(February 2, 2014 at 1:57 pm)là bạn điên Wrote: people eat meat because they like the taste not because they need it.

I am sure you eat a lot of things for taste only. Some of it may even be bad for you.
I'm not going to go through life depriving myself of something I like just so a chicken, cow, or hog can have a long happy life. Their death makes my life more pleasant. That makes it worth it.

(February 2, 2014 at 1:57 pm)là bạn điên Wrote: Food is a basic right. Killing animals is unnecessary.

So carnivores are unnecessary? Putting animals out of pain is unnecessary?

Quote:It is definitely for pleasure since you can get everything through not eating meat.

Not true for everyone.

Quote:people eat meat because they like the taste not because they need it.

Yes we like the taste, but everyone has different taste. I don't eat ham or bacon. Don't like the taste. I also don't like nuts or beans. I eat strawberries and carrots because I like the taste...

Quote:half a Billion hindus do just fine without it

So you don't eat meat because of religion? Ironic thing to say, when you try to compare us eating meat to religion.

(February 2, 2014 at 12:40 pm)KUSA Wrote:

(February 2, 2014 at 12:20 pm)jg2014 Wrote: We do not do it to be 'dicks', but out of a sense of compassion and duty. I think if more people acted out of these motivations the world would be a better place.

Yeah like religious people right? That's what they do. It's all out of compassion and duty. Maybe you should go to church now.

If a religious person gives money to a homeless person charity, for example, out of compassion and a sense duty to others, then would you say this wrong just because they also happen to be religious. Meat eating is bad for the environment, bad for your health, and bad for the animals. You should not just be vegan out of compassion for the suffering of animals, but for out of a sense of duty to reduce your environmental burden and reduce the burden of your ill health on society.

---

(February 2, 2014 at 1:30 pm)NoraBrimstone Wrote:

(February 2, 2014 at 12:20 pm)jg2014 Wrote: If people are doing something unethical and it impacts on the well being of others against their wishes, would you not say that other people have a duty to protect those that cannot protect themselves?

Definitely! But unless you start eating other people against their wishes, what you eat has absolutely no impact on the well being of others, so butt out.?

My point is that animals should be considered "others" too, ie they are worthy of our ethical consideration. If you are vegan/vegetarian then do you not consider animals worthy of our ethical consideration?

(February 2, 2014 at 1:30 pm)NoraBrimstone Wrote:

(February 2, 2014 at 12:20 pm)jg2014 Wrote: I know you might not agree about whether animals deserve this protection too, but vegans and vegetarians certainly do.

This is a lie that makes sane vegetarians look bad. I'm a vegetarian who occasionally "goes vegan." I certainly don't agree.

I did not mean to imply all. It is no way a lie, I had no intent to deceive. Please try to be polite.

(February 2, 2014 at 1:30 pm)NoraBrimstone Wrote:

(February 2, 2014 at 12:20 pm)jg2014 Wrote: We do not do it to be 'dicks', but out of a sense of compassion and duty. I think if more people acted out of these motivations the world would be a better place.

Nope. It's definitely just being dickish. Where's your "sense of compassion and duty" toward other human people? Food is a basic right, and animals are food for most people. Killing for food isn't like killing for sport or pleasure. It's natural, and for people in poorer parts of the world, it's absolutely essential.

Natural? I have no idea what this word actually means, please try to explain what natural is and why it would be justified to do what is natural.

Re meat eating being essential in poor countries. Firstly actually a vegan diet uses significantly less resources than a meat eating diet, and secondly in those places that rely on small pastoralist farmers, we have an obligation to support the proper infrastructure to allow farming of the wide range of vegan foods.

---

(February 2, 2014 at 2:23 pm)KUSA Wrote:

(February 2, 2014 at 1:57 pm)là bạn điên Wrote: people eat meat because they like the taste not because they need it.

I am sure you eat a lot of things for taste only. Some of it may even be bad for you.
I'm not going to go through life depriving myself of something I like just so a chicken, cow, or hog can have a long happy life. Their death makes my life more pleasant. That makes it worth it.

It might make your life more pleasant now, but your are significantly worsening global warming and increasing your risk of cardiovascular disease and cancer. You might like to just blithely say its worth it, but unless you can come up with a consistent set of ethics to justify this then you should stop.

(February 2, 2014 at 2:23 pm)KUSA Wrote:

(February 2, 2014 at 1:57 pm)là bạn điên Wrote: people eat meat because they like the taste not because they need it.

I am sure you eat a lot of things for taste only. Some of it may even be bad for you.
I'm not going to go through life depriving myself of something I like just so a chicken, cow, or hog can have a long happy life. Their death makes my life more pleasant. That makes it worth it.

So It would be OK for me to kill you and steal everything you have because it would make my life more pleasant?

---

(February 2, 2014 at 2:46 pm)StoryBook Wrote: It is definitely for pleasure since you can get everything through not eating meat.

Not true for everyone. [/quote]

really? Like who?

Quote:Yes we like the taste, but everyone has different taste. I don't eat ham or bacon. Don't like the taste. I also don't like nuts or beans. I eat strawberries and carrots because I like the taste...

Whatever meat you eat its for the taste. And no I am not justifying anything because of religion. But then you knew that and are playing the usual games. Now why not high 5 your buddies and make stupid jokes about killing vegans?

---

(February 2, 2014 at 2:46 pm)StoryBook Wrote: It is definitely for pleasure since you can get everything through not eating meat.

Not true for everyone. [/quote]

really? Like who?

Quote:Yes we like the taste, but everyone has different taste. I don't eat ham or bacon. Don't like the taste. I also don't like nuts or beans. I eat strawberries and carrots because I like the taste...

Whatever meat you eat its for the taste. And no I am not justifying anything because of religion. But then you knew that and are playing the usual games. Now why not high 5 your buddies and make stupid jokes about killing vegans?

(February 2, 2014 at 4:31 pm)là bạn điên Wrote: . Now why not high 5 your buddies and make stupid jokes about killing vegans?

? I never made jokes about killing vegans. I do not care that you are a vegan. I am just standing up for myself, because you hate the fact that I eat meat. You failed to think things throw and see the reality of things.

(February 2, 2014 at 12:40 pm)KUSA Wrote:

(February 2, 2014 at 12:20 pm)jg2014 Wrote: We do not do it to be 'dicks', but out of a sense of compassion and duty. I think if more people acted out of these motivations the world would be a better place.

Yeah like religious people right? That's what they do. It's all out of compassion and duty. Maybe you should go to church now.

It's also what members of any OTHER functional community do. And the fundamental difference is where people draw that line of shared identity. Some draw it only around their family, and fuck everyone else. Some draw it only around their race, and fuck everyone else. Some draw it only around their region, or their nation. Many draw it only around their species.

You are obviously attempting the ad hom approach of demonizing and marginalizing your opponent by attaching them to a group which carries stigma (this being an atheist forum). But this is an obvious and weak approach to arguing your ideas.

(February 2, 2014 at 4:31 pm)là bạn điên Wrote: So It would be OK for me to kill you and steal everything you have because it would make my life more pleasant?

If I was not human but rather a game animal or one that was raised for consumption yes.

(February 2, 2014 at 1:30 pm)NoraBrimstone Wrote: . . . unless you start eating other people against their wishes, what you eat has absolutely no impact on the well being of others, so butt out.

That's a strange analogy to introduce, since it introduces a clear double standard: we have to get permission from humans to eat them, but not animals. Why is this? What is intrinsically more important or valuable about a human life than another animal's life, that one requires approval from the victim and one does not?

Quote:Where's your "sense of compassion and duty" toward other human people? Food is a basic right, and animals are food for most people. Killing for food isn't like killing for sport or pleasure. It's natural, and for people in poorer parts of the world, it's absolutely essential.

Food is a right, but unrestrained pleasure is not. Why should food be privileged over other desires, which we mediate and moderate? Sex is a right-- but I can't do it anywhere or with anyone/thing I want just because that maximizes my pleasure.

---

(February 2, 2014 at 6:42 pm)KUSA Wrote: If I was not human but rather a game animal or one that was raised for consumption yes.

What is the logical foundation of anthropocentrism? What makes us morally more valuable than other species? What makes animals morally deserving of being caused to exist, to suffer, and to be eaten, when we expect for humans a life of opportunity and liberty?

My answer to both questions is this: Humans are people. Fully sentient people capable of complex thoughts and feelings beyond being hungry or horny.

(February 2, 2014 at 2:51 pm)jg2014 Wrote: My point is that animals should be considered "others" too, ie they are worthy of our ethical consideration.

This is the fundamental issue: where do we draw that moral "line in the sand," inside which things deserve consideration, and outside which things are treated without that consideration?

In this thread, vegetarians have sometimes been compared to religious people. However, it is the anti-vegetarian arguments which are more Biblical in nature: they imply that there's some kind of soul or essence which separates humans from other animals. But what is there, really? A brain, a nervous system, an awareness of the pain and discomfort of the self-- and these are very obviously not unique to the human species.

---

(February 2, 2014 at 6:58 pm)NoraBrimstone Wrote: My answer to both questions is this: Humans are people. Fully sentient people capable of complex thoughts and feelings beyond being hungry or horny.

And yet how much of this complexity ends up getting subjected to those monkey desires? How much intellect goes into arranging to get laid, or to preparing and consuming food? How much intellect goes into justifying behaviors that are clearly harmful to the local ecosystem, to the world's environment, and to many of the other species that live on Earth?