main
side
curve
  1. In Memory of LAJ_FETT: Please share your remembrances and condolences HERE

vegetarianism

Discussion in 'Archive: The Senate Floor' started by AnakinsGirl, Jan 6, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Blue_Jedi33

    Blue_Jedi33 Jedi Grand Master star 5

    Registered:
    Aug 12, 2003
    Devilinse

    So based on your feelings on this topic I guess you might just starve to death.:p
     
  2. AnakinsGirl

    AnakinsGirl Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 2, 2001
    i may sound like a crazed PETA nut, but at least i don't sound like an ignorant fool who completely avoids the point i was trying to make. if you dont have a legitimate rebuttle, resorting to making stabs at a person's character is pointless and stupid, and only further proves that you A) have no idea what you're talking about or B) dont have a strong enough argument to make.

    at least those crazed PETA nuts believe in something enough to do something about it, which is less than can be said about most other people.

    and no, as a matter of fact, i am NOT a member of PETA. i don't need a bunch of vegan propoganda on my side to prove that the meat industry is corrupt, hurtful, and wrong and i don't need to resort to it when--for example--quoting medical and scientific fact that people who follow a balanced vegetarian diet are much healthier than people who eat meat.

    so congratulations on completely missing my point and for proving to me that you have absolutely *nothing* to say in your own defense.

    people just assume that when someone knows more about what they are talking about than themselves, the person must be a fanatic or crazed psychopath. i don't know, maybe that's what books and education can do to you, ya know?
     
  3. lomion

    lomion Jedi Youngling star 3

    Registered:
    May 22, 2004
    Actually most scientific data states that a balanced diet including some meat is the healthiest. Anything else is simply a propagandist study.

    An exmaple, folic acid. Folic acid is very important to early natal development and to the bodies ability to repair DNA. The best sources tend to be red meat or leafy green vegetable, but the FDA requires it to be added to many whole grains and the like. Note the important part here is it's required to be added. Also food poisoning from vegetable and fruit sources has risen in recent years.

    As for PETA. PETA is really not a great orginization to refer to. Considering they put out ads encouraging underage drinking, and also have ads that lie about some of the nutritional value of things. They also had an interesting letter to Yassar Arafat http://www.peta.org/feat/arafat/

    They ask him to not hurt animals in his suicide bombing. The absurdity of that letter. But I digress.

    If anyone wants to be a vegetarian or a vegan, then fine. But to claim some moral high ground is absurd. Eat what you want and don't try and make yourself feel superior because of it I say. Also the meat industry does have problems, but some ppl are trying to change the meat industry with varying levels of success. I heard an interview with Temple Grandin about this. She is an interesting person who works to design better facilities for livestock and the meat industry. I think that is the best thing to do, not destroy the industry but change it. People are not going to stop eating meat anytime soon.
     
  4. darthOB1

    darthOB1 Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Mar 22, 2000
    Animals are alive, vegetables are alive, fruits are alive, gains are alive, and herbs are alive.

    Eat rock!

     
  5. Darth_Smileyface

    Darth_Smileyface Jedi Youngling star 2

    Registered:
    Apr 22, 2004
    I agree with lomion. Eat what you want. There is no moral highground to be claimed here (or in any other instance) since morality is ultimately subjective. I resent the idea that someone should tell me how to live my life on the basis that their beliefs are superior to mine. In a pluralistic society who determines which morality should prevail?
     
  6. AnakinsGirl

    AnakinsGirl Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 2, 2001
    i'm not necissarily saying you shouldnt eat meat. i'm saying you shouldnt support the industry, or that you should demand change. if the industry were different, i might be eating meat, too.
    i dont think it should be brought down. but if enough people demand to have wholesome, organically raised cows, the businessmen that run slaughterhouses will have no choice but to comply with consumer demands, lest they be run out of business. to completely have the industry destroyed is entirely based on choice. it is the choice of the consumer, to stop supporting it and it is also up to the supplier, to refuse to respond to its consumers' wishes.

    people wont stop eating meat soon. but people should demand higher and safer quality meat that is better for the animal and you and the workers at the slaughterhouses.

    plus, cutting back on meat consumption is good for the environment!!!
     
  7. lomion

    lomion Jedi Youngling star 3

    Registered:
    May 22, 2004
    plus, cutting back on meat consumption is good for the environment!!!

    How so? Consider the damage agrocorps can do to the enviroment is just as bad. The problem is more about the population of the planet and food needs than anything.

    A good example of overfarming is the Dust Bowl of the 1930s. A lot of farming combined with a drought created one of the worst periods and area in the US in it's history. A good example of the damages that can be down by livestock is some pig farms.
     
  8. AnakinsGirl

    AnakinsGirl Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 2, 2001
    less cows = less water, less oil.

    to amount of water and oil it takes to raise a cow is dramtically less than it takes to sustain a crop. i have statistics....somewhere....
     
  9. lomion

    lomion Jedi Youngling star 3

    Registered:
    May 22, 2004
    I'd love to see those stats. Evreything I have looked at suggests that irrigation uses a lot more water than cattle farmers do. Irrigation uses quite a bit of water and energy.

    I read somewhere it can take 1-3 tons of water for a single rice crop. As for cattle I checked and it seems like they use about 50 liters/day on average. I'd have to sit down and do some serious math to figure it out in the end. But it does not seem to be it's automatically better. Have you ever seen the devastation overfarming can do to a region?

    The larger worry, imho, with environmental concerns with the meat industry is contamination. Something needs to be done to reduce that in a big way. One also wonders what effects pesticides and fertilizers have on the environment.
     
  10. AnakinsGirl

    AnakinsGirl Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 2, 2001
    that too. lemme get those stats.

    EDIT: according to "the food revolution", which is a reliable source considering all of Robbins' statistics are cited and attributed.

    Water required to produce one pound of US Beef, 2,500 gallons.

    to produce 1 pound of lettuce: 23 gallons
    tomatoes: 23 gallons
    potatoes: 24 gallons
    1 pound of wheat: 25 gallons
    1 pound of carrots: 33 gallons
    of apples: 49 gallons
    1 pound of chicken: 815 gallons
    pork: 1, 630 gallons

    meat produced in the southeast takes much less water. meat produced in the southwest takes much more.
     
  11. Master_Fwiffo

    Master_Fwiffo Jedi Master star 3

    Registered:
    May 29, 2001
    I'm gonna post a rant from Maddox, plus this picture which I find hilarious.
    [image=http://maddox.xmission.com/bigpot6.jpg]

    This article has been edited for content. WHile Maddox is highly offensive (which I've done a lot to tone down), everything he brings up is a good point.
    ***

    I was looking over a menu in a restaurant the other day when I saw a section for vegetarians; I thought to myself "boy, I sure am glad that I'm not a meat-hating fascist" and I skipped on to the steak section (because I'll be darned if I'm going to pay $15 for an alfalfa sandwich, slice of cucumber and a scoop of cold cottage cheese), but before I turned the page something caught my eye. The heading of the vegetarian section was titled "Guiltless Grill," not because there were menu items with fewer calories and cholesterol (since there were "healthy" chicken dishes discriminated against in this section), but because none of the items used animal products. Think about that phrase for a second. What exactly does "guiltless grill" imply? So I'm supposed to feel guilty now if I eat meat? Screw you.

    What pisses me off so much about this phrase is the sheer narrow-mindedness of these vegetarians. You think you're saving the world by eating a tofu-burger and sticking to a diet of grains and berries? Well here's something that not many vegetarians know (or care to acknowledge): every year millions of animals are killed by wheat and soy bean combines during harvesting season (source at bottom). Oh yeah, go on and on for hours about how all of us meat eaters are going to hell for having a steak, but conveniently ignore the fact that each year millions of mice, rabbits, snakes, skunks, possums, squirrels, gophers and rats are ruthlessly murdered as a direct result of YOUR dieting habits.

    That's right: the gloves have come off. The vegetarian response to this embarrassing fact is "well, at least we're not killing intentionally." So let me get this straight; not only are animals ruthlessly being murdered as a direct result of your diet, but you're not even using the meat of the animals YOU kill? At least we're eating the animals we kill (and although we also contribute to the slaughter of animals during grain harvesting, keep in mind that we're not the ones with a moral qualm about it), not just leaving them to rot in a field somewhere. That makes you just as morally repugnant than any meat-eater any day. Not only that, but you're killing free-roaming animals, not animals that were raised for feed. Their bodies get mangled in the combine's machinery, bones crushed, and you have the audacity to point fingers at the meat industry for humanely punching a spike through a cow's neck? If you think that tofu burgers come at no cost to animals or the environment, guess again.

    To even suggest that your meal is some how "guiltless" is absurd. The defense "at least we're not killing intentionally" is bull anyway. How is it not intentional if you KNOW that millions of animals die every year in combines during harvest? You expect me to believe that you somehow unintentionally pay money to buy products that support farmers that use combines to harvest their fields? Even if it was somehow unintentional, so what? That suddenly makes you innocent? I guess we should let drunk drivers off the hook too since they don't kill intentionally either, right? There's no way out of this one. The only option left for you dip****s is to buy some land, plant and pick your own crops. Impractical? Yeah, well, so is your diet.

    Even if combines aren't used to harvest your food, you think that buying fruits and vegetables (organic or otherwise) is any better? How do you think they get rid of bugs that eat crops in large fields? You think they just put up signs and ask parasites to politely go somewhere else? One of the methods they use to get rid of pests is to introduce a high level of predators for each particular prey, which wreaks all sorts of havoc on the natural balance of predator/prey populations--causing who knows what kind of damage to the environment.

    A nu
     
  12. AnakinsGirl

    AnakinsGirl Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 2, 2001
    good points. except he forgot to research the fact that most animals arent killed humanely in the meat industry anyways.

    and unintentional or unknowing *does* make you partially innocent. if you do as much research as you possibly can with the means available to you, then yes you are innocent. however, if you just make assumptions or choose not to do thorough research on the topic, then you are held accountable.

    either way, animals will be killed due to human actions, and resources will ahve to be used. but with a plant-based diet, fewer animals die and fewer resources are exhausted.
     
  13. lomion

    lomion Jedi Youngling star 3

    Registered:
    May 22, 2004
    Well the stats that Robbins uses in his book are even disputed by vegetarians and ppl "on his side". Do you have any other sources? You neglected to mention his numbers for beef water usage range from 2500 to 12000 gallons per pound. The conservative estimates are about 430/lb. The actual number is most likely somewhere in between.

    Some of the other info in his books can be misleading, but he does have some good things he mentions. He has an agenda for his books which any reader needs to understand.

    His books do outline one problem, the way business has treated the food industry in recent years. But this is a combination of factors including increased population and profit motives.
     
  14. Green_Jedi33

    Green_Jedi33 Jedi Youngling star 3

    Registered:
    Nov 9, 2004
    They ask him to not hurt animals in his suicide bombing.

    Just to make a further mockery of this... (can't resist)


    Click here!
     
  15. Charn

    Charn Jedi Master star 8

    Registered:
    Dec 23, 2004
    well that really depends on why you are a vegitarian. If you think it's mean to kill animals for food then I don't think that is a good answer. Animals do not have souls, and the bible says it's ok to eat meat. If you don't eat meat because you can't stand to think this was once inside an animal then fair enough. The real question is about vegans.
     
  16. SaberGiiett7

    SaberGiiett7 Jedi Grand Master star 6

    Registered:
    Jul 2, 2002
    I have considered becoming a vegetarian. I have since learned that animals' lives don't supercede those of humans for nourishment. I probably would if non-animal sources of protein weren't so scarce and bland.

    <[-]> Saber
     
  17. Green_Jedi33

    Green_Jedi33 Jedi Youngling star 3

    Registered:
    Nov 9, 2004
    Charn said:

    Animals do not have souls

    Since you mentioned the bible in your post, I figure you esteem it as a reliable source from which to live by.... so....

    Prov. 12:10 - "The righteous one is caring for the soul of his domestic animal"

    So, as you can see, animals have souls.

    Ecclesiastes also has something interesting to say about animals in Chapter 3, but I'll let you research it yourself. :)
     
  18. Special_Fred

    Special_Fred Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Jul 30, 2003
    Maddox's rants against PETA are great! Here's another, written after PETA contacted him about the article posted by Master_Fwiffo above.

    So what exactly constitutes as "prevention" of animal suffering? The moral vegetarians (not the ones who do it for religious or health reasons) love to chant "we're trying to limit the suffering." What the hell does that mean? If you eat wheat or soy, you're not limiting anything. Unless you plant, grow and pick your own crops, you're not doing everything you can to "limit" the suffering. You know deep down that you could help limit a whole lot more suffering, but you've chosen not to. You've chosen not to because your lifestyle is too convenient, and you'd have to give up too much, but nevermind that--you have a conscience to feel good about, and you can't let a little thing like millions of violent deaths of field animals get in the way of your moral trip.

    Limit the suffering? That's like me saying I'm going to eat meat only 364 out of 365 days of the year in an effort to "limit" the suffering, I'm doing my part to prevent suffering. "BUT MADDOX, YOU COULD LIMIT A LOT MORE SUFFERING BY NOT EATING MEAT AT ALL!!!1" Exactly, and vegetarians could limit a lot more suffering by planting their own crops, but where do you draw the line? You claim to have compassion for animals, but just as soon as it gets too inconvenient you decide to call it quits? Cowards. You're no better off; not in my book. A murderer who kills 10 people is no better off than a murderer who kills 20 if the murder is avoidable. Of course, from the perspective of a suggestible young vegetarian I'm sure being responsible for half as many murders as the next guy means you're off the hook, right?

    I keep getting email from moral vegetarians saying "HEY MADOX WE FEED MORE GRAIN TO ANIMALS AND IF YOU EAT THE ANIMALS YOU ARE KILLING TWICE AS MUCH." No ****? The only difference is that I'm not protesting at street corners about other peoples' diets--I'm not the one with a mission to prevent "the suffering of living animals." This email I received, and many like it is the whole reason I wrote the article in the first place. My opinions are kept to myself on my personal web page. I don't remember asking anyone to read a damn thing on my website. When you open up your inbox, you don't find it full of my opinions, and if you do I didn't send them to you. I'm not standing on the street corners protesting, I'm not putting fliers on your car and I'm not putting ads on TV and in magazines. I'm not shoving my agenda down your throat, don't shove your agenda down mine. All you ******* activists need to get bent already.

    Fun with facts: vegetarians love to boast outrageous figures like "it takes 5,000 gallons of water to produce one pound of beef and only 20 gallons to produce one pound of wheat." I've heard figures ranging from 2,000 to 5,000, and vegetarians will be ****** if they include a source so we'll take the mean (that means "average") and go with 3,500. The average person consumes 1.5 million gallons of water every year (it takes water to grow and produce the food you eat in addition to the water you drink, quit emailing me you morons). Why isn't PETA protesting overpopulation of humans on the street corners? Why isn't PETA passing out free condoms or throwing javelins in your **** when you walk down the street if they really cared about water consumption? It's not like that water just suddenly disappears. The earth has had about the same amount of water for 2 billion years. So if a pound of beef takes 3,500 gallons of water, what difference does it make? How many vegetarians drive a car? To make a car (including tires), it takes about 40,000 gallons of fresh water. That's not including the gas it takes to run the car, the electricity to run the gas station, the water used to create the boat that brought your precious oil, the water used to create the pavement you drive on, the destruction of toxic chemicals that went into creating your clothes, and the electricity you use every day to send me stupid emails
     
  19. AnakinsGirl

    AnakinsGirl Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 2, 2001
    his rants are humorous, and he does make a good point. however, things cant always be taken to the extreme like that. thats just like saying, "people need to recycle more, therefore i refuse to eat use or buy anything that was transported or wrapped in plastic, paper, or foil."

    rather than take everything to the absolute extreme, why not recognise that both sides have a point and try to be in a happy, relative medium? yes, people waste alot. that doesn't mean you can or should COMPLETELY eliminate ANYTHING that might be considered "waste" from your lifestyle, but you can do your part by reducing what you use and recycle more.
    just like you can't say, "well, people waste so much so me making my own private effort to cut back on consumption doesn't matter in the scheme of things so i'll make absolutely no effort whatsoever to do *anything* to help the problem--in fact, i'll go out of my way and make it worse."

    PETA is extreme, and i'm not standing up for them or denouncing Maddox, i'm just saying you cant take everything to the absolute opposite end of things. not everything is black and white. in a utopian society, people would be living in their little clay huts, hunting meat and using animals' materials to sustain their way of life. the world wouldnt be overpopulated, and there would be a sustainable balance. we havent been here for thousands of years.

    all we can do is do our own, individual small part to make things a little better.
     
  20. Special_Fred

    Special_Fred Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Jul 30, 2003
    Well, obviously the Maddox material is satirical in nature, and cannot be taken too seriously, but he raises several good points. One in particular:

    "Unless you plant, grow and pick your own crops, you're not doing everything you can to "limit" the suffering. You know deep down that you could help limit a whole lot more suffering, but you've chosen not to."

    This is what angers many people, myself included, about vegans who claim the "moral high ground" by denouncing the consumption of animals. Yeah, sure, "do your part," that's great. But don't tell me I'm not doing enough, and I won't tell you you're doing too much. [face_peace]
     
  21. AnakinsGirl

    AnakinsGirl Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 2, 2001
    that quote had nothing to do with what you said. but i get your meaning. and whats wrong with too much?
     
  22. darthOB1

    darthOB1 Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Mar 22, 2000
    whoa greenie jedi hold on a sec. [face_talk_hand]

    I think you better clarify your statement:

    So, as you can see, animals have souls.

    They are souls, they do not posses them.
     
  23. Jarik

    Jarik Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jun 21, 2000
    darthob1....

    "They are souls, they do not posses them."

    What?
     
  24. JarJar Slayer

    JarJar Slayer Jedi Youngling star 2

    Registered:
    Jun 19, 2000
    I shudder to even ask this question.

    Is there any indication that Jesus ate meat? In the bible or anywhere else.

    Remember, if you're Christian, you must believe Jesus is without sin. So if he ate meat, then there's nothing morally wrong with it, if you're christian.
     
  25. J-Rod

    J-Rod Jedi Grand Master star 6

    Registered:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Off hand, I know he ate fish.

    But some people don't count fish as meat.

    EDIT: There are also Old-Testament verses saying eating meat is OK, except on Fridays. Then you eat fish.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.