[Closed] Please explain Veganism to me . . .

I equate it to dead flesh, but this does not revolt me.

Which "nutters" action on other sides are you attempting to equate this with?

Presumably the girl knocking a tray of ham sandwiches to the floor.

How does pouring gravy on food make someone a "nutter" ?

Reaching over someone else's food who you know is a vegan and pouring gravy on it - that's being a nutter, don't you think?

Its still a binary choice tom there is no middle way between eats meat and does not eat meat and your floundering attempts to prevent yourself just admitting this error are risible.

Again, you've misunderstood. You genuinely think I give a shit about what veggies eat, all I care about is the arguments you and others have used to justify your choice. You are pro-abortion yes Junky? If so, do not pretend any well thought out philosophical standpoint ever influenced your decision to not eat meat.

You are pro-abortion yes Junky? If so, do not pretend any well thought out philosophical standpoint ever influenced your decision to not eat meat.

There you go again. Strange.

I just have a psychotic dislike for poor logic.

You are pro-abortion yes Junky? If so, do not pretend any well thought out philosophical standpoint ever influenced your decision to not eat meat.

Life must be a struggle.

Again I am not against peoples decision to eat or not eat meat, just their arguments for doing so.

Fair enough. Care to deconstruct the flaw in my argument, then?

In case you missed it: I don't eat meat because I find the concept of eating lumps of animals to be gross and barbaric, and I'm lucky enough to live in a society where it's wholly optional, so I choose not to.

I'd have problems with handling bleeding lumps of flesh and innards, and consider that it would be massively hypocritical of me to cheerfully put something in my mouth that earlier I'd have been squeamish about putting in my hands, so long as someone deals with the wetwork for me first.

What have you got for me, logic boy?

I think that the best way around the disassociation between killing animals and the food we eat would be to introduce hunting onto the primary school curriculum. Maybe with spears.

That way, once you've stalked an animal, ended its life with a well aimed sharp implement, ripped its guts out while 'blooding' your mates with its entrails, then roasted it on an open spit, you can make a decision on your future dietry requirements from there.

I've suggested this to the local education authority, but the bloody Guardian reading veggies were aghast at the idea, and immediately dismissed it.

There's simply no bloody pleasing some people!

so the best you can come up with is they used technically correct words you dont like.

Which is why I said "it's not been huge on this thread" and explicitly mentioned that they are indeed technically correct.

As to whether or not "meat" as a term is used to make it subconciously easier to handle, maybe for some but in general I doubt it - the word for "flesh" and "meat" is the same in Spain, and there are far fewer vegetarians here for example. I think most people like meat and don't particularly care about where it comes from.

Fair enough. Care to deconstruct the flaw in my argument, then?

In case you missed it: I don't eat meat because I find the concept of eating lumps of animals to be gross and barbaric, and I'm lucky enough to live in a society where it's wholly optional, so I choose not to.

Then it's an emotional choice, nothing more. But your use of the term barbaric implies that you think that others are barbaric. At least dead chickens get used for something, what do dead foetuses get used for?

I'm genuinely struggling to understand the link to Abortion that Tom keeps mentioning...

How does pouring gravy on food make someone a "nutter" ?

Would you eat a burger I'd urinated on? That's exactly how it feels to me when someone tips meat juices all over my food. Is deliberately (as opposed to innocently / accidentally) ruining someone's dinner "normal behaviour"?

You are pro-abortion yes Junky?

It's about agency, chickens have none - nor do foetuses. That is partly why we justify killing the latter. What is so barbaric about killing the former, if you are willing to do the latter.

Then it's an emotional choice, nothing more.

Arguably. What if it is?

But your use of the term barbaric implies that you think that others are barbaric. At least dead chickens get used for something, what do dead foetuses get used for?

You really are reaching now, aren't you. Dead foetuses get used for, as a random example, preserving the long-term sanity of rape victims.

Are you here for the five minutes or the full half hour?

So let me get this straight, you think that because I may support a woman over her choice of what happens to her own body, my choice of not eating meat is some-how morally* bankrupt?

Really?

* suggests of course that you only see one reason not to eat meat...

{quote] You really are reaching now, aren't you. Dead foetuses get used for, as a random example, preserving the long-term sanity of rape victims.

Chickens can be used for food in areas that can't grow arable crops. Importing arable food to these places increases CO2 output, killing more fluffy bunnies. Plenty of utilitarian uses for eating meat to justify the practice.

Do you only support aborttion for rape cases then?

So let me get this straight, you think that because I may support a woman over her choice of what happens to her own body, my choice of not eating meat is some-how morally bankrupt?

Really?

Pretty much, with the caveat...only if you think you are morally superior to those who do eat meat.

So, in summary, there are two main arguments for/against vegetarianism: are you pro-choice and does preparing meat (aka flesh) make you feel icky?

What is so barbaric about killing the former, if you are willing to do the latter.

Fundamentally, I don't believe that I have a right to tell someone else what they can and can't do with their bodies. Which is why I'm not a preachy vegetarian and why I don't think women should be banned from removing a bunch of cells from their bodies before it turns into something they'll have to look after 24/7 for the next two decades of their life.

As straw men go, this is a particularly good one.

Killing animals for no other reason than we really like it, on the other hand, sounds like the sort of thing they'll be reading about with disbelief in text books in a millennium or two.

[i]only if you think you are morally superior to those who do eat meat[/i]

I think that's only going on in your head TBH.

I haven't seen one veggie on this thread claim moral superiority, most of us are pretty aware of the caveats and compromises we have chosen to make.

what do dead foetuses get used for?

Do you only support aborttion for rape cases then?

Tom are you feeling ok? Have you considered exercising this obsession with aborted feotuses on another thread?

only if you think you are morally superior to those who do eat meat

I think I'm morally superior to those who make rubbish straw man arguments. Does that mean I'm not allowed to be pro-choice?

In case you missed it: I don't eat meat because I find the concept of eating lumps of animals to be gross and barbaric, and I'm lucky enough to live in a society where it's wholly optional, so I choose not to.

And I fully support your choice not to

In fact can't think of any significant voice within the meat eating community that would oppose your choice not to, or would try to impose their own moral code on you and demand that veggie burgers were banned or force you to eat meat.

There are actual organisations however, with real significant membership numbers, that seek to impose that on the meat eating community, and to remove or undermine their choice to eat what they want.

Please don't.
It might be irrelevant but at least it's irrelevant in one place.

Chickens can be used for food in areas that can't grow arable crops. Importing arable food to these places increases CO2 output, killing more fluffy bunnies. Plenty of utilitarian uses for eating meat to justify the practice.

This affects me how?

Do you only support aborttion for rape cases then?

Sorry, I thought an example would be sufficient to counter your frankly barking argument, I didn't realise you'd need a full and exhaustive list.

Pretty much, with the caveat...only if you think you are morally superior to those who do eat meat.

Never really gave it much thought to be honest. Can't really see the logic in why I would though, as I've said several times now I'm not (primarily) vegetarian for moral reasons, it's just a happy side-effect.

There are actual organisations however that seek to impose that on the meat eating community, and to undermine their choice to eat what they want.

Go on then, which ones?

There are actual organisations however that seek to impose that on the meat eating community, and to undermine their choice to eat what they want.

And you were doing so well for a moment there. Why do you keep repeating the same point when I've already answered it several times now?

Because trying to point to them as a small minority of 'extremists' doesnt reflect many meat eaters experience of interacting with veggies.

How often do you interact with extremists? I'm not even sure who you're referring to, they're such a large part of my experience.

Again, you've misunderstood.

Reading the thread so you think is working for you

* I'm not for or against eating meat,
for fear or repeating myself you either are for it and eat meat or you are against it and dont eat meat. There is no other option available - well there is the one you are doing now but its unhinged gibberish that makes you look bonkers.

Which "nutters" action on other sides are you attempting to equate this with?

How does pouring gravy on food make someone a "nutter" ?

well campylobacter is less of an issue for veggies so less flame needed

its easy to cross contaminate though.

on the flip side, if you are an organic veggie there is a significant increase risk of faecal bacteria on your food.

How often do you interact with extremists?

Because trying to point to them as a small minority of 'extremists' doesnt reflect many meat eaters experience of interacting with veggies.

Because trying to point to them as a small minority of 'extremists' doesnt reflect many meat eaters experience of interacting with veggies.

And your logical fallacy is... *spins the wheel*...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Most meat-eaters'experience of interacting with most veggies day to day will go unnoticed as we don't wear signs and usually only mention it when we have to. And when you do find out, it only sticks as memorable when you find a shouty one. This is basically the "all cyclists are..." argument again; [i]"trying to point to [s]them[/s] [b]idiots on bikes[/b] as a small minority of 'extremists' doesnt reflect many [s]meat eaters[/s] [b]car drivers'[/b] experience of interacting with [s]veggies[/s] [b]cyclists[/b]."[/i]

You and a couple of others keep implying that the world is seemingly overrun by militant vegetarians on a mission to take over the world armed with lentils and tofu. Yet, often go all quiet when asked if this actually happens to them on a regular basis, if ever. It's lazy, tedious and inaccurate.

And even if you were right, the fact remains that they [i]are[/i] extremists, they aren't representative, so these 'many meat eaters' perceptions are skewed.

Because trying to point to them as a small minority of 'extremists' doesnt reflect many meat eaters experience of interacting with veggies.

So most veggies are extremists? They must all be members of these organisations who you still haven't named yet who want to force everyone to be veggie.

You and a couple of others keep implying that the world is seemingly overrun by militant vegetarians on a mission to take over the world armed with lentils and tofu

Those who ignore the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them

Your posts on here are cast iron proof of that.

Those who ignore the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them

Is it me or has this thread got a bit silly this lunchtime?

It's just you. It's been a bit silly for way longer than that. (-:

many meat eaters experience of interacting with veggies.

Been thinking about this and I reckon most meat eaters experience of interacting with veggies goes something like...

- Oh so do you eat fish then?
- No

Extremists indeed 🙂

I don't think I've ever really encountered nutty aggressive vegetarians/vegans.

I think what D0nk alluded to earlier is true though. Vegans/vegetarians here aren't being preachy but when you say you aren't claiming any moral high ground - when you say you are vegetarian/vegan for moral reasons you are inherently claiming some kind of moral superiority.

You could argue it's insecurity on the part of meat eaters knowing they should at least eat less meat, I'm sure there's an element of that sometimes. I reckon I should eat less meat, and should definitely pretty much never eat factory produced meat. There does seem to be a bit of an assumption though that vegetarian/vegan = people who care about animal welfare and ethical consumption, omnivore = someone who doesn't. Maybe it's all in my head but I don't think so.

Killing animals for no other reason than we really like it, on the other hand, sounds like the sort of thing they'll be reading about with disbelief in text books in a millennium or two.

You mean a bit like people carrying out abortions because they like sex a bit too much? 😆

when you say you are vegetarian/vegan for moral reasons you are inherently claiming some kind of moral superiority

That is BS what I am saying is that you are morally inferior 😉

See cougar point above

I think meat eaters can care and they can make it nicer/better with more ethical choices but the basic sticking point,for some, is is it good or bad to kill animals for food ?

No matter how nicely you do it it will still be considered bad by some non meat eaters.

In the same way we can have a "humane" execution or death by a thousand cuts . I am note sure either is good but one is certainly worse

Killing animals for no other reason than we really like it, on the other hand, sounds like the sort of thing they'll be reading about with disbelief in text books in a millennium or two.

You mean a bit like people aborting because they liked sex a bit too much? 😀

Keep up with the ad hom though guys.

This affects me how?

Because omnivore diets with a little bit of meat are a bit greener, you selfish planet destroyer. 😀 I suppose you pollute the planet with your toxic prius batteries and reduce food security for the developing world by buying organic as well 😀 ......you barbarian Cougar

when you say you are vegetarian/vegan for moral reasons you are inherently claiming some kind of moral superiority.

The assumption I suppose hinges on whether not eating meat really [i]is[/i] the more moral choice or whether it's subjective opinion. Is moral superiority being implied or inferred here?

Ie, the veggie states "I don't eat meat because I think it's the right thing to do," then either the meat eater doesn't agree that it's the right thing to do in which case there's no moral advantage to either party; or the meat-eater agrees that it's the right thing to do but can't bring themselves to do it, in which case their feeling of moral inferiority is because in that instance they are actually morally inferior.

I could be talking toot of course, cod (substitute) philosophy isn't really my forté.

Which post by Cougar JY?

I'm not quite following his claim not to be vegetarian for moral reasons but then saying he doesn't eat meat because it's barbaric.

Personally I'm quite strongly into scientific scepticism and I think it pays to challenge ones assumptions and preconceptions. I'm not sure that assuming that vegetarian = better for animals without thinking through other factors is good logic. As above I know veges who eat a lot of eggs and have never considered how many chickens die to produce those eggs. But it seems pointing out stuff like that is deemed as borderline bullying or something.

You mean a bit like people carrying out abortions because they like sex a bit too much?

Yes, because that's exactly why most people typically have abortions, as a convenient form of birth control. 🙄

I'm not quite following his claim not to be vegetarian for moral reasons but then saying he doesn't eat meat because it's barbaric.

I think you may have misunderstood (or cherry-picked) there. That's not really what I said. Or at least, it is, but that wasn't the crux of the explanation.