, and that’s gonna cut into the profits of your mutual fund, sure as the sun’s gonna shine tomorrow!
But the worst bit about them folks as can’t abide by the taste of flesh is that they’re healthier than us sane omnivorous types. They don’t get all fat and all them obesity diseases like athlerorror skelerosisshus and varicose veins and die of heart attacks. You know what that means? They make less health insurance claims. and any second now some accountant git with a chart is gonna notice that people who check off “vegianismitalims” on their flight seating arrangement live longer, and they’ll end up getter better insurance premiums, which means good, honest, meat-eating folk like you and me will have to pay more to see a sawbones. and paying more, that’s just dangerous
I’m wasn’t saying anyone on here was a “threat”, or anyone on this Board for that matter. I was trying to explain in a little more detail why some people may be bothered at heart.
There seems to be a certain “stigma” associated with believing in the slippery slope. Unfortunately, IMO, all too often the slippery slope is real life. One can look to the “causes” of gun control, personal safety equipment (seatbelts, airbags, carseats, motorcycle helmet laws, etc), and other issues.
Here, let me be an ass and ask this of vegetarians/vegans:
-
Do you truly believe killing animals for their meat is murder? Or that it is immoral?
-
If the answer to (1) is “yes”, don’t you think you have a duty to stop it, in all its forms?
-
And if (2) is true, doesn’t that duty include preventing me from committing murders too?
-
Thus, if 1-3 are true, is it not logical that I should expect that you will want to affect my personal decisions?
If (1) is true, what justification is there for not trying to stop the crimes against nature committed by myself and others?
If you don’t believe killing animals for meat/etc is murder or immoral, than none of the above applies.
As I said, I personally am not terribly worried about the slippery slope, because I honestly do think the issue will go away. However, I still think it does exist.
Even allowing for (2) and (3), which are themselves tricky issues (no, I don’t think that one’s personal ethics necessates impacting others), your error is in (4). Why should vegetarians ever have the ability to actually do (4)?
pan
I would find it more than a little audacious for someone to be in other threads stating that it is always wrong to kill any person at any time for any reason, but to then describe a belief that it is wrong to cause unnecessary suffering in creatures capable of feeling it as “ignorant and dangerous.” One might be give pause to wonder what such a person was smoking. IIRC, that person also has some odd opinions about gun control.
This thread is funny, though, because the more I read the posts, the more I learn about myself through other people. Take this, for example:
Oh no! We can’t have people having screwy opinions! Such a thing is impermissible in polite society! We must eye them with great suspicion! We must ever be on the alert against hearing ideas which differ from our own!
Everyone, everywhere, believes at least one thing that is fundamentally stupid. I guess we’re all screwed.
Yes, because I have read, and decided to post something substantial. Although not that substantial, I suppose. I am trying to illustrate the slippery slope in this issue, and to find out how vegetarians/vegans feel on this.
I used to think vegetarians/vegans were a bit “wacky”. That’s because I was stupid and ignorant on the issue. Now I think the opposite - they are smart people who just have some different beliefs.
However, I keep coming back to my point above. If eating meat is “criminal” in nature, and/or immoral, than why should I be allowed to continue committing these crimes or being immoral? Let’s say that commercial farms are cruel and inhumane. No, let’s not argue, let’s say they are. How can I be allowed to keep supporting these farms by eating meat? Am I not part of the crime there too? And if so, shouldn’t the farms and I be stopped - by legislation?
It just seems hard to believe that a person would feel meat is murder and not mind enough that the murder continues that they feel they should do anything possible to stop it. And look down on me for being an immoral criminal. Do y’all see what I’m getting at here?
I cannot speak to this point because I don’t think that eating meat is immoral. I’ve said so throughout the thread. However, I will point out by way of analogy that there are many pro-choicers who are clear that an abortion is the killing of a human fetus, and think doing so is wrong, but would not choose to restrict other women from doing so.
**
You don’t have to stop eating meat–you can actively petition to make those farms and slaughterhouses more humane and less cruel. And it doesn’t even have to be through legislation. Market forces can be very powerful.