Vegan

[Soyeong]

What am I supposed to do, kill myself to save animals? That's probably the only thing you would accept. In that case, I have finished looking at your ignorant comments. You actually think that that's a logical argument. You do everything that I do, accept 100 times worse. So in fact, you don't really have a reason to comment anymore...

You've already said a number times that two wrongs don't make a right, so even if I were to grant that what I do is 100 times worse, then that still doesn't mean that what you are doing is right. You can not consistently say that a mouse's life is not more important than yours and continuing to take actions that support your survival at the cost of their lives. If you truly believed that, then you wouldn't take that action. So you have the option to either act consistently with your claimed belief and stop eating a vegan diet, or you be honest with the fact that you really believe the lives of mice are less important than your's and continue with your diet.

 

[Mountain_Girl406]

It is necessary to eat in order to survive, but it is not necessary to survive. When you choose to eat to survive, that is on purpose, not on accident, and that involves killing animals on purpose, not on accident. If you truly believed that a mouse's life isn't less important, then you wouldn't place your survival over their survival, but your actions show that you really do believe that your life is more important.

Nonesense. ..I believe all human life is important, but I place my survival over others anyway. If someone chose to attack me I would fight back, and same goes for an animal, if a bear attacked me I'd fight back as well, not let it eat me.

 

[Soyeong]

Nonesense. ..I believe all human life is important, but I place my survival over others anyway. If someone chose to attack me I would fight back, and same goes for an animal, if a bear attacked me I'd fight back as well, not let it eat me.

You can believe that all lives are important, but also that they have relative importance. If the bear is trying to survive and you're trying to survive and you kill the bear, then you think your survival is more important. However, Brooklowe claims that she believes that mice are not less important than her, which does not permit her to kill mice in order to survive.

 

[Ilovegod888]

It may not be merciful and compassionate, but it isn't torture either.

T & M then set those 33 mice free to munch on grain, scurry, groom their fur, build nests, or whatever. All through the harvesting season, they tracked their rodent gang. Guess how many died in a grain harvester? One. One out of 33 – that’s 3.3%. In other words, 96.67% of the mice on a harvested farm were not killed by cruel bladed machines. But 17 – that’s almost 50% - were killed by other critters – owls and weasels, to be more specific. Their radio collars were found on carcasses, or chewed up in burrows, or as fancy new toys for owlets. Statistically speaking, harvesting machines had virtually no impact at all.
v.s.

 

[Brookelowe454]

You've already said a number times that two wrongs don't make a right, so even if I were to grant that what I do is 100 times worse, then that still doesn't mean that what you are doing is right. You can not consistently say that a mouse's life is not more important than yours and continuing to take actions that support your survival at the cost of their lives. If you truly believed that, then you wouldn't take that action. So you have the option to either act consistently with your claimed belief and stop eating a vegan diet, or you be honest with the fact that you really believe the lives of mice are less important than yours and continue with your diet.

I do save animals lives, just in the way of supply and demand. If I didn't purchase the meat, future animals would not exist to be slaughtered and abused.

"Eating fewer or no animals doesn't mean that animals who would've been killed will now live; it means that animals who would've been bred into existence to suffer on factory farms will now not be brought into the world and exploited in the terrible ways that are customary in the meat industry. It's a supply and demand issue. Less demand should mean less supply."

Be honest? I have been honest this whole time, I just provide facts. We all kill animals in many ways to survive, but you do it in an abusive and horrific way that is sad to see even exist. Also, I kill animals by accident, while you choose to support a terrible industry.

 

[Brookelowe454]

You can believe that all lives are important, but also that they have relative importance. If the bear is trying to survive and you're trying to survive and you kill the bear, then you think your survival is more important. However, Brooklowe claims that she believes that mice are not less important than her, which does not permit her to kill mice in order to survive.

For the last time, you kill animals on purpose. And actually, mice burrow themselves so that they aren't killed. There are WAY fewer deaths than 65 BILLION (65,000,000,000) animals killed for meat a year....

 

[Mountain_Girl406]

You can believe that all lives are important, but also that they have relative importance. If the bear is trying to survive and you're trying to survive and you kill the bear, then you think your survival is more important. However, Brooklowe claims that she believes that mice are not less important than her, which does not permit her to kill mice in order to survive.

There's a difference between believing animals are not less important than humans in general, and believing ones individual survival is no less important than anyone elses. We are programmed through a long period of evolution to first keep ourselves alive, then our community, then our species, then the rest of the planet. So we rank, we have to. But what is necessary for survival is often different than doing what is pleasurable, especially if that causes suffering. I need to eat, so I do so in the way that minimizes animal suffering. I need to wear clothes, too, but I choose synthetics instead of fur or leather. Fur may be a status symbol and leather might be cool, but I don't think that's worth killing for, anymore than I think taste or convenience is.

 

[Soyeong]

T & M then set those 33 mice free to munch on grain, scurry, groom their fur, build nests, or whatever. All through the harvesting season, they tracked their rodent gang. Guess how many died in a grain harvester? One. One out of 33 – that’s 3.3%. In other words, 96.67% of the mice on a harvested farm were not killed by cruel bladed machines. But 17 – that’s almost 50% - were killed by other critters – owls and weasels, to be more specific. Their radio collars were found on carcasses, or chewed up in burrows, or as fancy new toys for owlets. Statistically speaking, harvesting machines had virtually no impact at all.
v.s.

Poison kills more mice than during plowing and harvesting, but again, saying that something is not as wrong does not mean that it is not also wrong.

 

[Soyeong]

I do save animals lives, just in the way of supply and demand. If I didn't purchase the meat, future animals would not exist to be slaughtered and abused.

"Eating fewer or no animals doesn't mean that animals who would've been killed will now live; it means that animals who would've been bred into existence to suffer on factory farms will now not be brought into the world and exploited in the terrible ways that are customary in the meat industry. It's a supply and demand issue. Less demand should mean less supply."

Be honest? I have been honest this whole time, I just provide facts. We all kill animals in many ways to survive, but you do it in an abusive and horrific way that is sad to see even exist. Also, I kill animals by accident, while you choose to support a terrible industry.

I'm not sure how you can argue that causing an animal to never have been born is saving their lives. You admit that you kill animals to survive, so how can you consistently at the same time say that you don't consider their lives to be less important? If you didn't consider their lives to be less important, then you wouldn't be willing to kill them to survive.

 

[Brookelowe454]

Poison kills more mice than during plowing and harvesting, Again, saying that something is not as wrong does not mean that it is not also wrong.

This is no longer a community hangout forum. This is you attacking others to make yourself feel better. You're not even vegan, yet you're coming here to justify eating your meat. I don't care anymore, so you don't need to prove why eating meat is "just as bad." Stop commenting, as your arguments are beyond boring by now. Meat eaters are the majority of the population, so you should stop complaining and hang out with them.

 

[Ilovegod888]

Poison kills more mice than during plowing and harvesting, Again, saying that something is not as wrong does not mean that it is not also wrong.

I am trying to say your diet is worse. I have instincts like animals to survive so I eat ORGANIC food. You have instincts to torture. BIG difference. My facts are right and yours are made it up by the meat industry to make themselves feel better about meat. The animals were killed for numerous reasons, the plowing had no effect. Plus, I am way healthier and am going to most likely live longer. First off, I eat stuff that's good for my body. You eat things that kill humans and animals. You value human lives over animals, so why do you continue this mass murder AND take away food from starving children. I don't value my life over sentient beings, in fact I have the right to love them. You eat innocent animals, I kill 3.3% animals by ACCIDENT. Like I am killing bacteria right now, but at least I didn't raise them for slaughter and make them feel fear. The animals I kill lived a happy life, go ahead eat meat. But when you're having your arteries unclogged I will be happily reading the Bible and eating my yummy dinner. While I'm eating my painless food, you can have your potluck where in your mind, you claim that God gave you it. Why do you continue to comment when you just want to attack someone who will NEVER change. Byeeeee!

 

[Soyeong]

This is no longer a community hangout forum. This is you attacking others to make yourself feel better. You're not even vegan, yet you're coming here to justify eating your meat. I don't care anymore, so you don't need to prove why eating meat is "just as bad." Stop commenting, as your arguments are beyond boring by now. Meat eaters are the majority of the population, so you should stop complaining and hang out with them.

I don't need to feel better about myself, I'm not concerned with justifying my eating habits to you, and I haven't been trying to prove that eating meat is just as bad. I'm just trying to help you understand the inconsistency of your position.

 

[Brookelowe454]

I don't need to feel better about myself, I'm not concerned with justifying my eating habits to you, and I haven't been trying to prove that eating meat is just as bad. I'm just trying to help you understand the inconsistency of your position.

You don't need to be here then. If you're expecting me to say "Oh I'm so sorry Soyeong you're right and I was wrong." Then you're going to be here a long time. My argument is pretty consistent. Keep refusing to look at the truth. After all, you did say that you didn't believe in scientific facts & you believed the Gospel was a reliable source... I shouldn't converse with someone like that. If you disagree with me, you can leave.

 

[Rajni]

Now you're just looking for a fight, so I will politely remove myself from the conversation, as long as you're in it. Also, you're saying the same thing as Soyeong is, so two wrongs don't make a right. I am Buddhist, so I do practice compassion. I do not need your unnecessary comments as they aren't helpful.

Seriously? That's your response to an opportunity to
improve on compassionate ways of
eating? Wow. Just .... wow.

PETA states facts even if they are "hypocrites". Look at the information in front of you. If you don't like PETA there are a million more organization that states facts. Get educated, then get back to me.

Already have, which is why I disagree.

"They can be killed painlessly." BUT THEY ARE NOT. "Humane slaughter

The process of slaughter entails taking an animal's life, most commonly by the slitting of the individual's throat while forcibly held in an upside down position in order to facilitate the draining of the blood prior to skinning and dismemberment. According to the American Heritage Dictionary, the definition of "Humane" includes such words as compassionate and merciful. To have one's throat involuntarily slit may be many things, but few on the receiving end of such an act would be likely to call it merciful, or compassionate. Hence, humane slaughter is an oxymoron."

http://www.humanemyth.org/glossary/1033.htm

They should get with PETA, which has had some
experience in euthanizing animals humanely.
Or so they say.

What am I supposed to do, kill myself to save animals

No. You've already been provided with another
alternative, but it evidently struck a nerve and you
dismissed it as merely “looking for a fight”, of all
things.

This is no longer a community hangout forum. This is you attacking others to make yourself feel better.

And with that, my irony meter just broke.

-

 

[Brookelowe454]

Seriously? That's your response to an opportunity to
improve on compassionate ways of
eating? Wow. Just .... wow.

Already have, which is why I disagree.

They should get with PETA, which has had some
experience in euthanizing animals humanely.
Or so they say.

No. You've already been provided with another
alternative, but it evidently struck a nerve and you
dismissed it as merely “looking for a fight”, of all
things.

And with that, my irony meter just broke.

-

I've been very patient this entire time until people start insulting my lifestyle, like you and Soyeong are doing. I tried to get you to be open-minded, but you aren't, so why bother? In fact, I can be as rude as I want, but I choose to be mature. You seem to be looking for a fight because of the way you are speaking to me. Unless you aren't, then in that case, I apologize. Are you open minded? What do you want to know? If you are here to insult me, you can leave, because I won't waste my time....

 

[Soyeong]

You don't need to be here then. If you're expecting me to say "Oh I'm so sorry Soyeong you're right and I was wrong." Then you're going to be here a long time. My argument is pretty consistent. Keep refusing to look at the truth. After all, you did say that you didn't believe in scientific facts & you believed the Gospel was a reliable source... I shouldn't converse with someone like that. If you disagree with me, you can leave.

Again, you claim to believe that mouse's lives aren't less important than yours, but act as though your life is more important than theirs, which this is very clearly inconsistent, so I have no idea how you can claim that it is pretty consistent. Indeed, the Gospels have shown themselves to be a very reliable source, but I have never said anything like that I don't believe scientific facts.

 

[Soyeong]

I've been very patient this entire time until people start insulting my lifestyle, like you and Soyeong are doing. I tried to get you to be open-minded, but you aren't, so why bother? In fact, I can be as rude as I want, but I choose to be mature. You seem to be looking for a fight because of the way you are speaking to me. Unless you aren't, then in that case, I apologize. Are you open minded? What do you want to know? If you are here to insult me, you can leave, because I won't waste my time....

Saying that you are inconsistent is not an insult your lifestyle.

 

[Brookelowe454]

Again, you claim to believe that mouse's lives aren't less important than yours, but act as though your life is more important than theirs, which this is very clearly inconsistent, so I have no idea how you can claim that it is pretty consistent. Indeed, the Gospels have shown themselves to be a very reliable source, but I have never said anything like that I don't believe scientific facts.

Just like Mountain girl said, we are animals, and we rely on instincts to survive. Yes, I guess I kill animals, on accident, while you do on purpose. Gospels are not scientific facts, it's your belief. & yes you did, you said that anything could be a fact to a person as long as they believe. Just like the Bible. I am trying to change, while you destroy habitats and waste energy. I bet your carbon footprint is off the charts. Like I have been saying for the past 20 posts, I am finished with this conversation, I hope you learned something.

 

[Brookelowe454]

Saying that you are inconsistent is not an insult your lifestyle.

I agree, but your entire argument was insulting me because you are saying that a VEGAN diet is "just as bad as meat." It's pretty insulting, not to mention false.

 

[Ilovegod888]

Seriously? That's your response to an opportunity to
improve on compassionate ways of
eating? Wow. Just .... wow.

Already have, which is why I disagree.

They should get with PETA, which has had some
experience in euthanizing animals humanely.
Or so they say.

No. You've already been provided with another
alternative, but it evidently struck a nerve and you
dismissed it as merely “looking for a fight”, of all
things.

And with that, my irony meter just broke.

-

I know people like you will never change, why should I try? Plus, it's better a painless death than a tortured life. You are a BIG hypocrite because you kill animals that die in pain. http://www.peta.org/blog/euthanize/ Read this and then you can continue to mindlessly argue while you are killing animals. PETA saves animals, and no one says anything when shelters put down HUNDREDS of dogs. A person is blind, we use dogs as slaves. A dog is blind, they die. No one is saying anything about the tortures that animals go through. I can't stand hypocrites!