Hey!
I'm half Latvian, you makin fun of my people?
God Bless you all, heathen, faithful, and IED bombers alike.
Just stop the bombin, and that goes for you Americans, too, ok?
=)
Ethical vegetarianism rubs me the wrong way; it's based on the erroneous belief that plants lack animus.You stated that as a fact. I have no idea where you got that from.Well, the rest of your post pretty much says it to me. BTW, when I say animus, I don't mean a soul, I means the qualities which we ascribe to living things that makes us squeamish about killing and eating them.
I realized plants had animus after watching an episode of Beyond 2000 almost 20 years ago. This particular segment was about giraffe dying in African nature reserves. I say dying, but what I really mean is being killed by acacia trees. You see, when an acacia tree is attacked - chewed on by a giraffe - it redirects its energies from what is was doing (photosynthesizing) to producing poison. This poison is bitter so the giraffe knows its time to move on. However, in addition to producing poison, the acacia also releases a pheromone that tells other trees down wind to start producing poison because a predator is on its way. The giraffe, like any good predator, have learned to come into acacia groves from downwind, so as to catch the trees by surprise. Normally, the giraffe will move on when a grove becomes inedible, but the game parks weren't big enough; with no other choice the giraffe chose to eat poisoned food over starvation.
Here's the deal though: When the acacia tree is attacked, it fights back . It screams, alerting its kith and kin to danger. It will kill to survive. These sound like very animalistic actions. Just because we can't see it fight and can't hear it scream does not depreciate these actions.
To me ethical vegetarianism is hypocritical. You put animals and people on the same level, but you think you're superior to animals because you arbitrarily choose what living things you eat. It's a prescriptive rather than descriptive way to live.
That said, it doesn't hurt me what you eat (as long as it's not me), so if you still want to be an vegetarian, I...
If I still want to be a vegetarian? You mean, you think your argument was so persuasive that a 26 year vegetarian has had a change of heart and now needs himself a 22 lb buttsteak?
Thank you for the clarification on animus. However much of what both you and Lady Aurora seems to hinge on the idea of me saying that killing animals for food is a moral wrong. Never said it. Never thought it. Wrong environmentally, sure? Less nice, absolutely. See, an ethical vegetarian's understanding of right and wrong applies merely to himself, and not a world overview.
I don't actually see how I made your point for you, or bolstered your opinion as fact. If you'd further indulge me, I'd be curious to see an illustration of what you mean. I'd say my lil essay there revealed that I do what I do with my eyes open, and with reservations. Did I personally demonstrate herbivorous hubris or a loathing for green things that grow? By saying that my post pretty much said it I'm inferring that you'd rather believe all ethical vegetarians are the same person rather than taking the time to know something about me specifically. But, in my opinion, such sociological generalities are what often happens when we have such a sour experience with a group that we give up being open to learning something new about them.
You offered a wealth high quality giraffe/acacia details, but the length of the offering seems like hanging academic pork. It's very nice. You're very smart. Now zip it back up. You're not the only one who watches documentaries or reads books on the amazing mysteries plant life. I know what plants do when threatened. I was paying attention to this since the 70s, going so far as to bother with Kirlian photography and other, even more embarassing attempts to uncover strange botanical phenomena.
In your time, I'm guessing you may have known vegetarians who shot a lot of self-justifying bull puckey your way, but your personal observations just don't jibe with my reality. They fail to take into account that I bought eight acres of woodland specifically to save it from development. There are trees here I could sell for thousands and thousands of dollars, and though I'm presently sliding and sliding fast financially... I do not profit off them and would never consider it. I'd bet that if you spoke to people who knew me you might come to the conclusion that I'm more ethical when it comes to plant life than your average ten thousand people (going so far as to not walk on the grass even if it means taking the long way around).
Perhaps I'm reading too much into this because I'm one of those people caught up in the generalization, but for some reason I'm seeing a picture painted in broad stokes which seem to depict a gang of plant slayers who stand laughing over the reft husks of screaming stalks of celery, all the while somehow unaware of their responsibility in the dark side of eating plants. I've heard so many vegetarians tell me that they're having guilt over eating plants that I'm not really certain how large your case could be. But then, who can know what the veggies are like where you are? You may have them all nailed, I don't know. I doubt it though. Many vegetarians and vegans make me cringe when they open their mouthes. I met a professor from India who became very defensive when finding out I was a vegetarian. I talked him down off the ledge and he explained that the vegetarians in India are off the scale in their sanctimony and their lecturing. These people had clearly unnerved this man to the point where the very memory of it set him off.
I'll tell you what I told him. That's not me.
A good number of us are out there trying to save trees and rain forests. Botanists and weed growers aside, I'd like to see the group that is more committed to plants.
And to quell another of your assumptions. Since you said YOU, I'll have to respond personally. I don't think I'm superior or inferior to plants or animals. The stringbean line was a joke. I just know one of the two, either plant or animal, is going to die if I'm going to live. Since I'm so terrible at suicide I choose the turnip over the mammal. There's less drama in harvesting one over the other, and clearly I can see with my own senses that the suffering of one is more visible that the other. Sure it's a slippery slope, but I have an ice pick and a brain. There are choices to be had here, and with great deliberation I have made them. Don't toss around words like hypocritical when you may be talking about me. I'm not hypocritical, and dualism is not my nature.
Hey!
I'm half Latvian, you makin fun of my people?
God Bless you all, heathen, faithful, and IED bombers alike.
Just stop the bombin, and that goes for you Americans, too, ok?
=)
I know this sounds trite but I mention the Latvians because I call one friend, his name is Gatis. I knew an Estonian as well... though, so far as I know, I've never met a Lithuanian to fill out my Baltic trinity.
And don't you worry. Not all Americans are bomb happy. I suppose that's little consolation knowing that an influential few seem to be.
It's as if people are trying to be offended by what was clearly just me standing up for one of my groups again, despite my lighthearted take. Standing up again, just like last time when folks here started casually tossing out assumptions about atheists.
I've found people often think it's OK to argue with vegetarians for some reason. My girlfriend and I are partial vegetarians; We don't eat meat at home, but if we go to someone's house we eat what they serve us, like Buddhist monks. We don't advertise the fact usually as it often leads to well-meaning people trying to convince us out of it. Why? What do they care?
Vegetarianism is one of those peculiar things where the general consensus is that it's OK to tell someone they are wrong to be a vegetarian, even though you would never dream of arguing with them about their religion or other ethical or dietary choice. Do people walk around telling Jews they shouldn't be kosher? People just don't take it seriously as a considered choice. And I don't buy the "every vegetarian I've met was sanctimonious, so you should forgive me for bugging you" excuse. When you meet someone new the civilized thing to do is to wait and see if they are sanctimonious or not, then argue with them if they are. It's not cool to just attack first.
If someone asks me why I avoid meat know what I say? "Because I feel like it." That's all I should have to say.
Just letting you know I'm here too :)
It's as if people are trying to be offended by what was clearly just me standing up for one of my groups again, despite my lighthearted take. Standing up again, just like last time when folks here started casually tossing out assumptions about atheists.I've found people often think it's OK to argue with vegetarians for some reason. My girlfriend and I are partial vegetarians; We don't eat meat at home, but if we go to someone's house we eat what they serve us, like Buddhist monks. We don't advertise the fact usually as it often leads to well-meaning people trying to convince us out of it. Why? What do they care?
Vegetarianism is one of those peculiar things where the general consensus is that it's OK to tell someone they are wrong to be a vegetarian, even though you would never dream of arguing with them about their religion or other ethical or dietary choice. Do people walk around telling Jews they shouldn't be kosher? People just don't take it seriously as a considered choice. And I don't buy the "every vegetarian I've met was sanctimonious, so you should forgive me for bugging you" excuse. When you meet someone new the civilized thing to do is to wait and see if they are sanctimonious or not, then argue with them if they are. It's not cool to just attack first.
If someone asks me why I avoid meat know what I say? "Because I feel like it." That's all I should have to say.
Just letting you know I'm here too :)
I often wonder the same thing, tonight certainly included. Other 'groups' don't take half the in-your-face lecturing from debate clubbers.
Thank you for your thoughtful post, Kahoolin. I was feeling pretty alone tonight and I needed it. I guess I should mention I'm Jewish on my mother's side and hope no one here will try to talk me out of it.
There is a boat-missing in even beginning to think that being a vegetarian is an analytical result. Though I certainly gave my vegetarianism thought during its formation, being a vegetarian came from a inherent revulsion toward the idea of eating animal flesh. I was thirteen when that bardo smacked me out of my chair. I realized that I could live, and live healthfully, all the while doing less harm. I love them. Why eat them? There was no inferiority-of-plants element or real choice involved. I didn't make judgements... I listened to what the voice inside told me was right for me.
Ever see the movie Silent Running? It was after seeing that film that I developed what many called a rather odd reverence for plants.
Come to think of it, I'm just an odd guy.
Jade, I didn't mean to offend you. My comments were aimed at sanctimonious vegetarians. The fact that you know where your beliefs come from and you don't force them on others makes you alright in my book. I wouldn't go out of my way to argue with a vegetarian, but this is the "civil religious discussion", you have to expect these sorts of things. (Yes, I'd classify vegetarianism as religion, but that's just me.)
I do have an issue with one point you made:
However much of what both you and Lady Aurora seems to hinge on the idea of me saying that killing animals for food is a moral wrong. Never said it. Never thought it. Wrong environmentally, sure? Less nice, absolutely.
How is "less nice" not a moral judgement?
Ever see the movie Silent Running? It was after seeing that film that I developed what many called a rather odd reverence for plants.
No, never seen it. I'll have to look it up.
And I know what you mean, avoiding meat is like most other ethical choices: People do it because first of all they feel it's the right thing to do, and they may or may not bother justifying it intellectually. I have reasons for avoiding meat, but I also mostly do it because I feel like it, and so what? If someone asks me with respect and genuine interest I'll say that I feel healthier if I restrict the meat in my diet. And also I think there's something vaguely and indefinably unwholesome about the way animals are herded for meat. I don't mind so much if it's a fish caught from the sea, or kangaroo meat, because even though we get roo in the supermarket here they are all hunted not farmed. I'll even eat the odd burger if I'm on the road or something, or a steak if it's a special occasion. But usually it's vegetarian for me. Moderation is good.
I just don't think growing a bunch of cows in a pen and putting a bolt in their head like we're plucking an apple off a tree is the way it's meant to be. My girlfriend is the same, though she cares more about the pain inflicted on the animals, something I don't feel as deeply. I just don't think the consumer approach to meat is natural, and I think it should be rare (no pun intended :)) and appreciated when it's eaten.
There you have it. They might not be ironclad or rely on complex (or even consistent) definitions of sentience, but that's because they are justifications for something I feel, not reasons ;)
My brother and his wife are vegetarians. People hate them, and debate them, in some cases because when they get invited to dinner, they wait until the food's on the table to look at everything and say, "We won't eat that." I've got no big problem with it, but it can definitely impinge on others (every time we have a family get-together, my mother ends up making 2 different dinners).
In most times and places, people ate whatever they could get their hands on. I've worked in the third world, and I've eaten cow foot and pig ear and even a chicken foot once, because it was that or be hungry. It's only in prosperous, safe times that people can afford to artificially discriminate between various kinds of food. And that's kind of cool, that we can do that, although I still get amused when vegans accuse each other of not being "real" vegans (setting ever-loftier standards that in most cases can't even be monitored, much less followed).
Does any of this mean I'm downing Jade? On the contrary--like he said, at least he does it with his eyes open. I can definitely respect that. On the other hand, I've always suspected that most young vegetarians do it because that's what their peer group does.
When I was 15 a woman named Cat (who I believe won an academy award of some time for her documentary on Buddhism) gave me a book called "The Way of the White Clouds" written by Lama Anagarika Govinda. Written back in 1947. A fantastic book. Ever heard of it?
Man, you're really into the Tibetan stuff! That one's a great travelogue, from what I've heard. Again, I haven't read it--I've been woefully remiss in exploring Tibetan Buddhism, although my wife (a Unitarian, not a Buddhist) is reading that Dalai Lama's book.
As an aside, "Govinda," if I remember correctly, is another of Vishnu's or Krishna's names or avatars in Hinduism.
|
Oops, forgot the second thing I wanted to say...
Kirth, I'm curious what you mean about the Catholic & Protestants having different 10 Commandments. Can you clarify that statement?
My wife and I were talking about this recently. They (the writers of the Bible) didn't number the ten commandments and left it up to us to figure out where the breaks were for the 10 commandments. She grew up combining "Have no other gods before me" and "Have no idols" as the first commandment. She then had broken up the last commandment "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, wife, property, ..." into two commandments.
The truth is that they are all the same, the breaks are just a little bit different.
|
|
CRL: Go away. You don't really have anything to say. Go pray for all us poor misguided sinners and take your self-congraulatory self-righteous nonesense with you. When I see St. Peter, I'll tell him to kiss my ass and that I'd rather burn than suffer through fools of your caliber.
Not that I think you've picked the right dog in this particular fight or that there will actually be a St. Peter, but insofar as Moff Rimmer has caused me for any amount of time to consider the merits of his philosophy and the teachings of his god (which he has), you have reminded me of the unthinking robotlike belief that taints all religions. You have done your faith a diservice with your postings; I hope St. Peter forgives your hubris and self-righteousness.
Casca, look at the above posts. Specifically Moffs and Lady A's
They answer the questions they are asked with ideal christian understanding and they don't dodge out with a buzzer beater...
I was going to say something like this, but felt like I should just let it go. I'm glad someone did... Thanks guys.
|
|
My question was open to the public. If CRL declines to answer it (though I hope he doesn't, I'm interested in what he has to say), anyone else with an opinion can.
Did Lady Aurora answer your question sufficiently, or would you like me to research some of this.
The problem that I have with the 10 commandments is that Jesus "redefined" them all pretty much when he said that people were saying that they hadn't murdered anyone and he responded saying that if you hate someone, that is just as good as "pulling the trigger", so to speak.
At the time, people were really getting to be "rules lawyers" and were really missing the point. They felt that they were holy because the "kept the Sabbath", but they really didn't give God the recognition that he deserved. I believe that Jesus was largely trying to make people a bit more humble by telling them that they had done more wrong than they realized. There is hope, but if you don't feel like you have done anything wrong, what is the point?
I do have an issue with one point you made:
However much of what both you and Lady Aurora seems to hinge on the idea of me saying that killing animals for food is a moral wrong. Never said it. Never thought it. Wrong environmentally, sure? Less nice, absolutely.How is "less nice" not a moral judgement?
In my opinion the resultant drama of slicing a pig's throat is far less nice to the senses than say, plucking a berry. It's like saying Newark is less nice than the Riviera. It's not a moral judgement. It's a preference. I guess if you think making snow angels amidst the sludgy maroon viscera on the slaughterhouse floor is a good time for the whole family but weep when a coconut falls from the tree, you'd completely disagree. ;)
I had a friend who was a big steak eater. He later told me, "When you went vegan I figured you knew what you were doing and didn't say anything, but when you gave up wheat for those months, it was hard to keep my mouth shut."
Then he went to work at a store and on the first and only day he worked there he was put on lobster killing duty. He put lobsters in a microwave. Later that day he called me asking for some vegetarian literature if I had any, and a sample meal plan. He said he could feel the energy drop out of the room and after that day became the strictest vegan I've ever known. I'm not someone who claims to have any special bond or knowledge of energy interaction, and I don't follow chakras and the like... but I've held people and animals as they died, and I've always said that one can feel it. Is it self-imagined? Perhaps... but I felt what I felt, and my friend felt it too. When I've had to harvest the herbs I had grown, it did bother me, but I sublimated that doubt and marched onward to end game. If the plants experienced a pain reaction that I could recognize? I wouldn't be long for this world. Some people are sensitive to this sort of thing, and feel that we want to do as little damage as possible. I don't think saying what damage is should really become an esoteric topic for discussion. It's a personal take on the world around you.
Vegetarianism actually isn't a religion. That's a metaphor. Not killing Kamchatkans (there ya go, Kruelaid) isn't a religion... as I was saying before, it's something we simply know won't feel right. So, if meat were to enter my mouth, knowing what screaming path brought it to my mouth, my natural reaction is to vomit my spleen out. I don't refer back to 'the rules' of some vegetarian canon. This isn't Pythagoras' (first well known vegetarian?) followers failing to cross a bean field when the Romans were chasing them because he told them that beans were evil. Some of them died that day for what was clearly a vegetarian religion.
But I'll find truth in it enough to say that my feeling of connection with the living things on this planet is an intimate and holy one. However, these days, I only know five vegetarians. The other fiddy are beef eatin' fools. If I believed that eating meat was a moral wrong, as you seem to want to be nailing me on, well then I've deliberately chosen wrongsters for friends. That doesn't add up, does it? The proof is in the non-gelatin pudding.
There you have it. They might not be ironclad or rely on complex (or even consistent) definitions of sentience, but that's because they are justifications for something I feel, not reasons ;)
I hear all of that. Well said.
Anyone who can go out and bring down a kill has their hands in the truth of what's going on. As I said before, they're engaging an ancient bond. If you're typing on Paizo you're probably not doing so from the third world, and so we have the choice as to what we decide to eat. With hunger out of the equation (because hungry people will eat a shoe) I think a lot of people would become vegetarians if they had to move their meat from its meadowy frolic to table. I say this only because taking lives simply feel unpleasant. I say this because, like many here, I have on accident taken a life. Little kids don't always just run into the pig pen with their pig farmer dads saying, "Let me kill one, pa!" Often the father has to engage a doubt quelling initiation and take the time to fill the child's head with a solid understanding for why the animal must die.
My brother and his wife are vegetarians. People hate them, and debate them, in some cases because when they get invited to dinner, they wait until the food's on the table to look at everything and say, "We won't eat that." I've got no big problem with it, but it can definitely impinge on others (every time we have a family get-together, my mother ends up making 2 different dinners).
In most times and places, people ate whatever they could get their hands on. I've worked in the third world, and I've eaten cow foot and pig ear and even a chicken foot once, because it was that or be hungry. It's only in prosperous, safe times that people can afford to artificially discriminate between various kinds of food. And that's kind of cool, that we can do that, although I still get amused when vegans accuse each other of not being "real" vegans (setting ever-loftier standards that in most cases can't even be monitored, much less followed).
Does any of this mean I'm downing Jade? On the contrary--like he said, at least he does it with his eyes open. I can definitely respect that. On the other hand, I've always suspected that most young vegetarians do it because that's what their peer group does.
Veganism did start as a politic, but that's not why I'm a vegan. I won't be lectured by them or their sense of purity. Purity has nothing to do with why I do what I do, and I won't be involved in contests with fact spewing, angry, indignant, and disrespectful people who will probably be eating filet mignon in ten years while I'll still be here chewing my cud. Vegan activists often recruit young kids looking for a path and make small fiery impressions... and those kids often drop the diet within two to five years, going so far as to tell every vegetarian they meet after that, "I used to be a vegetarian." Some guys see my long hair and whip out old pictures to show that they too once belonged to the hair bear bunch. I guess I inspire solidarity. Now when people see my confident and easygoing attitude towards my vegetarian lifestyle they ask good questions and I give fabulous answers. That's caused a few people to give up red meat and quite a few to cross over completely. It didn't stick with everyone but it did with some, and none of them feel like they were in a cult. Why? Because I didn't tell anyone what to do, I only answered their questions as best I could.
That dinner scene is annoying. When someone invites me out to eat I'm always apologetic and explain the details of my diet. I understand that its strictures make it hard for other people to host me and I feel bad about that. But ya know what? I am so worth pulling up recipes off the net for.
Now when people see my confident and easygoing attitude towards my vegetarian lifestyle they ask good questions and I give fabulous answers. That's caused a few people to give up red meat and quite a few to cross over completely. It didn't stick with everyone but it did with some, and none of them feel like they were in a cult. Why? Because I didn't tell anyone what to do, I only answered their questions as best I could.
That dinner scene is annoying. When someone invites me out to eat I'm always apologetic and explain the details of my diet. I understand that its strictures make it hard for other people to host me and I feel bad about that. But ya know what? I am so worth pulling up recipes from the net for.
Nice one. My favorite quote is from Isa Moskowitz's "Vegan Cupcakes Take Over The World." She said something like, "If they want to be accepted, vegans just need to stop whining and start cooking!"
Nice one. My favorite quote is from Isa Moskowitz's "Vegan Cupcakes Take Over The World." She said something like, "If they want to be accepted, vegans just need to stop whining and start cooking!"
When you choose a restrictive that's going to impact the people around you. One must take responsibility. If the entire world was vegetarian, can you imagine a guy coming to your dinner table and whimpering, "I only eat freshly decapitated wombat! Please get this green filth off my plate! The world needs to stop spinning because my dietary restrictions are not being met! I demand that you go beheadify a critter... I'm HONGRY!"
If the entire world was vegetarian, can you imagine a guy coming to your dinner table and whimpering, "I only eat freshly decapitated wombat! Please get this green filth off my plate! The world needs to stop spinning because my dietary restrictions are not being met! I demand that you go beheadify a critter... I'm HONGRY!"
You've seen Wallace & Gromit? "Smashing food, Gromit... for rabbits, that is! I need something a bit cheesier..."
You've seen Wallace & Gromit? "Smashing food, Gromit... for rabbits, that is! I need something a bit cheesier..."
And that's when Gromit sat him down and made him eat Clay Aiken.
Curse of the Were-Rabbit was a fun film.
My line about the screaming Latvian was meant to be a joke. Clearly I don't need to kill first to know that even small doses of dispensing violence feels bad and is bad.And your "lesser of two evils" paragraph/admonishment...do you think that's what I'm saying based on what I wrote? I seriously have no idea what you're talking about.
Hill giant, Lady Aurora... where did I say that killing animals was a moral wrong? I can't rightly defend against words never said and don't believe. I believe we each make our own decision what our connection with the animal world will be. The hunter and prey have always known each other. Their bond is ancient and sacred. My bond with them is altogether different.
It's as if people are trying to be offended by what was clearly just me standing up for one of my groups again, despite my lighthearted take. Standing up again, just like last time when folks here started casually tossing out...
I recognized your Latvian comment as a joke. My response was supposed to also be one. Guess I'm the one who failed at humor and you're the one being offended unnecessarily.
But I *was* serious about the lesser of two evils comment. I interpreted your earlier posts to mean that you did not think it was "right" to eat an animal nor did you think it was "right" to eat a plant necessarilly (under the same standards as consuming a living thing) but since a person obviously *has* to eat *something* to gain nurishment, you therefore eat plants. Perhaps I misunderstood you; if so, please clarify. I also understood your early post to explain your plant consumption by saying (perhaps partially tongue-in-cheek, partially true) that you feel bad, but not *that* bad (since it's necessary for survival). The point I was trying to make is that I find it astonishing that a person can daily commit an act they themselves define as "wrong" just because the alternative is even less appealing. If I have somehow misjudged your earlier post, I apologize. Please don't misunderstand mine. I'm not offended at all by your comments and I certainly didn't intend you to be offended by mine.
Jade, if you thought I was somehow insulting vegetarians (or vegans) then clearly I'm being misjudged. I simply asked if a person believed animals and humans equals then what would that really look like on a daily basis versus someone who believes humans are inherently superior to animals. The conversation then took a quick turn to debating what constitutes cannibalism versus meat consumption and/or vegetarianism. I was implying that if a person truly believed animals and humans were equal then one of two things would be true in regards to eating animal flesh 1) that those who eat meat would be considered by the animals=humans believer to be cannibalistic and therefore contemptable or 2) that those who eat meat would be equally acceptable to the animals=humans believer as would those who eat human flesh. If there are other options to this hypothetical, I'd enjoy hearing them because these two seem the only ones that logic allows. That's *all* I was saying. I never commented at all on those who choose to be vegetarians (or vegans) for a myriad of other reasons.
The point I was trying to make is that I find it astonishing that a person can daily commit an act they themselves define as "wrong" just because the alternative is even less appealing.
We-- all of us-- do it every day. You allow non-Christians to remain non-Christian, as the lesser of two evils. The Jade and I eat because, although the animals and plants have a right to live, so do we. Life isn't black & white, despite what our President tells us.
I was implying that if a person truly believed animals and humans were equal then one of two things would be true in regards to eating animal flesh 1) that those who eat meat would be considered by the animals=humans believer to be cannibalistic and therefore contemptable or 2) that those who eat meat would be equally acceptable to the animals=humans believer as would those who eat human flesh. If there are other options to this hypothetical, I'd enjoy hearing them because these two seem the only ones that logic allows. That's *all* I was saying.
I already answered that one; see my post above regarding diseases. Cannibalism isn't repugnant because people are "better" than animals, but becuase eating humans (or their relatives) leaves one open to a variety of VERY nasty human (and near-human) diseases that wheat and chickens don't carry. The logic is VERY clear, and it's based on pragmatism, rather than hypothesis.
We-- all of us-- do it every day. You allow non-Christians to remain non-Christian, as the lesser of two evils. The Jade and I eat because, although the animals and plants have a right to live, so do we. Life isn't black & white, despite what our President tells us.
First let me say your political statement made me chuckle, but I won't get into that.
Anywhoo, I'm not trying to start a flame war here but why do you say that I "allow" non-Christians to remain non-Christian? Since when was I master of the universe? I can't control what other people think, feel, or believe. How/when did someone else's life become my responsibility? I'm perfectly happy to encourage people along what I consider the "right" path but I can't force them to do so. I can't hardly make my kids stay in bed at nighttime and I'm supposed to hold someone's immortal soul in the palm of my hand? I interpret your statement to somehow imply that I have the power to rescue someone from their unbelief but for some reason I hold back. That's not only completely inaccurate and untrue but thoroughly insulting! I have said it over and over - it is *not* my job to convert non-Christians, nor am I interested in the position.When I offered my silly little example of the angry friends being poisoned to Sebastian, I was hoping his role-playing skills would allow him to reflect the situation I find myself in (especially on these boards) but instead he chose to answer from his own point of view, which wasn't really the point.
As a Christian it can be very frustrating trying to be loving and patient to non-Christian friends. If I try to share with you my thoughts and beliefs I get blasted with "Shut up, you condescending b-tch! How dare you think you can tell me how to live my life or who to believe in/not believe in!" but if I remain silent about my personal views and try to support those whose beliefs are completely opposite of my own, telling them that they are free to believe whatever they choose, I get blasted with "You cold-hearted, callous b-tch! If you really cared about me at all you'd try to save me! You think I deserve to burn in hell and that's why you aren't forcing me to accept your beliefs!". What's a person to do? What is the loving, compassionate response to those accusations? What do you people want from me?!?
That's not only completely inaccurate and untrue but thoroughly insulting!
Whoa... I certainly didn't mean to offend you! Look at it this way: last poll I saw, 85% of Americans identified themselves as Christians. They all pretty much agree that it's a shame the other 15% aren't-- but most of them, like you, know that it's counterproductive to proselytize. Score 1 for you.
However, the margin is big enough that--in theory-- if it REALLY mattered enough, and if you all got together, it would be no difficulty to take over the nation by force (the armed services are heavily Christian) and dictate your beliefs. You don't, though, becuse you know that it's better to lose the 15% than to precipitate a civil war. Score 2 for you.
My remarks are in your favor, not against you. I'm just saying that most Christians maybe aren't happy that 15% of their fellow Americans are so "misguided," but they understand that the cure would be worse than the disease.
Same with eating. I might feel bad for the animals and plants, but it would be highly counterproductive to starve myself on that account. The Jade preserves woodland from development. I walk a tightrope, cleaning up the environment for a living while maintaining incentive for economic development. In either of our cases, the few animals/plants we'd save by dying are outweighed by the ones we CAN save by living. Like you, we try to practice what we preach. We just don't think we're inherently better than all other life forms.
In my opinion the resultant drama of slicing a pig's throat is far less nice to the senses than say, plucking a berry. It's like saying Newark is less nice than the Riviera. It's not a moral judgement. It's a preference.
From what you've written, I wouldn't define you as an ethical vegetarian. I've really got no issue with personal preference.
Vegetarianism actually isn't a religion.
I'll admit my definition of religion is broader than most.
But I'll find truth in it enough to say that my feeling of connection with the living things on this planet is an intimate and holy one.
Mine too. It's just that eating things is part of my connection to the biosphere. To each his own.
However, these days, I only know five vegetarians. The other fiddy are beef eatin' fools. If I believed that eating meat was a moral wrong, as you seem to want to be nailing me on, well then I've deliberately chosen wrongsters for friends. That doesn't add up, does it? The proof is in the non-gelatin pudding.
Who wants to be surrounded by people who agree with them?
Whoa... My remarks are in your favor, not against you. I'm just saying that most Christians maybe aren't happy that 15% of their fellow Americans are so "misguided," but they understand that the cure would be worse than the disease.
Same with eating. I might feel bad for the animals and plants, but it would be highly counterproductive to starve myself on that account. The Jade preserves woodland from development. I walk a tightrope, cleaning up the environment for a living while maintaining incentive for economic development. In either of our cases, the few animals/plants we'd save by dying are outweighed by the ones we CAN save by living. Like you, we try to practice what we preach. We just don't think we're inherently better than all other life forms.
Okay (..ah, deeep breath). Sorry for my rant. I have no excuse for venting my frustration at you or anyone else. I apologize and I do know that your comments were not a personal attack and shouldn't have been reacted to as if they were. I was wrong. Please forgive my complete momentary loss of self-control.
As for the plant-eating debate, I was only responding to Jade as he seemed to imply that my original post was some condemnation of his dietary choices. I understood your choice and view of "cannibalism" especially since that fits in one of the "catagories" I specified. I respect your choices and felt you justified them perfectly well. My original post on animal value versus human value was not intended as an insult to those who choose to consume plants and abstain from eating meat. Based on how I interpreted Jade's posts, he somehow took offense and my later posts were trying to address that impression.
I was wrong. Please forgive my complete momentary loss of self-control.
No apologies needed, certainly. I feel your frustration on the other end sometimes (as has been obvious in the past, I'll warrant!). Besides, you weren't "wrong"--you were just coming from a different viewpoint, which is what this thread is all about. :-)
However, the margin is big enough that--in theory-- if it REALLY mattered enough, and if you all got together, it would be no difficulty to take over the nation by force (the armed services are heavily Christian) and dictate your beliefs.
Never really thought about it before. Hmmmmm.... interesting. j/k! :P
I'm glad you weren't scared off, Casca. But beware! The people on these boards and this thread in particular are intelligent, logical, insightful, committed individuals who think/feel/believe just as strongly about their personal views as you do about yours. It is wise to refrain from making a statement unless you're willing and able to defend it. I hope you find this thread as interesting and enlightening as I have!
I have nothing to defend, you are the ones committing Blaspheme. I am mearly trying to shed light on it so you realize it.
Please then, point out at exactly which point I blasphemed! I take that as an extremely serious charge!
And, BTW, I have accepted Jesus into my heart, thank you very much!
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
... It is wise to refrain from making a statement unless you're willing and able to defend it.I have nothing to defend, you are the ones committing Blaspheme. I am mearly trying to shed light on it so you realize it.
I cannot, by word or action, force you to follow God's commandments or to accept Jesus into your hearts. That choice is yours and yours alone.
Got it. I missed it before (duh) but now I see it.
He's full of s!@~. It's a funny full of s+!@ now that I realize it, but full of s&$$ nonetheless. Well played - you got me.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I have nothing to defend, you are the ones committing Blaspheme. I am mearly trying to shed light on it so you realize it.
Please then, point out at exactly which point I blasphemed! I take that as an extremely serious charge!
And, BTW, I have accepted Jesus into my heart, thank you very much!
LA, he's trolling. Someone else pointed it out somewhere (though I didn't realize it until after I had posted initially telling him to go away), but read his profile then look at his posts.
Never really thought about it before. Hmmmmm.... interesting. j/k! :P
Thank God you're kidding. I just wish some of your more radical brethren understood that being "soldiers for Christ" and "taking back America for Jesus" against the "evil Secular Humanists" are hurting their cause more than helping it. We know what a theocracy is like, and we just overthrew the Taliban. I'd hate for someone to have to return the favor one day.
LA, he's trolling. Someone else pointed it out somewhere (though I didn't realize it until after I had posted initially telling him to go away), but read his profile then look at his posts.
Thanks for the heads-up, Sebastian. I guess I fell for it.
LA, he's trolling. Someone else pointed it out somewhere (though I didn't realize it until after I had posted initially telling him to go away), but read his profile then look at his posts.Thanks for the heads-up, Sebastian. I guess I fell for it.
As did we all. He's got the patter down pat.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
LA, he's trolling. Someone else pointed it out somewhere (though I didn't realize it until after I had posted initially telling him to go away), but read his profile then look at his posts.Thanks for the heads-up, Sebastian. I guess I fell for it.
So did I. It was only his most recent responses that made it clear. He wouldn't be saying that you blasphemed if he really believed what he was posting.
I recognized your Latvian comment as a joke. My response was supposed to also be one. Guess I'm the one who failed at humor and you're the one being offended unnecessarily.
But I *was* serious about the lesser of two evils comment. I interpreted your earlier posts to mean that you did not think it was "right" to eat an animal nor did you think it was "right" to eat a plant necessarilly (under the same standards as consuming a living thing) but since a person obviously *has* to eat *something* to gain nurishment, you therefore eat plants. Perhaps I misunderstood you; if so, please clarify. I also understood your early post to explain your plant consumption by saying (perhaps partially tongue-in-cheek, partially true) that you feel bad, but not *that* bad (since it's necessary for survival). The point I was trying to make is that I find it astonishing that a person can daily commit an act they themselves define as "wrong" just because the alternative is even less appealing. If I have somehow misjudged your earlier post, I apologize. Please...
The Latvian response I initially took as a joke... but the lesser of two evils line had me uncertain. I never said eating plants was wrong, so the lesser of two evils line made no sense to me. I had to reread it few times before I discovered the missing element, the assumption that I was ascribing morality to diet. Since I never said any such thing, it seems calling myself an ethical vegetarian is what set everyone off. Even if I'm not what the rest of you good folk recognize as an ethical vegetarian, I'm going to keep the title.
As a Christian it can be very frustrating trying to be loving and patient to non-Christian friends. If I try to share with you my thoughts and beliefs I get blasted with "Shut up, you condescending b-tch! How dare you think you can tell me how to live my life or who to believe in/not believe in!" but if I remain silent about my personal views and try to support those whose beliefs are completely opposite of my own, telling them that they are free to believe whatever they choose, I get blasted with "You cold-hearted, callous b-tch! If you really cared about me at all you'd try to save me! You think I deserve to burn in hell and that's why you aren't forcing me to accept your beliefs!". What's a person to do? What is the loving, compassionate response to those accusations? What do you people want from me?!?
People say that to you? I realize this is the "civil religious discussion" but those people kind of sound like jerks. That's a real "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation you got there.
I can't comprehend the level of insecurity, self-delusion and weakness that would drive someone to say "if you really cared you'd try and convert me! Even though we both know I'll spit in your face" to someone who is meant to be their friend. Do they have any convictions at all?
Sorry, but that just made me really angry on your behalf. I don't exactly know why.
Also, is Casca that dude who was pretending in the other thread that he was the immortal centurion who supposedly stabbed Jesus? Why do they always pretend to be immortal? "Oooh I'm a vampire. Oooh, highander is real suckers and I'm one of them, oooh I was cursed by Jesus to walk the earth." Who's next. the Wandering Jew?
INTERNET!! *shakes fist*
Jade, if you thought I was somehow insulting vegetarians (or vegans) then clearly I'm being misjudged. I simply asked if a person believed animals and humans equals then what would that really look like on a daily basis versus someone who believes humans are inherently superior to animals. The conversation then took a quick turn to debating what constitutes cannibalism versus meat consumption and/or vegetarianism. I was implying that if a person truly believed animals and humans were equal then one of two things would be true in regards to eating animal flesh 1) that those who eat meat would be considered by the animals=humans believer to be cannibalistic and therefore contemptable or 2) that those who eat meat would be equally acceptable to the animals=humans believer as would those who eat human flesh. If there are other options to this hypothetical, I'd enjoy hearing them because these two seem the only ones that logic allows. That's *all* I was saying. I never commented at all on those who choose to be vegetarians (or vegans) for a myriad of other reasons.
I put Hill Giant's name in that post, which made a couple of points. It was actually Giant who was casting sour comments due to his well defined notion of hypocrital vegetarianism. Since you never said anything about vegetarians, clearly I wasn't suggesting that you had. See, I'm the ONLY one who knows what's going on up in here. lol
Does someone need insults for vegans? I'm willing if your really need some?
Sure. Why not.
Aw crap, I was just joking. I've never had to insult vegans before, so I don't know any good ones. Sorry..
You had me curious. ;)
Cheese spurner!
Cheese spurner!
lol. I shun thee and thine waxy brick!
Ever wonder about the origin of cheese? Scrapings from a cow, pig, goat's stomach (we'll call it rennet) are put into milk to coagulate it and create solid curds and liquid whey. Now, the thing I've always wondered... who was the first to do this? You know what I think? I I think ten thousands years ago some yahoo tried to throw some sheep innards over a container filled with milk and it went in. He left it there, because he was a pig. Later that week he was hungry and noticed that the milk had cheese dumplings floating around in it. Having no reason not to, he jammed one in his mouth. The rest is Ritz topping.
This probably happened in many different parts of the world because there are a lot of people with bad aim and a curiousity to bite strange stuff out there. Witness: Fear Factor.
Ever wonder about the origin of cheese? Scrapings from a cow, pig, goat's stomach (we'll call it rennet) are put into milk to coagulate it and create solid curds and liquid whey. Now, the thing I've always wondered... who was the first to do this? You know what I think? I I think ten thousands years ago some yahoo tried to throw some sheep innards over a container filled with milk and it went in. He left it there, because he was a pig. Later that week he was hungry and noticed that the milk had cheese dumplings floating around in it. Having no reason not to, he jammed one in his mouth. The rest is Ritz topping.This probably happened in many different parts of the world because there are a lot of people with bad aim and a curiousity to bite strange stuff out there. Witness: Fear Factor.
Okay. That was funny!
Jade, is their any problems that can arise with vegans and breastfeeding? Are their such things as vegan diets for nursing children?
Jade, is their any problems that can arise with vegans and breastfeeding? Are their such things as vegan diets for nursing children?
Hard to find an animal exploitation angle there, Sexi. I'd say mother's milk is just what the doctor ordered and I'd hope that even the strictest vegans would agree. That said, I do believe that the nursing mothers ought to be free range and fed pure food without antibiotics.
Odd that we're the only animal in nature that seeks to keep drinking after infancy. I know you can get some cats to lap at the stuff but as a kid I had a dog who ate my used tissues, so I'm not sure if housepets are an ideal barometer since behaviourally, we keep them in a state of suspended infancy.