It is unethical to eat animals
~Morph~
but that is your choice not mine. You may choose to eat animals; that
is your right. You may choose to advocate that others
do and that it is ethically and morally acceptable. But that's where
your rights end. ~~the Budell~~
>
> Get used to it.
>
ps; I would recommend higher ethics! Don't be confused, with the
behavior of animals, we are human!
http://www.idausa.org/
http://www.earthsave.org/
http://www.pcrm.org/
http://lcanimal.org/
Adam Knisely
> but that is your choice not mine. You may choose to eat animals; that
> is your right. You may choose to advocate that others
> do and that it is ethically and morally acceptable. But that's where
> your rights end. ~~the Budell~~
What exactly is so unethical about eating animals? Don't laugh and say
"Pshht, don't waste my time"; I have never once recieved a straight answer
that really made sense.
Jonathan Ball
>
> You're still confused Sam. [...]
You wrote "you're", instead of "your", as a contraction for "you are".
You're obviously an imposter. What have you done with ~The REAL Slug~?
Jonathan Ball
> [...]
> ps; I would recommend higher ethics! [...]
As if YOU would know anything about that!
~Morph~
knowing about why it is unethical to eat animals? Why is it an interest?
I don't want to waste your time, so please entertain us! ~~the Budell~~
http://www.idausa.org/
Sam Barber
HUMA...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
> You're still confused Sam. It is unethical to eat
> animals, but that is your choice not mine. You may choose
> to eat animals; that is your right. You may choose to
> advocate that others do and that it is ethically and
> morally acceptable. But that's where your rights end.
> ~~the Budell~~
Therefore, it is not unethical to eat animals. Just what
I've always said.
Looks like you're still confused but thanks for proving me
right again, INHUMANE.
-----------------------------------
"Don't sound surprised Adam, Ive been a vegetarian for
almost 30 years."
- INHUMANE the Budell, 14 Jul 2000
"Ive been a vegetarian for almost 20 years..."
- INHUMANE the Budell, 03 Aug 2000
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Adam Knisely
> knowing about why it is unethical to eat animals? Why is it an interest?
> I don't want to waste your time, so please entertain us! ~~the Budell~~
> http://www.idausa.org/
Well, on any related web site or any discussions I've had about it, all I
hear is, "It's unethical to eat animals because its morally wrong." That
isn't a good enough answer, as there must be some rational explaination for
it, otherwise how would the activity atract a cult-like following?
rasiel
>...
>
>Well, on any related web site or any discussions I've had about
it, all I
>hear is, "It's unethical to eat animals because its morally
wrong." That
>isn't a good enough answer, as there must be some rational
explaination for
>it, otherwise how would the activity atract a cult-like
following?
well adam you're not going to get a straight answer because there
isn't one. militant vegetarians will give you a laundry list of
why eating animals is bad for you, causes distress to the animals
and how you're better off just eating veggies anyway. but they
can't, absolutely can't, tell you in any convincing manner that
it's more ethical to eat plants over meat.
after all, when it comes down to it, vegetables have no more or
less of a 'right' to exist as do animals.
Ras
ras...@rasiel.com
http://www.rasiel.com
-----------------------------------------------------------
Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com
Adam Knisely
> it, all I
> >hear is, "It's unethical to eat animals because its morally
> wrong." That
> >isn't a good enough answer, as there must be some rational
> explaination for
> >it, otherwise how would the activity atract a cult-like
> following?
>
> well adam you're not going to get a straight answer because there
> isn't one. militant vegetarians will give you a laundry list of
> why eating animals is bad for you, causes distress to the animals
> and how you're better off just eating veggies anyway. but they
> can't, absolutely can't, tell you in any convincing manner that
> it's more ethical to eat plants over meat.
All ethics have substancial reasons attached to them. If there isn't a
substancial reason for the ethics behind vegetarianism, then it isn't an
ethics problem.
> after all, when it comes down to it, vegetables have no more or
> less of a 'right' to exist as do animals.
Uh huh. An we humans have a right to exist, no? In order for that to be
true, we need to eat something.
Jonathan Ball
>
> > >Well, on any related web site or any discussions I've had about
> > it, all I
> > >hear is, "It's unethical to eat animals because its morally
> > wrong." That
> > >isn't a good enough answer, as there must be some rational
> > explaination for
> > >it, otherwise how would the activity atract a cult-like
> > following?
> >
> > well adam you're not going to get a straight answer because there
> > isn't one. militant vegetarians will give you a laundry list of
> > why eating animals is bad for you, causes distress to the animals
> > and how you're better off just eating veggies anyway. but they
> > can't, absolutely can't, tell you in any convincing manner that
> > it's more ethical to eat plants over meat.
>
> All ethics have substancial reasons attached to them. If there isn't a
> substancial reason for the ethics behind vegetarianism, then it isn't an
> ethics problem.
You managed to include a reply from someone unidentified, whose post
does not appear in the thread. In any case, he or she gets the problem
squarely right: animal, uh, "rights" believers can't *persuasively*
tell you why it's unethical for us to eat meat.
They usually try to base it on some fuzzy notion of "sentience", but
they can't rigorously define that term, first of all; they can't
reliably explain why they consider some broad families of animals
(usually mammals and birds) to be "sentient", but not others; and they
further can't give any political theory of why sentience leads to
rights. Additionally, they can't even begin to address why an animal's
sentience furnishes it with rights relative to us, but not relative to
other species of animals. That is, if you or I kill a rabbit to eat it,
that's immoral, but it's not immoral for a wolf or coyote to do so.
> [...]
~Morph~
NOT!! Your meager insults are futile. You have proved once more your
irrational behavior is repetitive obnoxious, insulting and demeaning, I
guess it comes with being an aggressive barbarian. haha haha ~~the
Budell~~ ps; you and Ball boy roommates?? hahah haha!
http://www.farmsanctuary.org/
ewitte
>other species of animals. That is, if you or I kill a rabbit
to eat it,
>that's immoral, but it's not immoral for a wolf or coyote to do
so.
xx%(35+?)/<20%/<10%
ewi...@hotmail.com
~Morph~
to simple for you now huh! I consider myself human, You? ~~the Budell~~
> other species of animals. That is, if you or I kill a rabbit to eat it,
> that's immoral, but it's not immoral for a wolf or coyote to do so.
>
> > [...]
~Morph~
~~the Budell~~ http://www.farmsanctuary.org/
ewitte wrote:
>
> After all we are only animals with a big superiority complex.
>
> >other species of animals. That is, if you or I kill a rabbit
> to eat it,
> >that's immoral, but it's not immoral for a wolf or coyote to do
> so.
>
Jonathan Ball
>
> Speak for yourself animal! some of us wish to be humans with some ethics
> ~~the Budell~~ http://www.farmsanctuary.org/
>
> ewitte wrote:
> >
> > After all we are only animals with a big superiority complex.
> >
As if ~~The Slug~~ knows a goddamned thing about ethics...
Jonathan Ball
>
> Ball boy! Humans must act like humans not animals. But of course that's
> to simple for you now huh! I consider myself human, You? ~~the Budell~~
No, ~Slug~ - I do not consider you human. Thanks for asking.
HUMANKIND
Budell~~ http://www.farmsanctuary.org/
Jonathan Ball
>
> Animals don't understand ethics do they Ball boy!! ~~the Budell~~
No. And neither do you.
Jonathan Ball
>
> Hey Ball boy ETHICS! COMPASSION! Kinda relate don't they???? haha ~~the
> Budell~~ http://www.farmsanctuary.org/
How would you possibly know? You don't.
ewitte
hurts. This is excactly what I was talking about when I
said "superiority complex."
ewitte
is a part of life. Without acknoledgeing the truth we are only
hurting ourselves.
Jonathan Ball
>
> You possibly know? You don't. ~~the Budell~~
>
I haven't claimed to know. You have. But you don't know, and you know
you don't know, and you knew it when you made the claim. That makes you
a liar.
ewitte
the truth.
ewitte
be Christian.
ewitte
from animal life (including us) to plants and bacteria, etc.
Besides photosythesis and consuming the dead remains of other
life I'm unaware of another way to provide the nutrition needed
to maintain life. I agree that life should not be destroyed in
vain but the truth remains that something has to die for us to
survive. Adding a cute face or argueing about a CNS is just
giving priority towards one life over another. I'm also
interested in your definition of animal. To me it does not
define lifestyles or ways of thinking but the matter in which
the lifeform is made up. We are primeates? What are
primeapes? Animals. I will however nolonger participate in
this discussin as you provide no clarification or justification
in your comments.
Jonathan Ball
>
> [...] nor does he claim to! ~~the Budell~~ What
> arrogance!
Yes, ~~Slug~~ - what arrogance. You really are an arrogant piece of
agent-orange damaged cytoplasm to pretend that you know anything at all
about ethics. You can't even tie your own shoes, let alone lecture
anyone on ethics.
Dale Anderson
news:22b84126...@usw-ex0103-023.remarq.com...
> After all we are only animals with a big superiority complex.
We are probably the only animals with the intelelgence to understand the
philosophy of a superiority complex, when it comes down to it...
--
Dale (BBD) Anderson
dand...@mail.tds.net
"My point being that when you argue
with animal rights activist about "poor
starving children" you might just as well
bring up aliens from Mars. As they
probably know more about that than
being poor, starving or children."
Verne
Dale Anderson
"HUMANKIND" <HUMA...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3993A9AE...@worldnet.att.net...
> Flesh is not necessary for life. True or False? ~~the Budell~~
It is neither necessary, or unnecessary. The same can be said for and
food. Consuming it is merely a personal choice.
Dale Anderson
> Denial gets you nowhere. Accepting the truth may be hard but it
> is a part of life. Without acknoledgeing the truth we are only
> hurting ourselves.
When it comes to ARAs, they literally revel in such flagillation.... ;-)
Richard Parvin
Don't hurt them to much Budell.
Your friend Bear ;-)
HUMANKIND wrote:
> HAHA HAYAHA Ball boy cant think now, the animal hasn't the capacity to
> know what ethics are nor does he claim to! ~~the Budell~~ What
> arrogance!
>
> Jonathan Ball wrote:
> >
> > ~~The Slug~~ wrote:
> > >
> > > You possibly know? You don't. ~~the Budell~~
> > >
> >
> > I haven't claimed to know. You have. But you don't know, and you know
> > you don't know, and you knew it when you made the claim. That makes you
> > a liar.
> >
> > > Jonathan Ball wrote:
> > > >
> > > > ~~The Slug~~ wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hey Ball boy ETHICS! COMPASSION! Kinda relate don't they???? haha ~~the
> > > > > Budell~~ http://www.farmsanctuary.org/
> > > >
> > > > How would you possibly know? You don't.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Jonathan Ball wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ~Morph~ wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Speak for yourself animal! some of us wish to be humans with some ethics
> > > > > > > ~~the Budell~~ http://www.farmsanctuary.org/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ewitte wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > After all we are only animals with a big superiority complex.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
Richard Parvin
view. There is no rule that all of us have to agree. Nor is there a rule that all
vegetarians believe in the same things, we can't even agree on exactly what it means, I
know why I'm a vegetarian, and I respect any one who tries to follow that path. So if you
don't mind can we get back on track in the NG? It's hard enough being a vegetarian in
your omnivore world. I need and value the interaction with my fellow vegetarians. If
y'all want to flame me go ahead, but let's get back on track.
Bear
Jonathan Ball wrote:
> ~~The Slug~~ wrote:
> >
> > [...] nor does he claim to! ~~the Budell~~ What
> > arrogance!
>
> Yes, ~~Slug~~ - what arrogance. You really are an arrogant piece of
> agent-orange damaged cytoplasm to pretend that you know anything at all
> about ethics. You can't even tie your own shoes, let alone lecture
> anyone on ethics.
>
> >
rasiel
can anyone see this? i friggin hate remarq... can anyone suggest
a web-based newsgroup service other than remarq or deja? (in case
this post does make it thru)
Ras
ras...@rasiel.com
http://www.rasiel.com
ewitte
from
http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=primates
"primate - an animal order including lemurs and tarsiers and
monkeys and apes and human beings"
xx%(35+?)/<20%/<10%
ewi...@hotmail.com
Adam Knisely
The lion thinks himself to be the king of the jungle, and he gets to eat
meat without being hounded.
Adam Knisely
your point of
> view. There is no rule that all of us have to agree.
Fine, disagree with us "horrible, immoral, unethical creatures who eat
'flesh'". But your opinion is invalid if you have no substancial
information, fact, or figure to back up your conjecture.
Adam Knisely
> hurts. This is excactly what I was talking about when I
> said "superiority complex."
Sorta. The modern-day classification system works like this:
Kingdom
Subkingdom
Phylum
Subphylum
Superclass
Class
Subclass
Infraclass
Cohort
Superorder
Order
Suborder
Superfamily
Family
Subfamily
Tribe
Genus
Subgenus
Species
Subspecies
The Animal Kingdom (Animalia) contains all the animals, therefore all the
consumable meat comes from this kingdom. Humans also reside within this
classification, although the term Human (Homo, in Latin) is a Genus, not a
species.
ewitte
don't eat meat because I chose not to" is a valid reason. But
for some reason these people attach some non-existet moral
obligation to it.
Adam Knisely
> the truth.
Simply because your opinions are, to you, what the truth is doesn't mean
that it is so for the rest of us. If we choose not to believe that your
deformed ethics and "truths" are in fact the absolute truth, that is our
business, and it isn't fair to brand us as deniers of truth.
Adam Knisely
> > Human is just a species of animal. Deal with it. The truth
> > hurts. This is excactly what I was talking about when I
> > said "superiority complex."
> The Animal Kingdom (Animalia) contains all the animals, therefore all the
> consumable meat comes from this kingdom. Humans also reside within this
> classification, although the term Human (Homo, in Latin) is a Genus, not a
> species.
I think I lost track of my point there.
ewitte
a perspective they can understand.
>consumable meat comes from this kingdom. Humans also reside
within this
>classification, although the term Human (Homo, in Latin) is a
Genus, not a
>species.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Adam Knisely
> to simple for you now huh! I consider myself human, You? ~~the Budell~~
Humans are animals, as I've explained in another post.
Adam Knisely
> don't eat meat because I chose not to" is a valid reason. But
> for some reason these people attach some non-existet moral
> obligation to it.
Granted, as long as they keep it to themselves. "I do not eat meat because
I choose not to" is not a valid reason, however, for saying that I'm an
unethical, immoral monster. I need more explaination than that to accept
it.
Adam Knisely
> a perspective they can understand.
I grew out of speaking baby-talk gibberish. I don't think I can explain it
any simpler.
Adam Knisely
> NOT!! Your meager insults are futile. You have proved once more your
> irrational behavior is repetitive obnoxious, insulting and demeaning, I
> guess it comes with being an aggressive barbarian. haha haha ~~the
> Budell~~ ps; you and Ball boy roommates?? hahah haha!
> http://www.farmsanctuary.org/
Why is it that you resort to namecalling every time you feel defeated,
someone makes a valid point, catches you in a lie, or Mr. Ball posts?
ewitte
explain it.
>I grew out of speaking baby-talk gibberish. I don't think I can
explain it
>any simpler.
>
>
>
>
Adam Knisely
> It probably would make no difference in here no matter how you
> explain it.
I concur.
Richard Parvin
then I would agree that I would have to explain myself, but this is a
Vegetarian NG, it's allows those of us with similar beliefs to interact. If
you think we are miss guided then your are welcome to you opinion, but why do
you expect us to prove anything to you? Why are you even in this NG, unless
it's to endlessly harass us?
Bear
Adam Knisely
Omnivore NG
> then I would agree that I would have to explain myself, but this is a
> Vegetarian NG, it's allows those of us with similar beliefs to interact.
If
> you think we are miss guided then your are welcome to you opinion, but why
do
> you expect us to prove anything to you? Why are you even in this NG,
unless
> it's to endlessly harass us?
This is the discussion topic, the ethics of eating meat. I choose to
participate in this discussion. Since my standpoint in this discussion is
that I request that people explain my beliefs so I can further educate
myself into the demented persona of a vegetarian, I express myself in that
manner. *You*, personally, do not have to explain anything, if you do not
so desire. I do, however, request that if you want to participate in this
discussion with the rest of us, I ask that you do so without such a
holier-than-thou mentality. Besides, even though this is a vegetarian
newsgroup, I may still participate in the discussions on it that I wish to
participate in. If something doesn't interest me, I won't participate in
it. I am, however, interested in the vegetarians explaining their code of
ethics. Thus, I will inquire about them. Thank you.
Adam Knisely
> participate in this discussion. Since my standpoint in this discussion is
> that I request that people explain my beliefs so I can further educate
> myself into the demented persona of a vegetarian, I express myself in that
> manner. *You*, personally, do not have to explain anything, if you do not
> so desire. I do, however, request that if you want to participate in this
> discussion with the rest of us, I ask that you do so without such a
> holier-than-thou mentality. Besides, even though this is a vegetarian
> newsgroup, I may still participate in the discussions on it that I wish to
> participate in. If something doesn't interest me, I won't participate in
> it. I am, however, interested in the vegetarians explaining their code of
> ethics. Thus, I will inquire about them. Thank you.
Arrg, replace "Since my standpoint in this discussion is that I request that
people explain my beliefs..." with "Since my standpoint in this discussion
is that I request that people explain their beliefs...". Thanks.
Brian L. O'Connor
<richard...@home.com> wrote:
> Why do I have to explain my beliefs to you?>
Of course, the key word is "beliefs." You may believe
whatever you wish, and nobody will complain.
If you and Grommit believe that the moon is made of
Wensley Dale cheese, I could care less Wallace...
But when you express your belief in a public forum,
don't whine when people ask you to explain your beliefs!
Having said this, you are under no obligation whatsoever
to explain your beliefs to anyone.
Still, were you able to provide a rational explanation,
I can't help but think that you might have siezed the
moment and done so.
And, of course, having done so, your feelings wouldn't
have been so hurt as you give evidence below that they were ...
> If I was posting to a Omnivore NG then I would agree that I
> would have to explain myself, but this is a Vegetarian NG,
It is a also *public* newsgroup, and it is perfectly fair
by *anyones* standards to question the assumptions,
basis and implications of your belief when you post your
beliefs in a *public* NG.
If your goal is to receive comments that are "affirmation
only," don't post publicly, Wallace.
> it's allows those of us with similar beliefs to interact.
And it "allows" those of us who ... what ... are not
"of the faith" and who wonder ... to ask questions.
Or - are the assumptions of your "beliefs" (your word)
above being questioned?
> If you think we are miss guided then your are welcome to you opinion,
> but why do you expect us to prove anything to you?
At least for me, the issue isn't "proof" so much as
enlightenment ...
> Why are you even in this NG, unless it's to endlessly harass us?
Enlightenment. Is there a more noble reason?
[ ... snip ... ]
Brian
ewitte
a shortage. Why feed someone in another country if there is no
profit in it?
>You may be right about the fact that the earth can feed a
finite amount of
>people. But you may not be. With a maximum amount of food
production, which
>has never occured, it is possible that the earth may be able to
feed many
>times its current population.
Pu'ali
[...]
> > > By spreading propoganda and turning the steakhouse-regulars into
> > > "flesh-eating barbarians", you aren't attracting a lot of healthy
> > > attention to your cause.
> >
> > If you check my posts you will never find that I have done this.
>
> I was refering to vegetarians as a whole.
"Vegetarians", as a whole, do not spread propaganda and
turn steakhouse regulars into flesh-eating barbarians.
You grossly misattributing the actions of a very few as
the actions of a whole.
Richard Parvin
reason why folks become vegetarian. I will go out on a limb and tell you why
I'm one. I believe that the planet Earth can feed a finite number of people.
Growing/raising one pound of meat takes many pounds of feed. I'm not going to
quote a specific number since I've seen a number of studies that have different
numbers, if your interested read "Diet for a Small Plant". I believe that we
can feed more people with a vegetarian approach then eating meat. In addition
to this I feel healthier and I'm more comfortable that no animals die so that I
can live. These are feeling that can't be quantified by studies, but I believe
very strongly. Hope this helps.
Bear
Sam Barber
<richard...@home.com> wrote:
> The bottom line is that "we" (us poor vegetarians) will
> never agree with your point of view. There is no rule
> that all of us have to agree. Nor is there a rule that
> all vegetarians believe in the same things, we can't even
> agree on exactly what it means, I know why I'm a
> vegetarian, and I respect any one who tries to follow
> that path. So if you don't mind can we get back on track
> in the NG? It's hard enough being a vegetarian in your
> omnivore world. I need and value the interaction with my
> fellow vegetarians. If y'all want to flame me go ahead,
> but let's get back on track.
> Bear
You miss the point. No one can argue with you if you choose
to be a vegetarian. That is fine and your beliefs are not
an issue.
The point, however, is that people like Budell and
organizations like PETA have decided to politicize meat
eating and demean meat eaters as "unethical barbarians,"
and they have chosen this forum to do so.
The fact remains that their tactics are to make meat eating
an ethical issue where none exists and to push their point
of view by demeaning those that don't agree with them. It's
very simple and straightforward. Budell even has a
hypocritical term for it: "constructive insults."
Well, actions have consequences, and we will exercise our
right to counter their baseless notions about us. If you
don't like what's going on here, then please direct your
complaints to people like Budell who, in the end, are
giving vegetarianism a rotten name. You can play by their
rules or those that are fair.
Fair enough?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Adam Knisely
common
> reason why folks become vegetarian. I will go out on a limb and tell you
why
> I'm one. I believe that the planet Earth can feed a finite number of
people.
> Growing/raising one pound of meat takes many pounds of feed. I'm not
going to
> quote a specific number since I've seen a number of studies that have
different
> numbers, if your interested read "Diet for a Small Plant". I believe that
we
> can feed more people with a vegetarian approach then eating meat.
You may be right about the fact that the earth can feed a finite amount of
people. But you may not be. With a maximum amount of food production, which
has never occured, it is possible that the earth may be able to feed many
times its current population.
However, if quantity is all that matters to you, then fine. But if you also
wish for quality, than you must appreciate that some people in this world
enjoy consuming meat.
Richard Parvin
Adam Knisely wrote:
> > Ok. I understand your point of view. I have found that there is no
> common
> > reason why folks become vegetarian. I will go out on a limb and tell you
> why
> > I'm one. I believe that the planet Earth can feed a finite number of
> people.
> > Growing/raising one pound of meat takes many pounds of feed. I'm not
> going to
> > quote a specific number since I've seen a number of studies that have
> different
> > numbers, if your interested read "Diet for a Small Plant". I believe that
> we
> > can feed more people with a vegetarian approach then eating meat.
>
> You may be right about the fact that the earth can feed a finite amount of
> people. But you may not be. With a maximum amount of food production, which
> has never occured, it is possible that the earth may be able to feed many
> times its current population.
That's the core of my belief, no one needs to go hungry.
> However, if quantity is all that matters to you, then fine. But if you also
> wish for quality, than you must appreciate that some people in this world
> enjoy consuming meat.
I have found both quality and quantity on a vegetarian diet, but then I guess
quality is in the eye of the beholder. I understand that many people still
chose to eat meat, I hope that more people will adopted a vegetarian diet over
time.
Bear
Richard Parvin
get more publicity then I do. Maybe my original post was to strong, I
just value this NG and was tired of the name calling, but then I'm just
a member of the group, I've posted my reasons, and now I guess I'll butt
out and let y'all have at it.
Bear
Adam Knisely
> > common
> > > reason why folks become vegetarian. I will go out on a limb and tell
you
> > why
> > > I'm one. I believe that the planet Earth can feed a finite number of
> > people.
> > > Growing/raising one pound of meat takes many pounds of feed. I'm not
> > going to
> > > quote a specific number since I've seen a number of studies that have
> > different
> > > numbers, if your interested read "Diet for a Small Plant". I believe
that
> > we
> > > can feed more people with a vegetarian approach then eating meat.
> >
> > You may be right about the fact that the earth can feed a finite amount
of
> > people. But you may not be. With a maximum amount of food production,
which
> > has never occured, it is possible that the earth may be able to feed
many
> > times its current population.
>
> That's the core of my belief, no one needs to go hungry.
No-one needs to go hungry, you're right. But why do you suppose people do?
> > However, if quantity is all that matters to you, then fine. But if you
also
> > wish for quality, than you must appreciate that some people in this
world
> > enjoy consuming meat.
>
> I have found both quality and quantity on a vegetarian diet, but then I
guess
> quality is in the eye of the beholder. I understand that many people
still
> chose to eat meat, I hope that more people will adopted a vegetarian diet
over
> time.
By spreading propoganda and turning the steakhouse-regulars into
Richard Parvin
Adam Knisely wrote:
Many reasons, most of which I can't do anything about. I believe by being a
vegetarian I'm part of the solution.
>
>
> > > However, if quantity is all that matters to you, then fine. But if you
> also
> > > wish for quality, than you must appreciate that some people in this
> world
> > > enjoy consuming meat.
> >
> > I have found both quality and quantity on a vegetarian diet, but then I
> guess
> > quality is in the eye of the beholder. I understand that many people
> still
> > chose to eat meat, I hope that more people will adopted a vegetarian diet
> over
> > time.
>
> By spreading propoganda and turning the steakhouse-regulars into
> "flesh-eating barbarians", you aren't attracting a lot of healthy attention
> to your cause.
If you check my posts you will never find that I have done this.
Bear
Adam Knisely
How could you say that you can't do anything about something to which you
claim to be part of solution?
> >
> >
> > > > However, if quantity is all that matters to you, then fine. But if
you
> > also
> > > > wish for quality, than you must appreciate that some people in this
> > world
> > > > enjoy consuming meat.
> > >
> > > I have found both quality and quantity on a vegetarian diet, but then
I
> > guess
> > > quality is in the eye of the beholder. I understand that many people
> > still
> > > chose to eat meat, I hope that more people will adopted a vegetarian
diet
> > over
> > > time.
> >
> > By spreading propoganda and turning the steakhouse-regulars into
> > "flesh-eating barbarians", you aren't attracting a lot of healthy
attention
> > to your cause.
>
> If you check my posts you will never find that I have done this.
I was refering to vegetarians as a whole.
Adam Knisely
> a shortage. Why feed someone in another country if there is no
> profit in it?
Why should we be responsible for feeding them? Don't they have land and
soil? Why don't they farm?
Adam Knisely
> > > > "flesh-eating barbarians", you aren't attracting a lot of healthy
> > > > attention to your cause.
> > >
> > > If you check my posts you will never find that I have done this.
> >
> > I was refering to vegetarians as a whole.
>
> turn steakhouse regulars into flesh-eating barbarians.
>
> You grossly misattributing the actions of a very few as
> the actions of a whole.
Well, then, it's the few that ruin it for the many, isn't it? The impression
that I (and most others like me) recieve from vegetarians is that they're
either save-the-whales extremists or people who just want to be the odd ones
out. Mainly the former, but I see a few of the latter.
HUMANKIND
any animal rights comment or explanation, but nevertheless here is
something for you. Have Mercy on the animals ~~the Budell~~
ewitte wrote:
>
> Define flesh. Life can come in all shapes and sizes. Ranging
> from animal life (including us) to plants and bacteria, etc.
> Besides photosythesis and consuming the dead remains of other
> life I'm unaware of another way to provide the nutrition needed
> to maintain life. I agree that life should not be destroyed in
> vain but the truth remains that something has to die for us to
> survive. Adding a cute face or argueing about a CNS is just
> giving priority towards one life over another. I'm also
> interested in your definition of animal. To me it does not
> define lifestyles or ways of thinking but the matter in which
> the lifeform is made up. We are primeates? What are
> primeapes? Animals. I will however nolonger participate in
> this discussin as you provide no clarification or justification
> in your comments.
HUMANKIND
Adam Knisely wrote:
>
> > Human is just a species of animal. Deal with it. The truth
> > hurts. This is excactly what I was talking about when I
> > said "superiority complex."
>
> Sorta. The modern-day classification system works like this:
>
> Kingdom
> Subkingdom
> Phylum
> Subphylum
> Superclass
> Class
> Subclass
> Infraclass
> Cohort
> Superorder
> Order
> Suborder
> Superfamily
> Family
> Subfamily
> Tribe
> Genus
> Subgenus
> Species
> Subspecies
>
> The Animal Kingdom (Animalia) contains all the animals, therefore all the
HUMANKIND
ewitte wrote:
>
> Even "I don't eat meat because I don't like how it tastes" or "I
> don't eat meat because I chose not to" is a valid reason. But
> for some reason these people attach some non-existet moral
> obligation to it.
>#######If animals didnt feel pain there would not be some non-existet moral obligation to it., but thats not reality is it? !!~~the Budell~~####
HUMANKIND
Adam Knisely wrote:
>
> > This is what saddens me about our societies. Complete denail of
> > the truth.
>
> Simply because your opinions are, to you, what the truth is doesn't mean
> that it is so for the rest of us. If we choose not to believe that your
> deformed ethics and "truths" are in fact the absolute truth, that is our
> business, and it isn't fair to brand us as deniers of truth.
HUMANKIND
Adam Knisely wrote:
>
> > Ball boy! Humans must act like humans not animals. But of course that's
> > to simple for you now huh! I consider myself human, You? ~~the Budell~~
>
> Humans are animals, as I've explained in another post.
And as I have explained , speak for yourself! I prefer to be human.
~~the Budell~~
HUMANKIND
Adam Knisely wrote:
>
> > Why do I have to explain my beliefs to you? If I was posting to a
> Omnivore NG
> > then I would agree that I would have to explain myself, but this is a
> > Vegetarian NG, it's allows those of us with similar beliefs to interact.
> If
> > you think we are miss guided then your are welcome to you opinion, but why
> do
> > you expect us to prove anything to you? Why are you even in this NG,
> unless
> > it's to endlessly harass us?
>
> This is the discussion topic, the ethics of eating meat. I choose to
> participate in this discussion. Since my standpoint in this discussion is
> that I request that people explain my beliefs so I can further educate
> myself into the demented persona of a vegetarian, I express myself in that
> manner. *You*, personally, do not have to explain anything, if you do not
> so desire. I do, however, request that if you want to participate in this
> discussion with the rest of us, I ask that you do so without such a
> holier-than-thou mentality. Besides, even though this is a vegetarian
> newsgroup, I may still participate in the discussions on it that I wish to
> participate in. If something doesn't interest me, I won't participate in
> it. I am, however, interested in the vegetarians explaining their code of
> ethics. Thus, I will inquire about them. Thank you. WHY!! ~~the Budell~~
HUMANKIND
so you demean or attempt to argue uselessly. It is people like you Sammy
that's giving vegetarianism a rotten name. People wont fall for your
meager attempts to demean vegetarianism. Were not nieve Sammy boy. Its
futile, you will be assimilated.LOL ~~the Budell~~
HUMANKIND
"Brian L. O'Connor" wrote:
>
> In article <39948BD3...@home.com>, Richard Parvin
> <richard...@home.com> wrote:
>
> > Why do I have to explain my beliefs to you?>
>
> Of course, the key word is "beliefs." You may believe
> whatever you wish, and nobody will complain.
>
> If you and Grommit believe that the moon is made of
> Wensley Dale cheese, I could care less Wallace...
>
> But when you express your belief in a public forum,
> don't whine when people ask you to explain your beliefs!
>
> Having said this, you are under no obligation whatsoever
> to explain your beliefs to anyone.
>
> Still, were you able to provide a rational explanation,
> I can't help but think that you might have siezed the
> moment and done so.
>
> And, of course, having done so, your feelings wouldn't
> have been so hurt as you give evidence below that they were ...
>
> > If I was posting to a Omnivore NG then I would agree that I
> > would have to explain myself, but this is a Vegetarian NG,
>
> It is a also *public* newsgroup, and it is perfectly fair
> by *anyones* standards to question the assumptions,
> basis and implications of your belief when you post your
> beliefs in a *public* NG.
>
> If your goal is to receive comments that are "affirmation
> only," don't post publicly, Wallace.
>
> > it's allows those of us with similar beliefs to interact.
>
> And it "allows" those of us who ... what ... are not
> "of the faith" and who wonder ... to ask questions.
>
> Or - are the assumptions of your "beliefs" (your word)
> above being questioned?
>
> > If you think we are miss guided then your are welcome to you opinion,
> > but why do you expect us to prove anything to you?
>
> At least for me, the issue isn't "proof" so much as
> enlightenment ...
>
> > Why are you even in this NG, unless it's to endlessly harass us?
>
HUMANKIND
so you demean or attempt to argue uselessly. It is people like you Sammy
that's giving vegetarianism a rotten name. People wont fall for your
futile, you will be assimilated.LOL ~~the Budell~~
Sam Barber wrote:
>
> In article <39947C71...@home.com>, Richard Parvin
HUMANKIND
Adam Knisely wrote:
>
> > Ok. I understand your point of view. I have found that there is no
> common
> > reason why folks become vegetarian. I will go out on a limb and tell you
> why
> > I'm one. I believe that the planet Earth can feed a finite number of
> people.
> > Growing/raising one pound of meat takes many pounds of feed. I'm not
> going to
> > quote a specific number since I've seen a number of studies that have
> different
> > numbers, if your interested read "Diet for a Small Plant". I believe that
> we
> > can feed more people with a vegetarian approach then eating meat.
>
> You may be right about the fact that the earth can feed a finite amount of
> people. But you may not be. With a maximum amount of food production, which
> has never occured, it is possible that the earth may be able to feed many
> times its current population.
>
HUMANKIND
Your respectable Bear. Your contributions are refreshing. Thanks ~~the
Budell~~
Richard Parvin wrote:
>
> Adam Knisely wrote:
>
> > > Ok. I understand your point of view. I have found that there is no
> > common
> > > reason why folks become vegetarian. I will go out on a limb and tell you
> > why
> > > I'm one. I believe that the planet Earth can feed a finite number of
> > people.
> > > Growing/raising one pound of meat takes many pounds of feed. I'm not
> > going to
> > > quote a specific number since I've seen a number of studies that have
> > different
> > > numbers, if your interested read "Diet for a Small Plant". I believe that
> > we
> > > can feed more people with a vegetarian approach then eating meat.
> >
> > You may be right about the fact that the earth can feed a finite amount of
> > people. But you may not be. With a maximum amount of food production, which
> > has never occured, it is possible that the earth may be able to feed many
> > times its current population.
>
> That's the core of my belief, no one needs to go hungry.
>
> > However, if quantity is all that matters to you, then fine. But if you also
> > wish for quality, than you must appreciate that some people in this world
> > enjoy consuming meat.
>
> I have found both quality and quantity on a vegetarian diet, but then I guess
> quality is in the eye of the beholder. I understand that many people still
> chose to eat meat, I hope that more people will adopted a vegetarian diet over
> time.
>
> Bear
Sam Barber
HUMA...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
> Sammy boy ball Jr. Ha! lol Cant take a little criticism
> constructively, so you demean or attempt to argue
> uselessly.
Where is this so-called "constructive criticism" of yours,
INHUMANE?
> It is people like you Sammy that's giving vegetarianism a
> rotten name.
Hardly. Haven't you understood a word I have posted? No, I
didn't think so.
> People wont fall for your meager attempts to demean
> vegetarianism.
Your welcome to show me where I have demeaned
vegetarianism.
Take your time.
> Were not nieve
Are you trying to write, "We're not naive?"
> Sammy boy. Its futile, you will be assimilated.
Sorry, I am already part of the rational world.
> LOL ~~the Budell~~
Sorry, as always, the laugh is on you, INHUMANE. It happens
every time you open your mouth and demean
non-vegetarianism.
P.S. Along with your reasoning abilities, your spelling and
posting abilities are atrocious. Shall we expect any
improvement?
-----------------------------------
"Don't sound surprised Adam, Ive been a vegetarian for
almost 30 years."
- INHUMANE the Budell, 14 Jul 2000
"Ive been a vegetarian for almost 20 years..."
- INHUMANE the Budell, 03 Aug 2000
Dale Anderson
news:39949A74...@home.com...
> Ok. I understand your point of view. I have found that there is no
common
> reason why folks become vegetarian. I will go out on a limb and tell you
why
> I'm one. I believe that the planet Earth can feed a finite number of
people.
> Growing/raising one pound of meat takes many pounds of feed. I'm not
going to
> quote a specific number since I've seen a number of studies that have
different
> numbers, if your interested read "Diet for a Small Plant". I believe
that we
addition
> to this I feel healthier and I'm more comfortable that no animals die so
that I
> can live. These are feeling that can't be quantified by studies, but I
believe
> very strongly. Hope this helps.
An interesting concept... How does it jibe with the fact that we have so
much surplus in the US that we pay farmers not to produce from time to
time?
--
Dale (BBD) Anderson
dand...@mail.tds.net
"My point being that when you argue
with animal rights activist about "poor
starving children" you might just as well
bring up aliens from Mars. As they
probably know more about that than
being poor, starving or children."
Verne
Dale Anderson
news:399453CB...@worldnet.att.net...
> The truth remains! animals feel torture pain and death ~~the Budell~~
What exactly does death feel like? (This should be interesting....)
Richard Parvin
If these people agree with your / my point of view the're "people with strong
beliefs" if they don't agree then they appear to be "fanatics". Based on my own
experience most Vegetarians are not fanatics, but folks who believe in their
cause. There are also those folks that enjoy pushing the limits and push non
vegetarians "buttons", I don't always agree with their approach, but I will
admit that I sometimes fall of my chair LOL and after a long hard day at work I
take comic relief how ever it's presented.
Bear
Adam Knisely wrote:
> > > > > > Ok. I understand your point of view. I have found that there is
> no
> > > > > common
> > > > > > reason why folks become vegetarian. I will go out on a limb and
> tell
> > > you
> > > > > why
> > > > > > I'm one. I believe that the planet Earth can feed a finite number
> of
> > > > > people.
> > > > > > Growing/raising one pound of meat takes many pounds of feed. I'm
> not
> > > > > going to
> > > > > > quote a specific number since I've seen a number of studies that
> have
> > > > > different
> > > > > > numbers, if your interested read "Diet for a Small Plant". I
> believe
> > > that
> > > > > we
> > > > > > can feed more people with a vegetarian approach then eating meat.
> > > > >
> > > > > You may be right about the fact that the earth can feed a finite
> amount
> > > of
> > > > > people. But you may not be. With a maximum amount of food
> production,
> > > which
> > > > > has never occured, it is possible that the earth may be able to feed
> > > many
> > > > > times its current population.
> > > >
> > > > That's the core of my belief, no one needs to go hungry.
> >
> > >
> > > No-one needs to go hungry, you're right. But why do you suppose people
> do?
> >
> > Many reasons, most of which I can't do anything about. I believe by being
> a
> > vegetarian I'm part of the solution.
>
> How could you say that you can't do anything about something to which you
> claim to be part of solution?
>
> > >
> > >
> > > > > However, if quantity is all that matters to you, then fine. But if
> you
> > > also
> > > > > wish for quality, than you must appreciate that some people in this
> > > world
> > > > > enjoy consuming meat.
> > > >
> > > > I have found both quality and quantity on a vegetarian diet, but then
> I
> > > guess
> > > > quality is in the eye of the beholder. I understand that many people
> > > still
> > > > chose to eat meat, I hope that more people will adopted a vegetarian
> diet
> > > over
> > > > time.
> > >
ewitte
classify a type of animal. I've given you the definition of
primate. Chose to ignore it or not. You are still an animal
classified as human no matter how much you deny or argue.
Jon Inge Bragstad
<dand...@mail.tds.net> wrote:
<snip>
> An interesting concept... How does it jibe with the fact that we have so
>much surplus in the US that we pay farmers not to produce from time to
>time?
I've heard that german farmers receive 250$/acre for _not growing
anything at all_ !
Iow, they stop working, and get a raise...
------------- Jon Inge Bragstad --------------
-------- Visit Jonis Huntingpages. -----------
- http://home.online.no/~sivertb/hunters.htm -
------- Member of the Hunting Trail. ---------
ewitte
History class this is because the government wants them to cycle
land (grow on one patch this year, on the other the next). This
is because of what happend during the dust bowl (farming
everything in sight).
>I've heard that german farmers receive 250$/acre for _not
growing
>anything at all_ !
>
>Iow, they stop working, and get a raise...
>
>------------- Jon Inge Bragstad --------------
>-------- Visit Jonis Huntingpages. -----------
>- http://home.online.no/~sivertb/hunters.htm -
>------- Member of the Hunting Trail. ---------
>
>
Adam Knisely
I find that it tastes good. I therefore believe it is high in quality.
Adam Knisely
I don't know yet. Put yourself in a food processor and fax be about it.
Adam Knisely
The same can be said about plants. And belive me, vegetarians are the
number-one murderers of plant life in the world! Sick, its just sick.
Adam Knisely
> > The truth remains! animals feel torture pain and death ~~the Budell~~
>
Its that sensation that you get when INHUMANE the Budell shall harm you no
more.
Adam Knisely
I thought I was....
Adam Knisely
>
that's
> > > to simple for you now huh! I consider myself human, You? ~~the
Budell~~
> >
> > Humans are animals, as I've explained in another post.
>
> And as I have explained , speak for yourself! I prefer to be human.
Did you ever go to school, or are you still too young to tie your shoes? The
Species Homo sapien (Humans) is part of the Kingdom Animalia, along with
every other animal.
Adam Knisely
I think you should stop going to raves at the insane asylum.
Pu'ali
[...]
> Well, then, it's the few that ruin it for the many, isn't it?
To some degree, yes.
> The impression
> that I (and most others like me) recieve from vegetarians is that they're
> either save-the-whales extremists or people who just want to be the odd ones
> out. Mainly the former, but I see a few of the latter.
The majority don't go around screaming about it. You need
to learn how to be more specific and precise in your
attributions. You, like Budell, are confusing your own
perception with reality.
Pu'ali
[...]
> Based on my own
> experience most Vegetarians are not fanatics, but folks who believe in their
> cause.
Vegetarianism is not a "cause", it is a diet.
[...]
Adam Knisely
>
> To some degree, yes.
But groups like PETA and other save-the-whales organizations are preceived
to represent most, if not all, people participating in their activities. If
you do not support what they're doing, write them letters or start a group
against PETA.
> > The impression
> > that I (and most others like me) recieve from vegetarians is that
they're
> > either save-the-whales extremists or people who just want to be the odd
ones
> > out. Mainly the former, but I see a few of the latter.
>
> The majority don't go around screaming about it.
That's exactly my point. The majority do not scream, and are therefore
non-existant. If you don't want to be perceived in the same manner as those
belonging to extremist groups, then speak out, and be known as vegetarians
who hate PETA.
Adam Knisely
> > experience most Vegetarians are not fanatics, but folks who believe in
their
> > cause.
>
> Vegetarianism is not a "cause", it is a diet.
But with many vegetarians, there is a cause associated to their diet.