I'm against eating them.

11/9/2005 8:38:36 PM

but seriously, you don't tell your kids about santa clause because they wouldn't accept the presents otherwise.

11/9/2005 8:39:37 PM

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=sponsor

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=grill

Quote :

"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 damned 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 stuck up vegetarian assholes. 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). 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. What's that? I'm sorry, I don't hear any more elitist banter from you pompous cocks. Could it be because your shit has been RUINED? 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 bullshit 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 dipshits is to buy some land, plant and pick your own crops. Impractical? Yeah, well, so is your stupid 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? Actually, I wouldn't put that suggestion past you hippies. 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. Oops, did I just expose you moral-elitists for being frauds? Damndest thing. A number of people have pointed out that the amount of grain grown to feed animals for slaughter every year is greater than the amount of grain grown for humans. So I guess the amount of grain grown for human consumption suddenly becomes negligible and we can conveniently ignore the fact that animals are still ruthlessly murdered either way because of your diet, right? Not to mention that the majority of grain grown for livestock is tough as rocks, coarse, and so low-grade that it's only fit for animal consumption in the first place. Spare me the "you could feed 500 people with the grain used to feed one cow" line of shit; it's not the same grain. Then there are the people who jump on the bandwagon with "you could plant billions of potatoes on the land used for cows"--good point, except for the fact that not every plot of land is equally fertile; you think farmers always have a choice on what they do with their land? Also, many vegetarians don't know (or care to acknowledge) that in many parts of the United States they have "control hunts" in which hunting permits are passed out whenever there is a pest problem (the pest here is deer, elk and antelope) that threatens wheat, soy, vegetable and other crops; this happens several times per year. Then some of you throw out claims that "we are trying to limit the suffering." How about you limit MY suffering and shut the hell up about your stupid diet for a change; nobody cares. Even if the number of animals that die in combine deaths every year isn't in the millions, even if it's just one, are you suggesting that the life of one baby rabbit isn't worth saving? Are you placing a value on life? Enjoy your tofu, murderers."

11/9/2005 8:42:16 PM

Yeah, but no amount of plant you eat is going to give you enough B-12 to live on

11/9/2005 8:51:30 PM

I don't necessarily think people who eat meat should feel guilty, I just don't think people should pretend their food doesn't come from a dead animal, which they often like to do. Also, if you're not willing to have killed the animal yourself, then you probably shouldn't be eating meat. Most people like to live in a fantasy world where they don't think about where their meat comes from, they just eat it. I would personally eat meat that was free range and killed humanly, but it's generally too expensive for my budget so I'm a vegetarian by default.

11/9/2005 8:52:07 PM

^^seaweed has a lot of b-12

11/9/2005 8:52:35 PM

No, not hardly! You may want to get more educated in this especially since you are a vegitarian and if you want to debate about human and animal nutrition.

B-12 does not occur in any plant product... it's a bacterial byproduct that occurs within the animal and absorbed in the meat of the animal.

We also have B-12 making bacteria in our gut, unfortunetly it is produced past the point in our GI tract that it can be absorbed.

Quote :

" Free range...killed humanly...."

and what by your definition is this?? I'm an animal science major and I can tell you that when you slaughter anything you want it to be as quick and efficent as possible. They don't have time to torture anything! and most people don't care for the taste of free range... the grass changes the taste and color of the meat! killing is killing... there's no fluff to it.


[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 9:03 PM. Reason : .]

11/9/2005 8:53:22 PM

Look, there's a bit of extremism on both sides of the debate, but this is the best quote I've seen in the whole discussion

Quote :

"I'm saying you should think about what you support in your actions. As a developed nation, we don't need meat. Seriously. Or at the very least, not in the quantities we consume it today, and not by the means we use."

Very true. I don't personally have any problem with eating meat, but we certainly don't need to eat it all the time. Some people don't think they're having a meal unless there's a slab of meat involved, and that's not only unhealthy, it's not environmentally sound. Also, that meat was likely from an animal that lived a tortured life.

When I eat meat now, it's usually only every few days (every 2 or 3), and then, it's organic, grass-fed, etc. Have you ever seen the way that industrially produced pigs, cows, and chickens are treated? Do you know the details of how that works? For some info, check out "Power steer," by michael pollan. IT's a pretty informational article.

http://www.mindfully.org/Food/Power-Steer-Pollan31mar02.htm

Anyway, cows are supposed to live in pastures and eat grass. They are NOT equipped to eat grain, and they are certainly not equipped to be cooped up so that they can't turn around. The only reason some industrial animals can survive in the conditions they're kept in is because they're pumped so full of antibiotics they hover between life and death. They're literally like zombies - not quite dead, but alive enough to be eaten... sort of.

When I eat an animal, I want to know it was as happy as possible for an animal that was going to be eaten. A chicken is supposed to live with a bunch of other chickens, scratching at the ground and eating insects. A pig is supposed to live in an area where it can wallow in the mud and be a pig.

Anyway, all I'm saying is that most human beings eat meat. In some native cultures, there are two words for full stomach: One that means full, and one that means full but craving meat. You can tell me all you want that we're not "real carnivores," and that's true - we're omnivores. However, in normal conditions, we either need to eat some meat or eat alot of supplements. That's fine if that's what you want to do, but it's absolutely not as healthy as eating some meat. Sure, eat meat that's raised ethically, but you need a little bit.

Well, that's my rant.

11/9/2005 9:04:20 PM

I dont really like that Maddox article. Instead of his:

"for every animal you dont eat, ill eat 3"

id sub this quote:

"for every animal you dont eat, theres a homeless guy that will eat that same animal out of a shit-lined shoe"

i do support hightened responsiblity in the meatpacking industry. id like to see todays stockyards phased out in favor of grass-grazing, but i just dont see that as a top priority for your money togo towards.

i wanted to have a discussion with you (to the girl standing up for PETA), but you chose to post an article by someone named Mona Wong who used veganism-advocation books as her sources. not exactly objective material. give me some university studies on this and ill believe you. Im still willing to listen if youll drop your pretention and actually REPLY TO THE PMs IVE BEEN SENDING YOU WANTING TO DISCUSS THIS.

please.

V interesting...did meat always used to be yellow before the modern stockyard/factory farm came into use? im a history major, i need to know these things for grad school in US history next year

[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 9:13 PM. Reason : .]

11/9/2005 9:05:54 PM

Quote :

" id like to see todays stockyards phased out in favor of grass-grazing"

This won't happen unless consumers change there buying habits...

Grazing cattle on grass changes the meats color... kind of yellowish (unless artificial color is added!)... and can even change the taste of the meat. Most people won't buy yellow meat.

11/9/2005 9:10:37 PM

FIrst off, B12 is a bacterial product that grows in all animals intestines (ours as well) off of the food you eat. But it isn't enough to live off of (nor is it for other animals). The best source is bacteria growin in fecal material. In developing countries where plants are'nt washed as well, veggies get plenty of B-12 (there are nutrition articles on this). Here there are strict aesthetic and cleanliness standards. I've even heard of cows who, because of how pesticides change their grazing environment, need B-12 injections.

As for the maddox arguement, it's old, unoriginal, and is based on faulty logic. See here for a refutation: http://courses.ats.rochester.edu/nobis/papers/leastharm.htm

I call it "torture" if you cram the animals in tiny cages where they barely have room to move around, burn their beaks off at birth, castrate them without anesthetic, ETC. The cheapest way to raise animals for food is to do so without much concern for their wellbeing (the only concern given when it coincides with the quality of the meat)

Nutrition... I've written a paper here: http://www4.ncsu.edu/~imrindos/veganism.doc on vegan nutrition. Vegan OUtreach has a great page that goes in-depth on vegan nutrition: http://www.veganhealth.org/sh/ . I believe the best indicator of proper nutrition is how you perform- I've won 2 gold and 1 bronze state champ bike medals this year on a vegan diet.

11/9/2005 9:19:22 PM

^and you can raise animals w/o doing any of this

im not arguing ethics, im arguing practicality. many people like meat and im not going to tell them not to eat it.

and i eat less meat now than i did in high school, when i was all-conference 2 straight years for cross country and a conference finalist twice in the 300 hurdles, so yeah, thats silly.

and are these sources coming from advocacy groups or objective research?

you gotta scrutinize these things, dont just look for your side and be happy.

[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 9:24 PM. Reason : .]

11/9/2005 9:23:10 PM

Quote :

"In developing countries where plants are'nt washed as well, veggies get plenty of B-12 "

The Vegitable isn't absorbing the B-12.
You are essencially just eating fecal matter to obtain your B-12.

So we concluded that Vegitables don't have B-12 in them.

Quote :

"FIrst off, B12 is a bacterial product that grows in all animals intestines (ours as well) off of the food you eat. But it isn't enough to live off of (nor is it for other animals). "

I said the first half before... the rest of your statement is incorrect.

Cows can make their own B-12 because the bacteria makes it before the point of digestion thus the cow can absorb it.

Quote :

"I've even heard of cows who, because of how pesticides change their grazing environment, need B-12 injections"

Not pesticides but with some antibiotics that are givin to cattle (for various reasons) can deplete this bateria and then you must supplement the cattle with B-12 until the bacteria can regenerate itself. (Usually a dose of Probios can shift the bacteria in a positive way an increase the good bacteria)

[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 9:31 PM. Reason : .]

11/9/2005 9:29:04 PM

These are from objective research- I like Vegan Outreach because they don't make up crap (I hear some sad veggies who say, "I don't need B12! That's a myth!").
I do not think we will ever have a 100% veggie world, and I'm not necessarily saying we should- but it shouldn't be the way it is now. Take a look at the Batswana, among other cultures, who use cattle for food, but acknowledge their life's dependency on it and treat the cows as life-givers. Then look here, where most people couldn't care less.

11/9/2005 9:29:21 PM

Plants do not produce B12, and neither to animals.
But plants can absorb B12: see Mozafar A, Oertli JJ. Uptake of microbially-produced vitamin (B12) by soybean roots. Plant and Soil. 1992;139:23-30

11/9/2005 9:35:08 PM

This is not passed on to the fruit by the Source to Sink relationship... thus we won't get it in our food.

11/9/2005 9:36:24 PM

Quote :

"No, not hardly! You may want to get more educated in this especially since you are a vegitarian and if you want to debate about human and animal nutrition. B-12 does not occur in any plant product... it's a bacterial byproduct that occurs within the animal and absorbed in the meat of the animal."

Quote :

"Moreover, many seaweeds contain what appears to be vitamin B-12, a vitamin normally found only in animal products. Avoiding B-12 deficiency has traditionally posed a problem for people on raw foods, vegan, macrobiotic, and vegetarian diets, but seaweed just might solve the problem. The source of the B-12 in seaweed remains a mystery (is it made by bacteria living on the surface or in the water?), and researchers wonder if it is not really B-12 but an “analogue” – something that resembles B-12 but cannot be utilized by the human body."

http://www.loveseaweed.com/health.html

Quote :

"Fermented soya products, seaweeds and algae have all been proposed as possible sources of B12."

http://www.vegsoc.org/info/b12.html

so yea, it doesn't have as much b-12 as meat and it might not actually be useful to humans, but it's there. Also, my only source of b-12 is eggs (which I eat about once a week), milk (around a glass a day), and seaweed. I go into the health center every couple months to get checked up and I don't have a b-12 deficiency on this diet.

Heh, and if you want to debate about human nutrition, you should learn to spell vegetarian.

11/9/2005 9:41:00 PM

"Soybean, barley, and spinach plants were then grown in pots of 2.5 kg of soil. 10 g dry manure was added to each pot. Plant parts were thoroughly washed to remove any soil before B12 was measured.
B12 Analogue (ng/g) in Plants1
nothing addedto soil "organic"(10 g dry manure added)
soybeans 1.6 2.9
barley kernels 2.6A 9.1A
spinach 6.9B 17.8B
A,B - Statistically significant difference between groups with same letters

Further analysis showed that most or all of the B12 analogue in the plants was unbound. Mozafar concluded that plant uptake of B12 from the soil, especially from soil fertilized with manure, could provide some B12 for humans eating the plants, and may be why some vegans, who do not supplement with B12, do not develop B12 deficiency. "

11/9/2005 9:41:12 PM

god damn, cow is some tasty shit.

11/9/2005 9:46:59 PM

The key word littered in that statment and paper is could...

One research is not enough proof to conclude anything yet, nor have they proved if it is actually available for human digestion.

There is lots of research and proof that contradicts that study. Until more research is done you can't use that as your complete defense and argument, it just doesn't hold up.

It's still theory at the moment not fact, although very interesting.

It also suprises me that if they were really certain of such a thing that no other reasearch has been done in past 14 years, since the paper was written in 1992. That says a little something about the research.



[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 9:55 PM. Reason : .]

11/9/2005 9:49:03 PM

Quote :

"As for the maddox arguement, it's old, unoriginal, and is based on faulty logic. See here for a refutation:"

Said refutation is flawed in that it does not actualy refute the maddox argument. It may refute least harm, but even there it's shakey at best. To address the flaws one by one:

Quote :

"first, Davis makes a mathematical error in using total rather than per capita estimates of animals killed"

Maddox argument part II suggests that you are here placing a value on certain lives over another, in short, chosing which animals should live and which should die, and in the end, making the same fundamental choice that people who eat meat do. The difference is, where I am deciding an animal should die because I want to live, you are deciding an animal should die because you want a cow to live.

Quote :

"second, he focuses on the number of animals killed in production and ignores the welfare of these animals;"

Once again, we are placing value judgements on life, and now going a step further to say it's better to kill than to allow animals to suffer even if alive, which of course leads one to ask why we object to an existance for the animal where their life is artificialy short, designed from begining to end to be as fast (including death) as possible. I assure you that it hurts the animal far more to be hunted down and shot instead of having a spike driven through the back of it's head. Is it worse for the animal to live a short and prisoned life or a long life where death is handed out by disease, peredator or failure of body? Who are we to say?

Quote :

"and third, he does not count the number of animals who may be prevented from existing. "

This I can even begin to fathom why it has relevance to it being better to kill animals in captivity or run them over with a thresher.

In short, your refutation is a refutation of the argument that grain production kills more animals, when the maddox argument is that life if life and if you value one, you must value all.

11/9/2005 9:49:49 PM

^^ the point is, you can have a non-meat diet and get enough b-12.

On a side note, has anyone seen the Wallace and Gromit movie? Everytime they say the word "veg" I swear it sounds like "vag" they even reference a "vag eating monster." I got a kick out of that.

11/9/2005 9:54:59 PM

Veg*nism is the path of least harm.
There may be a few deaths of animals like mice in harvesters, but all the more reason to grow your own food (like I do). But it takes many times more harvested plants to feed a cow that you can eat than to just eat the plants in the first place.
It is impossible to live 100% vegan in this modern world (for example, the rubber in tires involes animal products)- but I choose to be as close as I can to cruelty free.
"And why do you look at the splinter in your brother's eye, and not notice the
beam which is in your own eye?"

11/9/2005 9:56:37 PM

^^Point is... there is not enough substancial research to prove you can get enough B-12 From an all vegetable diet. All other research says otherwise.

unless of course you supplement with a daily vitamin.

[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 9:57 PM. Reason : .]

[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 10:07 PM. Reason : I don't multitask well]

11/9/2005 9:56:44 PM

I think is was supposed to sound like vag
Veg*ns taste better in that regard (seriously, what you eat influences how your cum tastes)

11/9/2005 9:57:56 PM

Yet there is proof that vegans who don't supplement have managed without animal or supplement sources of B12.
What's wrong with synthetic? Or slightly dirty food? It is possible. Just a bit hard to do so without supplementing in our society.

11/9/2005 9:59:32 PM

I agree it's harder for a vegan to get b-12, but it's easy for a vegetarian to get it without supplements or meat.

also, it's spelled vegetable

11/9/2005 10:04:33 PM

Quote :

"There may be a few deaths of animals like mice in harvesters, but all the more reason to grow your own food (like I do)."

Is not the mouse as deserving of life as the cow?

Quote :

"But it takes many times more harvested plants to feed a cow that you can eat than to just eat the plants in the first place. "

Quote :

"Not to mention that the majority of grain grown for livestock is tough as rocks, coarse, and so low-grade that it's only fit for animal consumption in the first place. Spare me the "you could feed 500 people with the grain used to feed one cow" line of shit; it's not the same grain."

Quote :

""And why do you look at the splinter in your brother's eye, and not notice the beam which is in your own eye?""

I'm not the one with the crisis of concience when I order a steak.

11/9/2005 10:08:08 PM

^^^Sure its possible. There are also people in the world who are immune to the HIV virus. It may even be that humans evolve to be able to become true vegans without the need of a supplement ever.

But at the current moment this is highly unlikely and it is also unlikely that humans as a whole could survive without synthetic supplements on a Vegan diet

^^ I still have to disagree with you, they need to be supplemented in our society, anyway, and somehow I don't see our culture embracing fecal matter as food (b/c of e-coli- salmonella etc.)

[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 10:12 PM. Reason : .]

11/9/2005 10:10:22 PM

I prefer B12 from bacterial cultures to murder and torture.

How could modern cattle production survive without hormones, antibiotics, genetic modification?

11/9/2005 10:12:38 PM

Go eat shit then... hahahah Sorry I couldn't help myself

And I still say, as an Animal science major and have grown up raising cows and horses that you aren't as well educated of the idustry as you need to be. You have no idea how good most animals raised for food have it (although there are those places where this is not the case, overall, the animals are very well taken care of)

It may be interesting for you to take a few ANS classes. You may learn a lot.

[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 10:21 PM. Reason : .]

11/9/2005 10:15:43 PM

Quote :

"How could modern cattle production survive without hormones, antibiotics, genetic modification?"

You could say the same with plant and crop production as well.

There has been more plant genetic modification then there has animal including GMO's. Plants are sprayed with chemicals and pesticides, growth hormones are used to control crop growth. They must do this to make a profit and to keep up with demand.

How could the modern crop production survive without hormones, chemicals and genetic modification?



[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 10:25 PM. Reason : .]

11/9/2005 10:17:49 PM

That's why I buy organic and grow on my own what I can. Any "fault" you find with how plants I eat are somehow "wrong", realize that in consuming any animal products, you're responsible for the same sevenfold. I consciously choose what I see as the least harm.

That's amusing about shit, because you don't realize how many bacteria from shit are still on your food. Meats are always on the list of the most dangerous foods because of E. Coli and other disease risks.

11/9/2005 10:23:36 PM

you can get b-12 from animal by-products too. Like I said, I eat eggs and seaweed and drink milk. I get regular check-ups and they check for b-12 deficiency. I get enough b-12 that I don't have a deficiency.

11/9/2005 10:24:27 PM

My point being, for every argument you give me, I can give you the same argument back... whether you want to admit it or not.

and most people can't afford "organically grown foods" nor for the average farmer do these crops yield enough to keep them profitable on a large scale.

Quote :

"realize that in consuming any animal products, you're responsible for the same sevenfold"

and that's an unfounded statement.


[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 10:31 PM. Reason : .]

11/9/2005 10:27:33 PM

Quote :

"That's why I buy organic and grow on my own what I can. Any "fault" you find with how plants I eat are somehow "wrong", realize that in consuming any animal products, you're responsible for the same sevenfold. I consciously choose what I see as the least harm. "

You assume least harm, I assume that either way the law of unintended consequences equalizes my choices. I'm not going to tell you you're wrong for what you chose to do, but don't tell me I'm wrong either. We're both chosing death, just different animals to kill.

Quote :

"and most people can't afford "organically grown foods" nor for the average farmer do these crops yield enough to keep them profitable on a large scale. "

To add to this, consider the environmental ramifications of everyone trying to grow their own food.

[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 10:38 PM. Reason : sdfgsfdg]

11/9/2005 10:31:51 PM

where does "vegan outreach" get their information from? thats not any different than saying "intelligent design is true! says the christian science assoc." until you can provide substantial proof that they get information from actual, unbiased research.

11/9/2005 10:33:18 PM

One another note... what about medicinal animals products? and animals that are produced for these medicinal uses? Such as pig/bovine valves for the heart etc (synthetics are not a viable option)

Would you both rather see people die, you yourself maybe, your mother, father? then to kill (Or in your opinions "torture") the animal for their organs to save a human life?

Just curious...?


[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 10:45 PM. Reason : .]

11/9/2005 10:36:38 PM

Vegan Outreach gets all its data from peer-reviewd journals (and cites all its info- see the link).

I try to avoid what medicinal animal products I can. I've never needed any in my time as a vegan, so it hasn't come up as an issue. But there are always alternatives. With vaccines, it's interesting to note that aborted fetal tissue as well as animal embroyos are in them: "Varivax - Chickenpox Merck & Co., Inc. 800.672.6372: * varicella live virus neomycin phosphate, sucrose, and monosodium glutamate (MSG) processed gelatin, fetal bovine serum, guinea pig embryo cells, albumin from human blood, and human diploid cells from aborted fetal tissue"

From what I understand about heart valves, the only difference with synthetics are a tendency for blood to clot, so the patient takes anticoagulants. If I had a choice between synthetics and pig, I would chose synthetic- that is my choice. What others choose is their choice. I wish to note here that I do not thing veg*nism is something I would wish to force upon people- it is something you must make a choice about. The display is about informing you about the reprecussions of your choices. I choose what I see as the path of greater compassion and lessened suffering. I make my choices based on that- veganism is as much an ethical philosophy as it is a way of living. There are hard choices, but I choose according to what I beleive.

11/9/2005 11:04:02 PM

PETA's 'shock and awe' presentations are over the top and ridiculous. They have only made me cynical about PETA and others with similar views. To me, the display in the Brickyard says "Look at these poor animals. We treat them as bad as we treated the blacks, indians...." Is that an insult to animals, or is it an insult to maligned minorities? Given the choice between freeing animals or freeing slaves, which would PETA choose?

But I guess my biggest difference with PETA is that I cannot equate an animal to a person.

That and I like a nice, medium rare steak.

11/9/2005 11:04:16 PM

Quote :

"Or in your opinions "torture""

thanks for telling me my opinion.

I don't have a problem with eating/killing animals, as I stated earlier. I dislike factory farming and I can't afford free range meat, that's why I'm a vegetarian. Also, I wouldn't feel comfortable killing the animal myself and then eating it, which would make me feel like a hypocrite if I were to eat meat. Although, if I had no other food source I would certainly do it. I wouldn't have a problem using animals to produce medicines per se, depending on how they're treated. Of course if someone ate McDonalds their whole life and then needed pig/bovine heart valves, I wouldn't feel sorry for them in the slightest if they couldn't get it.

11/9/2005 11:09:41 PM

I slightly dislike the brickyard display only because it seems to be going for an emotional reaction rather than a rational one.

11/9/2005 11:12:46 PM

tricked into eating meat? are you serious?

11/9/2005 11:22:41 PM

"I didn't climb to the top of the food chain so I could be a vegetarian"
"If we ain't meant to eat animals, how come they're made out of meat?"

"PETA, PETA, what do you want us to eat-a?
you protest the things that we like to eat
like cows and turkeys and pickled pigs feet
you protect the rights of the protien givers
the lamb the steer, and the chicken livers
and now you protest our right to fish
to fry up and serve this delectible dish
instead you'd have us eat vegetable stew
some peas, some carrots, a 'mater or two
we can't live without our fried flounder
our barbeque sandwich, our big quarter-pounder
our palettes desire the taste of fresh meats
we'll have the t-bones, you eat the beets!
and you better beware of us bass-master boys
cruisin the lakes in our bass boatin' toys
we take pride in our sport, with us you don't trifle
cause most of us boys are totin' a rifle
so go on ahead you ignorant souls
beatin the water with big bamboo poles
you wish we would quit, well you better keep wishin
cause like it or not we're a gonna go fishin!

all this savin the whales and freein' the minks
you're wasting your time that's what this ol boy thinks
we'll keep eatin meat with our kids and our wives
so shut up, get a job, and quit ruinin' our lives"

11/10/2005 12:57:19 AM

you can tell me all day that veganism is healthy and you get what you need
but the point is i dont give a shit unless someones tells me why i should change my diet

11/10/2005 1:07:23 AM

nevermind

[Edited on November 10, 2005 at 1:24 AM. Reason : -]

11/10/2005 1:24:29 AM

So, is anyone up for a cookout on the brickyard today?

11/10/2005 8:03:39 AM

Quote :

"While you might not "beleive" in giving up meat, what about treating the animals you do eat humanely?"

Hey, I put A-1 on steaks and ketchup on burgers. I know what goes where.

Quote :

"I refuse to support industries who exploit humans with my money."

Don't spend much money do you?

Ok. All kidding aside. I think that the biggest problem going on is that people would try to elevate the animal to human status. I know several people that treat their animals like they would treat one of their own children (if they had any). I'm not saying that people shouldn't treat the animal nice, I'm saying that the family dog shouldn't hold the same status as a child. We had a cat that started showing severe signs of violence and at the time we also had a 3 month old baby. We didn't hesitate in getting rid of the cat. It was a danger to something much more important, our child. We loved our cat and we still miss her but we realize there are more important things in life.

I shake my head sometimes when I see people dropping all kinds of cash toward the luxury of their animals. Yes, I said luxury. There is a difference between simply taking good care of an animal and lavishing it with anything and everything under the sun (see the animal=child point). I can't help but think - wow, this dudes dog is getting better treatment than a whole hell of a lot of people in the world. Pets are even getting better health care than many americans.

Humans come first. Now with that said I'll go ahead and say that I believe we have stewardship over animals and I believe we will be held accountable for that stewardship. I don't carry that so far as to say that no one should eat meat but I do carry that far enough to not needlessley or purposely cause harm to animals.

I'm middle of the road. I don't put animals on the same plane as humans but I recognize and respect that they are living beings. I eat meat but I guess I'll compromise and not get the 'meat lovers' pizzas

[Edited on November 10, 2005 at 8:23 AM. Reason : -]

11/10/2005 8:22:27 AM

One wonders if vegitarians would find it so easy to eat if a plant struggled and screamed when you killed it.

11/10/2005 10:18:28 AM

don't fuck with PETA, those fuckers are crazy

11/10/2005 10:24:44 AM