FROM MADDOX: GUILTLESS GRILL MY A$$!!! I was looking over a menu in a restaurant the other day when I saw a section for vegetarians; I thought to myself "boy, I sure am glad that I'm not a meat-hating fascist" and I skipped on to the steak section (because I'll be damned if I'm going to pay $15 for an alfalfa sandwich, slice of cucumber and a scoop of cold cottage cheese), but before I turned the page something caught my eye. The heading of the vegetarian section was titled "Guiltless Grill," not because there were menu items with fewer calories and cholesterol (since there were "healthy" chicken dishes discriminated against in this section), but because none of the items used animal products. Think about that phrase for a second. What exactly does "guiltless grill" imply? So I'm supposed to feel guilty now if I eat meat? Screw you. What pisses me off so much about this phrase is the sheer narrow-mindedness of these stuck up vegetarian a$$holes. 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 sh*t 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 bullsh*t 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 dipsh*ts 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 sh*t; 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.
I eat only venison that either I or my family kills ourselves. Kill and grill it I say. If you strip off the layer of white on the meat, cut it correctly and prepare it like steak (the chops) or any hamburger dish (ground venison) you couldn't tell the difference. My uncle in Baton Rouge has a friend who went contribute meat to for the purpose of making deer sausage, better than any you'd buy in the store. Venison is low in fat and is indistinguishable from beef. I've fed my family for ten years on what I and my family kill in the wilds of Mississippi with my bow.
Though I'm still reeling from the amount of hate in the Maddox post, I'll try to answer his claims. But being a "narrow-minded" "elitist" "****," I have trouble pecking at my keyboard with my beak. Millions of animals are killed each year in the harvesting process. That's a sad fact of modern farming. But millions of animals suffer *every day* in the meat industry. All these animals eat grain. A lot of grain -- about half of all of the grain produced in America. If the population of the United States stopped eating meat, we would need less grain, thus killing fewer animals during harvesting. Less meat = less grain = less animal suffering. When we eat meat, we contribute to the suffering of farmed animals *and* to animals killed during harvesting. If my diet saves just one animal, it's worth it to me. Like I said in an earlier post, it's impossible to be vegan in today's world. I just do the best that I can. It saddens me that my diet contributes to *any* animal cruelty, but I do my best to minimize that. And I believe a vegetarian diet does so. Hope I wasn't too much of a "****."
I prefer describing myself as someone who doesn't eat meat rather than a "vegetarian," which brings with it all sorts of notions of Birkenstocks, hippies and bean sprout sandwiches. I never really thought it was any big deal once I did it. I have found, however, that those who find out I don't eat meat are FAR more concerned about it than I am. I have never been able to understand why people feel so threatened, angered, upset and confused by my food choices. I guess I can understand if you have a friend who gives you hell about eating meat or won't allow you to eat meat around him/her. That probably would be annoying. I don't do this for that reason. What is funny is that I usually get nearly opposite reactions to "I don't drink" and "I don't eat meat." When I tell people I don't eat meat, they usually respond with 100 questions (Where do you get your protein? Do you eat fish? etc), some form of confusion (Why in the world would you do that??) or with a real degree of frustration. When I mention that I don't drink alcohol, it is almost greeted with apology. "Oh, good for you. I know it is bad for me but I really don't drink very much..." I tend to think that my food choices have more effect on others - total strangers included - than myself which is just wierd. Why does anyone care? You'd think I just told them I eat babies or something. Since I'm wondering out loud, why DOES anyone care?
I didn't read Khan's post. What's the point? There hasn't been any animus from any vegetarian in this thread. All we've said is we choose to do one thing and you should do whatever you want. Khan (or Maddox, whoever that is) can decide for themselves from whence their weird anger springs. My guess: some serious projection. Not all meateaters are "cocks," but whoever wrote that definitely is. Dallas: I don't have a good source for you. That's from stuff I read 16 years back when I was into it as a cause. Even then, though, I didn't preach. The digestive thing's not limited to steak -- it's all beef. Search on vegetarian and I'm sure you'll find what you're looking for. Not able to post much now as I'm on the road, but here's a tip for travelling. Never, ever reserve a hotel room in person or on the phone. Do it on the internet. I'm looking out a window onto Canal Street at the corner of Bourbon Street (in the Big Easy of course), sitting on a comfy bed in a super nice hotel. The price if I'd reserved in person (or by calling)? Around $150. The price on Expedia? $61. Tonight should be fun.
I knew that some people would get upset at the "Maddox" post, and maybe I shouldn't have posted it. But many people do try to force their ideals upon others and carry a 'holier than thou' attitude in their vegetarian lifestyle. Even Albert Einstein stated that a human diet w/o meat would be a better one, but i'm not givin it up! And if someone tells me i'll killing animals then I will tell them that they are as well, and if they're living in a house, they are killing animals and if they drive a car they are killing animals. No matter what, animals will die. If someone is that emphatic about animals, maybe they should just kill themselves in order to not hurt anymore animals. If my stack of dead animals is a little bigger than some veggie's, I really don't care. I respect everyone's choice as long as I don't have to hear about it, which is often not the case.
The funny thing is, I didn't see anyone get upset at the Maddox post. A few people responded to the information contained within it, but I thought that debate was encouraged in this forum. Besides, the Maddox post isn't even new to this board -- Nomar (remember him?) found it so amusing, he posted it several times and even had snippets of it in his signature. So I certainly don't think it shocked any of us this time around. Fair enough, but in this thread vegetarians were specifically asked to respond by the thread starter himself -- so, hopefully, you don't view this thread as a case of people trying to push their beliefs on you.
so, is it OK for Californian veggans to egg Arnold Scwhartzenner?? hehe http://cache.eonline.com/News/Photos/s/schwarzenegger.090303.jpg
try again so, is it OK for Californian vegans to egg Arnold Scwhartzenegger, or can only meat eaters waste chickens that way?? <img src="http://cache.eonline.com/News/Photo...gger.090303.jpg">
Apparently, this statement is not true. If you truly respected others' opinions, you wouldn't post some of the things you did. Your opinion that we should eat meat is clearly as vociferous and angry as some militant vegetarians who say we shouldn't. Like I said in my earlier post, I just don't get the hostility towards someone who simply makes different food choices. It doesn't effect anyone but the person making the choice. The vegetarians of the militant ethical variety that seem to irritate you so much probably make up, what, 2 or 3 percent of the total population. My guess is that you have probably never personally encountered one or only very briefly. I don't blame you for disliking people who get in your face on issues. I agree with you. But to lump the entire non-meat-eating world into that category is clearly false and reactionary.
honestly...who has the time and energy to concern themselves with what others eat?? if you want to eat meat...have at it! if not...that's great, too!!!
ok i don't get it...so it ok to kill things that don't feel pain and eat them, but not ok to kill things that feel pain and eat them in the eyes of a vegan?
Amen, brother! As a vegan, I'd love to see the world espouse more veggie ideas (just as a Republican would like to see more Republican influence, etc.), but that's not my call. There are 6 billion decisions that have to be made for that to happen. Personally, I'd rather sink my energy into Madden 2004 than trying to convert the world.
Traditionally, vegetarians avoid all meat products and vegans avoid all animal products (meat, dairy, eggs, leather, etc.).
ohhhhhhhh!!!! thanks!!! i have heard the word vegan used from time to time...but wasn't really familiar with the concept.
