I think the main reason one should go vegetarian is for ethical reasons. Vegetarianism doesn't necessarily mean healthy because a vegetarian can load up on sweets, sugars and other fried foods. By the way, I am vegetarian and I get at least 120 grams of protein per day.
moes & finals and anyone else, Mrs. B-Bob and I are meat eaters, but have health concerns and also concerns about big agrobusiness. With a few other pseudo-hippie couples last spring we bought an entire, local, grass-fed cow. We visited the farm where it grew up and everything (but did not meet the cow). So each of us got 1/4 of a cow and froze it away. This type of agriculture is much better on the earth than big agrobiz, the meat is much, much healthier (especially in terms of fat and hormone content; it's not even close compared to corn-fed beef), and it actually was pretty economical. So we'll thaw something once a week or so and try a new recipe, and otherwise I guess we're pretty veggie-oriented. Also, moes, some friends of mine got chickens (in the middle of San Francisco!). They keep them as pets basically, but the hens are laying lots of eggs, and these eggs are incredible. Like a whole different color and taste than the crap we usually buy in the store. So there are some really cool ways to still be an omnivore and feel pretty good about it, health-wise and world-impact wise. I recommend reading the Omnivore's Dilemma if that hasn't been mentioned already in this thread. On a completely separate point, I would only add that soy and wheat farming kills a huge number of small mammals in the combines... I'm just saying... there's no free lunch.
I'm not a vegetarian and I'm a big supporter of hunters, that said there are many excellent ethical reasons to be a vegetarian and many of them have been posted in this thread. When non-vegetarians are hypersensitive about the ethical foundation of choosing to be vegetarian it is puzzling.
Sorry bro. My wife is a vegetarian and she hooks me up with some of the best meat dishes you can imagine. Ask your gf about her leather bags, leather shoes, leather belts, etc. You shoudl see how she clings to her Coach bag.
Mr. Brightside is a only vegetarian because most indie rockers are, so I understand that. I already learned enough in this thread to confuse me and keep me conflicted about everything. I just keep seeing valid points on both sides. I need to compromise. I think from now on I will only eat cows that were evil cows and deserved to die horrifically.
moestavern19, So finalsbound wants to get a pig, and B-Bob is suggesting that you get a chicken as a pet for the fresh eggs and to buy a cow. Something tells me this is all a conspiracy to get you to agree to the cat as a "compromise."
I only read up to page 4, but felt it necessary to put in my 2 cents about vegetarianism. I think it's a very cleverly disguised philosophy. Something that appears to be very moralistic, but if you think about it from a different perspective, it's a pretty selfish thing. Point #1: I find it absolutely astonishing that there are actually people out there that cherish animal rights before even considering human rights. I'm not saying vegetarians are blood thirsty dictators, but I'm also pointing out that it's a little ridiculous to be so worried about animals yet to seemingly not care at all about human rights. I'm not accusing anyone in this thread, I just happen to know many vegetarians like this, and it is very annoying! I realize the horrible things that happen to some animals before they're turned into yummy food, but people are being tortured and murdered EVERY SINGLE DAY. How another HUMAN BEING could be so involved and determined to support animal rights with vegetarianism yet be so uninformed about human rights is revolting to me. Point #2: How sad is it that in the society we live in, we actually have the luxury to refuse food? This is another reason why I find vegetarianism to be a tad selfish. That steak you just refused would be gladly eaten by anyone else in the world. I know this is a ridiculous thing to say, like when someone says "a child in africa could've eaten that" when you throw food away with some left, but it's about the principle of the matter. Meat is food. People across the world don't have the luxuries we do in terms of food, and the fact that we can just so easily refuse FOOD is a little surprising to me. I realize that my arguments have flaws. For instance, the "refusing food is unfair to others who don't have food". This argument really only comes in play when you're being offered food at a restaurant, or at a barbecue, etc. But in terms of actively purchasing food with your agenda it's perfectly ethical to buy non-meat products. You're just buying what you want to buy. From reading some of the things finalsbound said, she's obviously in it for the right reasons. Gain some energy, feel healthier, etc. It's when it starts getting into a moral area that it really starts to bother me.
^^^ the biggest flaw in your argument is that every vegan or vegetarian that i've met who's in it for moral reason are top tier believers in human rights. how the hell you polarized vegans as not caring about human rights is beyond me.
I said that many vegetarians I knew where like that.... polarizing vegans to "not caring about human rights" is not at all what I did. You took what I said and blew it out of proportion. Maybe the reason it's "beyond you" is because that's not at all what I did or was trying to do. It's great that the vegetarians/vegans you know are great people, but I was pointing out there there are people like that that exist... and I know many of them.
Oh and just to add, a SUPPORTER of human rights? Who the hell ISN'T a supporter of human rights?! I was just saying that I find it odd that people will take an active stance on animal rights, but when it comes to human rights there's not much they will do. "How another HUMAN BEING could be so involved and determined to support animal rights with vegetarianism yet be so uninformed about human rights is revolting to me." -- my exact words.
Though I don't agree with the poster, I think that they do bring up a sort of valid point. When so many atrocities are being committed against PEOPLE around the world, it's almost unthinkable that PETA and Whole Foods are getting wrapped up over an issue like "cruelty to mollusks" when there's so much cruelty to people going on. I really like B-Bob's post. While vegetarianism/veganism is a bit too extreme for my palate, I think a good way to protest factory farming is to buy meat from livestock that's been humanely raised and slaughtered, and to buy farm fresh eggs. Obviously there's the cost issue, I've posted earlier that smaller quantities of high quality meat is probably the direction we should be moving in.
Apps, Most people need to concentrate on one moral cause. I actually think that works the best. Be an expert in one thing rather than a jack of all trades, master of none type thing. You can't do everything and know everything. I just don't agree with criticizing someone based on their moral cause by using the argument that something else is more important. I mean, my biggest moral cause is dogs, partly because I like to believe I'm really good at it. That doesn't mean I don't care about kids.
Dude I completely understand and respect that. I was just defending myself because it seemed as though you were criticizing my post for something that was taken out of context. I'm not trying to make all-inclusive comments about people or tell people that what they care about isn't as important as other things. I'm just voicing my opinion man. And I hate to degenerate this back to the prior argument, but I never criticized anyone's moral cause by saying something else was more important. I was just stating that I find it a little strange that someone could care so passionately about animal rights yet be so uninformed about human rights. I don't know what you mean by your "biggest moral cause is dogs", but as you said, you also care about kids! I was just saying that I know a lot of people that would only care about dogs and not give a crap about kids.
You realize your arguments have a few flaws, Apps? Really? You think? Actually they have nothing but flaws. Your first argument is the definition of a strawman. It's like me saying caring about human rights is bad because all the people I know that care about human rights don't care enough about the environment. You know some jerks. So what? I do too. That doesn't mean that every cause they support is wrong by association. As for your second argument, in some societies people eat dogs and cats. If you refused to eat a dog or cat when visiting those societies, would that make you selfish? Some people eat people. As a self proclaimed supporter of human rights, would it be selfish to turn down the offer of cooked or raw human meat in societies where humans are "food?" And what are you doing posting on a message board when you could be spending that time doing something about human rights? How selfish! Just a terrible, terrible post. I'm vegan and I don't care what anybody else eats. I never force my diet or my beliefs on anyone (apart from mentioning it when people get on a moral high horse in the D&D) and I never bring it up unless I'm asked. But meat and dairy are not food to me. And, in fact, though I keep it to myself as a rule, I find the idea of eating that stuff utterly repugnant. Most people wouldn't know that about me so I do feel bad when I have to turn down their offers of meat. But I don't feel selfish. That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. And the only time I'm a jerk about my diet and its ethical implications (again, apart from the D&D, where I do it to provide a mirror for people who are being similarly self-righteous) is when someone suggests something like you or Azadre did in this thread. What business is it of yours what I believe, particularly when I am the only person in the world who is affected? As for moes and finalsbound, I am always impressed by the thoughtfulness and care for each other that you display here. I think you guys are going to have a very long, happy life together. Let me know if you ever want to come over for dinner. My girlfriend eats dairy and fish but she is the best vegan chef in the freaking world.
Well, I didn't really come on here looking for an internet argument or anything, but it's pretty clear that's what this is going to turn into. I never said supporting animal rights is "bad". Never once did I say that. I said that I do not understand how some people can support animal rights so adamantly and be at the same time unaware of the horrible things happening to people across the world. Rereading what I wrote, I never once said anything about vegetarianism for the sake of animal rights is a bad cause because of the bad people. I just said I don't understand how some people can become vegetarians based off of a certain psyche, and then widely ignore something else just as important, if not more, while at the same time is more relevant to them as human beings. Here are a few quotes in my original post in which I display this: "I'm also pointing out that it's a little ridiculous to be so worried about animals yet to seemingly not care at all about human rights. I'm not accusing anyone in this thread, I just happen to know many vegetarians like this, and it is very annoying!" "How another HUMAN BEING could be so involved and determined to support animal rights with vegetarianism yet be so uninformed about human rights is revolting to me." Please, PLEASE show me where I am calling vegetarians with association to animal rights bad people because of their devoted association to to animal rights!! WHERE AM I SAYING THIS?! Why am I getting so much flack for saying something I didn't even say??? The above quotes support what I've been defending myself with. All I am asking is how people can be really supportive of animal rights, but the same time not know too much or care too much about human rights, which is more directly relevant to themselves?? I am not saying caring about animal rights is wrong, I am not saying ALL vegetarians don't care about human rights, I am just bringing up a point that I have found to be the situation in many cases! As for your second point--what a horrible comparison. Dog and cat is a sociologically and culturally driven dish, which is usually found in specific geographical areas of the world. Vegetarianism, on the other hand is an "ism", which means that it is a philosophy and a life choice that anyone in the world can choose to be a part of. If I offered you a plate full of crap you would probably refuse for many reasons, but at the same time, that's probably not something I'd give to a starving African child anyways. There are starving people in India, and refusing a steak wouldn't be morally wrong in an indirect manner in regards to them at all here in America. There are obviously many exceptions, and I even made a point to bring that up in my post. Yeah, there were a few things I wrote in my original post that if I could go back and change I would (like the whole "selfish" bull crap), but for the most part what I said has been taken widely out of context. I apologize if I offended anyone, I just meant to voice my opinion. If you were offended personally, then my goodness, I'm sorry. But for you to jump on my back like that the way you did is only going to make me defensive about my point, whether or not it's "right" or "wrong".
In all fairness, if you were to put themselves in a situation where they're enjoying the hospitality of cannibals (or with a diet that includes dog/cat), I think you would be a rude guest to turn down the food they had to offer you. Let's take a less extreme example. If you were to travel to, say, Vietnam and some nice, possibly impoverished rice farmer is kind enough to offer you the one chicken he can afford to kill a month, would you be able to say to him "Sorry, I can't"? Not judging you, just curious for your perspective.
