Vegetarian Rant

[LazerMaster5]

Y'all need steak.

[Yarra]

I'm bow hunting Saturday.  Yes, deer.  mmmm venison.

[Irreverent]

How about: "My god, you people want to argue over what people eat."

Nations have gone to war for it....and less.....

[Sutekh_the_Steak]

I've been a pescatarian since I was a baby because of my parents. For me there isn't any sort of moral "don't eat meat it's bad" stuff behind it, I've just gotten used to not eating land meat.

I did eat meat by accident once though. I was at a noisy birthday party when I was about 5 and one of the adults there said "who wants meatballs!!!!!". I didn't hear the "meatballs" bit because of the noise but everybody else was all like "ooh me! Me me me!!!", so I had one as well because I thought if everyone else wanted it so badly it must be something really tasty. 

I mean I'd never seen a meatball before so you can't exactly blame me.  

[Zeke]

I love a good debate so alright I will be bite.  First for the record let me state that I am not a vegetarian nor do I personally believe in a moral reason to not eat meat so for the following argument I will be playing devil's advocate.

First lets start with an uncontroversial point that will form the basis of the argument here.  Most, if not all, of the animals we eat are capable of feeling pain and thus can experience suffering.  If we can say that is bad for pain or suffering to be deliberately caused to you then having pain or suffering deliberately caused to another entity is morally equivalent.  Therefore we could say that one should be a vegetarian because they have a moral obligation to not cause suffering when it can be avoided.

Except that nature in itself is suffering, so it cannot be avoided. One way or the other, you are going to cause pain. Whether it is for your bacon, or the produce you buy at the supermarkets. 

For instance, the massive fields of Soy have caused suffering to the native species that used to live in that field. The fertilizers and pesticides that run off into rivers also cause suffering to the fish and other life that live in the rivers and ponds by causing eutrophication and hypoxia. 

Machines that harvest the plants also kill many insects and small animals during the process since mice, voles, moles, snakes, etc live in the fields. Regardless, people who have a moral obligation to not eat meat are either ignorant or willfully ignorant of this fact. 

Being a Vegan or vegetarian for the benefits of health or allergies? Okay. There are people who cannot digest meat proteins, same with people who are allergic to soy or corn.

 

Edited October 22, 2015 by Ozriel

[Wolflich]

Except that nature in itself is suffering, so it cannot be avoided. One way or the other, you are going to cause pain. Whether it is for your bacon, or the produce you buy at the supermarkets. 

For instance, the massive fields of Soy have caused suffering to the native species that used to live in that field. The fertilizers and pesticides that run off into rivers also cause suffering to the fish and other life that live in the rivers and ponds by causing eutrophication and hypoxia. 

Machines that harvest the plants also kill many insects and small animals during the process since mice, voles, moles, snakes, etc live in the fields. Regardless, people who have a moral obligation to not eat meat are either ignorant or willfully ignorant of this fact. 

I don't think many people of either viewpoint regarding meat consumption follow some kind of 'all or nothing' approach that would make the inevitability of suffering a deciding factor.

[Zeke]

I don't think many people of either viewpoint regarding meat consumption follow some kind of 'all or nothing' approach that would make the inevitability of suffering a deciding factor.

I wouldn't expect them to, but it's more of an awareness thing when people are "holier-than-thou" regarding being a vegan or vegetarian. Things die for us and it is better to approach it with respect and humility than with "My diet is better than yours".

Edited October 22, 2015 by Ozriel

[Derin Darkpaw]

Except that nature in itself is suffering, so it cannot be avoided. One way or the other, you are going to cause pain. Whether it is for your bacon, or the produce you buy at the supermarkets. 

For instance, the massive fields of Soy have caused suffering to the native species that used to live in that field. The fertilizers and pesticides that run off into rivers also cause suffering to the fish and other life that live in the rivers and ponds by causing eutrophication and hypoxia. 

Machines that harvest the plants also kill many insects and small animals during the process since mice, voles, moles, snakes, etc live in the fields. Regardless, people who have a moral obligation to not eat meat are either ignorant or willfully ignorant of this fact. 

Being a Vegan or vegetarian for the benefits of health or allergies? Okay. There are people who cannot digest meat proteins, same with people who are allergic to soy or corn.

 

Yes there will always be an amount of suffering that can not be avoided, but that fact doesn't negate our moral obligation to reduce suffering whenever possible.  The problems you mentioned apply not only to the farming of produce, but to the production and care of livestock as well.  Pests need to be killed to protect livestock and the runoff of all the feces and various other animal waste causes just as much suffering in the fish living in nearby rivers and ponds.  Then there is the biggest issue with your particular argument here is that livestock also needs to eat produce to survive.  So with livestock you are growing crops which cause suffering and at the same time you are also raising and killing animals which causes even more suffering.  If we remove livestock from the picture we are still causing less suffering by simply eating produce.

The crux of the argument I was presenting was not that we can eliminate suffering, but that we have a moral obligation to reduce suffering whenever possible and that animals suffer when we kill them for food.

[Clove Darkwave]

Mother nature doesn't give a shit about you or your suffering or their suffering or the suffering of anyone else. Nor does any of mother nature's children, which coincidentally also include magnetars, comets, asteroids, black holes, and generally 99.9% of existence.

I want to agree that when the choice to not cause undue amounts of it exists, it is right to take that path but I also realize that it's easy to say that when you're not the ones responsible for the production of meat for 318.9 million people.

Which if even only 75% of those people consumed 1/2lb of meat in an entire day, daily, amounts to 239,175,000 1/2lbs or 119,587,500lbs of meat daily.

Or you could be hopeful and say 50% but let's be honest and admit that you're still talking about insane amounts of dead flesh pumped out daily. This argument always turns silly for me, why not respect all life and stop murdering plants too while we're at it right? I don't think the "well it can't feel pain so it's alright" mentality is going to serve us very well in the not-so-distant future.

But you know one day some space object will put an end to our evil ways I'm sure.

[Spot]

I want to agree that when the choice to not cause undue amounts of it exists, it is right to take that path but I also realize that it's easy to say that when you're not the ones responsible for the production of meat for 318.9 million people.

Couldn't agree more. But are you referring to meat production in the U.S, or globally? I'm sure it's more globally.

[Clove Darkwave]

Couldn't agree more. But are you referring to meat production in the U.S, or globally? I'm sure it's more globally.

US population is 318.9 million people as of 2014.

[Spot]

US population is 318.9 million people as of 2014.

Thought so.

[Clove Darkwave]

I'm sure it's more globally.

 

Thought so

Couldn't resist the temptation to tease.

Edited October 23, 2015 by Clove Darkwave

[Spot]

 

Couldn't resist the temptation to tease.

Tease away I'm to drunk to care. WOOOOO BOOZE!

[feraleks]

I'd feel terrible if someone killed a human being for me to eat. I feel no remorse when someone kills a plant for me to eat. Between these two extremes there's a gray area that makes me uncomfortable as I do eat meat and enjoy it a lot. I also realize that intensive animal agriculture is environmentally damaging and it'd be better for our planet if we cut down the amount of meat we consume.

I realize eating a lot of meat is morally dubious and I accept it. I am that much worse as a person for doing it, but I never claimed to be perfect. I refuse to hide from the fact that not all I do is right by making up excuses and preteding that they justify all of my actions. 

Edited October 23, 2015 by feraleks

[BagelRabbit]

Disclaimer: I'm a vegetarian.

You know what really pisses me the fuck off? When people are like, EAT HAMBURGERS AND BACON. IS DELICIOUS. DO NOW. These people generally point out that 1) people who eat meat are pretty healthy, 2) humans were meant to digest meat, and 3) meat is tasty.

To which I reply: this is the most senseless criticism I've ever received in my life.

There are many, many different things that some people dislike eating: guacamole, beef, horseradish, grapefruit, and froyo, for example. If I was to say, "I won't eat guacamole, horseradish, grapefruit, and/or froyo," people would be okay with that, for the most part. But when I say, "I won't eat beef," people go, "Oh shit! A vegetarian! Run while you still have a chance!" And regardless of the reason I'm a vegetarian, that's a little weird.

I know that there are some vegetarians that try to shove their personal preferences (go vegetarian) in everyone's faces. That's a terrible thing to do, but it doesn't mean that vegetarianism itself is bad. And there's definitely a group of people who are countering by shoving their personal preferences (eat meat) in vegetarians' faces.

So, my advice is: let people eat whatever the hell they wanna eat. Don't try to convince vegetarians to eat meat, and don't try to convince meat-eaters to go vegetarian. All it does is lead to threads that are as stupid and childish as this one.

Thank you.

-bagel

[Umbra.Exe]

Disclaimer: I'm a vegetarian.

You know what really pisses me the fuck off? When people are like, EAT HAMBURGERS AND BACON. IS DELICIOUS. DO NOW. These people generally point out that 1) people who eat meat are pretty healthy, 2) humans were meant to digest meat, and 3) meat is tasty.

To which I reply: this is the most senseless criticism I've ever received in my life.

There are many, many different things that some people dislike eating: guacamole, beef, horseradish, grapefruit, and froyo, for example. If I was to say, "I won't eat guacamole, horseradish, grapefruit, and/or froyo," people would be okay with that, for the most part. But when I say, "I won't eat beef," people go, "Oh shit! A vegetarian! Run while you still have a chance!" And regardless of the reason I'm a vegetarian, that's a little weird.

I know that there are some vegetarians that try to shove their personal preferences (go vegetarian) in everyone's faces. That's a terrible thing to do, but it doesn't mean that vegetarianism itself is bad. And there's definitely a group of people who are countering by shoving their personal preferences (eat meat) in vegetarians' faces.

So, my advice is: let people eat whatever the hell they wanna eat. Don't try to convince vegetarians to eat meat, and don't try to convince meat-eaters to go vegetarian. All it does is lead to threads that are as stupid and childish as this one.

Thank you.

-bagel

As someone who isn't a vegetarian, I pretty much agree with all of this. I find it silly that some people get so worked up over what other people choose to eat or not eat. (Especially the non-vegetarians telling vegetarians to eat meat... And again, this is coming from someone who does eat meat. Let 'em be, guys!)

OP, that was pretty misleading of them to label it as "veggie" if it was not, in fact, a vegetarian meal. I wonder if it comes like that every time, or if someone just (badly) screwed up the order? If that is how it's "supposed" to come, I would bring it up to them and see about having that changed.

[Guest]

"OH MY GOD PEOPLE WON'T EAT SOMETHING I LIKE"

That's it. That's how folks who criticize vegetarians sound. Who fucking cares if that guy over there is eating steak? Who cares if the chick three seats to the left is eating some green vegan soy thing? Why does it honestly bother the hell out of some people?

On the same note, I wonder if its because meat eaters automatically feel bad because they know that "most" vegetarians don't eat meat because meat is cruelty or whatever? Like.. Meat eaters at one point have had a run in at least with one vegetarian in their lives, and they see the sentiment from the louder, pissier subset of vegetarians that insult meat eaters and liken them to murderers and what have you. Do you guys think that whenever a meat eater is reminded or see a vegetarian somewhere,t he reasonw hy they default to name calling or fact-bombs or even hostility is because they remember that someone of their group called them a murderer?

Is the word confirmation bias or am I looking for another word?

 

Anyways, this thread would be a whole lot different if someone posted "Ugh! I ordered a salad without strawberries because I'm allergic to strawberries. Lo and behold, I bit in to it and there was a strawberry and I died'. Obviously, it'd be different because someone could die if they ate something they were allergic to. But what about if they just didn't like strawberries. And then posted a thread. Folks would commisserate, there'd be one guy who guys 'but strawberries are delicious' as if that changes the person's mind, and then it'd fizzle out. I just want to know what it is about vegetarians who aren't yelling at you, that are quietly eating their greens and sunlight, bothers the heck out of some people. 

[Azure]

i once served a muslim split pea soup

there was ham in that

i didnt tell him and now hes gonna go to muslim hell

[Umbra.Exe]

 

Anyways, this thread would be a whole lot different if someone posted "Ugh! I ordered a salad without strawberries because I'm allergic to strawberries. Lo and behold, I bit in to it and there was a strawberry and I died'. Obviously, it'd be different because someone could die if they ate something they were allergic to. But what about if they just didn't like strawberries. And then posted a thread. Folks would commisserate, there'd be one guy who guys 'but strawberries are delicious' as if that changes the person's mind, and then it'd fizzle out. I just want to know what it is about vegetarians who aren't yelling at you, that are quietly eating their greens and sunlight, bothers the heck out of some people. 

I was thinking of bringing up something like this as well, when someone in here told OP to keep eating the ham because the pig was already dead, or something to that effect. That doesn't change the fact that OP specifically did not want ham in her omelette, and doesn't like eating ham. To me, it shouldn't matter why. If something's labeled as "veggie" one could reasonably think that it's a vegetarian dish, and I think OP is justified in being displeased at the ham in the food. Her reasons for not wanting the ham shouldn't matter, it's her preference.

[Naesaki]

There was a girl in my high school who was holier than thou, she yelled abuse at one of the dinner ladies because the the mixed veg pasta looked boring and wasn't selling enough but the minced beef spaghetti was flying off the shelves she starting ranting and saying the school was being anti-vegetarian and going against her lifestyle for not trying to make the kids buy the veggie option, even though the meat option automatically gave the kids a salad and generally got eaten >__>

[Derin Darkpaw]

Mother nature doesn't give a shit about you or your suffering or their suffering or the suffering of anyone else. Nor does any of mother nature's children, which coincidentally also include magnetars, comets, asteroids, black holes, and generally 99.9% of existence.

I want to agree that when the choice to not cause undue amounts of it exists, it is right to take that path but I also realize that it's easy to say that when you're not the ones responsible for the production of meat for 318.9 million people.

Which if even only 75% of those people consumed 1/2lb of meat in an entire day, daily, amounts to 239,175,000 1/2lbs or 119,587,500lbs of meat daily.

Or you could be hopeful and say 50% but let's be honest and admit that you're still talking about insane amounts of dead flesh pumped out daily. This argument always turns silly for me, why not respect all life and stop murdering plants too while we're at it right? I don't think the "well it can't feel pain so it's alright" mentality is going to serve us very well in the not-so-distant future.

But you know one day some space object will put an end to our evil ways I'm sure.

What is natural is completely irrelevant to the discussion of what is moral.  Also the number of people engaging in an activity is irrelevant.  Just because its natural for certain animals to murder children of their own species that doesn't make infanticide acceptable, and just because a large group of people are doing something morally wrong it doesn't suddenly become right.  Also it isn't silly at all to say we should stop raising livestock but continue to cultivate produce because as I pointed out livestock also need to consume produce.  Even if we valued the lives of plants and animals as equals total suffering is reduced by stopping the rearing of livestock for slaughter and consumption because the number of plants that are harvested would remain relatively constant.

You also seem to be making the argument that it would be difficult to accomplish such a task, but again that is irrelevant to the discussion of whether or not it is moral.  Many times morality can be extremely demanding, but that in and of itself is not enough to remove our moral obligation to do the right thing.

Look the argument I presented at the outset of this is far from impenetrable.  There are a lot of ways I can think of to come at and attack that position and probably many more that I haven't thought of.  As a pointed out at the beginning I don't even follow this philosophical position I am just playing devil's advocate here.