Advice of the Day (Forum)
Books (Forum)
Druidic Ramblings (Forum)
Dumb Ideas (Forum)
H-Town (Forum)
Links (Forum)
Movies (Forum)
Music (Forum)
Opinions (Forum)
Photo Albums (Forum)
Prose/Poetry (Forum)
Questions (Forum)
Video Games (Forum)
Member Login



Register Here


Forum posts for Moo

Can someone explain...
Posted by phduffy on Feb 18, 2004
the rational for being vegan?
I can understand being a vegetarian, but I don't really get vegans. Is it just that you think we're enslaving animals or something? Is it a health issue?

not sure.
Posted by weberm1 on Feb 18, 2004
two of my very good friends are vegans, and sometimes i don't get it either. but when you really think about it, they do not want to ingest any part of any animal, and it makes some amount of sense. being vegan is expensive, cause you have to buy soy everything. and this couple has to read the labels to everything before they can eat them, just to make sure they are not eating any animal fat. that's pretty hardcore, i could never ever do it.

Posted by Nerhael on Feb 18, 2004
I'm lacto-ovo, but could never be vegan. Not because I think it's too hard, though that might become the reason were I to try, but because my issue has to deal with death of animals, not their upbringing.

I think the farmyard lifestyle is what creates a vegan... I can't think of much else.

Tell me more.
Posted by mike on Feb 18, 2004
I'm a regula moron. I'm known for it. I have been waiting for a while to say that now, and this works pretty good. I know next to nothing about vegetrianism.

I have NO problem killing animals. I have NO problem with the death of animals (in general, not endangered species or cats, or I suppose pets in general). I have a LARGE problem with the general treatment of animals. Veal calves are just plain wrong. PLAIN WRONG.

I have made great attempts to cleanly kill all the animals that I hunt, that would mostly be groundhogs and fish. I can't stand animals suffering.

I want to learn more about this (vegetarianism), because I see no plroblem with killing animals (in general, see previous note).

I worry, and this is totally just a guess on my part, that people misunderstand the death of cattle, pigs, chickens, etc. If it has anything to do with pictures of "live" animals being disembowled, then I don't get it at all. When ever anything dies suddenly, in my experience, the excess electrical impulses left in the body casue some violent contractions in the muscles. The animal is dead, but keeps flopping. When it urinates all over itself it is because the muscles relaxed in death, not because its scared or something.

I require more knowledge, this is something I don't understand, but would like to. Please don't take me to be some calous asshole, I am just very used to the death of animals (I hunt, I fish). I don't like the idea of chickens not even being able to stand up in their cages, let alone walk around.

Please go on...

Posted by Nerhael on Feb 18, 2004
Personally, I developed a huge fear of death when I was younger. Death in general. I couldn't sleep at night very well if my mind even strayed to the subject.

The sleeping problem eventually left. However, my fear of death has never really left me. This translated into all sentient life being valuable, and I couldn't stomach being responsible for killing anything. The method/manner death is brought about doesn't matter; that the end product is death is what bothers me.

That's why I don't eat meat/fish etc, but don't have so much an issue with milk/cheese etc.

It doesn't really bother me that other people eat meat. I have no qualms about it, the smell and look of it sometimes turns me off, but that's it. I actually think I have more respect for people that can do their own killing, since they're actually not taking a sideline to the end result. They're intimate with all aspects of how that cold cut got in their sandwich, and accept it.

Posted by phduffy on Feb 18, 2004
I think I pretty much agree with everything you said.

I don't have a problem with animals dieing to feed me, but I wish they would do it humanely. Which is why I don't eat veal. But that leads to the slippery slope of should I still eat pork? And then chicken?

I have thought for a while that there could be money to be made by opening up a deli/chain of delis that deals only in free range animals, and with meat that hasn't been injected with Red Dye, HGH, and all the other stuff they put in it.

Aside: I remember driving down Heart Lake Road once, and seeing a sign for free range eggs. I was all like "Score, free eggs!"
Then my dad explained what it meant.

Posted by phduffy on Feb 18, 2004
You're not known for being a moron.
Sometimes I think you have strange views, but I've never thought you were a moron. I don't think anyone on here has.

Posted by nszyngie on Feb 18, 2004
Heart Lake Road! Nice!
Welcome to Brampton!

Regula Moron
Posted by mike on Feb 18, 2004
I can say some pretty stupid shit sometimes. I would hope however that I am not regarded as a moron in general.

It's actually a line from Analyse This that I really liked. It has to be heard to be appreciated I think. Regula is not a typing error.

If you think about it everybody has strange views, it's all relative to the views of the person hearing another persons views on things.

I like the vegetarian discussions here. I am truly curious why people do what they do. I am even more curious if there was no alternative, would a vegetarian eat meat? You know, if they were starving.

*waving a hanky*
Posted by cosmicfish on Feb 23, 2004
I can't do it anymore, I feel guilty a lot again, I'm going to phase out the meat... maybe not fish, but everything else. Good-bye bacon and breakfast sausages, farwell roast beef sandwiches and fried chicken...

Posted by phduffy on Feb 23, 2004
The question is this...

If I told you that if you didn't eat a chicken, I would kill another chicken, what would you do?


That's awesome!
Posted by mike on Feb 24, 2004
Duffy, you are pretty great at creating logic loops like that.

Good job.

Posted by Nerhael on Feb 24, 2004
I'd say go ahead, kill the extra chicken. Your call, not mine. And technically, that's what's going on anyhow. Jim at the slaughter house didn't get my call saying I'm not going to eat chicken anymore, so his quota is one less now. Jim just keeps on killing.

Posted by mike on Feb 24, 2004
My thinking was that that would be an excellent logic loop to present a vegan with.

I see where you are going with this though nerhael.

Truth is...
Posted by phduffy on Feb 24, 2004
Mike, I didn't make that question up. I got it from an Ali G interview with two professors, and he asked that question.

I let this chicken run free or I kill it, depending on whether or not you eat it.

: Þ
Posted by cosmicfish on Feb 24, 2004
You are still the one killing the chicken not me.

Posted by phduffy on Feb 25, 2004
but it's your actions that led to the death of the chicken. Or inactions.

Yeah, but
Posted by Nerhael on Feb 26, 2004
that's a bullshit trap.

So either you kill the chicken for no reason, or I kill it to eat it, breaking my entire belief set. Yeah, that seems like a good trade.

So yeah, I comprise myself so that YOU don't have to kill something. Bullshit.

It sure is.
Posted by mike on Feb 26, 2004
Yes, it is a bullshit trap.
Either you are condoning the killing of a chincken by eating the first chicken, or you are indirectly bringing about the death of the second chicken by not eating the first.
In almost all cases I am sure the solution would be to let the second chicken die and not eat the first. The second chicken is but a drop in the ocean of all of the chickens which are killed for eating anyway.

I am just saying that Duffy (or whoever) has presented an inriguing moral dillema for a person who happens to be a vegan. Unless I don't understand the principals of veganism, which is a VERY real possibility. By putting a vegan in that position they are indirectly involved in the killing of an animal no matter what choice they make. Of course a rational person would realize that is is bullshit, and ignore the whole issue letting the second chicken die. I think anyway...

It is still an interesting Catch 22 to me.

Posted by mike on Feb 26, 2004
It's kinda like this:

I give you a hammer. I tell you that unless you knock yourself unconcious with that hammer, that I will knock some arbitrary third party unconscious with a second hammer that I am holding.

It is a ridiculously odd situation, similar to a riddle. And also similar to a riddle, I have to enter the stipulation that you are not allowed to knock me unconscious with the hammer I gave you to circumvent the enire problem.

Re: Yeah..
Posted by cosmicfish on Feb 27, 2004
If you want to say that you may as well say that our innaction to send money to third world countries is killing thousands of innocent children.

Wait a minute...