Just for the Veggies

[Guest alex]

I don't agree with people who're vegetarians because they don't like the thought of killing something to eat it.

 

people who don't eat meat for medical reasons and those who refuse to eat animals who've been severely mistreated are all fine and fair enough. But serisouly people who're veggies because eating "meat is murder" should have their canines forcibly removed and pinned to their forhead so we can spot the stupid fuckers and avoid them.

 

Re: Veggies=Killjoys, I think that it's not neccesarily true, but often the case that people who take a moralistic approach to vegetarianism also tend to be a bit breathy-social-worker-type. The simpering idiots who'll try and reason with charvers and who think all life is sacred or something

I don't get the vitriol from the likes of you personally but hey-ho.

[Fop 1]

I don't agree with people who're vegetarians because they don't like the thought of killing something to eat it.

 

people who don't eat meat for medical reasons and those who refuse to eat animals who've been severely mistreated are all fine and fair enough. But serisouly people who're veggies because eating "meat is murder" should have their canines forcibly removed and pinned to their forhead so we can spot the stupid fuckers and avoid them.

 

Re: Veggies=Killjoys, I think that it's not neccesarily true, but often the case that people who take a moralistic approach to vegetarianism also tend to be a bit breathy-social-worker-type. The simpering idiots who'll try and reason with charvers and who think all life is sacred or something

 

In current modern life if you had to kill and butcher something yourself to eat it quite a lot of people would be vegetarians, but conversely if you're got no other choice but to kill it or starve to death very few if anyone would be. But then hypocrisy a fundamental part of the human soul really.

[Meenzer 14031]

I don't see what's hypocritical about it. We pay other people to slaughter animals so that we don't have to. How's that fundamentally different to, I don't know, using public transport rather than walking? I think you're allowed to reap the benefits of progress without being branded the H-word, much as I know you're very attached to it.

[Fop 1]

I don't see what's hypocritical about it. We pay other people to slaughter animals so that we don't have to. How's that fundamentally different to, I don't know, using public transport rather than walking? I think you're allowed to reap the benefits of progress without being branded the H-word, much as I know you're very attached to it.

 

That's an interesting point of view, but if you don't see the hypocrisy in the "pay someone else so I don't have to get my hands dirty" statement (although that wasn't actually my point, nor what I was referring to with hypocrisy ), do you see it in say 3rd world food production?

[The Fish 8989]

I don't agree with people who're vegetarians because they don't like the thought of killing something to eat it.

 

people who don't eat meat for medical reasons and those who refuse to eat animals who've been severely mistreated are all fine and fair enough. But serisouly people who're veggies because eating "meat is murder" should have their canines forcibly removed and pinned to their forhead so we can spot the stupid fuckers and avoid them.

 

Re: Veggies=Killjoys, I think that it's not neccesarily true, but often the case that people who take a moralistic approach to vegetarianism also tend to be a bit breathy-social-worker-type. The simpering idiots who'll try and reason with charvers and who think all life is sacred or something

I don't get the vitriol from the likes of you personally but hey-ho.

 

but are you a "All life is sacred I couldn't bear for Jonny the Cow to be slaughtered on my behalf" of more the "I won't eat non-Free-Range" foodstuffs group?

 

I honestly don't understand the former, as imo it's part and parcel of omnivorous animals lives; other species must die for you to survive. If we we forced to slaughter animals ourselves I'd wager a few more would find meat less appealing, but eventually would get over their squeamishness.

 

I know I sound like my way is best, your way is stupid and ner-ner-ne-ner-ner and I suppose my vitriol is a little exaggerrated. But honestly I think we're omnivores and as such have developed teeth, organs and hunger for the variety of foods that we eat. We're "designed" to eat meat and veg, not just one or the other.

 

but that's just an opinion (and most likely a backlash against the militant vegetarians I've met)

[ChezGiven 0]

Have humans always been carnivores? I thought not but could be wrong.

[Fop 1]

Have humans always been carnivores? I thought not but could be wrong.

 

I could divulge quite a lot of info on that subject, but I'll only get told off for it.

Edited April 26, 2007 by Fop

[ChezGiven 0]

Have humans always been carnivores? I thought not but could be wrong.

 

I could divulge quite a lot of info, but I'll only get told off for it.

 

Now you're just acting yourself. Iirc our understanding of food consumption patterns of early man is largely theoretical due to the quality and nature of the evidence.

[Meenzer 14031]

I don't see what's hypocritical about it. We pay other people to slaughter animals so that we don't have to. How's that fundamentally different to, I don't know, using public transport rather than walking? I think you're allowed to reap the benefits of progress without being branded the H-word, much as I know you're very attached to it.

 

That's an interesting point of view, but if you don't see the hypocrisy in the "pay someone else so I don't have to get my hands dirty" statement (although that wasn't actually my point, nor what I was referring to with hypocrisy ), do you see it in say 3rd world food production?

 

I buy Fairtrade coffee so I'm doing my bit. Seriously though, I do know what you're saying - assuming I've managed to drag myself up to the level of understanding you this time - but I also think it's essentially impossible to live a functioning life in a western society without either directly exploiting someone else or indirectly benefiting someone who's involved in exploitation themselves. It's one thing if you bury your head in the sand completely, but I don't see what's to be gained by branding people for indulging in certain aspects of a modern lifestyle if they're aware of the cause-and-effect but have no realistic opportunity to change the status quo and the alternative is going without. Even if the third world produces for us and doesn't have enough itself - those are the mechanisms we have to function within. So if that's what you deem "hypocritical" then we just interpret the term with a slightly different nuance, I'd say.

 

EDIT: And if your point was something completely different, you'd probably best stick to the poo jokes.

Edited April 26, 2007 by Meenzer

[Guest alex]

I don't agree with animals being killed for food, but I don't like to preach about it. It's my choice (and yours). That's why the 'my way is best argument' is stupid in a society like ours in my view. It's up to the individual. The omnivore argument is a red herring for me too. Humans are constantly changing their diet. We've only been farming etc. for a relatively short time etc. And militants from any group are pains in the arse tbh but are hardly representative.

Edited April 26, 2007 by alex

[Fop 1]

Have humans always been carnivores? I thought not but could be wrong.

 

I could divulge quite a lot of info, but I'll only get told off for it.

 

Now you're just acting yourself. Iirc our understanding of food consumption patterns of early man is largely theoretical due to the quality and nature of the evidence.

 

Nope you're not going to goad me into explaining, live in ignorance.

[Fop 1]

I don't see what's hypocritical about it. We pay other people to slaughter animals so that we don't have to. How's that fundamentally different to, I don't know, using public transport rather than walking? I think you're allowed to reap the benefits of progress without being branded the H-word, much as I know you're very attached to it.

 

That's an interesting point of view, but if you don't see the hypocrisy in the "pay someone else so I don't have to get my hands dirty" statement (although that wasn't actually my point, nor what I was referring to with hypocrisy ), do you see it in say 3rd world food production?

 

I buy Fairtrade coffee so I'm doing my bit. Seriously though, I do know what you're saying - assuming I've managed to drag myself up to the level of understanding you this time - but I also think it's essentially impossible to live a functioning life in a western society without either directly exploiting someone else or indirectly benefiting someone who's involved in exploitation themselves. It's one thing if you bury your head in the sand completely, but I don't see what's to be gained by branding people for indulging in certain aspects of a modern lifestyle if they're aware of the cause-and-effect but have no realistic opportunity to change the status quo and the alternative is going without. If that's what you deem "hypocritical" then we just interpret the term with a slightly different nuance, I'd say.

 

 

Yes, you make a fair point, but you're still just "justifying" the hypocrisy of the situation (more so in a way if you buy fair trade stuff bizarrely).

 

We're good at doing that as a species (I don't think we'd have invented politics if we weren't), to not do so would be either to actually and openly not care or actively do something about it.

 

 

EDIT: And if your point was something completely different, you'd probably best stick to the poo jokes.

 

My original point still was something else, but I've given up with people here in that respect tbh, so don't worry about it.

[ChezGiven 0]

Have humans always been carnivores? I thought not but could be wrong.

 

I could divulge quite a lot of info, but I'll only get told off for it.

 

Now you're just acting yourself. Iirc our understanding of food consumption patterns of early man is largely theoretical due to the quality and nature of the evidence.

 

Nope you're not going to goad me into explaining, live in ignorance.

 

Not my area of expertise and not arsed to enough to goad you.

[Guest alex]

I don't see what's hypocritical about it. We pay other people to slaughter animals so that we don't have to. How's that fundamentally different to, I don't know, using public transport rather than walking? I think you're allowed to reap the benefits of progress without being branded the H-word, much as I know you're very attached to it.

 

That's an interesting point of view, but if you don't see the hypocrisy in the "pay someone else so I don't have to get my hands dirty" statement (although that wasn't actually my point, nor what I was referring to with hypocrisy ), do you see it in say 3rd world food production?

 

I buy Fairtrade coffee so I'm doing my bit. Seriously though, I do know what you're saying - assuming I've managed to drag myself up to the level of understanding you this time - but I also think it's essentially impossible to live a functioning life in a western society without either directly exploiting someone else or indirectly benefiting someone who's involved in exploitation themselves. It's one thing if you bury your head in the sand completely, but I don't see what's to be gained by branding people for indulging in certain aspects of a modern lifestyle if they're aware of the cause-and-effect but have no realistic opportunity to change the status quo and the alternative is going without. If that's what you deem "hypocritical" then we just interpret the term with a slightly different nuance, I'd say.

 

 

Yes, you make a fair point, but you're still just "justifying" the hypocrisy of the situation (more so in a way if you buy fair trade stuff bizarrely).

 

We're good at doing that as a species (I don't think we'd have invented politics if we weren't), to not do so would be either to actually and openly not care or actively do something about it.

 

 

EDIT: And if your point was something completely different, you'd probably best stick to the poo jokes.

 

My original point still was something else, but I've given up with people here in that respect tbh, so don't worry about it.

Surely that means practically all people living in the west are hypocrites once they reach a certain age/level of consciousness. Therefore when people use the term hypocrite they mean it in a relative sense. I'm not saying you're wrong by the way. But if people eating meat who haven't killed it themselves are hypocrites then really, who isn't?

[Meenzer 14031]

Yes, you make a fair point, but you're still just "justifying" the hypocrisy of the situation (more so in a way if you buy fair trade stuff bizarrely).

 

We're good at doing that as a species (I don't think we'd have invented politics if we weren't), to not do so would be either to actually and openly not care or actively do something about it.

 

Like I say, it's a question of perspective. What you see as "justifying hypocrisy", I'd call "not seeing everything in black and white".

[Fop 1]

 

Surely that means practically all people living in the west are hypocrites once they reach a certain age/level of consciousness. Therefore when people use the term hypocrite they mean it in a relative sense. I'm not saying you're wrong by the way. But if people eating meat who haven't killed it themselves are hypocrites then really, who isn't?

 

Aye pretty much. (which is some thing closer to my original point)

[Guest Patrokles]

To be fair, someone eating meat or not eating meat- in all probability- doesn't really impinge unpon anyone else, so I don't see the need to get het up about it either way. If vegetarians started fashioning crude weapons from celery and rampaging through town, then alright. But if people have reasons for doing something in their own lives that doesn't negatively affect the lives of anyone else, then so what?

[Fop 1]

Yes, you make a fair point, but you're still just "justifying" the hypocrisy of the situation (more so in a way if you buy fair trade stuff bizarrely).

 

We're good at doing that as a species (I don't think we'd have invented politics if we weren't), to not do so would be either to actually and openly not care or actively do something about it.

 

Like I say, it's a question of perspective. What you see as "justifying hypocrisy", I'd call "not seeing everything in black and white".

 

Which I'd still say was the same thing (which isn't to say to not be hypocritical you have to deal only in absolutes), but anyway getting more than a little off topic I guess.

Edited April 26, 2007 by Fop

[Guest alex]

To be fair, someone eating meat or not eating meat- in all probability- doesn't really impinge unpon anyone else, so I don't see the need to get het up about it either way. If vegetarians started fashioning crude weapons from celery and rampaging through town, then alright. But if people have reasons for doing something in their own lives that doesn't negatively affect the lives of anyone else, then so what?

Cheers, what I was trying to say before I think As for Fop's argument about the species being inherently selfish, I think he's got a point. I think we're probably the worst thing that ever happened to planet Earth along with the odd big asteroid.

[Guest Patrokles]

To be fair, someone eating meat or not eating meat- in all probability- doesn't really impinge unpon anyone else, so I don't see the need to get het up about it either way. If vegetarians started fashioning crude weapons from celery and rampaging through town, then alright. But if people have reasons for doing something in their own lives that doesn't negatively affect the lives of anyone else, then so what?

Cheers, what I was trying to say before I think As for Fop's argument about the species being inherently selfish, I think he's got a point. I think we're probably the worst thing that ever happened to planet Earth along with the odd big asteroid.

 

Agree with that completely. We're the most monstrous species; ironically by virtue of our intelligence.

[Fop 1]

To be fair, someone eating meat or not eating meat- in all probability- doesn't really impinge unpon anyone else, so I don't see the need to get het up about it either way. If vegetarians started fashioning crude weapons from celery and rampaging through town, then alright. But if people have reasons for doing something in their own lives that doesn't negatively affect the lives of anyone else, then so what?

 

Some people might I guess, only to be met by people wielding french fries (cooked in animal fat) and burgers.

[Guest alex]

All this talk about fashioning things out of vegetables puts me in mind of Monty off 'Withnail and I'

[jimburst 0]

Have humans always been carnivores? I thought not but could be wrong.

 

have we ever been carnivores?

 

[Guest Patrokles]

All this talk about fashioning things out of vegetables puts me in mind of Monty off 'Withnail and I'

 

Griffiths was made for the sad predatory homosexual role. Seen History Boys? He's found his niche.

[Radgina 1]

All this talk about fashioning things out of vegetables puts me in mind of Monty off 'Withnail and I'

 

I could think of some things to fashion out of veggies...