Childhood indoctrination

[KichigaiNeko]

It REALLY isn't in me to educate people ....so I will try my best to give you MY point of view

Is this an excuse for animal cruelty? Absolutely not. But humans have removed themselves so far from the chain of survival that even the well-intentioned ones don't quite understand the way things go.

I would say you are still trying to remove yourself from the food chain Forbi and set yourself up as "lord and master" complete with religious overtones. You so far have not displayed that you have any idea of the complexities of life on this rock. I would also posit that you have not really "read" the article that Summer has generously given you.

Thanks for that. Definitely an interesting read, and as I think you've acknowledged, the author still is unable to justify eating or wearing animal products.

Justify religion then. Why should an omnivore justify the way they want to live to you?

Crops certainly do need to be supplemented in some way, but I'm not convinced that fertiliser is necessary. This is from http://www.sustainabletable.org/207/soil-quality :

Traditionally, agricultural soils were fertilized using livestock manure, which is rich in nutrients and organic matter. Farmers also practised crop rotation, regularly alternating the types of crop grown in various fields and periodically allowing fields to remain unplanted. This process enables organic matter to accumulate and decompose, thus restoring nutrients to the soil.
The over-application of synthetic fertilizers and manure both contribute to the growing problem of nutrient pollution.

Thank you. You have just negated your argument against animal manure/ animal death as a fertiliser. I find that animal manure plus some trace elements enough to maintain a "Kitchen Garden". You will have to reference Rhythm's knowledge of 'Big Ag' for the crops that are needed for your utopia.

It seems that crop rotation may be a more sustainable form of agriculture, allowing us to mostly avoid the fertiliser issue. In the article that you posted, the author seems to assert that plants require nutrients from blood and bone fertiliser, but history (and the article I posted) suggest that these nutrients are available in decomposing plant matter.

Not necessarily so. Have you read Rudolph Steiner? Take out the woo bit, but you will find (as I did) that it is bacteria/ parasites/ micro organisms that make the world go round and even vegan/ vegetarian shit/ animal death is required to keep a soil fertile....add to that alot of bleeding and dying and rotting corpses from wars, Oh, and also a fertile top soil to a depth of metres.

Vegan means no animal products, so that couch is vegan. All products have some environmental impact though obviously, and we need to try to minimise that. It's a bit of a losing battle when there are 7 billion of us, but we still need to do our best.

No one is disputing this. But I am concerned about the damage of petro-chemicals (in light of the recent BP oil disaster) have on our environment and crops/ animal live stock and our soils and the health of our rivers and oceans....these petro-chemical sythetics you are so stongly advocating come from Du-pont and their ilk ...are you sure you want to support this sort of corporate structure that has given rise to Monsanto et al?

"In the first place" is a figure of speech, not an attempt at historical revisionism, as I'm sure you'd like it to be.

Would I? how presumptuous of you

And what's funny is that after stating that you're definitely not playing the defensive omnivore bingo game, you've managed to fill in yet another square by feigning concern over what will happen to our current livestock when the world turns vegan. The question has already been answered seriously, so I'll just answer by saying that the cows will take over the world, enslaving all of humanity.

Ah. Well there's the rub. Your sentiments can be just as easily inserted to your silly bingo game. And you are saying that you would much rather see ALL of our live stock die of petro-chemical poisoning , drought and starvation ? VERY humane of you.

]Ahh there's the old "but we've always done it!" argument which always favours the status quo. You mention this "human development", but fail to state any evolutionary adaptation (not found in other herbivorous primates) to consuming flesh and secretions.

This is where you show you complete lack of understanding of biology, evolutionary theory, genetic theory, germ theory and your place on this planet. Again I would posit that you are speaking from the pages of dogma to set yourself up as a religious fanatic. Have you not seen how chimpanzees (our closest relatives) delight in cannibalism for their share of meat protein?

Thanks for your post. I guess as long as we have a monetary system, humanity is screwed? That sounds about right, but let's not make innocent animals pay for our mistakes.

Who says that "inocent animals are "paying" for our mistakes? We have about 65 million years of evolution with these creatures that feed us. Are you positing that evolution is a mistake?

So you're telling me that synthetic fibres are actually failing quality control tests, and they're still letting them on the market? I think I might have to call consumer affairs! Maybe a more realistic/believable statement would be that the synthetics achieve quantitatively lower results on rub tests but still pass them. If they're genuinely failing, I think you need to provide a source.

Yes synthetic fibres fail the test for durability and eco-friendliness. After all Pertol is something that is abundant and something you seem to be advocating . How often do you think you have to replace that IKEA Lounge? Both Daniel and I are from a wool growing nation and we have a long and abiding love of sheep and everything that animal gives us, nothing is wasted. Your synthetics on the other hand take much more to produce (by way of environmental vandalism) to last only five years? i and many other Aussies have the ubiquitous "Ugh Boot" that will last 5-10 years thank you sheep for your skins and meat.!

Your petro-chemicals are not even in the same ball park.

The only "evidence" that the vegan couch provides is of the existence of a vegan couch, but what it means is that the animal products are not necessary. You would have to at least agree with that, even if you view the vegan option as inferior. You're the one with the choice, and you seem to care deeply about finding the most gentle textile for your precious tushy, but the animals who are exploited for that choice have absolutely no say, and I think it would be basic decency to at least consider your victims.

The victims are the environment and the very soil you need for your vegan/ vegetarian utopia. I really don't think you have questioned the dogma you have swallowed hook line and sinker.

Also, if we recycle our synthetic products, then it doesn't really matter that they are not biodegradable, so I remain unconvinced that an environmental argument against veganism is credible.

NOW we get to the crux of the matter. Sythetics are not recyclable nor are they eco-friendly and have a longer half life than "natural" fibres.

You LIKE the vegan/ Vegetarian ethos? Good for you. I am so glad you have found something other than the abrahamic religions to be religious about. But the point is; you are still locked in a dogma fed to you and you seem to enjoy second hand ethics other than constructing your own.

No one here gives less than a tinker's cus about your "blind ethics". You are clearly striving to set yourself up as some messiah, a message bringer to those of us who have out grown your silly childish nonsense and understand the world as it is. No it isn't pretty and I will re-iterate..."IF you are going to kill something, make it a clean quick kill so the animal/ creature in question does not suffer". Pity we don't extend this to our own species but that is another story.

From an Urban Horticulturalist/ Permaculturalist point of view you are far to free with your wilful murder of plant life. You have no regard for the earth or anything that is living on/in it and as such are no more worthy of note than a rabid judeo/ xtian/ islamist.

You sir are just a first world yuppy striving to abrogate your guilt for being alive and stifling third world nations in the process. In short...you are a nothing and your message is not the panacea you would like to think it is. I am certain that many vegan/vegetarians cringe at your virtuous mouthings and just simply want to do what they can do as they see fit; you forget that not everyone is able to got the "vegan/vegetarian way" from mainly genetics (enzymes) but most importantly, bacterial (animal) symbiosis that you seem very ignorant of.