Veganism

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:34 PM, rhmilo said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:26 PM, fletcher said:

Plants have been here for millions of years before us (and will no doubt succeed us at the rate we are going). 

 

What gives us the right to intensively grow them just to chop them up and eat them?

 

Speciest Privilege, That's what.

 

/ thread

 

Eating meat occasionally is our original sin. Deal with it.

 

idunno

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:36 PM, MIXL2 said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:34 PM, rhmilo said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:26 PM, fletcher said:

Plants have been here for millions of years before us (and will no doubt succeed us at the rate we are going). 

 

What gives us the right to intensively grow them just to chop them up and eat them?

 

Speciest Privilege, That's what.

 

/ thread

 

Eating meat occasionally is our original sin. Deal with it.

 

but does it have to be? should we strife to change our genetics, let's say, to live off sunlight instead? so that no harm is done?

 

idunno

 

The transhumanist in me says yes. The realist in me says that's too far ahead in the future to speculate. The pessimist in me says the humanity has probably killed itself or regressed back to dark ages before we get that far.

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:36 PM, MIXL2 said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:34 PM, rhmilo said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:26 PM, fletcher said:

Plants have been here for millions of years before us (and will no doubt succeed us at the rate we are going).

 

What gives us the right to intensively grow them just to chop them up and eat them?

 

Speciest Privilege, That's what.

/ thread

 

Eating meat occasionally is our original sin. Deal with it.

but does it have to be? should we strife to change our genetics, let's say, to live off sunlight instead? so that no harm is done?

 

idunno

*waits for the evolution argument* >:)

What if Ebola is just the seedling in the lifecycle of a species greater than us.  What gives us the right to want to eradicate it?

  On 3/27/2019 at 2:07 PM, xox said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:36 PM, MIXL2 said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:34 PM, rhmilo said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:26 PM, fletcher said:

Plants have been here for millions of years before us (and will no doubt succeed us at the rate we are going).

What gives us the right to intensively grow them just to chop them up and eat them?

Speciest Privilege, That's what.

/ thread

Eating meat occasionally is our original sin. Deal with it.

but does it have to be? should we strife to change our genetics, let's say, to live off sunlight instead? so that no harm is done?

idunno

But by ‘eating’ sunlight we’re ‘stealing’ the photons other animals or plants might have ‘eaten’, so it’s still unethical :/

*waits for the evolution argument* >:)

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:18 PM, mokz said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 12:49 PM, eugene said:

lol at debating the ethics of veganism. just don't fucking hurt or kill other beings that want to live and not feel pain. is that really something that needs some in depth analysis?

 

I would say there's a lot of gray area here when it comes to animal rights vs human needs. If you think that killing animals for food is not ok even though it might be more ecological in some cases then fine. How about killing insects or parasites to prevent diseases? Is that ok? How about if the diseases caused by the said creatures didn't actually hurt humans but some other species? Would you rather kill the insect with the lower cognition than let the disease spread to a mammal?

 

If you say "ok fine, it's ok to kill insects for a survival of higher species" then how about a scenario where there's a high fatality disease spread by rats, like the black death of the olden days? Rats are pretty intelligent and probably have emotions. Would it be ok to wipe out the rat population to prevent a pandemic that would maybe kill thousands or more people?

 

I don't think the question is so simple that "just don't kill or hurt anything".

 

how is protecting yourself/others from harm a counter argument to veganism exactly?

if a bear is going to maul you and you have no chance of escaping, then yeah, you can hurt him to in order to stop him from killing you. same logic applies to your other examples, they are more complicated technically, not ethically.

  On 3/27/2019 at 2:28 PM, eugene said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:18 PM, mokz said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 12:49 PM, eugene said:

lol at debating the ethics of veganism. just don't fucking hurt or kill other beings that want to live and not feel pain. is that really something that needs some in depth analysis?

 

I would say there's a lot of gray area here when it comes to animal rights vs human needs. If you think that killing animals for food is not ok even though it might be more ecological in some cases then fine. How about killing insects or parasites to prevent diseases? Is that ok? How about if the diseases caused by the said creatures didn't actually hurt humans but some other species? Would you rather kill the insect with the lower cognition than let the disease spread to a mammal?

 

If you say "ok fine, it's ok to kill insects for a survival of higher species" then how about a scenario where there's a high fatality disease spread by rats, like the black death of the olden days? Rats are pretty intelligent and probably have emotions. Would it be ok to wipe out the rat population to prevent a pandemic that would maybe kill thousands or more people?

 

I don't think the question is so simple that "just don't kill or hurt anything".

 

how is protecting yourself/others from harm a counter argument to veganism exactly?

if a bear is going to maul you and you have no chance of escaping, then yeah, you can hurt him to in order to stop him from killing you. same logic applies to your other examples, they are more complicated technically, not ethically.

 

I'm not arguing against veganism here but the wording "just don't fucking hurt or kill other beings that want to live and not feel pain" that it's not always a simple choice of not just killing anything. It went a bit off topic, sorry about that.

Back to veganism, I think global veganism is also a goal for the future, or maybe something like lab grown meat replacing the meat from sentient animals. But meanwhile trying to apply first world ideologies in the third world is not going to work unless there's a solution to replace the current food production systems in a sustainable manner that doesn't throw large parts of population to starvation. It's a very different world where subsistence agriculture is the main source of food, not large collective farms.

I’m going to try going vegan for a week. And not drink. I’m a pos when I drink.

  On 3/27/2019 at 3:16 PM, Bulk VanderHooj said:

I’m going to try going vegan for a week. And not drink. I’m a pos when I drink.

  On 3/27/2019 at 3:16 PM, Bulk VanderHooj said:

 I’m a pos when I drink.

I have this problem too

  On 3/27/2019 at 3:17 PM, MIXL2 said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 3:16 PM, Bulk VanderHooj said:

I’m going to try going vegan for a week. And not drink. I’m a pos when I drink.

I'm going to eat double as much meat just to spite you

Lol that’s alright. We used to have a vegetarian day once a week and I found that kind of tough. I just want to try vegan to see how hard it truly is. I’m curious as to effects on my body composition as well.

Double up on steak to make up for me.

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:21 PM, darreichungsform said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 12:49 PM, eugene said:

lol at debating the ethics of veganism. just don't fucking hurt or kill other beings that want to live and not feel pain. is that really something that needs some in depth analysis?

Veganism doesn't really rescue animals though. The same amount of industrial life stock farming is happening with the same amount of animals killed with or without Veganism.

This statement is patently false.  Of course your decisions have an impact, no matter how small of a percentage you are of the world population.  You are voting with your consumption and monies every day which is what keeps the systems of the world going.  Obviously markets are not 100% liquid in responding to demand, but suggesting your consumption isnt part of problems this thread is identifying is willful ignorance.

Im not a vegan but this is the easiest aspect to admit - that your consumption has an impact.  Thus my post on pg1 (or 2) about conscious consumption and eating less meat being at least a positive, if imperfect, step to make

  On 3/27/2019 at 4:03 PM, Marked x 0ne said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:21 PM, darreichungsform said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 12:49 PM, eugene said:

lol at debating the ethics of veganism. just don't fucking hurt or kill other beings that want to live and not feel pain. is that really something that needs some in depth analysis?

Veganism doesn't really rescue animals though. The same amount of industrial life stock farming is happening with the same amount of animals killed with or without Veganism.

This statement is patently false.  Of course your decisions have an impact, no matter how small of a percentage you are of the world population.  You are voting with your consumption and monies every day which is what keeps the systems of the world going.  Obviously markets are not 100% liquid in responding to demand, but suggesting your consumption isnt part of problems this thread is identifying is willful ignorance.

 

Im not a vegan but this is the easiest aspect to admit - that your consumption has an impact.  Thus my post on pg1 (or 2) about conscious consumption and eating less meat being at least a positive, if imperfect, step to make

 

Do you really think that even if the amount of vegans will multiply tenfold the meat industry will kill any less animals? For a real change to happen a much much larger percentage of the population will have to go vegan but this is never gonna happen in near and medium-term future.

I generally agree with the idea of an individual responsibility that has to be taken by many people to induce change for the better but in case of Veganism I don't see that it can change anything significantly even if I'd wish so. I think technological solutions like lab grown meat are more realistic than a vegan society

  On 3/27/2019 at 12:36 AM, fletcher said:

Dear vegans: would you eat lab grown meat?

Had no responses to this one yet.....

I don't consider myself vegan, but I still wouldn't knowingly consume lab-grown meat. Considering the potential costs, stem cell development would be better appropriated for medical applications I think. Far cheaper protein alternatives are abundant.

  On 3/27/2019 at 4:46 PM, fletcher said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 12:36 AM, fletcher said:

Dear vegans: would you eat lab grown meat?

Had no responses to this one yet.....

 

if they were grown from the cells of celebrities, maybe...

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:21 PM, darreichungsform said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 12:49 PM, eugene said:

lol at debating the ethics of veganism. just don't fucking hurt or kill other beings that want to live and not feel pain. is that really something that needs some in depth analysis?

Veganism doesn't really rescue animals though. The same amount of industrial life stock farming is happening with the same amount of animals killed with or without Veganism.

 

Markets are relatively efficient, 10% demand decrease will eventually propagate to the producers

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:26 PM, fletcher said:

Plants have been here for millions of years before us (and will no doubt succeed us at the rate we are going). 

 

What gives us the right to intensively grow them just to chop them up and eat them?

 

Speciest Privilege, That's what.

They don't feel pain and aren't sentient, and in fact many plants specifically evolved in a way that intended them to be eaten to spread their seeds.  That's why plants taste good.  This is a completely false comparison

  On 3/27/2019 at 5:29 PM, ambermonk said:

I don't consider myself vegan, but I still wouldn't knowingly consume lab-grown meat. Considering the potential costs, stem cell development would be better appropriated for medical applications I think. Far cheaper protein alternatives are abundant.

Lab grown meat has been becoming cheaper and cheaper. What if at some point it will be the a) cheaper, b) more high quality and c) morally superior option? Would you eat it?

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:49 PM, mokz said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:36 PM, MIXL2 said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:34 PM, rhmilo said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:26 PM, fletcher said:

Plants have been here for millions of years before us (and will no doubt succeed us at the rate we are going). 

 

What gives us the right to intensively grow them just to chop them up and eat them?

 

Speciest Privilege, That's what.

 

/ thread

 

Eating meat occasionally is our original sin. Deal with it.

 

but does it have to be? should we strife to change our genetics, let's say, to live off sunlight instead? so that no harm is done?

 

idunno

 

 

The transhumanist in me says yes. The realist in me says that's too far ahead in the future to speculate. The pessimist in me says the humanity has probably killed itself or regressed back to dark ages before we get that far.

 

"Veganism is just too far ahead in the future"

It's not lmao it's right here just do it and stop being a wimp.  Do you even have free will?

  On 3/27/2019 at 4:13 PM, darreichungsform said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 4:03 PM, Marked x 0ne said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:21 PM, darreichungsform said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 12:49 PM, eugene said:

lol at debating the ethics of veganism. just don't fucking hurt or kill other beings that want to live and not feel pain. is that really something that needs some in depth analysis?

Veganism doesn't really rescue animals though. The same amount of industrial life stock farming is happening with the same amount of animals killed with or without Veganism.

This statement is patently false.  Of course your decisions have an impact, no matter how small of a percentage you are of the world population.  You are voting with your consumption and monies every day which is what keeps the systems of the world going.  Obviously markets are not 100% liquid in responding to demand, but suggesting your consumption isnt part of problems this thread is identifying is willful ignorance.

 

Im not a vegan but this is the easiest aspect to admit - that your consumption has an impact.  Thus my post on pg1 (or 2) about conscious consumption and eating less meat being at least a positive, if imperfect, step to make

 

Do you really think that even if the amount of vegans will multiply tenfold the meat industry will kill any less animals? For a real change to happen a much much larger percentage of the population will have to go vegan but this is never gonna happen in near and medium-term future.

I generally agree with the idea of an individual responsibility that has to be taken by many people to induce change for the better but in case of Veganism I don't see that it can change anything significantly even if I'd wish so. I think technological solutions like lab grown meat are more realistic than a vegan society

 

Do you really think if one slave owner frees their plantation it's going to have any dent on the number of slaves?  Maybe some day we can free the slaves, but it's too far off in the future and we need to be realistic.

  On 3/27/2019 at 5:36 PM, darreichungsform said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 5:29 PM, ambermonk said:

I don't consider myself vegan, but I still wouldn't knowingly consume lab-grown meat. Considering the potential costs, stem cell development would be better appropriated for medical applications I think. Far cheaper protein alternatives are abundant.

Lab grown meat has been becoming cheaper and cheaper. What if at some point it will be the a) cheaper, b) more high quality and c) morally superior option? Would you eat it?

 

I don't know that much about the process tbh. But I'm guessing it's still in a fledgling state. It wouldn't be surprising tho if it reached mass-production scale within the next few decades. In that case...maybe - assuming pumping it full of nitrates, antibiotics, and other chemicals would be unnecessary.

  On 3/27/2019 at 9:19 AM, fletcher said:

https://www.motherjones.com/food/2014/07/your-almond-habit-sucking-califoirnia-dry/

 

I'd rather have some locally produced cow milk from a healthy and happy cow that is 5 miles down the road, than be contributing the the droughts / wildfires and destruction of California and have the processed almond milk flown 7000 miles across the planet.

 

I also do not mind that my eggs are pushed from the anus of a chicken and may have fecal matter on it.

Luckily I do not eat the shell and I wash my hands before and after preparing a meal, so I think I am ok.

The average almond weighs 1.2g

>Almonds Almond Average Nut 1.2g

There are 453.592 grams per pound, so 377 almonds in a pound

If it takes 1.1 gallons to produce one almond

Meanwhile, it takes 1.1 gallons of water to produce a single almond

That means it takes 414.7 gallons to produce 1 pound of almonds.  Horrible right?

Sadly it takes about 1,800 gallons to produce one pound of beef, the number vary.  But beef is significantly less efficient than almonds.  And it takes about 468 gallons to produce one pound of chicken

https://foodtank.com/news/2013/12/why-meat-eats-resources/

http://www.thepoultrysite.com/poultrynews/36936/how-much-water-does-it-take-to-produce-meat/

  On 3/27/2019 at 5:38 PM, Zeffolia said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:49 PM, mokz said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:36 PM, MIXL2 said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:34 PM, rhmilo said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:26 PM, fletcher said:

Plants have been here for millions of years before us (and will no doubt succeed us at the rate we are going). 

 

What gives us the right to intensively grow them just to chop them up and eat them?

 

Speciest Privilege, That's what.

 

/ thread

 

Eating meat occasionally is our original sin. Deal with it.

 

but does it have to be? should we strife to change our genetics, let's say, to live off sunlight instead? so that no harm is done?

 

idunno

 

 

The transhumanist in me says yes. The realist in me says that's too far ahead in the future to speculate. The pessimist in me says the humanity has probably killed itself or regressed back to dark ages before we get that far.

 

 

"Veganism is just too far ahead in the future"

 

It's not lmao it's right here just do it and stop being a wimp.  Do you even have free will?

 

Living off sunlight is too far ahead in the future..

Edit: also I don't believe in free will but that's another topic entirely..

  On 3/27/2019 at 5:48 PM, mokz said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 5:38 PM, Zeffolia said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:49 PM, mokz said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:36 PM, MIXL2 said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:34 PM, rhmilo said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:26 PM, fletcher said:

Plants have been here for millions of years before us (and will no doubt succeed us at the rate we are going). 

 

What gives us the right to intensively grow them just to chop them up and eat them?

 

Speciest Privilege, That's what.

 

/ thread

 

Eating meat occasionally is our original sin. Deal with it.

 

but does it have to be? should we strife to change our genetics, let's say, to live off sunlight instead? so that no harm is done?

 

idunno

 

 

The transhumanist in me says yes. The realist in me says that's too far ahead in the future to speculate. The pessimist in me says the humanity has probably killed itself or regressed back to dark ages before we get that far.

 

 

"Veganism is just too far ahead in the future"

 

It's not lmao it's right here just do it and stop being a wimp.  Do you even have free will?

 

 

Living off sunlight is too far ahead in the future..

 

It's coming sooner and sooner every day.  Tesla solar shingles + backyard vertical farming pods.

EDIT:  Oh yeah I didn't read closely

  On 3/27/2019 at 5:38 PM, Zeffolia said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 4:13 PM, darreichungsform said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 4:03 PM, Marked x 0ne said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:21 PM, darreichungsform said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 12:49 PM, eugene said:

lol at debating the ethics of veganism. just don't fucking hurt or kill other beings that want to live and not feel pain. is that really something that needs some in depth analysis?

Veganism doesn't really rescue animals though. The same amount of industrial life stock farming is happening with the same amount of animals killed with or without Veganism.

 

This statement is patently false.  Of course your decisions have an impact, no matter how small of a percentage you are of the world population.  You are voting with your consumption and monies every day which is what keeps the systems of the world going.  Obviously markets are not 100% liquid in responding to demand, but suggesting your consumption isnt part of problems this thread is identifying is willful ignorance.
 
Im not a vegan but this is the easiest aspect to admit - that your consumption has an impact.  Thus my post on pg1 (or 2) about conscious consumption and eating less meat being at least a positive, if imperfect, step to make

 

Do you really think that even if the amount of vegans will multiply tenfold the meat industry will kill any less animals? For a real change to happen a much much larger percentage of the population will have to go vegan but this is never gonna happen in near and medium-term future.
I generally agree with the idea of an individual responsibility that has to be taken by many people to induce change for the better but in case of Veganism I don't see that it can change anything significantly even if I'd wish so. I think technological solutions like lab grown meat are more realistic than a vegan society

 

 
Do you really think if one slave owner frees their plantation it's going to have any dent on the number of slaves?  Maybe some day we can free the slaves, but it's too far off in the future and we need to be realistic.

 

 
This isn't a good comparison because if you end a slave ownership it has direct effect on the slave you set free. If you along with a small percentage of the population stop consuming meat the meat industry is not going to change their plans so there is literally zero effect.
 
 

  On 3/27/2019 at 11:40 AM, MIXL2 said:

gl surviving as a vegan when the big solar flare melts all of our infrastructure

also

  On 3/27/2019 at 7:38 AM, darreichungsform said:

I think speciesism is a useful term and not silly at all. Human supremacy is solely based on a feeling of superiority towards animals justified with a biologistic rationalization which is similar to racism. I guess 100 years ago people would have laughed at terms like racism or sexism now they found their way into normal speech.
Imagine an alien race came to earth that is much more intelligent and technologically advanced and sensitive than humans are and started enslaving humans, eating our children and destroying our habitat and we ask them: "Don't you see how much we suffer?" and they reply: "Yeah, we don't like this part either but you lot just taste so damn good."

I'm not sure where I stand on the whole thing but I do know a rebbutal to this particular idea from zizek see:

(argument starts at 36:38, central point is at 39:32)

so the argument as I understand it is that you cannot really draw a parallel between animals and human beings (when it comes to rights) because animals do not have the same access to agency as humans (pls correct me if I misunderstood)

I'm not sure if I agree with him, just thought it was a relevant point

 

Interesting. I think the notion of canyons and rivers having to have human rights is pretty stupid, tho

  On 3/27/2019 at 5:49 PM, darreichungsform said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 5:38 PM, Zeffolia said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:49 PM, mokz said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:36 PM, MIXL2 said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:34 PM, rhmilo said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:26 PM, fletcher said:

Plants have been here for millions of years before us (and will no doubt succeed us at the rate we are going). 

 

What gives us the right to intensively grow them just to chop them up and eat them?

 

Speciest Privilege, That's what.

 

/ thread

 

Eating meat occasionally is our original sin. Deal with it.

 

but does it have to be? should we strife to change our genetics, let's say, to live off sunlight instead? so that no harm is done?

 

idunno

 

 

The transhumanist in me says yes. The realist in me says that's too far ahead in the future to speculate. The pessimist in me says the humanity has probably killed itself or regressed back to dark ages before we get that far.

 

 

"Veganism is just too far ahead in the future"

 

It's not lmao it's right here just do it and stop being a wimp.  Do you even have free will?

 

 

He said that changing human genetics to give us the ability to live off sunlight is too far ahead in the future, not veganism.

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 5:38 PM, Zeffolia said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 4:13 PM, darreichungsform said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 4:03 PM, Marked x 0ne said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 1:21 PM, darreichungsform said:

 

  On 3/27/2019 at 12:49 PM, eugene said:

lol at debating the ethics of veganism. just don't fucking hurt or kill other beings that want to live and not feel pain. is that really something that needs some in depth analysis?

Veganism doesn't really rescue animals though. The same amount of industrial life stock farming is happening with the same amount of animals killed with or without Veganism.

 

This statement is patently false.  Of course your decisions have an impact, no matter how small of a percentage you are of the world population.  You are voting with your consumption and monies every day which is what keeps the systems of the world going.  Obviously markets are not 100% liquid in responding to demand, but suggesting your consumption isnt part of problems this thread is identifying is willful ignorance.

 

Im not a vegan but this is the easiest aspect to admit - that your consumption has an impact.  Thus my post on pg1 (or 2) about conscious consumption and eating less meat being at least a positive, if imperfect, step to make

 

Do you really think that even if the amount of vegans will multiply tenfold the meat industry will kill any less animals? For a real change to happen a much much larger percentage of the population will have to go vegan but this is never gonna happen in near and medium-term future.

I generally agree with the idea of an individual responsibility that has to be taken by many people to induce change for the better but in case of Veganism I don't see that it can change anything significantly even if I'd wish so. I think technological solutions like lab grown meat are more realistic than a vegan society

 

 

Do you really think if one slave owner frees their plantation it's going to have any dent on the number of slaves?  Maybe some day we can free the slaves, but it's too far off in the future and we need to be realistic.

 

 

This isn't a good comparison because if you end a slave ownership it has direct effect on the slave you set free. If you along with a small percentage of the population stop consuming meat the meat industry is not going to change their plans so there is literally zero effect.

Grocery stores closely keep track of sales and directly feed that information back to manufacturers.  They aren't going to intentionally buy more stock of animal products than they will sell.  A 1% increase in veganism may not result in a clean 1% decrease in production, but it will result in something years down the line once the supply chain logistically stabilizes.  It's nonsense to claim that even as people stop consuming this product the supply will just continue on forever.  You're acting so willingly powerless against the corporate behemoth.