Do you preach vegetarianism

[PizzaSHARK]

Hunt for your own meat, that way you dont support industrial slaughter. The worst thing I know is people who critize hunters but are glad to stuff themselves with meat that comes from an industry that is far less humane then hunting. Not saying you are one of those btw, but there plenty of those types of hypocrites in the world. Makes me rofl everytime. Lol

Well, it doesn't have to go to that degree, just be aware of where your food is coming from. Most decent-sized cities here will have butchers that only receive their stock from humane farms, and some even get their stock from local hunters if everyone has the appropriate licenses. Their prices are higher, of course, but that's fine - it's a luxury, and it's kind of neat to go in and buy some venison that was, uh, "harvested" by a local hunter.

[Moralgy]

I have no idea what you mean by this. Of some reason it feels like you are making a statement that I never even said if I understood it correctly.

"Becoming a vegetarian for ethical or environmental reasons do not make any sense to begin with."

Not making any sense usually equates to being wrong, especially in these types of threads.

[Elim Garak]

It's inferred. You're stating that access to meat results in a better diet... which in the context of this discussion about the diets of royalty versus peasantry (and in general), means a more varied or diverse diet.

Access to meat means more variety regardless of the color of your blood. And I still don't see where I claimed that variety is irrelevant.
And in the future - quit inferring - just ask.

Except "access to meat" can easily be linked to "access to wealth/power." That royalty ate better, no one is disputing. The point is that the royalty ate better because they had more money, more power, more resources than the peasants did. In the context of this discussion, who ate more meat is almost wholly irrelevant.

I said right away that RICH people had more access to meat. Why do you need to "easily link" "access to meat" to "wealth" is beyond my understanding - as I directly, explicitly said that it is the way it was. And it is completely irrelevant to my point. Which is - access to meat is better diet. No matter how that meat was procured.

Hence why I said you're shitting out both ends.

The only one who shits out both ends is the one who infer too much.

Yes, and there are numerous methods of cooking a wide variety of plants, fruits, and meat substitutes. What's your point, again?

If you cook meat differently each day - it's different kind of a dish. If you cook a potato differently each day - it's still a potato. Be it fried, boiled, mashed, baked, steamed, microwaved or whatever. Yes meat is still meat. But there's hell more variety in how you cook it than any vegetable could ever dream of. And it is delicious in itself, while vegetables are side dishes.

You couldn't possibly live a healthy life on potatoes alone. Hence the need for variety in vegetarian diet. But you can live on meat with the same side dish - forever.

[Frozen Death Knight]

Hunt for your own meat, that way you dont support industrial slaughter. The worst thing I know is people who critize hunters but are glad to stuff themselves with meat that comes from an industry that is far less humane then hunting. Not saying you are one of those btw, but there plenty of those types of hypocrites in the world. Makes me rofl everytime. Lol

I am personally not a hunter, but my father is. Moose meat is the best thing I have ever tasted. Though, I would never be able to resist falukorv or other types of meat products I enjoy. Don't see how it is the consumers' fault for animals having to suffer at farms or the like when we have to deal with the people taking care of the animals when killing them off for food. Animals do not need to suffer just because they are going to be put on someone's table some day.

[Deleted]

Nope, in order for me to eat for reasonable amounts of money animals have to die. There's nothing more to it. Not only are vegetables more expensive, but if everyone went vegetarian the prices would be ridiculous.

haha western world is so weird, (normal)meat is cheaper than veggies

me personally i would never understand not eating meat, the taste leaves you more satisfied

[PizzaSHARK]

And it is completely irrelevant to my point. Which is - access to meat is better diet. No matter how that meat was procured.

Except it is relevant because the two are directly linked in your example. The royals ate better because they had more money. The peasants ate more poorly because they had less money. Both had access to meat, and plenty of it.

If you cook meat differently each day - it's different kind of a dish. If you cook a potato differently each day - it's still a potato. Be it fried, boiled, mashed, baked, steamed, microwaved or whatever. Yes meat is still meat. But there's hell more variety in how you cook it than any vegetable could ever dream of. And it is delicious in itself, while vegetables are side dishes.

You couldn't possibly live a healthy life on potatoes alone. Hence the need for variety in vegetarian diet. But you can live on meat with the same side dish - forever.

Fucking dumb argument, like usual. A single cut of meat is typically only prepared a few different ways; the versatile types of meat are the ones made from multiple cuts, like ground beef or sausage, and preparing a cut of meat differently doesn't make it a different meal. Steak will remain steak, chicken will remain chicken, and if you're talking about seasonings... well, meat substitutes work fine with seasonings, too.

Also, while a potato does not make a meal in and of itself, neither does a steak or chicken breast.

[Frozen Death Knight]

"Becoming a vegetarian for ethical or environmental reasons do not make any sense to begin with."

Not making any sense usually equates to being wrong, especially in these types of threads.

Problem with that is that I already acknowledged that being a vegetarian/vegan is not wrong in of itself. However, some of the arguments I've seen some vegetarians/vegans make to justify their way of living are demonstrably wrong and they can paint up the issue in a very black and white manner. Are there legitimate reasons for wanting to be one? Sure. Not every reason makes logical or even moral sense, however, which is the point I have been making since the very beginning.

[PizzaSHARK]

haha western world is so weird, (normal)meat is cheaper than veggies

me personally i would never understand not eating meat, the taste leaves you more satisfied

It's probably the protein you're thinking of - protein (and fiber) tend to fill better than carbohydrates do. Well, the taste is satisfying too, but it's the protein that makes you feel full

[Deleted]

If you cook meat differently each day - it's different kind of a dish. If you cook a potato differently each day - it's still a potato. Be it fried, boiled, mashed, baked, steamed, microwaved or whatever. Yes meat is still meat. But there's hell more variety in how you cook it than any vegetable could ever dream of. And it is delicious in itself, while vegetables are side dishes.

That is a perception biased by the society you live in. "Side dish" is no scientifical category.

You couldn't possibly live a healthy life on potatoes alone. Hence the need for variety in vegetarian diet. But you can live on meat with the same side dish - forever.

And that means what?

[PizzaSHARK]

Problem with that is that I already acknowledged that being a vegetarian/vegan is not wrong in of itself. However, some of the arguments I've seen some vegetarians/vegans make to justify their way of living are demonstrably wrong and they can paint up the issue in a very black and white manner. Are there legitimate reasons for wanting to be one? Sure. Not every reason makes logical or even moral sense, however, which is the point I have been making since the very beginning.

That's no different from discussions on religion, sexuality, or anything else. Fanatics are being fanatics, nothing new there.

[Jackmoves]

Well, it doesn't have to go to that degree, just be aware of where your food is coming from. Most decent-sized cities here will have butchers that only receive their stock from humane farms, and some even get their stock from local hunters if everyone has the appropriate licenses. Their prices are higher, of course, but that's fine - it's a luxury, and it's kind of neat to go in and buy some venison that was, uh, "harvested" by a local hunter.

Yes, of course, just pulled a extreme example, hehe. And yeah you can opt for meat coming from eco farms etc here in almost every store. Where I live we a couple of neat indoor markets as well, several small businesses under one roof, who sell top produce. So-called "saluhall", got one almost right by our office.

This place.

[Moralgy]

Problem with that is that I already acknowledged that being a vegetarian/vegan is not wrong in of itself. However, some of the arguments I've seen some vegetarians/vegans make to justify their way of living are demonstrably wrong and they can paint up the issue in a very black and white manner. Are there legitimate reasons for wanting to be one? Sure. Not every reason makes logical or even moral sense, however, which is the point I have been making since the very beginning.

The same can be said for eating meat and this thread is proof of those existing. Would it be fair to say any ethical or environmental reason for eating meat just doesn't make sense? No, because broad generalizations are just silly and insulting, to both the target audience and the person who said the generalization.

As for the demonstrably wrong, unless you are just talking about the "killing is wrong" statements, none of the ethical and environmental reasons for being vegan/vegetarian can be tested in either direction and never will be able to be tested as a whole, so no, they are not demonstrably wrong. it is like saying gun bans do not work when only one city/state/country has banned guns in an entire state/country/continent.(don't go into this subject, it is just an example.) There are way too many variables in play to say something is demonstrably wrong in the case of most all non-simplistic reasons for not eating animals or animal products.

[Frozen Death Knight]

That's no different from discussions on religion, sexuality, or anything else. Fanatics are being fanatics, nothing new there.

Well, I agree. Still, I think it's worth discussing regardless.

[PizzaSHARK]

Well, I agree. Still, I think it's worth discussing regardless.

It's never worth wasting time on a fanatic. They aren't there to discuss anything, they're just there to spew their bile at anyone who'll give them the time of day.

[Deleted]

Minorities have to deal with the status quo all the time. You know that when you are a minority of some kind (race/skin, gender, age, sexuality, religion, and indeed lifestyle related choices like your diet) or possess the ability to emphasize with a minority. I can guarantee you they had (or still have) a harder time to deal with you as majority than you have with them as it is. And some random preacher who preaches about whatever is easily ignored.

That said I must say I'm not a vegetarian in fact I love quality meat, but I am absolutely disgusted by some of the crap some human beings dare to eat. Not only the look of it, but also the smell and the way they are apparently able to handle that with joy, they have NO CLUE what is in it, and they do it in public! The worst of it all is the stench. In my opinion as soon as you start to share odors with others related to food you are being rude, and deserve a fine for that foul, anti-social behavior. Unfortunately since half society eats the crap nothing will happen.

[obdigore]

There was that study a couple of years back where a vegetarians tended to have, on average, marginally longer lifespans (in the range of 4-6 years) than the average meat-eaters. While this wasn't attributed to their being vegetarianism itself, it was suggested that the correlation was due to the sample of people who were vegetarians were also generally more health-conscious, and also tended to avoid undesirable habits like smoking, while also generally caring more about their fitness.

I'll try and find the link.

Edit:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhe...nger-lifespan/

http://www.nutraingredients.com/Rese...rs-finds-study

From a quick google search, though I think these are different studies.

That study is only halfway done (not that I expect it to change), but it says people who take care of themselves live longer than those who don't. Apparently people who watch their weight are less likely to smoke as well. Oh lordy no!

otoh, I find it humorous that there are people that call themselves vegetarians that eat Eggs and Fish, but w/e. (it was brought up in the study)

[Moralgy]

That study is only halfway done (not that I expect it to change), but it says people who take care of themselves live longer than those who don't. Apparently people who watch their weight are less likely to smoke as well. Oh lordy no!

otoh, I find it humorous that there are people that call themselves vegetarians that eat Eggs and Fish, but w/e. (it was brought up in the study)

Fish yea, but eggs?

[Frozen Death Knight]

The same can be said for eating meat and this thread is proof of those existing. Would it be fair to say any ethical or environmental reason for eating meat just doesn't make sense? No, because broad generalizations are just silly and insulting, to both the target audience and the person who said the generalization.

As for the demonstrably wrong, unless you are just talking about the "killing is wrong" statements, none of the ethical and environmental reasons for being vegan/vegetarian can be tested in either direction and never will be able to be tested as a whole, so no, they are not demonstrably wrong. it is like saying gun bans do not work when only one city/state/country has banned guns in an entire state/country/continent.(don't go into this subject, it is just an example.) There are way too many variables in play to say something is demonstrably wrong in the case of most all non-simplistic reasons for not eating animals or animal products.

I don't have a problem with that, no. Problem is that taking a moral highground on an issue where you have to eat something to survive is going to have different moral implications regardless if someone is eating meat or vegetables. That's life in a nutshell. I'm not going to feel guilty for eating meat and you don't have to feel guilty for eating a veggie burger. We eat to survive and that's where I draw the line for letting animals suffer at our hands. At least we can treat them with some dignity before they die.

The stuff I have heard some vegetarians and vegans say have been demonstrably wrong. Granted, they have had pretty extreme views, but the ethical and environmental reasons they bring up have been wrong. Still, if you feel like I put every single vegetarian and vegan under the same category, I apologize.

[PizzaSHARK]

That study is only halfway done (not that I expect it to change), but it says people who take care of themselves live longer than those who don't. Apparently people who watch their weight are less likely to smoke as well. Oh lordy no!

otoh, I find it humorous that there are people that call themselves vegetarians that eat Eggs and Fish, but w/e. (it was brought up in the study)

Eggs are kind of a weird in-between. Unfertilized eggs are just an animal product, not much different from dairy and stuff like that. But I guess people get hung up on the whole "it represents a potential animal" thing.

[Frozen Death Knight]

It's never worth wasting time on a fanatic. They aren't there to discuss anything, they're just there to spew their bile at anyone who'll give them the time of day.

So, do we have any of those people in this thread then? You can still discuss this stuff without having to discuss anything with people who do that.