Do you agree with Richard Dawkins?

[The Grand Nudger]

There is a mountain of empirical evidence about gods, none of which having anything to do with cosmic wizards and magical powers. Try that.

[downbeatplumb]

no but i'd rather support it as an argument, after all if someone argues for something with no reason it's not entirely so strong. Besides, we may also suppose that there is no evidence that disputes the existence of god so therefore god must exist, an argument tantamount to that which you advocate. Obviously I agree that the lack of credible evidence is the basis for atheism itself but I'd rather attempt to substantiate this view than dogmatically oppose a lack of evidence to which my own argument is subject. I don't believe in God but I could never justify dismissing it entirely as a possibility simply because there is no empirical evidence.

If there is no evidence for something, thats a pretty good reason not to believe it.

If some evidence for god does pop up I'll have a look at it and review my postion then, until that time.

There is no god.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

There is no god.

Positive claim attracts the burden of proof. Let's see it.

Absence of proof implies absence in fact, and is often the case,but it does not prove the case in and of itself.

[NoahsFarce]

Nuns resist the natural urge to copulate as they see no moral justification for it as servants of God.

Vegans/Vegetarians resist the natural urge to consume meat as they see no moral justification for it.

Therefore:

Vegans are Meat Nuns.

Seriously though, I will concede to the notion that the act of not consuming meat is the moral "high ground". I will however point out the fact that you vegans/vegetarians(the non fish/egg eating type) are only as such because you have the luxury to be so.

So while you might be taking the more moral action, it is not immoral to consume meat.

Let's not get into pain and suffering either. It is possible to raise and butcher an animal humanely.

[Jinkies]

[Polaris]

I do not agree with the approach of Dawkins. I would never have given the Creationists the time of day.* I did mention earlier that him not debating one was a bad choice, but that is only because he let the flood gates open by acknowledging that group in the first place. You give a mouse a cookie and they will always come back for more.

*Actually if it were not for people like Dawkins and those who support him, I would never have known there were people who espoused Creationist views as all Christians I have met believed in evolution, etc.

[NoahsFarce]

Yes, so awesome everyone on this forum has the luxury to choose a vegan lifestyle. The problem is, we are but a small sample of the world. I think you miss my point here. I question how veganism could possibly be the absolute moral action if it is a result of luxury. What does this mean for people who do not have this luxury? Are you going to argue that it's an exception for them?

This will lead to the exact same type of argument for taking another's life in self defense. If taking another person's life goes against the absolute moral, then it is wrong no matter what. Or else, it wouldn't be "absolute" correct? This is why I have a problem with us attempting to find an absolute moral truth as if it even exists. Take a step outside for a second, do you realize we are having a debate about morals over food? Why do we separate ourselves from the animals because of our "intelligence"? Why do we attempt to attribute human pain and suffering onto animals like cows and chickens? I understand they feel pain, but as I've said, not all farms abuse them. I personally protest those companies. And let's not play semantic games. You know what I mean when I say "humane". Otherwise, let me pull the definition of ethics:

1. a system of moral principles: the ethics of a culture.
2. the rules of conduct recognized in respect to a particular class of human actions or a particular group, culture, etc.: medical ethics; Christian ethics.
3. moral principles, as of an individual: His ethics forbade betrayal of a confidence.

Where in there does it say anything about consuming meat? 

I know what you mean by it though so I'm not going to play semantics with you. Let's not go down that boring road.

So let me ask you... How consistent are you about treating animals humanely? Do you consciously try and avoid killing insects? Are they not deserving of the same sympathy? What about to your fellow human-beings? Do you always avoid purchasing from big businesses in order to help out the local market? 

Do you think asking me, a Korean, to quit eating meat is ethical? The Korean culture regards meat consumption as a privilege. Our food is rich with meat dishes. We have a seaweed and beef soup dish that we eat on our birthdays. Also, sticking to the roots, we don't waste the excess animal parts. Where do you think all this "exotic" food comes from? Down to the tongue. Is it ethical for you to ask me to give up what is literally a part of my culture? Do you know what my father would say to me if I became a vegan? He'd think that I'm very spoiled and ungrateful because when he was my age, meat was very hard to come by. 

At the expense of sounding elitist, I do not regard animals that are not even capable of self-recognition the same as I regard those that do. Hence, you'll never catch me eating primates (a lot are capable of recognizing themselves in a mirror). At the same time, I won't knowingly consume meat that has come from a farm like the ones KFC employs where chickens are so big, their legs break. 

Another question... Do you think an animal suffers if it is killed instantly? What about Japanese Kobe beef farms? The one where they massage the cow and let it roam free on farm land? What's your stance on fish? Thus far, all evidence points to fish not being capable of feeling pain. I saw a video of a Japanese sushi chef filleting a fish while still alive. He cut out half of the fish's side and put it back in the tank. The fish swam like normal and didn't act erratically. I personally dislike the thought of chefs doing this, but can't bring myself to object to it knowing that the fish is not suffering. 

One last question for you... Do you think walking upright is immoral? What's your moral justification for it? What if walking upright offends other animals? Can you prove to me that they aren't offended? I mean, we are the only animals that walk upright. The rest of the animal kingdom either fly, swim, or walk low to the ground. What is the justification for us to walk upright like we're high and mighty?  

That question does sound rather silly doesn't it? I have to say, calling people that consume meat "immoral" is rather silly to me. Questioning morality about meat consumption is pretty silly I think. 

[Jinkies]

[NoahsFarce]

I'll reply in full later. I will say this much now...

Comparing meat consumption to rape and pedophilia is more silly than anything you say I am being silly about put together. And he fact you don't care about how my culture is or how much weight I place on my father's approval show you hold less respect for me and my culture than you do for the cows I eat.

Silly...

[Minimalist]

Nuns resist the natural urge to copulate as they see no moral justification for it as servants of God.

I don't believe that shit for a moment.

A small town has a monastery on one end, and convent on the other. The nuns need some supplies, so one of the priests is sent to deliver them. It’s a nice day, so he decides to walk the supplies over.

As he gets to the edge of town, a hooker approaches him and asks, “Hey father, how ’bout a blowjob, 25 bucks?”

The priest says, “What’s a blowjob?” at which the hooker laughs and walks away.

At the center of town, another hooker asks the same thing, with the same result.

At the other edge of town, still another hooker asks him the same question, to which the priest again replies, “What’s a blowjob?” And, again, she laughs and walks off.

Finally the priest reaches the convent, knocks on the door, and delivers the supplies. Before he leaves, he says to the mother superior, “May I ask you a question, sister?”

“Of course,” she says.

“What’s a blowjob?” the priest asks.

“Twenty-five bucks,” says the nun, “same as in town.”