Turn on thread page Beta

My favourite pro veganism quotation! watch

Announcements
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Personally, I am not vegan because humans evolved to be omnivores to take advantage of what the world around us has to offer to survive. This doesn't mean that I agree with current industry standards, and I do try to eat the best quality meat I can - for example, I would have no issue eating a pheasant that my dad has shot because it's lived a long and healthy and free life. battery-farmed chickens? A whole other story.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    So yes, you are bad with your money

    You can buy like 5 normal broccoli for 2 quid XD

    I assume you're getting fish derived ones then - cant do that - I'm veggie.
    I'm great with my money, I saved 3 grand this year! Strict £50 a week diet. Where are you getting this broccoli from?! It's 67p per broccoli here, tenderstem is much more expensive, but it works better in a stir fry.

    Lamb derived.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rock_climber86)
    Also it is important to remember where animals in the meat industry get their protein from. They get it from plants! . Protein is effectively passing down the foodchain in a slightly more concentrated form through meat, but in essence it all comes from plants, so that's why it's dumb to assume we can't get enough protein from plants. I don't see anyone questioning a gorilla, elephant or ox where they get their protein from, and they're ****ing huge!
    Chickens I eat feast on insects.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JD1lla)
    You are purposely avoiding saying the child.
    I don't really know how to reply to this comment.
    There are contexts that would change who I save. So yes, I have purposefully avoided saying something that wouldn't be my view. Isn't that the idea? Was I supposed to put forward a view that I didn't hold?
    Spoiler:
    Show

    If so I'll go with a NAZI one, because why not invoke Godwin's law:
    If the child was Aryan then of course the child. But if the child was disabled, black, Jewish, or gay then the dog.


    Is that better? I can go Stalinist if you prefer.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    I don't really know how to reply to this comment.
    There are contexts that would change who I save. So yes, I have purposefully avoided saying something that wouldn't be my view. Isn't that the idea? Was I supposed to put forward a view that I didn't hold?
    Spoiler:
    Show

    If so I'll go with a NAZI one, because why not invoke Godwin's law:
    If the child was Aryan then of course the child. But if the child was disabled, black, Jewish, or gay then the dog.

    Is that better? I can go Stalinist if you prefer.
    It's a silly, hypothetical made up situation that probably won't happen anyway. Dogs usually can swim anyway.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JD1lla)
    Chickens I eat feast on insects.
    Wow you must eat special chickens - most of them feed on grains :rolleyes:

    You're clutching at straws trying to defend eating meat sonny. I'm still not won over that we need meat to survive lol
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    If quotes from fiction are allowed too, I'd add this from the Vulcan T'Pol in Star Trek: "You humans claim to be enlightened, yet you still consume the flesh of animals", and this from later on in the timeline, from Commander Riker: "We no longer enslave animals for food purposes...You've seen something as fresh and tasty as meat, but inorganically materialized out of patterns used by our transporters." (This parallels the development of lab-grown meat, in my view).

    I'd also add this from Peter Singer: "We are, quite literally, gambling with the future of our planet - for the sake of hamburgers."

    (Original post by Lilly-Bayliss)
    Interesting quote, I have been vegan for 5 years now, and that's my choice, but I've just never thought that people who eat meat are just as bad as rapists, murders and paedophiles, I mean to eat meat is someone's choice, right? just as it is our choice not to.
    The freedom of choice argument shouldn't apply when other sentient beings are harmed as a result of that choice. Murdering someone or torturing someone is also someone's choice, but we still ban both actions because they inflict unnecessary suffering on humans.

    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    I am perturbed by the way pigs seem to be farmed, in small pens. It seems inhumane, is there a better way to do it or what are the reasons for it?
    Obviously there is real physical suffering, such as confinement in a small cage, or animals bred so hard for yield that they have health problems, or I can't imagine it's much fun having your tits squeezed by a milking machine.

    And I think it's obvious animals are going to feel fear and suffering at the moment of their slaughter - although here, note that they'd feel the same dying in the wild too, likely worse
    Therefore, you acknowledge that nonhuman animals do suffer in the meat industry in many instances: in fact, it's the majority of instances.

    If you agree that unnecessary suffering is wrong, regardless of whether it's physical or not, this should logically lead you to reduce and eliminate your consumption of animal products. Indeed, severely intellectually disabled humans and human infants can't reason either, meaning that they would only experience "physical suffering" too. I doubt you would condone treating them in the way that we treat nonhuman animals reared for meat, however.

    Also, your point about the wild is irrelevant: the alternative to farming and slaughtering animals for meat is not to release them into the wild, but to stop breeding as many animals, thereby preventing further beings from having to go through the cycle of suffering and misery prevalent in the meat industry.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rock_climber86)
    Wow you must eat special chickens - most of them feed on grains :rolleyes:

    You're clutching at straws trying to defend eating meat sonny. I'm still not won over that we need meat to survive lol
    1) We do not need meat to survive.

    2) Free range chickens (Like, actually free range, they wander around in a huge field where they can graze freely with a diet of whatever they can find)

    I'm not clutching at straws. The majority of the world eats meat. I'm not losing the battle here.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JD1lla)
    Who would you save if a dog and a child were stuck in a river, both having equal chances of survival, but only enough time to save one?

    Which one would you pick? I ask because I'm curious.
    It's not speciesist to choose the child if it has a greater capacity for self-awareness than the dog, meaning that it likely has a greater preference to continue to live. If it were a human infant, though, I would save the dog, other things being equal.

    Saving the child simply because it is a member of the species Homo sapiens is morally and intellectually indefensible.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JD1lla)
    It's a silly, hypothetical made up situation that probably won't happen anyway. Dogs usually can swim anyway.
    No, I'm having fun with this whole concept of having to put up views I don't agree with as if they're my own.

    Spoiler:
    Show
    A member of the KKK, in full uniform, and an adorable baby who isn't white are both stuck on an Island with no food. I have a boat that only I can operate, and it can only accommodate one passenger of these passengers, which one do I save?

    I would save the guy in the KKK uniform of course! White power and all that! You see really, I am a massive racist!


    Here's another one:

    Spoiler:
    Show
    Eating celery is the best, we should all do it, because, well, ALIENS!


    What other views would you like me to put up that I don't agree with?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by viddy9)
    It's not speciesist to choose the child if it has a greater capacity for self-awareness than the dog, meaning that it likely has a greater preference to continue to live. If it were a human infant, though, I would save the dog, other things being equal.

    Saving the child simply because it is a member of the species Homo sapiens is morally and intellectually indefensible.
    But what about predicted suffering ramifications from people who would likely have a connection to the dog and the child?

    If you knew the child's loved ones had all passed away and the dog was very loved, that's one thing. But what if that was true of the dog?

    (I think you'll agree with me, this thought experiment is so limited it's empty and useless, there's so much open to question).
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    But what about predicted suffering ramifications from people who would likely have a connection to the dog and the child?

    If you knew the child's loved ones had all passed away and the dog was very loved, that's one thing. But what if that was true of the dog?

    (I think you'll agree with me, this thought experiment is so limited it's empty and useless, there's so much open to question).
    Yes, that's why I belatedly added 'other things being equal'.

    Usually with those thought-experiments, I just imagine it's the other people involved and myself who exist in the world.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JD1lla)
    1) We do not need meat to survive.

    2) Free range chickens (Like, actually free range, they wander around in a huge field where they can graze freely with a diet of whatever they can find)

    I'm not clutching at straws. The majority of the world eats meat. I'm not losing the battle here.
    What does the majority of the worlds habits have to do with the question: Is it ethical to eat meat?

    The majority of the world used to think that the earth was flat, being in the majority doesn't make you right.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    What does the majority of the worlds habits have to do with the question: Is it ethical to eat meat?

    The majority of the world used to think that the earth was flat, being in the majority doesn't make you right.
    No they did not.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I got a better one. Choice between saving JDla and a dog. i would save the dog even if the human species depended on him! :cool:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JD1lla)
    No they did not.
    Better find a good history book sonny. He is right!
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JD1lla)
    No they did not.
    This is too funny. You're actually clinging to the view that if a lot of people think something that makes the argument behind it more valid.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    This is too funny. You're actually clinging to the view that if a lot of people think something that makes the argument behind it more valid.
    You said the majority of people thought the earth was flat. I am saying that is not true.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_flat_Earth
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JD1lla)
    You said the majority of people thought the earth was flat. I am saying that is not true.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_flat_Earth
    Which was simply to counter your belief that having lots of people belief something doesn't equate to the position being sustainable.
    Should I take your lack of counter to be a backing down of your absurd defense?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rock_climber86)
    I got a better one. Choice between saving JDla and a dog. i would save the dog even if the human species depended on him! :cool:
    So you are just as savage as I am.

    Btw, J Dilla, one of the greatest Hip Hop producers, who I am named after, died of a very rare disease called Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura. Amazing research has been done on mice and baboons to create treatment models for this horrible disease.

    :rolleyes: but i'm sure there are alternative ways to develop cures for every possible illness...
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: October 30, 2015
Poll
Do you think parents should charge rent?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.