OT :meet your meat

[Shaolin Wookie]

Killing animals just isn't necessary, nor is it environmentally sound. That's how I see it.

Just because our ancestors had to kill to survive does not mean we need to...it's called evolution. Ascension. We are unique among animals, and that gives us more responsibility.

I know everyone will do what they want. Ultimately, this world is completely illusionary and transitory. But interacting with it, my vow is to help release beings from suffering.

Killing animals will always be necessary. It's called the FOOD CHAIN!!!

I have nothing against vegetarianism, and nothing against carnivorism. I'm an omnivore. But here's something to excogitate:

1. We are not unique among animals. We are, in fact, animals. Hairless apes, to be more specific. (excepting Su Kong Tai Djin, such as he was actually just a hairy ape).

2. Evolution is not an ethical or moral process. Your kindness to animals has not forwarded nor retarded the evolutionary process one step. I rescued two kittens from starvation, but I wouldn't call that evolution. It's just kindness. And they love me so long as I feed them....and they'll only eat meat. Quite a quandary, huh?

3. Vegetarinism will never take precedence. In times of prolonged drought (such as we see in Africa right now), humans rely on animals for sustenance. Is this immoral? Of course not. It's called the FOOD CHAIN!!! But we also have agriculture...why? In case there's a shortage of livestock...say by disease, ill fortune, or natural disaster.

4. Plants are living things. Do you really espouse the wholesale slaughter of beanstalks worldwide? You animal, you....

5. Killing animals is environmentally sound, sometimes. Surplus animals means a shortage of food, and quicker consumption of resources. Sometimes you have to depopulate in order to secure the safety of the herd.

6. #5 brings up a good point for humans, however. We are far too large an animal herd. Our fishing is depopulating the ocean at an alarming rate. Our habitations have ruined the natural landscape for numerous species, and driven certain plants and animals to the brink of extinction and beyond. Malthus comes to mind.....there are just to many goddam people on earth.

7. #6 brings up an imporant issue for humans. As long as our populations continue to skyrocket, we'll need to keep killing and harvesting more. Sooner or later, we will **** up the Food Chain. Then humans will be the only truly well-stocked population of animals on the planet, and our fields will get exhausted from the endless crop rotations and demands we put upon it, if not from the UV scorching, chemical treatments, and atmospheric pollution. I figure we should start eating ourselves ASAP.

8. If #7 is morally reprehensible, we should immediatly begin researching the genetic splicing of animal and plant DNA. The best of both worlds....animals that feed on sunlight, crap seeds, and sprout more animals. Although creating a term to describe its predators would be tough......Veggivores? Carn-herb-vores?

[Shaolin Wookie]

And countless fish, hooked and gutted...I have done too much killing in this lifetime already. .

There's only one way to make reparations at this point in order to reset your karmic cycle on a positive note. You have to chop yourself up into little bits and feed yourself to sharks. Human chum....

mmmmmmmmmmm.......

[Leto]

We are the stewards of the foodchain, with the ability to preserve the natural environment and allow animals to live according to their natures. We don't need to live like a virus, consuming and destroying everything we come in contact with. We are advanced enough as a species to both live in harmony with nature, preserving life and environment, and have an advanced civilization.
You're right, animals will always eat other animals. I believe that we are able to transcend that cycle. But I understand you are firmly in the world of western science/old school logic, so I don't blame you for your position. I felt the same way for most of my life, and resisted becoming vegetarian for a long time, even though something deep and "illogical" was always tugging at me to stop eating meat.

In the case that no other food source is available, then killing an animal might be necessary...but it would be done with an attitude of respect and gratitude for the creature giving up its life...not as a thoughtless, heartless murder. There may seem to be no difference from a purely scientific perspective...but I believe it makes a huge difference in our lives and to our world.

As for humane societies and euthanization...who said no one talks about it? Everyone talks about it. Bob Barker used to stand up there every day and say "please get your pets spayed and neutered!"
There are a huge number of people who participate in animal rescue, taking them out of overcrowded pounds and "humane societies" and giving them a place to live until someone can be found to adopt them. My wife and I lived in a very small house, but it was enough space to take in cats and kittens. The two cats that are in our family now were from the first litter we rescued. Our two dogs are also rescued from the humane society.
Anyone who is serious about helping in this area should inquire with the humane sociery about volunteering to participate in animal rescue of some kind...I'm sure no matter where you live, they are eager for anyone who can help. They usually pay for all the food and medicine required for the animals you take in, you simply need to provide a safe place and loving kindness.

An even better act of kindness would be to serve as a foster parent for a human child or children...but far fewer of us have the resources required to participate in that. Believe me...I would be a foster parent before I will have children of my own, as soon as I have the means to do so. Human suffering is just as important as the suffering of all those animals...and there are countless children without homes, without loving families.


As for plants...I also consider their lives, and thank every one for giving themselves. Many plants you don't need to kill in order to get food from them...we eat seeds, or leaves, and fruits. Plant life is still life, and shouldn't be treated carelessly. Seeing deforestation, countless trees destroyed, also makes me sad. When I am able to, and have the land to build a home, I will chop down as few trees as possible, hopefully none. There are plenty of alternative building methods that don't require such massive waste of life. Sandbags, cob, strawbale construction...passive solar heating and solar and wind power...as I said earlier, we have all the means at our disposal to live completely comfortably and sustainably, in harmony with our environment. The only block to this is in our perception...of ourselves, our world, and "the way things are".

We resist change, but it is inevitable. Just because things have stayed the same for as long as we can remember, does not mean it will always be that way. Our memories are rather short, and our species hasn't really been around all that long, relatively speaking. Who knows what may change, and what is possible?
The argument that "this is just the way things are" is not a good argument.

[Shaolin Wookie]

We are the stewards of the foodchain, with the ability to preserve the natural environment and allow animals to live according to their natures.

I fully encourage you to walk out into a veldt in Africa and preach your sermon to a tiger. We are the stewards of nothing. Consider that in the ocean, we are nothing more than mobile bait. We do not have the power to preserve the natural environment. I mean, sometimes we'll restrain the impulse to turn a marsh or two into a parking lot, but have you looked outside? Have you ever lived in a city? We can't even survive in our own unnatrual environments....look at the increase in asthma in children, and the inbreeding on the loose, right now, in rural Alabama.

We don't need to live like a virus, consuming and destroying everything we come in contact with. We are advanced enough as a species to both live in harmony with nature, preserving life and environment, and have an advanced civilization.

We are nature. We survive. Oddly enough, we failed to see we were a part of this system all along, part of the food chain, and part of the environment. We always thought we were on top of it, and so never instituted proper population controls. And soon we'll pay the consequences for it.

You're right, animals will always eat other animals. I believe that we are able to transcend that cycle. But I understand you are firmly in the world of western science/old school logic, so I don't blame you for your position. I felt the same way for most of my life, and resisted becoming vegetarian for a long time, even though something deep and "illogical" was always tugging at me to stop eating meat.

This is really not a matter of East vs. West. It's a socioeconomic issue, regarding privilege, and not much else. You have the choice to eat how you wish. Many do not eat at all. There is nothing spiritual about it. It's just the privilege of being the proverbial "have" rather than a "have-not". You get to eat your tofu, and moralize it, too.

In the case that no other food source is available, then killing an animal might be necessary...but it would be done with an attitude of respect and gratitude for the creature giving up its life...not as a thoughtless, heartless murder. There may seem to be no difference from a purely scientific perspective...but I believe it makes a huge difference in our lives and to our world.

True. And nearly every civilization on the face of the earth has held this same respect before. Even Europeans had the same ethics, respect, and gratitude. But sooner or later, the population increase transformed cultural survival into an industry. And then we started dehumanizing each other.

An even better act of kindness would be to serve as a foster parent for a human child or children...but far fewer of us have the resources required to participate in that.

I know this isn't a popular idea, but this is a classic case of speciesism.....we're not any more valuable than a stray cat, or say, a dog. Although, it were better said "not any less valuable" as well.

Believe me...I would be a foster parent before I will have children of my own, as soon as I have the means to do so. Human suffering is just as important as the suffering of all those animals...and there are countless children without homes, without loving families.

Always been an issue, always will be. Look at the nineteenth century. It's just part of what goes on in the animal kingdom. It's how I got my cats, by the way. Same process.

As for plants...I also consider their lives, and thank every one for giving themselves. Many plants you don't need to kill in order to get food from them...we eat seeds, or leaves, and fruits.

So in that case, it'd be all right to eat eggs, right? Or maybe other embryos?

passive solar heating and solar and wind power...as I said earlier, we have all the means at our disposal to live completely comfortably and sustainably, in harmony with our environment.

I agree. But we're never at harmony. We're always subordinate. We adapt to our environment, but it can mess us up in a second. If there's comfort in nature, it's unnatural. It's that kind of thinking...the "we're above nature, not in it" kind of attitude that leads to the environmental problems in the first place. Try and control nature, and it will sooner or later slough you off. Not like a sentient being....more like a rape victim who happens to be connected to the mob. If you're the rapist, you'll get what's coming to you, or your progeny will.

Take your vegetarianism, for instance. If I were to, say, place you in the coldest region of Siberia, do you think you could survive during the winter without eating reindeer (primary source of nourishment there...kind of like sausage)? Your fields would be under a mile of snow (okay, that's an embellishment), and the only way to get your food is to import it. In order to import your veggies, you'd have to have a reliable transport system in place, or else you'd starve. A delay of two weeks might prove fatal, especially if the road gets blocked by an avalanche or rogue snow drift, or a fallen tree. This also presuposses you have a strong economic system in place, where companies feel they owe an obligation to servicing the customer, and won't just let you starve...b/c, to be honest, you're not in a good place to deliver to (you're just good customer service fanfare).

Would you say it is in this Siberain's best interest to refrain from eating meat? Note: this is a big question, so treat it seriously.....

The argument that "this is just the way things are" is not a good argument.

I agree. But hey, that's just the way it is.

[David Jamieson]

We are the stewards of the foodchain, with the ability to preserve the natural environment and allow animals to live according to their natures. We don't need to live like a virus, consuming and destroying everything we come in contact with. We are advanced enough as a species to both live in harmony with nature, preserving life and environment, and have an advanced civilization.
You're right, animals will always eat other animals. I believe that we are able to transcend that cycle. But I understand you are firmly in the world of western science/old school logic, so I don't blame you for your position. I felt the same way for most of my life, and resisted becoming vegetarian for a long time, even though something deep and "illogical" was always tugging at me to stop eating meat.

In the case that no other food source is available, then killing an animal might be necessary...but it would be done with an attitude of respect and gratitude for the creature giving up its life...not as a thoughtless, heartless murder. There may seem to be no difference from a purely scientific perspective...but I believe it makes a huge difference in our lives and to our world.

As for humane societies and euthanization...who said no one talks about it? Everyone talks about it. Bob Barker used to stand up there every day and say "please get your pets spayed and neutered!"
There are a huge number of people who participate in animal rescue, taking them out of overcrowded pounds and "humane societies" and giving them a place to live until someone can be found to adopt them. My wife and I lived in a very small house, but it was enough space to take in cats and kittens. The two cats that are in our family now were from the first litter we rescued. Our two dogs are also rescued from the humane society.
Anyone who is serious about helping in this area should inquire with the humane sociery about volunteering to participate in animal rescue of some kind...I'm sure no matter where you live, they are eager for anyone who can help. They usually pay for all the food and medicine required for the animals you take in, you simply need to provide a safe place and loving kindness.

An even better act of kindness would be to serve as a foster parent for a human child or children...but far fewer of us have the resources required to participate in that. Believe me...I would be a foster parent before I will have children of my own, as soon as I have the means to do so. Human suffering is just as important as the suffering of all those animals...and there are countless children without homes, without loving families.


As for plants...I also consider their lives, and thank every one for giving themselves. Many plants you don't need to kill in order to get food from them...we eat seeds, or leaves, and fruits. Plant life is still life, and shouldn't be treated carelessly. Seeing deforestation, countless trees destroyed, also makes me sad. When I am able to, and have the land to build a home, I will chop down as few trees as possible, hopefully none. There are plenty of alternative building methods that don't require such massive waste of life. Sandbags, cob, strawbale construction...passive solar heating and solar and wind power...as I said earlier, we have all the means at our disposal to live completely comfortably and sustainably, in harmony with our environment. The only block to this is in our perception...of ourselves, our world, and "the way things are".

We resist change, but it is inevitable. Just because things have stayed the same for as long as we can remember, does not mean it will always be that way. Our memories are rather short, and our species hasn't really been around all that long, relatively speaking. Who knows what may change, and what is possible?
The argument that "this is just the way things are" is not a good argument.

holy jebas.

this is practically a textbook on oidealism not based or grounded in reality.
yeesh. have you ever missed a meal? lol

I find your views to be rife with pollyannna syndrome, unrealistic and not in keeping with the reality of the world. But that's just my opinion. don't take it personally and by all means regard me as a barbarian or something.

But when it comes down to it, I will eat what I can afford to and what I like to eat. currently that includes the flesh of animals.

p.s my pets are spayed and neutered, does this make me a better person or just responsible to my neighbours?

[Shaolin Wookie]

p.s my pets are spayed and neutered, does this make me a better person or just responsible to my neighbours?

It just makes you a sadistic *******, where it regards your pets. but hey, I'm in that category, too.

I bet you if my cats could remember getting spayed and neutered every day of their lives, they wouldn't think of me so fondly.

[Leto]

I'm not saying everyone in the world must be a vegetarian. If I lived somewhere where there was nothing else to eat, I would eat meat. Since I have the ability to choose, a priveleged life of relative comfort, (like many people in America and Europe and other industrialized countries)...it is my choice to take advantage of my situation to avoid killing wherever I can. The problems we face were not caused by people eating meat, don't think I believe anything is as simplistic as this. From the beginning, I said that I understand everyone is in their own place, and don't expect eveyone to change. I'm just describing my place. Where I am is not "reality" for some other people.
I am not going to feel guilty for being born into a place where I am not starving and have everything I need to survive comfortably. Tigers don't need to hear sermons, and I wouldn't get in one's way if I could help it. I wouldn't be wandering around looking for tigers, in any case. Live and let live. Living in harmony doesn't mean having nature subservient to us. That's the attitude that got us where we are now, as has been said. To me, it's leaving as small of a "footprint" as possible. Not getting in the way of the natural course of things. When nature comes knocking on my door in the form of old age, sickness, disaster, accident, a determined predator, or whatever, well then that's that.
We come into conflict with large predators because we're competing for the same resources. With the technology and knowledge to create adn grow our own food sources without stripping the land, this conflict is no longer so necessary. We don't need to live in a cave, hoping a bear or lion won't come along and want the same cave. Things happen, and if you have to fight to survive then you do it. Of course, if we could just stop competing with ourselves long enough to put our knowledge and resources towards creating a society that can be sustained on this planet, perserving the life which naturally flourishes here...my idealism might seem closer to reality.

This "reality" hinges on the idea that humans are essentially primitive beings who can't help but fight eachother for basic survival needs. Some of you don't see this ever changing, because it's always been that way (as far back as we can remember). That's the difference. Call me an idealist, living in fantasy, illogical and irrational, or whatever...I have hope for us. There is more to our existence than physical survival.

I do eat eggs right now...only from local farms with free-range chickens. Same with dairy...I eat little of it, but I get it from the local organic food co-op.
Eventually I expect I will have an entirely vegan, "raw foods" diet.

This is definately not for everyone...I never could have seen myself going through with this, even four or five years ago. I don't blame you guys for thinking it is crazy, I though it was, too, for a long time. I grew up on a farm, and was used to eating meat for every meal. Sometime in my late teens there was a "turning around" in my perception, and everything started to seem upside down. Please don't be offended in my attempt to describe my perception of things...I don't expect everyone will like it or identify with it. I maybe crazy in your world...that's how it goes.

Being vegetarian is one way that I express my vow to not kill. Not everyone feels the need to impose this sort of vow on themselves. Not everyone has the luxury to do so. I imagine that anyone reading an internet forum, however, does pretty much have the luxury to choose. Anyone watching a video on youtube has internet access...a computer, probably a house or an apartment to stay in, most likely a car or other transportation, and plenty of access to a variety of foods from all over the place. This is the target audience...not folks living on the savannah in Africa, or people living in huts in the Amazon basin, or the starving impoverished masses across the world. I am not "preaching" to the tribes of Siberia that they shouldn't eat caribou, or to the nomads anywhere in the world. I am only talking to you people, here on the internet. If any of you are having a rough time, and can't afford to buy vegetables, or have no access to them, I am truly sorry. I did not intend to offend anyone. I wish you the best, and hope you have happiness in your life.

[Shaolin Wookie]

I don't blame you guys for thinking it is crazy, I though it was, too, for a long time. I grew up on a farm, and was used to eating meat for every meal. Sometime in my late teens there was a "turning around" in my perception, and everything started to seem upside down. Please don't be offended in my attempt to describe my perception of things...I don't expect everyone will like it or identify with it. I maybe crazy in your world...that's how it goes..

I have no issues with your vegetarianism. I actually prefer your outlook to the alternative from the other end of the spectrum. I just don't think you have a very...good?...definition of evolution in your head. Perhaps "healthy" is a better word than "good."

Plus, I'm just looking to argue with someone.

I am not going to feel guilty for being born into a place where I am not starving and have everything I need to survive comfortably.

Nor should you. Just look at the world "comfortable" in many ways, and think about what that really means, for you.

I'm not saying everyone in the world must be a vegetarian. If I lived somewhere where there was nothing else to eat, I would eat meat. Since I have the ability to choose, a priveleged life of relative comfort, (like many people in America and Europe and other industrialized countries)...it is my choice to take advantage of my situation to avoid killing wherever I can. The problems we face were not caused by people eating meat, don't think I believe anything is as simplistic as this. From the beginning, I said that I understand everyone is in their own place, and don't expect eveyone to change. I'm just describing my place. Where I am is not "reality" for some other people.

This is particularly what I was getting at, and trying to get you to talk about by leading you in this direction. The question I'd like to ask, and don't really have an answer for, b/c everyone has to supply their own---if everything does indeed depend upon environment, socioeconomic standards, and geography, is there really a higher ethic, a method of ascension, or an ethic to evolution? Ethics, transcendece, etc....they're a form of emolument, gained by a certain life of relative ease that doesn't directly involve going out and doing the "dirty" work. More than anything, their claim to returning to nature's harmony, or natural communion with the earth, are entirely the opposite to their effect. It's why I like Taoism and Chan, but hate the way they're always explained. I read someone say: "There is no Buddah nature, there is only you," and I see--there is no supernatural, transcendent property. There is only you. You are part of nature. You are an animal. You are in communion with nature, until you begin to attempt to transcend it. There lies the aberration. And then I hear an explanation that tries to impose some kind of transcendent quality into the equation, and jsut get fed up. Plus, if the ethic of "vegetarianism" is a higher ethic, it would be incumbent upon the Siberians to starve themselves to death and spare teh reindeer. This suggests something: that ethics are geographically, culturally, socioeconomically exclusive, and therefore do not period anything particularly profound, or "high". They're just one more illusion in our human abstraction (humans, removed from natural processes, natural cycles, and Natural Law).

Perhapse even more imporantly, they're species-specific.

Tigers don't need to hear sermons, and I wouldn't get in one's way if I could help it.

What about the tiger spiritual? LOL

[Leto]

I was using the word evolution loosely, obviously, not speaking strictly of genetic, physical evolution. As we have advanced to a certain level of understanding and technical ability, limitations we once had as a species are being overcome. It was once very hard to get to a new continent, it would take generations to travel from one side of the earth to the other. Now we can fly anywhere on earth in a day. We once were victim to many ailments which we have learned to avoid or cure. We now have a much better knowledge of how the environment works than we ever did. We know how to treat the soil to make it favorable for certain types of plants. We have an understanding of the basic building blocks of organic life. These advances in knowledge could be used to help provide basic needs for everyone on earth. I wouldn't want to force anyone to give up the "native" life, living the way their ancestors have always lived, in their own environment. That is a relatively small number of people, however. Far more on earth now live in cities, depending on industry and government to provide the means to live.

Ideally, I would hope to see our advances in science applied to a sustainable life of harmony with whatever environment we live in. Allowing people, no matter what their environment, to have the means of having all they need without needing to destroy anything (hence sustainable).

In terms of Taoism and Buddhism...or at least the teachings of Lao Tzu and Guatama Buddha and other buddhas and bodhisattvas...none of them say that "eating meat is always wrong", or that no one should ever eat meat. The ethic has nothing to do with what you eat...it's really about being dedicated to compassion, to the goal of the relief of suffering, and the right of all beings to have a basically happy life. Religions tend to take things literally, making metaphors and symbolism into dogma. Not eating meat is a symbolic gesture meant to remind you of this. It's a way to prove to myself that I am seriously committed to compassionate action...to not killing, to help beings wherever I can. I can't go out and stop the inhumane treatment of all animals and people personally, but I can give a few cats and dogs a happy, comfortable life, and I can be kind to the people I interact with.
In the teachings of Lao Tzu,
"Surrender yourself humbly; then you can be trusted to care for all things.
Love the world as your own self; then you can truly care for all things."

obviously, that's not exclusive to Lao Tzu either.

Lao Tzu also talks about being content with less, rejoice in simple things. That's something I take seriously as well. I grew up working on a farm, and I'm not afraid of getting my hands dirty. It was comfortable in the sense that we were never hungry, had a place to live, and were relatively healthy. Not comfortable in the sense of being able to sit around and do nothing all day long...we were always busy, and the kids had jobs and chores to do just as my parents did.
A life of luxury is not the kind of life I want or have ever had. Of course, my life on the farm would seem like a life of luxury to some people in the world. It's all relative. It's all illusion...everything I do here is just a symbol, an act, a mask to play a part in the illusion. Before enlightenment, chop wood and carry water, after enlightenment, chop wood and carry water.

Specific acts and individual practices cannot be universally applied. Compassion, kindness, unconditional love...I see these things as universal. A life of service can manifest in many ways, depending on the culture and the background, but its foundation is always the same.
There may be no scientific way to prove that there is a genetic or evolutionary purpose or benefit for such morality/compassion...but I don't require one.

[Shaolin Wookie]

Evolutionary purpose....it's kind of funny how it works out.

Check out the heterozygous advantage studies by JBS Haldane, particularly with regard to sickle cell anemia and malaria.

As for the rest, ah well. You're a little bit of a hippie, but it's all good.

[golden arhat]

well, I worked in an abattoir for about half a year, but before that would move retired dairy cattle to a few different companies depending on who could take the animals. In each case, the kill houses were more or less the same. besides, how do you humanely kill anything that doesn't want to die in the first place? Cats and Dogs are exterminated in huge numbers annually by so called "humane" societies. I don't see too many people up in arms about that. anyway...

now and then dairy cows get worn out and can't produce anymore and these are sent to be processed into food for you and me. tasty Bar-b-q food that is.

all im saying is I can respect vegetarians if that's what they wanna be, but I would also ask that it be recognized that we are omnivorous and for more time we have been eating animals than being totally agrarian.

consider the damage that large scale production of agrarian products does as well. Think of all the slash and burn and forest destruction that has to occur for those wheat fields to exist and so on.

In the eternal struggle that is the cycle of life, eating of other animals is natural, our mouths and our teeth are specially designed to eat almost anything that is edible including other animals.

making it a moral issue is completely of mind and has nothing to do with survival.

I would also add that in the worst circumstances, all human will revert to being an omnivore as opposed to starving. so vegetarianism is a luxury of advanced society.

of course its of mind

we dont need meat to survive so if u have the option why wat it if u can get on just fine without killing

in modern society eating meat is selfish and cruel

in ancient society it was natural and necessary

vegetarianism isnt a luxury its a natural evolution
we have an advanced mind so we can rationalise the rational thing to do would be to not kill unless you have to
no ?

[Leto]

Wookie: yeah, I'm probably a lot of a hippy. I even look like one, now. *lol* Someone's got to do it.

The discussion was useful for me, to be able to really think about and try to articulate my thought process about being vegetarian. It's not like I joined a religion or some group that said I shouldn't eat meat...it just occurred to me, over time, that it was what I should do. It was a turning around of perception which didn't have a consciously thought out, logical purpose behind it. I was not used to operating this way...I was raised to be cold and calculating, I initially went to school for engineering. My life has flipped, and I am working on acting on my feelings and intuition as much as logic.

So thanks, everyone, for being a reflection for me, and giving me an opportunity to reflect.

Arhat: that pretty much sums it up for me...I have been given the choice, so I choose not to participate in killing. The fact that other people don't have that choice shouldn't affect our choice.

[golden arhat]

Killing animals will always be necessary. It's called the FOOD CHAIN!!!

I have nothing against vegetarianism, and nothing against carnivorism. I'm an omnivore. But here's something to excogitate:

1. We are not unique among animals. We are, in fact, animals. Hairless apes, to be more specific. (excepting Su Kong Tai Djin, such as he was actually just a hairy ape).

we are unique its self evident
evolution gave us the brain that lets us sympathise etc

2. Evolution is not an ethical or moral process. Your kindness to animals has not forwarded nor retarded the evolutionary process one step. I rescued two kittens from starvation, but I wouldn't call that evolution. It's just kindness. And they love me so long as I feed them....and they'll only eat meat. Quite a quandary, huh?

if evolution gave u a powerful brain and ur brain came up with ethics and morality

then ethics and morality are part of evolution

simple

3. Vegetarinism will never take precedence. In times of prolonged drought (such as we see in Africa right now), humans rely on animals for sustenance. Is this immoral? Of course not. It's called the FOOD CHAIN!!! But we also have agriculture...why? In case there's a shortage of livestock...say by disease, ill fortune, or natural disaster.

veg is not there for the perpose of feeding us in case live stock ran out
there is a reason most of our teeth are designed for grinding and cutting as opposed to just 2 for tearing
humans "relied" (notice the past tens) we no longer need to eat them

4. Plants are living things. Do you really espouse the wholesale slaughter of beanstalks worldwide? You animal, you....

when was the last time a plant tried its hardest to get away from you ?

5. Killing animals is environmentally sound, sometimes. Surplus animals means a shortage of food, and quicker consumption of resources. Sometimes you have to depopulate in order to secure the safety of the herd.

no it isnt

we use far more rainforest for cattle production for far less food than we could get if we used the same space for vegetables

6. #5 brings up a good point for humans, however. We are far too large an animal herd. Our fishing is depopulating the ocean at an alarming rate. Our habitations have ruined the natural landscape for numerous species, and driven certain plants and animals to the brink of extinction and beyond. Malthus comes to mind.....there are just to many goddam people on earth.

i know

7. #6 brings up an imporant issue for humans. As long as our populations continue to skyrocket, we'll need to keep killing and harvesting more. Sooner or later, we will **** up the Food Chain. Then humans will be the only truly well-stocked population of animals on the planet, and our fields will get exhausted from the endless crop rotations and demands we put upon it, if not from the UV scorching, chemical treatments, and atmospheric pollution. I figure we should start eating ourselves ASAP.

or start having less kids

and stop relying on meat to sustain us

its much easier

8. If #7 is morally reprehensible, we should immediatly begin researching the genetic splicing of animal and plant DNA. The best of both worlds....animals that feed on sunlight, crap seeds, and sprout more animals. Although creating a term to describe its predators would be tough......Veggivores? Carn-herb-vores?

lolz i have no problem eating meat that didnt require somethign to die for it
as long as its not bad for me

eating meat is unnecessary we can get all the required nutrition without killing

killing is wrong

simple

[golden arhat]

holy jebas.

this is practically a textbook on oidealism not based or grounded in reality.
yeesh. have you ever missed a meal? lol

I find your views to be rife with pollyannna syndrome, unrealistic and not in keeping with the reality of the world. But that's just my opinion. don't take it personally and by all means regard me as a barbarian or something.

But when it comes down to it, I will eat what I can afford to and what I like to eat. currently that includes the flesh of animals.

p.s my pets are spayed and neutered, does this make me a better person or just responsible to my neighbours?

u dont need to eat meat
u can get all the comfort and nutrition from otherplaces
that dont require killing

so why would u eat meat its wrong
its murder

if i needed to eat meat say in siberia i would of course shoot and kill my food cook it up and eat it
but i dont have to so i dont

what part of this dont u get

do u like the fact that innocent things have to die to feed your habit ?

[DPL]

You know, if you make a conscious choice to be a vegetarian because you believe it's healthier to choose that route, go right ahead and more power to you.

But please, for the love of God, don't start on this crap that it's a more sensitive, intelligent, evolved, kinder way to be. You're just trying to make yourself feel more comfortable by killing and eating something that doesn't remind you of yourself.

Life consumes life. That's the way of the world. Deal with it.

Plants have all five senses (think about it - they sense light (sight), they grow roots toward nutrients and water (taste), they produce pheromones to warn other plants about predatory attacks (scent), they react to noise (hearing) and they react to physical contact (touch). They show remarkable intelligence in defending themselves from predators. They adjust to their environment and to the presence of other cooperative or antagonistic plants.

The good thing for you is that they don't register pain, fear or anguish in ways that we can readily understand, so that makes it okay to kill and eat them 'cause you don't have to look at their tortured little faces as they get consumed.

Please stop anthropomorphizing just the critters that can move about freely as a way to justify killing, mutilating and eating the babies of those that can't.

- This message has been brought to you by Citizens for the Rights of Non-Mobile, Carbon-Dioxide-Breathing Creatures