Page 3 of 5 <12345>
Topic Options
#27921 - 08/04/09 10:23 PM Re: Vegetarian, The Moral Argument. [Re: coelentrate]
ceruleansteel Offline
active member


Registered: 10/15/07
Posts: 784
Loc: Behind you
An explanation of the finer points of the food chain, for those of you too lazy to research how these things work and instead want to keep stabbing away at it until someone explains it to you:

Say that all dogs are feral and eat cats and rabbits. If we take cats out of the foodchain by domesticating them, then dogs will have only rabbits to eat. Briefly, the rabbit population will dwindle but the resulting death of more dogs by starvation will eventually even things out, with both populations ending relatively smaller than they started when the dogs had more than one option.

Now, say that a few million years go by and we decide we are not going to keep cats anymore, but will reintroduce them to the foodchain by "freeing" them. Now during this few million years, we have also gone from covering about ten percent of the planet to spanning about 80 percent of it, so there's not nearly as much room as there was before. Now, this was inconsequential when we had a small feral dog population because the numbers were manageable. BUT now that we have re-introduced a natural prey-animal for the dogs, they will have a population explosion and like was said before, they will begin to show up on human territory. This will happen for two reasons: one, because they will have no where else to go and two: because cats will still be roaming around in human areas even though they have been emancipated from our lives. The dogs - having never been tamed in the first place - will breed massive numbers very fast and then we will have to worry about controlling THEIR population because in this scenario in which there are only three animals, the dogs are prey to no one and so have no other way to be controlled in their own numbers.

The same would hold true if we released all of our domesticated food animals back into the wild (not to mention the fact that they would be so prone to disease because we have spent a billion years protecting them from same). As Fake pointed out, animals that are already at the top of the food chain right now, such as bears, would explode in population because there would be such a flood of available food for them. Even when the populations stabalized again, we would still be left with an unmanageable number of top-predators.

For those of you who want to talk about what is and is not natural, killing is totally natural and second only to fucking. Animals kill eachother; we are animals. Therefore, it is just as natural for us to kill (other) animals as it is for us to fuck.

Would I hunt, kill, dress it out and cook it up? In a New York minute, my friend. I would rather have a juicy, dripping tasty bit of flesh in my mouth than a wild pear or a fuckin' potato any day of the week.

Now, I admit that I do have a problem with the wholesale farming and slaughtering of animals simply because I disagree with many of the methods and details that are involved in doing so, BUT when you have seven billion humans sharing a small bit of soil, you need to think of ways to accommodate the more densely populated areas. A person living on the 12th floor of a New York high rise will probably not be able to accomodate meat foods of their own to raise and slaughter.

As far as my own array of personal morals goes (and this was actually the original point of the thread, NOT how wrong it may or may not be to eat meat), I believe many things to be morally reprehensible, but that does not mean I will hesistate to go against myself if I believe it to be the best solution to whatever the problem may be.

Meat is tasty and morals are flexible. The End.

Top
#27927 - 08/05/09 06:36 AM Re: Vegetarian, The Moral Argument. [Re: coelentrate]
god.over.djinn Offline
pledge


Registered: 06/23/09
Posts: 75
Loc: Melbourne
 Originally Posted By: coelentrate

- I feel that animal farming is wasteful. It's more efficient to eat what cows eat, rather than eat cows.


You want to eat grass??

Seriously, I've heard this argument bandied about. Has anyone ever actually substantiated it, or is it kind of like the proof that jumbo jets can't fly?

Meat is a very efficient source of food for humans. How much meat can you get off a cow? I can only guess, but it must be of the order of magnitude of 100kg, if you aren't being wasteful. Now, you can get a lot bang for your buck if you eat a kilo of meat a day.

In other words, a properly preserved cow can feasibly feed a human for quite some time.

How much ground would you need to farm to feed yourself fruit & vegetables for the same length of time, and how does the size of this plot of land compare to the amount of land the cow needs?

Even assuming there is any merit soever to the argument, is it really better to have sickly and unhappy humans who subsist on the bare minimum ground possible - or bright and vibrant humans who content themselves with the so-called inefficiencies of being predators?

G.O.D.
_________________________
SATAN, a recursive acronym invented by GOD: "SATAN: Advocating The Adversarial Nihilist"

Top
#27931 - 08/05/09 08:24 AM Re: Vegetarian, The Moral Argument. [Re: god.over.djinn]
coelentrate Offline
member


Registered: 07/07/08
Posts: 164
Loc: Dundee, Scotland
dear GOD,

Note that I was careful to say "I feel that animal farming is wasteful".

However, the hard evidence to me is obvious. We use food as react-able carbon. Most of the react-able carbon going into a cows mouth becomes cow pies and urea in the field, and CO2 and methane in the air. And I remember that it took a lot more than 10kg of food to gain 10kg of weight when I was growing. I think food prices reflect this. It cost less for me to buy 1 kg of corn or soy, what cows eat, than 1kg of cow.

To answer your other questions, my wife and I get about 90% of our vegetables (considerably more veg than most people eat since we use it as a main dish) on two 15x15 meter plots of land we tend ourselves. A quick google search told me that one cow needs 5 acres of grass.

I am not sick, unhappy, or subsisting on the bare minimum. I have no nutritional deficiencies. I'm built like a rugby player. I'm a competitive martial artist.

Top
#27940 - 08/05/09 05:21 PM Re: Vegetarian, The Moral Argument. [Re: coelentrate]
ceruleansteel Offline
active member


Registered: 10/15/07
Posts: 784
Loc: Behind you


Diets high in soy contribute to all kinds of cancer. Plus, soy is super high in estrogen.

So enjoy your man-tits, until they rot off from breast cancer.


Edited by ceruleansteel (08/05/09 05:23 PM)

Top
#27954 - 08/05/09 08:34 PM Re: Vegetarian, The Moral Argument. [Re: ceruleansteel]
Happy Birthday Asmedious Moderator Online
Moderator
senior member


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 1724
Loc: New York
Diets too high in anything will pretty much cause some kind of problem.

It's all about balance. A little of this, and a little of that. If you are a healthy adult to begin with, chances are you will be fine, if you keep your intake low, and balanced.

Disclaimer: In this case, I don't practice what I preach. I go on eating binges, and eat all sorts of things that might be bad for me. But I only do it on occasion.
_________________________
"The first order of government is the protection of its citizens right to be left alone."

Top
#27982 - 08/06/09 11:38 AM Re: Vegetarian, The Moral Argument. [Re: ceruleansteel]
coelentrate Offline
member


Registered: 07/07/08
Posts: 164
Loc: Dundee, Scotland
 Originally Posted By: ceruleansteel


Diets high in soy contribute to all kinds of cancer. Plus, soy is super high in estrogen.

So enjoy your man-tits, until they rot off from breast cancer.


I don't have a diet high in soy. I don't eat a lot of tofu or boca burgers. I cook my own dishes that never called for meat in the first place: like spaghetti marinara. Most meat eaters consume more phyto-estrogen than I do.

This digs into the meat of the reason why I bothered to respond in the first place. Most people have very dumb, emotional misconceptions about what a vegetarian is.

Top
#28006 - 08/06/09 05:40 PM Re: Vegetarian, The Moral Argument. [Re: coelentrate]
Fist Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/31/07
Posts: 1453
Loc: B'mo Cautious MF
Truthfully, I need about page properly respond to this thread. However, my time is short and I do want to chime in before this thread becomes 6 pages of unreadable nonsense.

To wit....

There is an annoying trend in Satanism where White Light Secular Humanists with Wiccan sensibilities masquerade as Satanist.

Far too many actually fear their own self-deification. Man is rapidly developing powers that were once considered god like. We are learning to create and shape life. We currently have a capacity to destroy on a biblical scale. And we are working hard at unraveling and understanding the very fabric of the universe.

In the words of Arthur C. Clarke "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

From the Satanic perspective, there can be no moral argument against eating meat. Wielding the power of life and death is what gods do.

Everyone a shining star....
_________________________
I am the Devil and I am here to do the Devil's work.

Top
#28035 - 08/07/09 03:54 AM Re: Vegetarian, The Moral Argument. [Re: Fist]
coelentrate Offline
member


Registered: 07/07/08
Posts: 164
Loc: Dundee, Scotland
But I don't have a moral argument against eating meat. It can make sense to be meatless outside of moral reasons. That's my whole point.
Top
#28056 - 08/07/09 07:51 AM Re: Vegetarian, The Moral Argument. [Re: coelentrate]
god.over.djinn Offline
pledge


Registered: 06/23/09
Posts: 75
Loc: Melbourne
 Quote:
It can make sense to be meatless outside of moral reasons.


Hi Coelentrate,

The only non-moral argument you've given for not eating meat was your second reason (one out of three):

 Quote:
My father cooked meat by boiling it gray with no seasoning, and served it for every meal.


The other reasons were moral reasons.

Basically, pursuing vegetarianism for the reasons you've given is kind of like saying that you don't have sex because you think the planet is already overpopulated, and besides your father always treated women badly so now you also find it hard to deal with women, plus you do respect women and you think it would be sexist to have sex with them.

Don't let me stop you from doing whatever you feel like, but if you are trying to present an argument about why vegetarianism can be viable even without resorting to moralisms, I think you still have a little way to go.


G.O.D.
_________________________
SATAN, a recursive acronym invented by GOD: "SATAN: Advocating The Adversarial Nihilist"

Top
#28061 - 08/07/09 09:46 AM Re: Vegetarian, The Moral Argument. [Re: god.over.djinn]
Fist Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/31/07
Posts: 1453
Loc: B'mo Cautious MF
From the health perspective, I have personally never know a healthy/sane vegan. The term 'vegetarian' seems to mean whatever the person wants it to mean. The term is thrown around to boost one's own ego as to suggest holier than thou.

You could live your whole life and never eat red meat. The only thing you would miss is some delicious fire grilled flavor. But to deprive your body of fish and eggs is starve your brain of important nutrients.

Man is an omnivore. We evolved eating a wide variety of foods and this has been our survival strategy for thousands of years. Our gut has much more in common with notorious omnivores like pigs.

From a satanic perspective, the Satanist should be concerned gastronomy - enjoying good food. And quite a lot of good food is actually good for you. As for everything else - all thing in moderation, including moderation it's self.
_________________________
I am the Devil and I am here to do the Devil's work.

Top
#30591 - 10/18/09 01:36 AM Re: Vegetarian, The Moral Argument. [Re: Nemesis]
Phenex Offline
stranger


Registered: 10/13/09
Posts: 11
I, personally, am a vegetarian because I believe that the harsh treatment practiced in slaughter houses is ridiculous, and I do not wish to have any part in it. Perhaps if the techiques of slaughter and the standards at which the animals are raised were of better quality, I would be more willing to consume meat every now and then. However, as it is, the majority of slaughter houses are run by pathetic morals.

In much of the United States, for example, there is no limit for the amount of livestock raised in one area. It's however many you can handle. I believe that if you want to make more money, you should do the proper work involved--this does not include shoving as many cows as you can onto one patch of land and keeping them alive at the bare minimum.

As for chickens, they are kept so tightly packed that they are no longer able to move, forcing their muscles to degrade. This is just cruel. The arrogance that must be obtained in order to do something like this is a level that I, personally, hope never to reach. If one is going to take a life for the sake of their own, it should be done fairly and respectfully. After all, their energy is being taken away and given to another; Is this not a sacrifice which should be respected?

Now, I am not the type of vegetarian to shove my ideals down another's throat. I believe that everyone has to right to decide their way of living for themselve's. However, the consumption of meat produced by slaughter-houses only seems arrogant and lazy to me. Hunting, I am able to endorse, as long as it is done fairly. (The use of a bow and arrow seems much more honorable to me all together, as it is not using another's work to form a machine to take the life of an animal who was simply not born with the same benefits.)
_________________________
"Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds." -Einstein

Top
#30597 - 10/18/09 10:53 AM Re: Vegetarian, The Moral Argument. [Re: Phenex]
Nemesis Offline
senior member


Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 2175
Loc: US
I can understand your moral objections to eating meat that's been raised in the type of conditions you've described. However some searching on Google would have yielded a list of farmers who raise their livestock in a more natural manner, who slaughter them humanely, and sell directly to the public.

There is an organization called AWA, which stands for "Animal Welfare Approved", and lists farmers who abide by its standards. If it was possible to buy directly from these farmers, would you still be a vegetarian?

http://www.animalwelfareapproved.org/
_________________________
Nothing is sacred.

Top
#30600 - 10/18/09 12:57 PM Re: Vegetarian, The Moral Argument. [Re: Nemesis]
Phenex Offline
stranger


Registered: 10/13/09
Posts: 11
The AWA seems like a wonderful organization. I wish all slaughter houses treated the animals more humanely, though I realize that the laziness and arrogance of society can seldom be undone.

As for if I would still be vegetarian or not, I believe that I most likely would. Since becoming a vegetarian, I have become more aware of the health benefits that come with it. However, if the majority of meat was sold directly from those farmers, I would not have the same disgust towards the consumption of meat, and would no longer be "against" it.
_________________________
"Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds." -Einstein

Top
#30603 - 10/18/09 06:26 PM Re: Vegetarian, The Moral Argument. [Re: Phenex]
Miss May Offline
pledge


Registered: 09/27/09
Posts: 66
Loc: sebastopol, CA
I don't share the opinion that killing animals for their meat is immoral. In fact, I think hunting an animal yourself for your own sustenance is perfectly natural. I have and would kill an animal for food. I don't feel bad about that. It doesn't mean that i don't respect and love animals. Animals would do the same thing if they were in my position.

I personally feel that there are people who have become removed from their instincts in such a way that they don't even view their meat as an animal anymore. Those who pay for meat and eat it only because it's what their used to, not for any reason in particular, who never give it a second thought and could care less about how it got there.

However, in todays society there are enough alternatives for those who who don't agree with the mass slaughtering that goes on to choose not to support it. There are free range options where the animals are not abused before their death, but raised healthfully.

There are more things to take into consideration before becoming a vegan or vegetarian though. Everyone's body has different needs. For example, blood type O needs animal protein to stay healthy. In contrast, those with blood type A do not tolerate a high level of animal proteins and a vegetarian diet will benefit them.

Top
#30608 - 10/19/09 01:21 AM Re: Vegetarian, The Moral Argument. [Re: Miss May]
TV is God Moderator Offline
Moderator
member


Registered: 08/11/08
Posts: 273
Loc: The Cornhole
I am a meat eater and I've been with a vegetarian for several years. While I don't share the same viewpoint I respect her decision and I can't say there's no validity to it.

Vegetarianism isn't really a singular viewpoint that you can put all together and argue against. Like any group of a decent idea there are people who understand and take part in the belief and others that merely exploit it to feel superior to others.

I think that sane decent vegetarians get a lot of undeserved shit on behalf of the idiots that bring it's name down. Not unlike many shallow kids I've known that think they understand Satanism.

As I see it unless a vegetarian is telling you that you're wrong for eating meat(which they quite often don't, people often just assume they will and take a preemptive strike) then there's no reason for a conflict, it's a personal choice that is not interfering with yours at all.

Some people just don't want to eat animals. There's no reason to have a problem with that. Some idiots dress up as cows and picket in the McDonalds parking lot. Those people are just shallow idiots.

Top
Page 3 of 5 <12345>


Moderator:  TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Woland, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.029 seconds of which 0.002 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.