I am very scared of the vegan movement, they will try to take our right away to have companion animals.

[knotinterested]

What's your conclusion, then? And what does that prove?

You are getting sloppy about quoting who said what. At least 3 of the quotes that say they were said by Hyperwoof are what I said.

I can no longer see any point in continuing in this thread. There is nothing I can say that would cause you to stop your assault on those of us that have no conviction associated with eating meat. Every point has been ignored and it has become a game of who is wrong the most and the point is that nobody is correct when it comes down to it. 95% of the world has no problem with consuming animal products and it is in that world where I live. You may live in whatever part of the world that you choose and it doesn't bother me in the least. BTW I do not eat meat every meal as suggested.

I see no need to defend my position as I have the right to take any position so long as it is legal. No you do not have the right to criticize someone because they do not agree with what you have decided to be right for your own life.

 

[HyperWoof]

.

"My problem is with deer dying when there is no need. That's it. If people have to do it to survive, it's justified. If predators have to do it to survive, it's justified. If we have to do it for their benefit, it's justified. People killing deer when there is no need isn't justified, and that's the issue we have. The only difference between a human and a wolf killing a deer is that a wolf needs to kill a deer, where a human doesn't--unless a human would otherwise starve to death (not likely in today's world), or some deer need to die to save the rest of the deer. My issue isn't really even so much with hunting as it is with farming."

So population control of deer is only bad when humans do it, even though humans are also eating it like the wold. Literally no difference other than what species eats the deer....And yet there's an issue with that somehow.


"Insults don't help your argument. Once again, generalizations. Maybe you'd be surprised how many vegans are tan and have high muscle mass. If you're just going to stereotype and insult people, I don't see much point in continuing the conversation."

Stereotypes generally have a lot of truth behind them. Yes of course there are masculine vegans, but they are the outliers.


Cool. Maybe the general population needs to be more involved in conservation behaviors. We're just trying to stop unnecessary killing. If killing deer is necessary for the well-being and there is no other way, then so be it. Just excuse us if we analyze that option to see if there are other ways.

You know what's a great way for the general pop. to become more involved in conservation behaviors? Hunting, fishing, hiking.... etc.
I lived for years without a phone--until I started having jobs where my company required me to have a phone. Now all the jobs in my field require a phone, or you don't get the job. We can play this further--maybe we don't have any computers or electronic devices, and so forth, until we are back in the stone age. That's backwards and ridiculous. We can, on the other hand, try to change the way the process is done. Cell phones aren't inherently cruel. We can fix the process. Slaughtering animals? That's inherently cruel and can't be fixed.

Even if I buy for a second that you lived without a phone for years until recently (I don't) Then why didn't you switch fields? If your career made it so you had to eat meat would you stay? I love the logic "cell phones aren't inherently cruel we can fix the process!" *says while actively supporting the process that allows those businesses to exist*
What's the difference? Can't you eat meat then while still working on ways to cut back on animal agricultural? Oh... yeah there's no difference....except for one. It's not hip and cool and revolutionary to NOT buy a cell phone, but you certainly feel like you're doing something powerful when you don't "abuse" animals.


Actually, most of my clothes are made in the USA. Some of the pants I had to buy were made in Mexico. At my last job, we had to wear a uniform, and those were made in Honduras or somewhere. I didn't have a choice--wear the uniform, or don't get the job. So, I guess we can be unemployed and not have any electronic devices. Whenever I have a choice at where something is made, I try to buy from the USA or a country that treats and pays their workers well. In fact, I'm much more conscious about this than the average person!

Why would you work for a company that benefits off of slave labour? There's LOTS of jobs out there that are very ethical in every way.

See how that same logic backfires on you?


Tell me, do you do the same? And did you give a darn about human slaves in third world countries before having this discussion with me? I did. I didn't know about the human cost of what went into making my phone. I don't think that not buying phones is the answer. I think changing regulations is the answer because the problem isn't with cell phones, it's the way we're currently making them. So let's find a way to get them made without exploiting humans! Also, it doesn't invalidate the vegan argument.

I eat meat, I use a cell phone, I wear whatever clothing is convenient. Because my idea of action isn't inaction. If I can make an impact on the world I do it, as I have done many times in the wildlife world as that is my passion... REAL action, not faux activism like avoiding honey. A phone makes my life a lot easier, so I use on. Sucks that people in china make pennies on the dollar to make them. But that's an issue caused by other peoples greed, not mine.


Yeah, I never claimed to be better than you. I'm only analyzing one set of actions, not a person's entire character. I've tried to be respectful and you're not giving me the same courtesy.

In direct wording you have not. You're right. But almost every comment you made is made clear you're doing so with your nose in the air.

 

[HyperWoof]

.

"It's always bad. But it's worse when there is no need to do it. There is a difference--species like wolves need to eat them or they will starve. Humans don't. Maybe they kill them out of kindness."

Does it matter to the deer who it gets eaten by? Does it matter to conservation? A dead deer is a dead deer. If it gets eaten that's all it matters. If I harvest a deer then guess what...i'm not buying meats from a grocery store for a good long while.
"Great. Let's do things like hiking that doesn't kill animals unless when killing them is in their best interest."


Yeah that's not how human interest works.

Really, now you don't believe that I didn't have a cell phone until just a few years ago? I didn't need one and got along without one just fine. But now industries have changed. I didn't know about the exploitation involved in making cell phones back then and going back to the stone age isn't at all reasonable or necessary. The problem isn't with cell phones; it's the way they're made. No career is going to force me to eat meat. That's ridiculous.

Animal agriculture will never be acceptable, no matter how good it is. Cell phones can be made in better ways. There is no good way to raise animals and then kill them

No of course I don't buy that, every adult has a phone other than the rare outlier.
Now you DO know about the exploitation, and you're saying "it's not reasonable to go back now blah blah" Then why is it reasonable for an omnivore to go to a vegan diet? It's literally the same logic.

You're also dodging the question by playing it off as if it was a realistically possible scenario that a job would force you to eat meat. It's a question of IF. And if you're true to your own principles you wouldn't take that job because you think eating meat is wrong. Now you know that cell phone sales benefit companies that oppress their workers to the point they need to install suicide nets onto their buildings to prevent workers from killing themselves. What are you going to do about it?
They don't benefit off of slave labor. You're blowing this way out of proportion. You're not even using logic at this point.

You're right in that i'm blowing this out of proportion, but that's the entire vegan argument. So enjoy a bit of your own medicine


Right, so you're doing all the harm that you're criticizing me for, AND you're killing animals on top of it. So, what are you doing to stop slave labor related to your cell phone and clothes? You say that's an issue caused by other people's greed, not your own. Yet, you claim it's directly my fault.

I am using your own logic against you. You claim I am supporting the cruelty of animals by hunting and eating meat. Well you're supporting slavery by buying cell phones and working for companies that save money by purchasing uniforms made by sweatshops. Either go on and mind your own business over what you and others eat, or accept that you're a proselytizing hypocrite

 

[Zoo50]

a trains coming, there's a goat stuck on the tracks and a 10 year old human kid. You have time to save one of them..... Are you sure they are still equal?

This a loaded bullshit question. It's like saying the following:

A train is coming, and there are two humans stuck on the track -- you have time to save one of them -- who are you going to save?

I still stand by what I said, that humans are equal to other animals (morally).

 

[HyperWoof]

This a loaded bullshit question. It's like saying the following:

A train is coming, and there are two humans stuck on the track -- you have time to save one of them -- who are you going to save?

I still stand by what I said, that humans are equal to other animals (morally).

congratulations, that makes you a brain dead retard.

 

[HyperWoof]

.

"You're flat out wrong and you're contradicting yourself. What about that guy you just mentioned who got along just fine without a phone: "

"No of course I don't buy that, every adult has a phone other than the rare outlier.

"It's reasonable for an omnivore to go to a vegan diet because animal agriculture is UNAVOIDABLY cruel, and so is killing an animal. Even at its best, it's unacceptable to the animals. Phones do not NEED to be made with slave labor and I'm all for the slave labor being done away with. As is stands, I'll probably have the one I have until it's so old that it's outdated and no longer supported."

So because an issue is avoidable, but currently isn't the case, that means it's fine to support said issue? lol?

"No, I would not eat meat if a company required it. I don't know what to do about the companies that oppress their workers, other than buying products from more ethical companies instead, which I already do when I'm able. I don't really have control over how third world countries treat their employees if they are the only option. If I ever have the option to buy a cell phone made without slave labor, I will definitely do so, even if it's more expensive. I DO know what to do about animal agriculture. I have no need of animal products. I DO have a need for a cell phone if I want to be gainfully employed and function in today's society. I can't control how my phone was made if that's the only option available. With other things I buy, I go out of my way to buy from ethical companies that pay their employees a good wage. As soon as this option becomes available in cell phones, I'll buy those. Unlike phones, with food there are already plenty of options."

You need a cell phone like I need meat. You can't tell me what I don't need if you're going to go on and on about how you N E E D a cell phone.


"It appears you've got nothing to offer but insults at this point."

If he says a goat is worth as much as a human child then he kind of deserves to be insulted

 

[HyperWoof]

Well, maybe I was a rare outlier. Haha. You don't know.



It's not fine to support slavery when we have a choice not to. I'm definitely interested in researching what can be done to stop the slavery issue without everyone having to go off the grid. I think taking measures to end the slavery is going to be better for humanity than for humanity to not ever use cell phones again (or computers, and so on).

What if in the 1800's people decided to not wear clothes because they didn't like the cotton being picked by slaves? Fortunately human rights activists helped abolish slavery, though life for an African American was anything but equal or easy after that. There's nothing wrong with cotton. There WAS, however, something wrong with how slave labor was used to pick it.



You don't need meat at all. I need a cell phone for most jobs and so I can stay in touch with people and actually function in modern society. What if instead of abandoning cell phones, they were made by workers who were treated and paid well? I'd rather support means to abolishing slavery than shunning technology.



I've found it's best to not insult people, even if they are wrong. Maybe this is how vegans feel when people say that animals' well-being doesn't matter.

Well I feel we've exhausted this argument. g'day.

 

[caikgoch]

Well I feel we've exhausted this argument. g'day.

The rest of us felt that way days ago.

 

[Zoo50]

You need to come off your attitude and open your eyes to reality. I DO NOT AGREE WITH YOU! You call me a spaciest only because i am not in moral parallel with your opinion. You say my views are discriminating, but you are being discriminating by projecting that your view and your view alone is the only correct view. If all living things could talk then yes they would all say that they wanted to live. That includes the broccoli and asparagus that was killed for your dinner. It is no more morally right for you to eat those things that were once alive then it is for me to eat that which was once alive if viewed from your moral viewpoint. If you say that a plant has lesser value then you are only trying to justify it so you are not subject to the same application as what you want in saying that killing animals is wrong. However you know that if you are going to apply morals to animals then you also have to apply them to any living thing.
You also call my attitude arrogant because I say that humans are superior to all other lifeforms. My attitude is correct and you ARE WRONG!
Do you think for one minute that you would be able to post a message on a website through the use of your computer if it had not been for humans? Show me any other animal that made that possible. You can't because no other animal has the intelligence as humans.
In your way of thinking you would say that if an animals such as a lion attacked a person then we should just let it do it's own thing and if we killed it we would be wrong. Your thinking is flawed! If it were normal then 95% of the world would agree with you and soon animal slaughter for food would be a thing of the past. Then and only then, morally or not will you ever be correct.

I called you a speciesist because you are a speciesist -- look up the definition of speciesism, as well as "human supremacy" -- you will see that your views are indeed speciesist. You have said many times that humans are not on the same "level" as other animals, which is an asinine, speciesist attitude.

Also, stop treating broccoli as being morally equal to pigs, cows, and humans -- that is ridiculous. Broccoli does not have conscious and cannot feel pain/suffering.

Again, you are wrong, not me. Humans are equal to other animals (morally), and your attitude is asinine. The fact that humans made computers isn't relevant -- what is relevant is an animal's interests, such as an animal's interests in not being killed. Also, stop using intelligence as the criteria on which you judge things. People in comas and people in vegetative states are not intelligent -- so do you disregard their interests in the same way that you disregard animal interests?

(Or do you do respect the interests of humans in a coma more than the interests of animals simply because they are human, in which case you are a speciesist). The reason I bring this up is because, by your logic, the interests of people who are in a coma (or in a vegetative state) can be disregarded because they are not intelligent.

By the way, elephants and dolphins have intelligence that is comparable to humans, so stop being a "human supremacist" and realize that humans are not "superior" to other animals.

If a lion kills a human, it is not morally wrong (unfortunate, tragic, but not morally wrong). Stop arguing that just because a majority of people think something, it is right. Slavery was supported by a majority of people a long time ago, and that didn't make it right.

Ultimately, your thinking is flawed, irrational, and delusional. You, ArticWolf, UR20Z and HyperWoof all do not have compassion for animals, because if you did, you would not eat meat. You are all callous people.

You're begging the question. Your claim literally has no structure to it. Stop spouting the same bullshit. You claim ALL animals have no morals and don't want to be eaten. You have zero proof to back any of this up.

You're the one who is full of bullshit, not me. Morality is a human concept -- if you really think that a bear can think morally in the same way that a human does, then you're crazy. Also, explain to me why murdering an animal is a justifiable action.

I would love to have some real data on the effect of cattle eating plants compared to Vegans eating plants. An average cow can feed 100 humans and expels a certain amount of gas. 100 Vegans would expel much more gas than 1 cow. The problem of processing plant fibre is just being moved up the food chain.

This is complete bullshit. Being vegan is far better for the environment than eating meat because it uses less resources.

This does not really get us around the bottom-line, which is that purchasing a package of ground beef from the grocery store is not really something that bothers me whatsoever. It does not bother most other meat-eaters, either. There is not a syllogism in the world that is going to change this fact.

But it should bother you, and the fact that it does not bother you means you are callous and do not have empathy for other living beings.

For one thing, I have established ethics of my own, which really mean quite a lot to me.

Your morals make no sense. You claim to care about animals, but also eat meat, which makes you a moral hypocrite. (Because eating meat is the opposite of caring for an animal).

If you ask me why I would not approve of murder, I would point out that the reason why you don't murder is that most people find it to be a deeply distressing thing to happen to someone in their communities. It causes them to feel distrustful and afraid.

People ought to view the killing of non-human animals as deeply distressing, in the same way that people find the killing of a human deeply distressing. Also, the animal's feelings need to be taken into account -- it is distressing for them to suffer and be butchered.

You could take several different routes with that. You could prove to me that relatively inexpensive meat often does not actually come from sources that use humane techniques of slaughter, and even when humane slaughter actually is used, it is clearly stressful to the cattle to be taken away from the environment that is familiar to them and put into a sterile and cold industrial slaughterhouse.

Like is said earlier, there is no such thing as "humane slaughter", because the slaughter itself is inhumane.

If you claim to be a vegan then you are a hypocrite. That is right because you use animal products everyday in one form or the other.

Vegans, like all people, are not 100% perfect -- it's about making changes to one's lifestyle that one has the power to change. In other words, not eating meat is still better than eating meat. Also, there are vegan soaps and shampoos -- one just has to know which ones to buy. Some uses of animal products may be unavoidable, but it is still more ethical to try to eliminate as many animal things as possible from one's life.

The process used in slaughter houses for cattle involves the use of an air powered gun that shoots a kind of nail into the brain of the animal and then withdraws for use on the next animal The animals drop immediately and from my view it seemed as painless as possible.

If a human were killed, and the human were killed in the most painless way possible, it would still be considered unethical (with the possible exception of medically-assisted euthanasia). Similarly, if a non-human animal is killed in a slaughterhouse, the act of killing the animal is itself unethical, even if no suffering occurs.

Also, stop treating animals such as cows as objects -- they are living beings with a right to live. The way in which you talk about them being slaughtered is disturbing and callous. Stop thinking about a human's interests, and start thinking about the interests of other animal species. Slaughtering animals is not necessary.

Also, as @SkawdtDawg said, a lot of times the slaughter process goes wrong, and the animals endure agony. Slaughter is inherently cruel and abusive, and it should be outlawed.

If you buy from them they will dress it completely giving you your roasts, and other cuts of meat all packaged and ready for your freezer.

Again, you are callously describing cows as though they are just objects, which is bullshit. You do not truly love animals, because if you did, you would not be talking like this. Cows, just like humans, are deserving of moral consideration.

I simply have no vested interest in the supermarket shelves remaining focused on meat as a primary source of easy protein. I reach for the meat because it is easy to find, and it takes minutes to prepare. It provides amino acids that make me feel adequately nourished, and it is, thanks to some handy subsidies, cheap. It would be trivially easy for grocers to become more adept at fulfilling the same criteria with non-meat products, and that constitutes no skin off my back. I have told you precisely what would change my eating habits. I am very uncomplicated.

Your attitude is very morally shallow -- you are only interested in trivial, superficial things, such as how "easy" something is to do, how cheap it is, etc. Really, it is pretty selfish. You ought to consider the ramifications of what you're doing (such as supporting the unethical slaughter industry).

And yet it's hunters who make up the largest portion of conservation groups out there actively doing something useful, spending chairty money on conservation, being part of groups who go and clean up our beautiful land, funding studies to better understand wildlife needs.... those groups are majority hunters, fishers and even bird watchers. They are doing a hell of a lot more than these fruity vegans who don't buy meat and because of that think they are one level below God himself.

It doesn't matter how many hunters contribute to conservation -- the act of hunting itself is still immoral. If someone steals something, but then claims they are moral because they donate to conservation, the fact that they stole something is still immoral -- the conservation aspect does not negate the fact that the theft is still immoral. As @SkawdtDawg said, vegans don't eat meat because they respect animals and their interests, not because they believe they are "superior" to others.

Then why don't you adhere to your same bullshit practices when it comes to human suffering?

You're the one with bullshit practices, not SkawdtDawg. You advocate and support the murder of animals (hunting and slaughter) -- these activities are inherently unethical, abusive, cruel, and unnecessary, yet you support them. And stop using arguments such as the phone argument -- that is just a red herring that is distracting from the main subject.

No, you're a hypocrite. Go ahead and don't eat meat, that's fine. But don't come to me and spout your holier than thou bullshit when i've done more for these animals you talk about than any vegan in this chat.

Actually, you're a hypocrite, because you say you care about animals, but also support murdering them (as well as support the cruel and abusive practice known as slaughter). It's not "holier than thou bullshit", it's a set of ethics that involves incorporating the interests of beings beyond just the human species.

Also, it doesn't matter how much you claim you've done good for animals -- if you kill animals, you are still behaving immorally.

Wrong those are crimes and there are laws against them. They are not opinions.

You're missing the point. Killing an animal ought to be considered a crime, and it isn't considered one due to speciesism. Also, what a law says doesn't determine whether something is moral or not.

The things you mention are illegal and what I was obviously referring to is legal everywhere. There is no comparison and nobody should ever be judged for what they do legally to make a living.

Stop using the "slaughter is legal" argument as an argument in favor of slaughter -- that is a bullshit argument. Slavery was legal, racial segregation was legal, torturous methods of capital punishment were legal in the middle ages, etc. Just because a law says something doesn't necessarily mean something is moral. So you are wrong -- the comparison @SkawdtDawg made was a good one, and you are too selfish and speciesist to realize it.

Slaughter ought to be a crime, because animals in slaughterhouses suffering agonizing deaths, because animals have a right to live, and because the interests of animals ought to be respected in the same way that human interests are respected.

You don't see the relevance in charitable contributions? Really?

As @SkawdtDawg said, donating to charity is not relevant to this discussion; it is a red herring. In any case, like SkawdtDawg said, most of the money that goes to charity does not help animals anyway. And if one is not eating meat, and not using animal products, that is actually better than donating to charity in my opinion.

However with the right ingenuity you could help to change things and give the animals that are headed to slaughter a good as possibly life.

Stop this "having a better life" nonsense. If a human has a good life, and then is killed halfway through their life, most people would consider that to be immoral. Similarly, if an animal (such as a cow) has a good life, and then is killed halfway through their life, that should be viewed as immoral as well. Beings (humans, cows, etc.) have a right to live.

And on a last note when you stop using plastic and ALL animal products then you can say you're a vegan, until then you are a hypocrite just as you call me one when I say I eat meat and I love animals.

A person who uses plastic bags and doesn't eat meat is still behaving in more moral way than a person who uses plastic bags AND eats meat. The fewer animal products are involved, the better. Stop this "all-or-nothing" nonsense -- your argument is that one has to be 100% perfect, and if they're not 100% perfect, they're a hypocrite -- this is bullshit.

And you're full of shit lol.

This says a lot about you. You are an angry, disrespectful person who insults people, rather than arguing things. I can assure you, @SkawdtDawg is not full of shit, and what he said is far more rational than anything you've said.

I see no need to defend my position as I have the right to take any position so long as it is legal. No you do not have the right to criticize someone because they do not agree with what you have decided to be right for your own life.

Once again you are using the "legal" argument -- that just because something is "legal", it is also moral, which is complete bullshit. You have tried to defend your meat-eating practices, and your arguments are not compelling. Slaughter is inherently cruel and unethical, and when you buy meat, you are supporting those who murder animals. Also, of course someone "has the right" to criticize someone who is doing something very unethical. If someone steals something from a store, someone has a right to criticize them.

When you say "right for your own life", that is a very selfish attitude. Stop thinking about what benefits you, and think about what benefits others ("others" = non-human animals).

I eat meat, I use a cell phone, I wear whatever clothing is convenient. Because my idea of action isn't inaction. If I can make an impact on the world I do it, as I have done many times in the wildlife world as that is my passion... REAL action, not faux activism like avoiding honey. A phone makes my life a lot easier, so I use on. Sucks that people in china make pennies on the dollar to make them. But that's an issue caused by other peoples greed, not mine.

You just admitted don't have any interest in impoverished people in third world countries -- you only brought it up to play the "hypocrisy card", as SkawdtDawg said. You criticize SkawdtDawg for using a cell phone, yet you use a cell phone yourself -- pot calling the kettle black. (You are a hypocrite).

Does it matter to the deer who it gets eaten by? Does it matter to conservation? A dead deer is a dead deer.

A deer has an interest in not dying, therefore a deer should not be killed.

I am using your own logic against you. You claim I am supporting the cruelty of animals by hunting and eating meat. Well you're supporting slavery by buying cell phones and working for companies that save money by purchasing uniforms made by sweatshops. Either go on and mind your own business over what you and others eat, or accept that you're a proselytizing hypocrite

This is an ad hominem argument. You are criticizing the character of the person making the argument, rather than refuting his points. First of all, you do not have any interest in prevent slave labor yourself. Second, the whole issue of whether people buy cell phones (because said cell phones were made with slave labor) is not relevant to the discussion of veganism -- it's just an attack on SkawdtDawg. If you disagree with SkawdtDawg, refute SkawdtDawg's central arguments, and don't bring up things that have nothing to do with veganism.

congratulations, that makes you a brain dead retard.

Stop insulting people.

You need a cell phone like I need meat. You can't tell me what I don't need if you're going to go on and on about how you N E E D a cell phone.

Wrong -- you do not need to eat meat. There are plenty of vegan food options available. There are not options with regard to cell phones.

If he says a goat is worth as much as a human child then he kind of deserves to be insulted

That's not what I was saying. What I was saying is that that argument can be twisted in a number of ways. Like SkawdtDawg said, you could say, "a 45-year-old man and a 65-year-old woman are on a train track, a train is coming, and you only have time to save one of them. Who will it be?" So it's a loaded bullshit question.

 

[HyperWoof]

The rest of us felt that way days ago.

That's nice dearie

 

[FeralLovin']

I eat the things that eat the salads.

 

[SigmaTheZeta]

It should indeed, and that's what we're trying to get people to see. The legal practices on their own are not humane, and those are often disregarded.

Well, speaking on talking to your audience, truth is something that actually matters to me. If it is an actual fact that the state of our slaughterhouses is an actual mess, I think it actually would make a difference if people knew.

I would not just make this a discussion about converting people to veganism, though, but instead, I would point out to people that they deserve for their perceptions to be fulfilled. If they are being given an impression that their meat comes from humane methods of slaughter, then that is what they deserve to have in their households, and if something else is in their households, they deserve to know.

I think that, once people understood how difficult and how expensive it is to industrialize such a process without traumatizing the animals that are being put through it, they would simply find the non-meat alternatives to be cheaper.

People are not going to change how they eat until the fake meat is both less expensive and tastes better, though. They are working regular jobs, and like it or not, keeping themselves and their kids healthy is their priority. Their own health and that of their offspring is their chief responsibility.

 

[Tailo]

They are working regular jobs, and like it or not, keeping themselves and their kids healthy is their priority. Their own health and that of their offspring is their chief responsibility.

Eating less meat could help with that.

 

[SigmaTheZeta]

Eating less meat could help with that.

Protein is necessary for human development and survival.

The simple advantage of a package of hamburger is that you pull it from the package and throw it on the skillet. It's browned enough to eat in all of four minutes, you drain it, and it is ready to eat.

Chicken is even easier: drop it into the deep-fryer, and then pull it out. It takes very little thought. You can dovetail it in with other tasks.

Someone ought to start talking to the grocery chains about clearly displaying an inexpensive vegan protein that is just as easy to use.

I have just left a manufacturing job at which I was working ten and a half hour shifts for ten American dollars per hour, and then there was a commute after that. If you are a single mother, then when you get home, you have about three waking hours left in the day. You still have to change diapers, bathe your children, play a game with them to make sure that they are getting emotional nurture and don't believe that you hate them, and invest in some self-care to make the blisters on your feet go down. The remaining window of time you have left for making dinner is not that large, and by the time you have gotten to it, you are mentally and emotionally exhausted to a point of literal delirium. If you cannot use it quickly while in an untenable state of mind for doing anything complex while surrounded by distractions, then you are not going to buy it.

If you want to change how people eat, the grocery chains will have to start clearly displaying an inexpensive and easy-to-use vegan protein that can be used immediately and easily with little or no instruction, under a great big sign that says "vegan protein" in great big bold impact letters.

 

[SigmaTheZeta]

Many vegan activists have placed hidden cameras in slaughterhouses to show the public just how the process actually plays out when employees think no one is watching. Blood and gore aside, there is obvious stress and trauma to the animals when the regulations are followed perfectly. The animals can sense something is wrong and panic. They can hear the screams and smell the blood. With pigs in gas chambers, they scream as the gas burns their lungs and they chew off their own legs trying to escape.

The stressed-out employees get frustrated when the animals won't cooperate and no one stops them if they feel like punching, kicking, or jabbing them. Why would they? They have a job to do, a short timeframe in which to do it, and the animals are going to be dead soon, anyway. Sometimes if the stunning doesn't work right because the animal keeps resisting, they'll just push them on through to have their throats slashed alive, as revenge.

Slaughterhouse footage is powerful. Not just because people might not like seeing the blood and guts, but because of the extreme distress the animals are in, how they are treated on their way to the kill floor, and how often the stunning process gets messed up.

Dominion:

and Land of Hope and Glory:

are free documentaries on YouTube which show exactly this. They come from some of the largest slaughterhouses and were done as a response to comments like, "Oh, but this doesn't happen here." and "My meat is slaughtered humanely." People seem to think the process isn't stressful on the animals, or painful. They also don't realize that the animals are often very young.

Sure, a person might be desensitized to gore and violence, but even then I'd think that maybe they'd still think it's a pretty awful way to come about food which is only tasted on the tongue for a few seconds. Seeing something is more powerful than just hearing about it. Lots of vegan events will have footage like this playing when they talk with the public. Granted, some people still won't care, and some will claim they just found some isolated incident and put on depressing music to play on peoples' emotions. What do they think it looks like the rest of the time? But, at least enough people should find it unacceptable that it will help change their minds and tip the scales on what the new normal is.

I think the only method of slaughter that wouldn't be stressful or painful would be euthanasia. But, that would be far too expensive and time-consuming, and why it's not done that way. Besides, bringing an animal into the world just to kill them at a young age is selfish. The current methods used are really just a compromise; they are better than simply slashing their throats a good amount of the time, and they aren't very time-consuming. But, it's still not acceptable and gets botched a lot of the time for various reasons.

I am concerned that vegans often put too much stress on the negative consequences of eating meat and insufficient stress on the ease and convenience of using affordable vegan proteins that are already available to most people from their local grocers.

What got me started on trying vegetarian options whenever I ate out was that somebody took me to some really great restaurants and pointed out menu options that were inexpensive and which had a big, bold, savory flavor. Before they showed me how, I had a choice between either eating meat or going without protein in my diet, which would have made me incredibly sick.

In my perception, vegans often suffer from a severe negativity problem, and that is going to hold them back from growing their movement until they have learned to teach people how a vegan lifestyle is not really an extraordinary sacrifice but really constitutes a decision that opens up opportunities, not just opportunities for new experiences but also opportunities to save money while still living well.

While you are correct that the slaughterhouse footage is valuable for countering the "humane slaughter" myth, focusing only on the negatives of eating meat is likely to alienate people from experimenting with vegan options in their dining.

 

[Tailo]

Protein is necessary for human development and survival.

Yes, but meat consumption is excessively high in some countries. I'm neither an expert on food nor health, but I know that meat consumption in the Untited States is one of the highest in the world while life expectancy isn't so great. Correlation isn't causation, but it's plausible that health and nutrition are related, isn't it?

My experience with veggie burgers and veggie sausages is that they are even quicker ready than meat. I don't know why that is so, but that's how it is. It says "roast gently for two minutes from each side" on the package of the veggie burgers in my fridge. These burgers are sold in regular super markets and in the cheapest discounters here. The are not the cheapest food though, I'll have to admit this.

 

[SigmaTheZeta]

Yes, but meat consumption is excessively high in some countries. I'm neither an expert on food nor health, but I know that meat consumption in the Untited States is one of the highest in the world while life expectancy isn't so great. Correlation isn't causation, but it's plausible that health and nutrition are related, isn't it?

My experience with veggie burgers and veggie sausages is that they are even quicker ready than meat. I don't know why that is so, but that's how it is. It says "roast gently for two minutes from each side" on the package of the veggie burgers in my fridge. These burgers are sold in regular super markets and in the cheapest discounters here. The are not the cheapest food though, I'll have to admit this.

Ten dollars an hour is not a whole lot of money to work with when you are raising multiple offspring that invariably get sick on the weekend and thereby need to be taken, expensively, to the emergency room.

I know there are cheaper alternatives out there that are just as easy, though.

 

[caikgoch]

With pigs in gas chambers, they scream as the gas burns their lungs and they chew off their own legs trying to escape.

That's one of the logical inconsistencies that block my acceptance of everything else you say. The hogs' legs (hams) are the product. Any part of the process that damaged product like that would be quickly changed.

 

[caikgoch]

I'm trying to find the video I watched about a year ago where a slaughterhouse employee was interviewed, and he said that whenever he would periodically clean out the gas chambers, there would be bits of hooves and legs down in there. It's not every single pig that chews them off, just a few; which illustrates the agony and fear they are experiencing.

"The density of the gas is so painful that slaughterhouse workers have reported finding pigs' hooves at the bottom of the chamber, a result of the pig thrashing around so violently while being asphyxiated with gas that they rip their hooves off their feet."

https://www.facebook.com/Jo.Frederi...-into-where-they-will-exper/1537402693008683/

It's pretty awful, anyway.

Now you've really lost me. That's from ALF, a confessed terrorist organization.

 

[SigmaTheZeta]

I have my eyes on a company called Mosa Meat still.

Mosa Meat

We’re a European food technology company that’s helping everyone take a bite out of a better future – starting with the world’s kindest beef burger.

www.mosameat.com

I think that, eventually, their product is going to be considerably less expensive than animal-produced meat. I think that, once animal-produced meat has been relegated to being a niche product, it is going to be regarded as rather bonkers to raise an animal for no reason at all except to induce it to an untimely death for the sake of eating it.

 

[caikgoch]

Dang it. I guess that invalidates everything I've written up to this point.

No, just most of it. It shows a major lack of critical thinking.

 

[caikgoch]

Would you care to elaborate? Critical thinking is something I try to use often.

True believers in general simply can't be unbiased sources. In other words, they cannot be trusted. When they believe in their agenda to the point of being willing to kill or commit crimes that actually damage their cause, absolutely nothing they say can be believed.

 

[Zoo50]

Protein is necessary for human development and survival.

One does not have to get protein from meat -- they can get protein from non-meat (plant) sources. There are now certain almondmilk / cashewmilk products that have pea protein in them. Also, soymilk has protein.

The simple advantage of a package of hamburger is that you pull it from the package and throw it on the skillet. It's browned enough to eat in all of four minutes, you drain it, and it is ready to eat.

You are still callously treating animals as though they are objects, rather than as beings worthy of morality. Your lack of empathy for living beings is disturbing.

The remaining window of time you have left for making dinner is not that large, and by the time you have gotten to it, you are mentally and emotionally exhausted to a point of literal delirium.

As @Tailo said, there are a lot of vegan products that are ready in 2 minutes, or microwavable (such as veggie burgers).

I am concerned that vegans often put too much stress on the negative consequences of eating meat and insufficient stress on the ease and convenience of using affordable vegan proteins that are already available to most people from their local grocers.

This is because the lives of animals are far more important (morally) than one's own selfish "convenience". In any case, vegans should do both -- show people the horrors of factory farms / slaughterhouses, while also discussing vegan products that are available.

You really ought to think about deeper issues, such as the value of one's life, and not trivial, superficial things such as taste and convenience.

That's one of the logical inconsistencies that block my acceptance of everything else you say.

It's truly appalling that you apparently have no empathy for other living beings, and are not disturbed by the agony that animals go through when they are slaughtered. Instead of focusing on the horrors of factory farming, all you care about is splitting hairs.

I have my eyes on a company called Mosa Meat still.

While cultured meat is more ethical than slaughtered meat, why not just abandon animal-derived foods altogether, and eat plant-based foods?

Dang it. I guess that invalidates everything I've written up to this point.

Are you being sarcastic?

No, just most of it. It shows a major lack of critical thinking.

I disagree. Everything @SkawdtDawg has said is rational and based in reason. The arguments made from other people, such as knotinterested and HyperWoof, are extremely irrational and fallacious. If anyone has displayed a lack of critical thinking in this thread, it is people who irrationally defend the unethical practice of meat-eating (such as knotinterested, HyperWoof, and BlueBeard).

 

[SigmaTheZeta]

One does not have to get protein from meat -- they can get protein from non-meat (plant) sources. There are now certain almondmilk / cashewmilk products that have pea protein in them. Also, soymilk has protein.

I'll stick to just milk, thank you.

You are still callously treating animals as though they are objects, rather than as beings worthy of morality. Your lack of empathy for living beings is disturbing.

I think that methods of animal husbandry and slaughter ought to be revisited, and that is where I am going to stay on this subject until I give word otherwise.

While cultured meat is more ethical than slaughtered meat, why not just abandon animal-derived foods altogether, and eat plant-based foods?

Because it tastes good.

This is because the lives of animals are far more important (morally) than one's own selfish "convenience". In any case, vegans should do both -- show people the horrors of factory farms / slaughterhouses, while also discussing vegan products that are available.

Then consider going to potluck dinners and sharing vegan recipes with people. What really makes people want to try something is to cook it for them and then show them that cooking it for themselves is really easy and can be done with inexpensive ingredients that are not even weird or exotic to them.

You really ought to think about deeper issues, such as the value of one's life, and not trivial, superficial things such as taste and convenience.

Being perfectly realistic about myself and about other people actually is a deeper issue. Changing how people behave demands starting from a place of accepting them for what they are. If you start from there, you can make a lot more progress with them.

 

[Tailo]

I'll stick to just milk, thank you.

I haven't committed to a vegan lifestyle, so milk is also an option for me, but I have to say that oats and especially rice drinks have won me over. I like them better with muesli and also for cooking than milk. Personally, I've never been a huge fan of soy drinks, unless they are flavored. Everyone has different preferences. There's also coco milk and the nut based drinks @Zoo50 mentioned. The variety is quite awesome. Grain and soy drinks are available for the same price as organic milk here in Germany although taxes are not even half as high for milk as for plant-based drinks for historic reasons and the unwillingness in politics to change this.

(Not sure whether "organic" is the right word in my last sentence. What I mean is milk from cows who are allowed to go outside, have more than the legally required minimum space in the stable and get more natural feed.)

Nothing, except for water, is as cheap as the factory farmed milk though. It is ridiculously cheap. Even the farmers have protested for years against the low prices that the big trade chains are imposing on them. I've heard farmers say that they literally earn more money from the shit that the cows discharge than from the milk. We can imagine that this situation doesn't leave much room to invest in the animals' welfare.

 

[SigmaTheZeta]

I haven't committed to a vegan lifestyle, so milk is also an option for me, but I have to say that oats and especially rice drinks have won me over. I like them better with muesli and also for cooking than milk. Personally, I've never been a huge fan of soy drinks, unless they are flavored. Everyone has different preferences. There's also coco milk and the nut based drinks @Zoo50 mentioned. The variety is quite awesome. Grain and soy drinks are available for the same price as organic milk here in Germany although taxes are not even half as high for milk as for plant-based drinks for historic reasons and the unwillingness in politics to change this.

(Not sure whether "organic" is the right word in my last sentence. What I mean is milk from cows who are allowed to go outside, have more than the legally required minimum space in the stable and get more natural feed.)

Nothing, except for water, is as cheap as the factory farmed milk though. It is ridiculously cheap. Even the farmers have protested for years against the low prices that the big trade chains are imposing on them. I've heard farmers say that they literally earn more money from the shit that the cows discharge than from the milk. We can imagine that this situation doesn't leave much room to invest in the animals' welfare.

Here comes lab-grown dairy: milk proteins made without animals

The search for sustainable, healthy alternatives to meat has two paths: the meat-mimicking veggie burger and lab-grown proteins.

www.latimes.com

 

[SigmaTheZeta]

Dear vegans: the only way that I will stop buying real live milk that is actually squeezed from a real live cow's mammary glands will be if you can sell me real live milk that is not squeezed from a real live cow's mammary glands for a lower price, so get cracking.

 

[SigmaTheZeta]

The synthetic milk will probably taste better, too!

 

[SigmaTheZeta]

That's not how the free market works, though. It won't be cheaper than cow's milk until more people buy plant-based milk, and dairy is no longer subsidized with tax dollars. Being vegan (and life in general) isn't about everyone else making your life easier for you. It takes effort, but if a person actually cares about the well-being of the animals, it's worth it.

I am certain that synthetic proteins can eventually be made less expensively than actually raising a cow, and nobody will ever know the difference when it starts taking the place of cows' milk on the shelf.

 

[SigmaTheZeta]

I might have misread this. Are you asking for dairy (non plant-based milk) that is essentially cow's milk that doesn't come from a cow? Why are you so stuck on cow's milk?

Because I happen to like it, and my opinion is that in the long run, it will be even less expensive to produce synthetic dairy proteins than to raise an actual plant.

Sustainable Animal-Free Dairy & Protein - Perfect Day

Animal-free protein naturally creates kinder, greener dairy that is just as delicious as dairy from cows.That means what’s best for you is also best for the planet.

www.perfectdayfoods.com

If they can sell it for a reasonable price, then darn right, I'll buy it.