Peter Singer

[Anonymous No.2524311]

“To protest about Dolphin slaughter in Japan, the eating of dogs in South Korea, or the slaughter of baby seals in Canada, while continuing to eat eggs from hens who have spent their lives crammed into cages, or veal from calves who have been deprived of their mothers, their proper diet, and the freedom to lie down with their legs extended, is like denouncing apartheid in South Africa while asking your neighbors not to sell their houses to blacks.”

Why aren't you vegan yet?
>implying /lit/ is actually intellectual

[Anonymous No.2524320]

Veganism would be depriving myself from my proper diet.

[Anonymous No.2524322]

>>2524320
you forgot to put quotes around "proper"

[Anonymous No.2524327]

>>2524311
Did he just imply that black people are like animals?

[Anonymous No.2524331]

>>2524322
It is natural for humans to eat animal tissue. It's always been part of our diet. That said, I do believe there are vegan diets that are sufficient to maintain human health. I however have food allergies that make it impossible to access plant protein in large enough quantities, therefore meat is sort of a requirement for me.

[Anonymous No.2524335]

>>2524331

Something being natural making it right is pretty clearly a huge fallacy if you apply it to anything else that ancestral humans did. I'm not a vegan, and eat copious amounts of farm-raised meat, but thats not how to argue against veganism. I just don't care.

[Anonymous No.2524345]

I just don't care. Good for you if you do; it's probably the way of the future.

[Anonymous No.2524348]

I have a duty to assert myself over lesser organisms.

[Anonymous No.2524349]

>>2524335
It would mean that it is the diet our bodies are adapted to. It would be a safe way to go. Also, your objection would, when correct, also nullify Singer's point in the quote.

Also, the healthiest peoples who reached the most advanced ages incorporate animal tissue in their diets in moderate amounts. Fish offers benefits that aren't found in a plant based diet, for example.

[Anonymous No.2524350]

I don't like dieting. I don't protest any of those things. I don't participate in any synthetic ethical games.

[Anonymous No.2524351]

Vegans are the ones promoting genocide. They wish to see the annihilation of farm animals.

[Anonymous No.2524354]

>>2524351

Not a vegan, but this argument is stupid.

[Anonymous No.2524355]

>>2524311
I'm glad to see that other people have chosen to leave behind unethical eating practices. I too am vegan. What makes me even happier is that someone is engaging the slavering monsters who continue to eat meat and "animal products".

Have you read any of J.M. Coetzee's works? He is a vegan, brilliant writer, and Nobel Laureate. I recommend reading "The Lives Of Animals". Good hunting.

[Anonymous No.2524360]

>>2524355
P.S. Coetzee goes even further than analogizing a diet consisting of meat to Apartheid. Coetzee's character Elizabeth Costello analogizes a diet consisting of meat to the genocide of "non-Aerians" by Nazi Germany.

[Anonymous No.2524362]

>>2524311

Vegan for two years now. It always amazes me how people can fail to recognise their own inconsistencies.

[Anonymous No.2524363]

>>2524360

Used to be a vegan; this is a false analogy.

[Anonymous No.2524364]

>>2524327
People are not "like" animals. Human beings are animals. do you even read?

[Anonymous No.2524365]

I get the dolphin thing but what's wrong with eating dogs?

[Anonymous No.2524366]

>>2524355
i love that movie so much

[Anonymous No.2524368]

>>2524363
It is a false analogy, I agree. The slaughter and consumption of other, non-human animals is by far worse than what the Nazis did.

[Anonymous No.2524369]

>>2524362
>>2524355

Ya. I'm trying to go vegan. I still eat eggs and fish though, i have a lot of food intolerances so protein is hard to get and i like to workout :(

[Anonymous No.2524370]

>>2524368
>The slaughter and consumption of other, non-human animals is by far worse than what the Nazis did.

how do you figure? In terms of environmental damage you mean?

[Anonymous No.2524371]

The funny thing is that the plant food industry kills more animals than the meat industry. Imagine those huge harvesting machines running over thousands of acres of grassland, instantly destroying birds, rodents, insects and other animals. Imagine the rainforests destroyed for the use of soy as a cash crop. The pesticides. The artificial fertiliser (especially in the absence of animal faeces we will undoubtedly have in the absence of meat consumption).

Vegans don't just boycott the meat industry, they boycott the wholesome cattle farmers as well. They prefer a cow to never be born over it living a pleasant life in a quiet meadow until it's life is taken in a humane manner after which it serves the people who cared for it all it's life.

A good farm is capable of providing a cow with all it's needs. It would be like a human getting a comfortable apartment and an allowance and is taken care of for his whole life on the condition that he dies at a certain age after which his body is used for scientific research. Not such a bad option.

[Anonymous No.2524373]

>>2524311
So vegans are smug idiots that's kinda what I got out of this thread.

[Anonymous No.2524374]

>>2524365
You probably believe in a chain of being, don't you? Got back to your Shakespeare, goon, there is nothing for your intellectual feebleness in the modern era.

[Anonymous No.2524376]

i respect vegans for their personal choices, but i don't understand why some of them feel everyone should make the same choices as they do.

[Anonymous No.2524381]

>>2524374
Seriously how is raising and eating dogs like going out and killing dolphins and clubbing baby seals?

[Anonymous No.2524383]

HEY GUYS MY DIET IS IMPORTANT AND MAKES ME SUPERIOR
it really sounds like you're an anorexic girl on a pro-ana site

[Anonymous No.2524384]

>>2524376
Because they believe it's the right one and they are passionate about it, obviously. One doesn't give up a taste steak for nothing. From an animal lover's perspective you are actually committing a crime.

I don't like how they discriminate against plants though.

[Anonymous No.2524387]

Help! Help! Someone call me an abulance. This thread is so edgy I fucking cut my hand on it. It's really deep too. I'm going to need stiches.

[Anonymous No.2524388]

>>2524371
>The funny thing is that the plant food industry kills more animals than the meat industry.

The funny thing is that your idea is totally wrong.
There are currently 3x more farm animals on earth than humans, and all will die pretty soon.

Farm animals consume more grains and plants than all the humans do. So not only are we killing tons of farm animals but also killing the "critters" in the process like you say...

[Anonymous No.2524390]

>>2524384
I am aware of their reasoning but i don't truly understand what it would take to feel like your choice is the ''right one''..you have to be narrow minded..this much choice in a diet is pretty rare..most humans are what could be called an opportunivore

[Ludwig !9CUY39dDYo No.2524391]

>implying I protest any of those things

[Anonymous No.2524395]

I don't protest any of those things. Not all cultures value dogs or dolphins the way we do. I also don't eat veal and I usually buy eggs harvested from cage-free chicken farms.

From what I have read, veganism is only a viable option if you use supplements for nutrients that you would normally only get from meat (vitamin b12 among others, iirc).

I'd prefer to have a complete diet and make the effort to obtain meat that was produced in an ethical and sustainable manner. I agree with you that industrial farming practices are horrific, but your solution (veganism) is far too extreme to win over the vast majority of the population.

[Anonymous No.2524399]

>>2524391
this. not everyone is an animal rights activist, op. not by a long shot.

[Anonymous No.2524400]

I honestly don't give a fuck about the animals I eat. They taste good.

[Anonymous No.2524401]

>>2524390
Having an opinion implies that you think this certain perspective is superior to other perspectives. That's the base on which you choose to adhere to it.

Would you call people who oppose child rape narrow minded because they don't respect the opinion of child rapists that it's actually all in good fun?

[Anonymous No.2524402]

>>2524369
Eat legumes. Those chickens suffer more than you can imagine.
>>2524370
No, i'm not so pragmatic or utilitarian. The wholesale slaughter, in terms of sheer numbers of living, feeling creatures killed, modern farm practices are far worse.
>>2524381
How is it any different?
>>2524383
That's not the point. Don't get caught up in the delivery of the argument or it's semantics. If you could look into your heart, and feel the pain that non-human animals suffer during their cruel existences on farms and their unceremonious murders, you might be able to relate to their plight. I feel this is the crux of ethical veganism and if you will not take the leap to empathy, for whatever reason, then there is no hope.
>>2524387
The lowest form of argument is a "personal attack".

[Anonymous No.2524408]

>>2524402
>Eat legumes

I can't eat beans and most legumes give me the shits
soy, beans, nuts, grains, etc...destroy my stomach

[Anonymous No.2524411]

>>2524401
having an opinion does not imply that at all. i think my opinions are mine and others are others. the factors that are in play in choice are numerous and complex and i can even entertain the perspective of child rapists even though i personally would not engage in that act for various reasons. truth statements are for plebes.

[Anonymous No.2524412]

So many logical fallacies that I'm going to have to sage.

I'm not sorry.

[Anonymous No.2524415]

>slaughter of baby seals in Canada
>actually belies PETA bullshit
>thinks he's intellectual

[Anonymous No.2524417]

>>2524412

yep, anti-vegans are full of logical fallacies, why sage this thread?

please respond

[Anonymous No.2524419]

>>2524415

>seal slaughter canada
>not happening

>"Fisheries Department is acting "recklessly" by setting an annual harp seal quota of 400,000 animals at a time when markets are drying up and the population is suffering....scientists said last year the quota should be 300,000"

It's happening doofus

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/03/20/canada-seal-hunt-quota_n_1368124.html

[Anonymous No.2524426]

>Seal harvest not happening

wtf?

[Anonymous No.2524432]

>>2524411
Your choices are completely arbitrary?

I can understand this kind of relativism in theory, but in actuality people do value their opinions and these opinions result in actions which can conflict. If you think it is okay to rape my child and I don't, we have some kind of dilemma. This has not so much to do with truth statements as with the fact that opposite opinions often can't coexist when they are put into practice.

If it was possible to constantly be tolerant there wouldn't be wars and such.

[Anonymous No.2524433]

>vegan

say goodbye to your gains

[Anonymous No.2524438]

>>2524415
It has to be a woman. I man would never spout this retarded dribble.

[Anonymous No.2524440]

98% of seals killed were under 3months old last year

killed by bludgeoning so as to not damage the fur...

I don't want to live on this planet anymore

[Anonymous No.2524441]

>>2524415
>>2524419
Seal slaughter is awesome. Don't "knock" it till you try it.

>>2524417
Why anti-veganism? Because we evolved more complex and impressive brains due in large part to our omnivore diets (especially because of meat). That's why. It's a tooth a claw world you little bitch.
Might makes right. It's simple truth.

I abhore the killing of dolphins for food because they are smart and loving animals. They have an almost enchanting quality. Same goes with dogs.

We shouldn't kill intelligent animals period (that is of course unless they are killing us). It's arbitrary but the universe is full of contradictions and exceptions: get used to it.

And don't give me that huge bullshit about pigs being more intelligent than dogs: it's faux pop-culture science that is based on nothing.

There, no more of this nonsense.

[Anonymous No.2524447]

>>2524373
>>2524376
>>2524383

I was a vegetarian (not a vegan) for almost seven years and I can't even tell you how many times I took shit for it. The several other vegetarians I knew? Also took shit (granted, part of this was through middle and high school, so everybody took shit for something.) And whenever I read discussions about vegetarianism or veganism online I see the same thing. "Fucking vegans, always shoving their diets down everybody's throats."

I NEVER ONCE preached to anybody, never saw any of my vegetarian friends preach to anybody, and I bet most of the vegetarians you know keep pretty quiet about it too (and trust me, you do know a few.) It's just not true that most of them are rabid activists; I wouldn't be talking about this at all if I hadn't seen this thread. Pretty obnoxious to assume that PETA, or bitchy sorority activists, or whoever you're thinking of, represent the whole demographic.

[Anonymous No.2524452]

>>2524368


Looks like we have an edgy mofo on our hands!

[Anonymous No.2524454]

>>2524432
opposite opinions most certainly can coexist, and you are talking about when these opinions are put into actions which is another thing altogether. on some level i believe choice to be a lot less rational and in a sense yes more arbitrary than is popularly believed. it is not ''relavitism'' i am just generally a skeptic of truth claims. as a kind of rhetorical exercise consider if someone did choose to rape your child, how you choose to react is not pre-set by the fact that you disagree with his opinion that child rape is fine..in fact your reaction will be determined by various factors some of which will be out of your control. anyway, to bring all of this back to reality, i simply do not like the attitude of superiority so often displayed by vegans..like i said i even respect their choices..but those choices are personal choices and they should be satisfied with their own sense of ethical fulfillment, rather than a sense of ethical superiority. if you really think eating meat is an abhorrent behavior you must respect the fact that the choice not to do so must come to each person in the same way it did for you, as the result of personal growth or change and not just because someone brow beat you into it.

[Anonymous No.2524456]

>>2524447
People are often cancerous about anything. More sexually active girl than you? She's a slut. Less active? Prude. More obscure taste in books? Hipster. Less obscure? Pleb. We find ways to belittle anything but ourselves. It's almost a second nature to us and very effective.

[Anonymous No.2524459]

>>2524441
>Because we evolved more complex and impressive brains due in large part to our omnivore diets (especially because of meat)

citation needed

what does it matter how smart they are? pain is pain.

[Anonymous No.2524460]

>>2524447
>"Fucking vegans, always shoving their diets down everybody's throats."

cuz non-vegans feel guilty about their position and that they're too weak to do what's right
i know, because thats how i feel lol
but i dont really care enough to change

[Anonymous No.2524461]

>>2524408
You may just be getting "the shits", as you so delicately put it, because your current diet contains little fiber by comparison. I got used to it. Now I produce 3 solid bowel movements per day on average. It's rather splendid. please keep any Freudian/psychosexual metanarratives to yourself if you find scatological discussion offensive
>>2524441
>Seal slaughter is awesome. Don't "knock" it till you try it.
I don't think you actually mean that. Maybe you should go to /b/?
>And don't give me that huge bullshit about pigs being more intelligent than dogs: it's faux pop-culture science that is based on nothing.
Don't buy into that nonsense about the value of life being based on its intelligence and don't rebuke me with the "I think therefore I am" intellectualization. "If you prick me, do I not bleed?" To place value to a life one must accept the value of suffering.


>>2524412
I don't think you know what "sage" does.

[Anonymous No.2524462]

>>2524402
>If you could look into your heart, and feel the pain that non-human animals suffer during their cruel existences on farms and their unceremonious murders, you might be able to relate to their plight.

I can't feel pity for inferior beings. I honestly feel that as superior animals, humans should use other animals to advance themselves.

[Anonymous No.2524464]

>>2524459
>implying there aren't differences in pain in accord with the complexity of the nervous system
>implying you can torture a jellyfish like you can torture a person

[Anonymous No.2524465]

>>2524447
hey idiot, i was talking about o.p's rhetorical question of ''why aren't you a vegan'' or whatever..that and the quote provided are fine examples of vegans proselytizing

[Standard Toaster !RQTOASTvfI No.2524468]

Because I'm not a tree-hugging hippie or a homosexual.

[Anonymous No.2524472]

>>2524462
Whilst I'm glad you at least recognised the fact that animals are humans, as the diction selection of many in this thread reveals they do not, I am dismayed to see that you fail to understand the obscene drivel that is a chain of being. What makes you think human beings are superior? Before you respond I would ask you to read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism..

[Anonymous No.2524474]

>>2524454
Opinions that don't result in action are irrelevant within a social environment anyway. Also, if you are so tolerant of others opinions, why does it bother you that they claim their values as superior? Wouldn't it be narrow minded of you to do so?

[Anonymous No.2524475]

>>2524464
pigs and cows and chickens are not jellyfish. they clearly feel pain. continue bullshit rationalizations.

[Anonymous No.2524484]

>>2524474
i am not tolerant, i am skeptical. and the fact that you think the opinion and the action are so cleanly related is a bit ignorant. what people say they believe and what they chose to do are really not causally related--although many like to believe they are. or one can be exchanged for the other.

[Anonymous No.2524487]

>>2524475
I was merely stating that there is some sort of gradual curve to it. Your 'pain is pain' statement was a bullshit generalisation.

I'm against the abusing of animals myself by the way, but I'm not against killing them. Also, this discussion will be irrelevant in a while with the invention of vat grown meat.

[Anonymous No.2524491]

>>2524487
>the invention of vat grown meat.
I look forward to this becoming economically viable.
>I'm against the abusing of animals myself by the way, but I'm not against killing them.
How is killing an animal not abuse? Just because you have the ability to kill another creature does not mean you should. Killing another is abusing the ability to do so. Murder, not even once.

[Anonymous No.2524499]

>>2524491
Because killing doesn't necessarily imply suffering. You could kill a pig (or a person for that matter) without him ever having any reasons to object to it. Let's say a painless death that it didn't see coming. I think it's not all that immoral to take good care of an animal for the majority of it's life with the only price to pay being not waking up again a bit sooner than might have been the case in nature.

[Anonymous No.2524500]

>>2524491
>implying you aren't constantly killing things just by walking around

how inconsiderate of you, dick. lrn2jainism

[Anonymous No.2524502]

So is there a problem with a wolf eating a cow? Should we be trying to convert the wolves to veganism? I mean for a cow, getting run down and eaten by a pack of wolves would be a horribly painful and frightening way to go. If were all animals anyways, why do humans have more responsibility than wolves? We evolved as hunter gatherers. We domesticated wolves because they were useful in hunting and hunted in a similar manner as humans.

[Anonymous No.2524506]

>>2524500
Yes, Jains are almost consistent. But not completely, otherwise there wouldn't be Jainism in account of them immediately killing themselves in the quickest way possible and never reproducing.

[Anonymous No.2524515]

>>2524506
>implying suicide would be acceptable to jains

[Anonymous No.2524514]

>>2524465

I'd hoped that linking three posts would make it clear that I was responding to that (very common) attitude of hostility towards vegetarian, and not to any particular person.

[Anonymous No.2524518]

>2012
>Listening to Peter Singer
"Sex with animals does not always involve cruelty, mutually satisfying activities of a sexual nature may sometimes occur between humans and animals"

Not even making this up

[Anonymous No.2524523]

>>2524499
i would agree. but in practice most are probably killed painfully and treated quite badly during their lives.

[Anonymous No.2524524]

>>2524499
If you could live for one more day, would choose not to? (Now let us not get side tracked by unrelated arguments about euthanasia.) I know I would rather live for a while longer but animals cannot say, so we must assume that they do for the alternative is unfathomably cruel.
>>2524500
Perhaps you are right, I do not have an ethically neutral presence in the world. That is not possible. I am also not trying to say that I am better than anyone else for my decision to boycott the "animal products" industry. I am just doing my best to reduce my unethicalness. It may be futile, it may be pointless, but I'll keep on trying. Sisyphus is my hero.

[Anonymous No.2524527]

>>2524514
the funny thing is that i am vegetarian but my ethics also prevent me from proselytizing or believing in superiority of values

[Anonymous No.2524528]

>>2524524
P.S. Please watch "Earthlings".

[Anonymous No.2524532]

>>2524524
you aren't saying your better but many people do. peter singer has that attitude and i dislike him. but i totally respect your outlook.

[Deep&Edgy !UfFKGtFx2M!!/0aWHODYBc0 No.2524537]

so guys what do you think we will do after we give rights to animals. thats already p. decadent so i figure it won't be too long before we start getting rights to kill ourselves and each other, stuff like that which is like, obviously where rights movements are going and why they are stupid and decadent

[Adorno !VGOK6fUxDA No.2524539]

Having fun projecting first-world schizophrenia OP?

[Anonymous No.2524540]

Honestly I don't really care about the Dolphin slaughter in Japan, the eating of dogs in South Korea, or the slaughter of baby seals in Canada. Meat taste good, I'm going to continue eating it, and not feel guilty in the slightest.

[Anonymous No.2524541]

>>2524524
>If you could live for one more day, would choose not to? (Now let us not get side tracked by unrelated arguments about euthanasia.) I know I would rather live for a while longer but animals cannot say, so we must assume that they do for the alternative is unfathomably cruel.

This isn't the alternative. The alternative to a farm animal being killed is him not being born at all, since they are brought into existence and treated well for this exact purpose. Cattle isn't raised for fun. It's a trade off. They get a life mostly shielded of from predators, disease and other instabilities and mishaps of life and in return for that they are eaten.

Would you rather not be born at all than live a pleasant life that is ended by painless homicide?

[Anonymous No.2524545]

>>2524537
>implying decadence is something you can stop
bring it on i say

[Anonymous No.2524553]

>>2524502

I get pretty tired of seeing this argument.

Look. There's no way to "convert" wolves to veganism. There's nothing we can do to eliminate all suffering from nature. But it would be entirely possible for us, humans, to stop eating meat.

Humans have more responsibility than wolves because
1. we're omnivores, we won't die if we stop eating meat
2. we're intelligent, we can grasp the moral consequences of our actions

But I didn't even have to type all that. We both already knew it. Why are you wasting our time?

[Deep&Edgy !UfFKGtFx2M!!/0aWHODYBc0 No.2524554]

>>2524545
of course you can't stop it bud nothing wrong with a healthy amount of decadence in every age

[Anonymous No.2524562]

>>2524527

10/10 I love you.

[Adorno !VGOK6fUxDA No.2524563]

>>2524553

Do you realize that large swaths of people in the developing world pray for meat? Literally pray to their meat gods for a bit of chicken once a week. Not asking for much I'd say. Would you deprive them of this?

[Anonymous No.2524564]

>>2524532
Thank you but do not disagree with veganism because of some of its proselytizing exponents. Consider it for yourself, not only cerebrally but with your heart. I know it sounds cheesey but I completely serious. Do not relegate your feelings for the sake of Empiricism or objectivity. Veganism is not Particle Physics after all.
>>2524541
Are you a deist? If something doesn't exist how can the possibility of non-existence be a harmful thing? If I was never born, I would never care because I could not. There would be no "I", there would be no possibility of a possibility of caring.
>painless homicide
Please watch "Earthlings" or go to a slaughter house. The homicides are very rarely painless. Did you know that cows emit a unique sound when being lined up for the slaughter. It is called "lowing" and it gives an indication that there is fear, that they might even be aware of the danger that awaits them.

[Anonymous No.2524570]

>Veganism
The quote in the OP says nothing about veganism, it only seems to be against factory farming and keeping animals in shitty conditions for the duration of their short lives.

[Anonymous No.2524571]

ITT: bleeding heart liberals

[Anonymous No.2524579]

I consider myself to be of higher value than any other animal.
That's why it is okay for me to eat them.
Not necessarily because of my higher "intellect" (seriously, who sets the bar for that anyways?), but mainly because I like it, I sort of depend on it and ultimately I don't care enough.

That might be insanely dumb or even arrogant (or both), but that's of a minor concern here.

[Anonymous No.2524582]

>>2524472
Reasoning capabilities, technological advancements, and ultimately our ability to subjugate non- human animals.

The best part is that his subjugation contributes to our advancement or at least, our enjoyment.

[Anonymous No.2524588]

>>2524563

Obviously not.

[Deep&Edgy !UfFKGtFx2M!!/0aWHODYBc0 No.2524594]

>>2524564
>If something doesn't exist how can the possibility of non-existence be a harmful thing? If I was never born, I would never care because I could not. There would be no "I", there would be no possibility of a possibility of caring.
Dohohoho, if you never existed, you would not be able to assert that you would not care that could not care that you didn't exist

[Anonymous No.2524598]

>>2524564
>If something doesn't exist how can the possibility of non-existence be a harmful thing?

Good point. If you kill an animal it doesn't exist any more, so it isn't harmed by the fact of it's non-existence, even if it did exist before. There is nothing immoral about it because there is no one who suffers from it.

>Please watch "Earthlings" or go to a slaughter house. The homicides are very rarely painless. Did you know that cows emit a unique sound when being lined up for the slaughter. It is called "lowing" and it gives an indication that there is fear, that they might even be aware of the danger that awaits them.
I'm not saying that practices are good as they are. I'm just saying that it's a possibility so killing animals for meat isn't necessarily objectionable when it doesn't instil suffering. If you would claim that killing animals itself is bad apart from the suffering and that it is a question of ending a life, you would have to object to killing plants too. And you would have to object to life in general, since living always implies the death of other organisms. For example the germs your immune system is killing at this very moment.

[Anonymous No.2524599]

so much stupidity in this thread

[Anonymous No.2524603]

>>2524553

I can imagine that it would be frustrating to have to defend your position to people over and over, but then maybe you shouldn't open threads on 4 chan telling people they are not intellectual because they eat meat. I only know a few vegetarians and I wouldn't insult them by posing the question, but I thought it would be okay here since we were having a discussion. Thanks for spelling it out for me though, I really was curious. I know that you can not actually "convert" wolves, etc. I just use hypothetical scenarios to examine my own belief systems.

In response I'd point out that "omnivore" means "eats everything" as opposed to "herbivore" which means "eats plants". Humans could, in theory, die without meat in their diet if they lacked the appropriate supplements for nutrients that can only be obtained from animal protein.

Your morals argument is debatable. Morals are relative. Ask a starving person if it is wrong to eat an animal.

[Anonymous No.2524609]

The real question all vegetarians and vegans must answer:

Why aren't you frutarians?

Even if the plant isn't intelligent, it's still life, you know. If it could think, I guess it would rather not be eaten by someone, now would it?
But you don't even need to go that far- it's in their genes to survive, you could say their sole meaning of life, which YOU are ruining...

Think about that and convert to beautiful veganism, eating only the stuff the world willingly hands to you. : )

[Anonymous No.2524617]

>>2524609
plants don't feel pain

[Anonymous No.2524623]

I've heard somewhere that not eating _any_ kind of meat, not even subsitutes extracted _from_ meat, actually does have adverse effects on the human body or your offspring.
I remember reading that vegans are lacking a certain compund(?) which could result in their offspring having disabilities.

Anyone care to comment on this?

[Anonymous No.2524624]

>>2524617
How would you know?

[Anonymous No.2524627]

>>2524617
So?

Who are you to pick THIS criteria? Tell me, why this?

Isn't the strongest pain conceivable, arguably, not existing? ;-)

[Anonymous No.2524633]

>>2524623

Meat is know to contain specialized faggotry inhibitors. Vegans don't have access to these and, well, you can see the results for yourself.

[Anonymous No.2524651]

>>2524603

Reasonable response. If I was snippy it's because I've seen that argument posed many times in bad faith, like, HAH! Betcha didn't think of THAT, vegan-faggots! And the answer is so simple: we can't fix the whole world, but we can fix ourselves.

Of course I would not begrudge a piece of meat to a starving person, or someone too poor to afford supplements. I don't know if morals are relative, exactly, but they're certainly situational.

[Anonymous No.2524652]

>>2524623
Just look at the wikipedia. There are lots of problems with veganism when it's not sufficiently supplemented.

[Anonymous No.2524658]

>>2524651

(I have to go eat dinner now, but if you write anything I'll read it when I get back. I won't get bitchy again, I promise.)

[rangaha !KJKZ7n2h3I No.2524659]

>I am vegan
>inferior /lit/izens try to defend eating meat
>mfw
captcha: issiants triumphed

[Anonymous No.2524660]

>>2524652
>>2524651
Are there supplements that are entirely "bio-engineered" or extracted from plants?

[Anonymous No.2524677]

Since when were predators obligated to care if their prey feel pain?

[Anonymous No.2524683]

>>2524677
Not sure if vegan or not...

[Anonymous No.2524695]

I'm not vegan because I don't have the money or the discipline to make it healthy. I'm lacto-ovo for now.

[Anonymous No.2524795]

>Why aren't you vegan yet?

decadent, bourgeois life-style based on excessive amounts of free time and money

[Anonymous No.2524807]

>>2524311
>implying I protest about any of the things you mentioned
>implying people who do probably aren't vegan anyway
>implying /lit/ aren't intelligent while being glaringly fallacious yourself
Why am I even replying?

[Anonymous No.2524813]

the guilt tripping of Asians for eating different animals from the animals that we eat is the most oxymoronic action I've encountered in my life

>thinking cute animals deserve life over chickens and pigs

SHIGGY DIGGY WIGGLY PIGGLY

[Anonymous No.2524823]

I'm very much against the practice, but I would perhaps eat a dolphin alive if I knew it would rustle vegans' jimmies.

[Anonymous No.2526257]

>>2524311
Because all things are nothing to me.

[Anonymous No.2526283]

Because all things are the same to me.

[Anonymous No.2526288]

>>2526257

>Max Stirner
>Not exclusively read by angsty American teenagers

Wow, /lit/ is even more pseudo-intellectual than I remember!

[ether.▲l. !s9Eaia.Z2A No.2526292]

>intellectual

>veganism

>refusing to be higher up on the food chain

>>2524311

yeah, you are a faggot.

[Anonymous No.2526295]

>>2526288
>implying American teenagers are capable of comprehending Stirner
>implying you are or have even read him

[ether.▲l. !s9Eaia.Z2A No.2526303]

>>2526295
stop projecting, bro.

[Anonymous No.2526305]

>>2526295

>Stirner
>Difficult to comprehend

Pick one.

Honestly, /lit/ seems to just be in a downward spiral of pretentious nonsense as of late.

Also:

>American teenagers
>Not smarter than you

I saw a high school girl on the train reading Anti-Oedipus the other day, pretentiousness is something most people in the US get over by the time they're 17.

[Anonymous No.2526360]

I only eat free range meat and animal products.

[Anonymous No.2526366]

>>2526360

>free range

you realize 1 hour week outside is what qualifies as "free range" for eggs/chickens

so...the rest of the time they are in a factory cage setting lol

[Anonymous No.2526372]

>>2526366

actually in the EU they dont have to be outside, they just scramble around inside a big barn, not much different than being in cages since they can barely move around

they dont see the sun and they eat the same diet as regular factory chickens

not much difference actually

[Adorno !VGOK6fUxDA No.2526383]

>>2526305

Did you hit on her? There's a rhizomes joke to be had in that situation.

[Anonymous No.2526386]

Because, OP, I like meat. I had bacon and eggs for breakfast today, a cheeseburger for dinner last night (it was an organic, free range cattle burger), and I have a bass in my fridge waiting to be filleted and cooked tonight. I also believe everyone should be allowed to do what THEY want. I respect you for making what was likely a very difficult, life-changing decision to stop eating animal products, but I will never do the same.

[Anonymous No.2526411]

>>2526386

>I also believe everyone should be allowed to do what THEY want.

You're an anarchist?

[Anonymous No.2526419]

>>2526411
More or less, yes.

[Anonymous No.2526436]

Once again those who consider themselves able to be a part of an intellectual debate defend themselves by saging, personal attacks and the type of logic christians use

>Christian: Ok, maybe God doesn't exist, but jeez guys don't need to be a MILITANT-ATHEIST over it

>Meatfag: Hey guys, massacring animals to appease my taste buds may be wrong, but quite talking about it you MILITANT VEGANS

Stay deluded /lit/

[Anonymous No.2526440]

>>2526411
>>2526419
This fags not an anarchist, he's a teenage nihilist retard who spouts this nonsense from the comfort of his parents' spare bedroom

[Anonymous No.2526451]

god damn the more i read about factory farming and farming in general the more i want to go vegan

1. its not sustainable and probably #1 destroyer of our environment

2. animals are unhealthy as FUCK, its just gross to eat animals that are full of tumors, pesticides and hormones, and literally live in feces all day, unable to move or see the sun or breath fresh air...yuck

3. cruelty...ya its bad, terrible...i hate seeing animals suffer
4. factory farms are breeding grounds for disease (mad cow, bird flu, foot-mouth disease)

[Anonymous No.2526467]

Non-humans can't read, therefore they are not /lit/ worthy.
> implying humans aren't the master race
> implying I give a fuck
> implying the chicken sandwich I just ate wasn't tasty as fuck

[Anonymous No.2526476]

>>2526451

Buy from local farmers.

[Anonymous No.2526481]

>“To protest about Dolphin slaughter in Japan, the eating of dogs in South Korea, or the slaughter of baby seals in Canada, while continuing to eat eggs from hens who have spent their lives crammed into cages, or veal from calves who have been deprived of their mothers, their proper diet, and the freedom to lie down with their legs extended, is like denouncing apartheid in South Africa while asking your neighbors not to sell their houses to blacks.”
But I don't decry the killing of animals in other cultures, so I am not being hypocritical in the slightest. Also:

>Murder plants for food
>Decry other people for murdering animals for food

[Anonymous No.2526489]

>>2526481

Plants aren't sentient. That's kind of a big deal.

[Anonymous No.2526490]

>implying I protest about Dolphin slaughter in Japan, the eating of dogs in South Korea, or the slaughter of baby seals in Canada

They're animals. They're not sentient. Fuck 'em.

[Anonymous No.2526491]

>>2526490

I think you're confusing sentient with sapient.

[Anonymous No.2526495]

>>2526489
>Plants aren't sentient.
A.K.A. plants aren't as easily anthropomorphized as people therefore I don't feel as sorry for them when they die. After all, no consciousness could ever exist without a central nervous nervous system, nevermind that plants, for instance, emit signals that other plants receive when they're being eaten or uprooted. They can't make a cute little baby face that directly appeals to what my myopic little mind can empathize with.

[Anonymous No.2526499]

>>2526476

>Buy from local farmers.

i can't inspect their practices 24/7

so there is no point.

[Anonymous No.2526501]

>>2526495

As far as we know, it's impossible to feel things without a central nervous system.

Can you provide evidence proving otherwise? Preferably from a credible, peer reviewed source?

[Anonymous No.2526503]

>>2526491

Yes, that thing.

[Anonymous No.2526509]

>>2526499

Then raise your own livestock.

Alternatively, stop being so autistic and just trust that local produce is going to be remarkably less shitty than the output of 'factory farms'.

[Anonymous No.2526531]

Because farm animals actually have good lives. If you've ever been to a farm (not a slaughterhouse), then you'd know that the farmers care about their cattle. Abuse is rarely an issue.

Plus, plants, if left unchecked, would destroy more than they would create. The same goes for animals, and obviously humans. Balance is difficult to attain, yes, but that doesn't mean it's impossible.

[Anonymous No.2526551]

Pescatarian. Have you looked into fish brains?

[Anonymous No.2526585]

>>2526531

I'm pretty sure the earth can balance itself without us sticking our noses into it, hm?

I think it was around before we came along to manage it.

[Anonymous No.2526601]

>>2526436

It's not about "appeasing taste buds" you fucking retard, it's about the biological machine that is the HUMAN BODY being adapted to consume the nutrients found in meats over millions of years.

[Anonymous No.2526604]

>>2526601

Can you eat meat and not die?

[Anonymous No.2526607]

>>2526604

Can you run that by me again?

[Anonymous No.2526664]

Vegetarianism will never catch on for a very simple reason - morality is based on reciprocation, and animals are not capable of reciprocating sophisticated expressions of human kindness like us collectively agreeing to stop eating other animals. We collectively agree to prohibit murder because even if we might individually benefit from the ability to kill certain people, if everyone had the permission to kill whoever they wanted society would very quickly collapse. There is no equivalent benefit to the prohibition of eating meat.

[Anonymous No.2526669]

>>2526664

>morality is based on reciprocation

[citation needed]

What a dumb as shit statement you got there, chum, so simplified and general as to be completely useless.

[Shoogee !jfU8C/uZ5U No.2526672]

I simply don't give a fuck about animals, they're just another resource to me.

Funny story about how I got back at my vegan-ex though... if anyone wants to hear.

[Anonymous No.2526680]

>>2526669
>[citation needed]
Simple: morality is useless at best and detrimental at worst if only one party in a contract adheres to it. If you want to hold your society back and get absolutely no benefit from it for any party capable of consenting to a moral code, just try it.

[Anonymous No.2526684]

>>2526680

What is this "contract" you're going on about mate

Why does there need to be a contract

[Anonymous No.2526714]

>>2526305
>Says Stirnerism is simple shit for angsty teenagers
>Calls people pretentious for subscribing to it

Pick one.

[Anonymous No.2526724]

>>2524349

untrue,
http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/445-farm-and-food-policy/10436-all-red-meat-is-bad-for-
you-new-study-says

>Eating red meat - any amount and any type - appears to significantly increase the risk of premature death, according to a long-range study that examined the eating habits and health of more than 110,000 adults for more than 20 years.

>Crunching data from thousands of questionnaires that asked people how frequently they ate a variety of foods, the researchers also discovered that replacing red meat with other foods seemed to reduce mortality risk for study participants.

>Eating a serving of nuts instead of beef or pork was associated with a 19% lower risk of dying during the study. The team said choosing poultry or whole grains as a substitute was linked with a 14% reduction in mortality risk; low-fat dairy or legumes, 10%; and fish, 7%.

>Previous studies had associated red meat consumption with diabetes, heart disease and cancer, all of which can be fatal. Scientists aren't sure exactly what makes red meat so dangerous, but the suspects include the iron and saturated fat in beef, pork and lamb, the nitrates used to preserve them, and the chemicals created by high-temperature cooking.

[Anonymous No.2526741]

>>2526724

>data gathered from unreliable questionnaires
>nothing but correlations, no explanations
>scientists who actually still think saturated fat is unhealthy

[Anonymous No.2526742]

>>2526680
>social contract
>not a ruthless band of thugs who invaded land and told people how it was going to be, period
>their inner hierarchy not decided by pure dominance

Sure isn't Genealogy of Morals in here.

[Anonymous No.2526744]

>>2526742
Oh, what's that? Do I detect a butthurt anarchist?

[Anonymous No.2526749]

>>2526744

* Jivaro: A family of "headhunting" peoples from South America whose dietary staple is cassava, which they grow in gardens. Supplemented by hunting and gathering.

* Yanomamö: The classic example of a violent indigenous people, native to South America. Diet primarily horticultural, supplemented by hunting and gathering. Heavily vegetable-focused diet. 75 percent of their diet comes from plant-based foods.

* Yanomamö (again): Keeling uses the Shamatari as well as the Namowei Yanomamö to further skew the data in favor of his thesis.

* Mae Enga: Primarily horticultural people of New Guinea.

* Dugum Dani: Primarily horticultural people of New Guinea. Staple food is sweet potato, which constitutes 90% of their diet.

* Murngin: Foraging (hunter-gatherer) people of Australia.

* Huli: Primarily horticultural people of New Guinea. Staple food is sweet potato.

* Gebusi: Horticultural people of New Guinea. Staple food is banana. "Gebusi get their protein mostly from casual foraging activities that yield grubs, bird eggs, nuts, and riverine fauna."

Note the absurdity of this list in generating a "general" picture of human origins. Seven of the eight peoples get most of their food from gardening rather than from hunting and gathering. Four of the eight are from New Guinea, and three of the others are from South America (two of them being simply different bands of the same tribe). The Murngin are the only people listed who were traditionally hunter-gatherers, and the only people listed outside of New Guinea or South America. It's very hard to imagine the good faith of an author whose sample is so poorly representative of indigenous peoples, and so clearly stacked in favor of his thesis.

[Anonymous No.2526751]

>>2526744

Convenient how studies like that never talk about peoples like the Mbuti or Lepchas or Batek

[Anonymous No.2526759]

>>2526749
>Seven of the eight peoples get most of their food from gardening rather than from hunting and gathering.
In other words, a society that is predominantly vegetarian in its diet will lead to massive rates of violent death?

[Anonymous No.2526762]

>>2526744
More of a fascist, really.