I think you are not right, processing meat is a heavy task for your body.

Obviously the first and most important two decisions about my diet was to reduce sugar consuming and get rid of wheat flour products.

Millions are living a healthy and happy life w-o eating Any meat, I am not afraid of any bad effects. However I am taking care of providing vitamins and such stuff which my body might lack because of the lack of meat. After more than 2 weeks I can say I haven't even noticed I made such a 'big change' in my diet.

although you got the first part right (where it's in his head)

you can't stop eatting sugar completely. sugar is an essential part of your daily diet, in moderation. the problem is most people overdo.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_sugar_e...l_part_of_diet

if your diet requires supplements it is not a balanced diet.

Just had 2 steaks

I am on the very top of the food chain. Thus, I eat meat.

And I have no regrets.

i have a fun gift en route to me right now- a meat grinder. gonna grind steaks for football sunday hamburgs

I am absolutely not saying I am eating vitamin pills to balance my diet :2 cents:

and i am absolutely not saying you are. :) what i am saying is that you having to compensate for a lack of nutrients that meat provides by adding *supplemental* sources, extra portions, etc. to make up for that is not how a balanced diet is supposed to be balanced.

What a extremely poor logical load of crap

The reason why is because I could give several arguments for someone, or at least show a gap in their logic, regarding the rights of animals. Most people have pets, and they understand to some degree that their pets are able to feel pain, and experience other negative emotions. The extension of this is well, if you appreciate that your animals can experience pain, surely you can appreciate that what you also ate had to experience pain as well.



1. As a default of moral choice, one should only partake in activities for which the level of pleasure results is more so than the level of pain that results.

2. The level of pain that results in commercial farming of animals for human consumption outweighs the level of pleasure that results.

3. QED, one should default to a position where they do not support or partake in the activities of argument 2.

-

This is just one argument. I can give you a few more, they'd probably be a hybrid of morality and environmental arguments. If you're genuinely interested, I suggest you listen to this whole video. It's Peter Singer, and he's incredibly thorough in his arguments for veganism. Probably my favorite philosopher.

so rather than telling almost the entire world to stop eating meat.. shouldn't we just fix the abuse issue?

There has yet to be scientific proof that vegetables don't feel pain. Please don't tell me that you think mankind has considered and invented every way possible to determine everything that there is to know. I know what you mean is that we can stimulate a brain with electricity and cause a reaction we know to be "pain." This does not negate what I've said. In fact, recent studies show how "intelligent" some plants are in using fungi in the soil to bring them nutrients and they coexist with them as it's beneficial to both. It's also common sense that a plant rooted in one place for it's entire life (life..) will generate more means to sense what is around it. ie, they're more sensitive than we are. Not less. Imagine one day learning that the carrots we yank up are screaming in utter agony? Laugh if you must. Nobody ever knew what 12 inches was until we decided what to call it and how to measure it.

I'm sorry, but we all participate in life together. The plants, animals, minerals, chairs, pencils, kevlar.. man or nature made doesn't matter. We cultivate some of it for food and the least and probably most we can do is use the energy well once it's part of us.

Not sure where does that "we have teeth for it" argument is coming from. I mean don't horses have teeth for it as well?

I eat modified paleo, lots of meat and fat. I also lift weights. It does great things for your body!

When I want to lean out I simply lower my carb intake and actually increase fat intake.

Of course it is possible to do against the abuse issue, but the food industry cares about profits and does not give a fuck on what kind of lives these animals are living, and the end-user just wants a good looking and cheap meat-product. I blame the food industry and the governments :pimp But until interests and money rules and people will remain ignorant on these problems... I expect a negative utopia :(

Most people could easily do at least a little without changing anything in their diets. They should just look more carefully what food they put on their tables.. :2 cents:

ugh not much worse than a born again eater. dude changes his eating habits 2 weeks ago because he feels sad for cows and now we are all supposed to look more carefully at our food and make changes.

again, nature does not give 2 shits about pain or ethics.



















the real pain and ethics convo should be centered around feeding starving people.

Too much text...
Just do whatever you want. If you want to eat meat, then eat it.
If you don't want to eat meat, then don't do it.
Just as easy as that. Piriod :1orglaugh

well.. wouldn't you pay some extra money to know, for sure, that the animal you're about to eat was treated with respect?

you could say it's a whole new market!

furthermore, i am curious on the impact terror and fear would have on an animal, rather than one who gets killed in a different way? (thinking the dude who was killing turkeys with a sword strike, while it was eating)

This kind of argument is a logical fallacy. Providing proof that something doesn't exist (i.e., the occurrence of pain in vegetables) is impossible. A similar argument would be that there has yet to be scientific proof that taking your helmet off in space will kill you. No one has ever done it, but we can make reasonable assumptions based on what we know about the universe. For instance, the helmet in space thing - we know that there's no oxygen in the vaccuum of space, humans require oxygen in order to power the brain, the brain having power is essential to living, therefore, taking off your helmet in space will kill you.

This is known as an argument from evidence of absence.

The same inferences can be made with vegetables. A central nervous system (and further, sentience) are required in order to feel conceptualize and experience pain (or, for that matter, 'experience' anything). There has yet to be a single plant, tree or anything in the family of non-animals that shows the existence of a central nervous system. Therefore, it is impossible for plants to conceptualize and experience pain.


Firstly, there is absolutely no reason for you to use the word intelligent. Intelligence is the wrong word to use, as it isn't a conscious decision. It is the result of evolution. Plants doing things that are interesting does not mean that they chose to - it's an extension of the fact that natural selection generally picks unique solutions for species to continue existing. This doesn't mean anything.

Secondly, the concept of coevolution is nothing new. My favorite example is the fig wasp/fig relationship. It has existed for close to 60 million years.



This type of argument is flawed, simply because it is reasonable to assume that something doesn't exist if there is a lack of evidence for it. A similar argument is used by religious people, and a suitable counter analogy is that of Russell's teapot. Unless you can prove otherwise, if I stipulate that there is a teapot orbiting Mars, you have to accept that as a fact. After all, as with me not being able to prove that vegetables do not feel pain, you cannot prove that there is not a teapot currently circulating the 4th planet from the Sun.

Thankfully, the logic is flawed, because you can have it on good authority (or, at least, you should have no reason to alter your views) that if something has absolutely no evidence or rational logic behind its existence, it probably doesn't exist.

If you want to give me some form of rational argument behind how a plant could even conceptualize pain, I'd be happy to hear it.

Thought this thread was going to be about something else entirely

Meat is a natural part of human nutrition and I love it.

Vegetarians would be able to force a lion to eat their grass. :1orglaugh

8 Arguments for Considering Vegetarian:

http://www.earthyreport.com/site/wp-...ta-358x250.jpg

http://www.stylebrity.co.uk/wp-conte...4207_large.jpg

http://gothamist.com/attachments/art...hpCDZmC3AM.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/...24_634x782.jpg

http://www.sexistad.com/files/basa_adv/sophie-monk.jpg

http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopo...5/peta-web.jpg

http://www.sugarandspikesrocks.com/w...ogo-780981.jpg

http://www.clickthecity.com/img2/art...295-image4.jpg

:stoned

ADG

I eat cooked animals to piss off vegetarians/vegans/moral crusaders who argue that it's 'morally wrong' to eat animals. Which is actually true, though as a side benefit rather than the primary reason.

Where's the flip-side of this exercise, where arguments are given against statements on why people shouldn't eat meat?

Do what you want, it's very simple. all these argument sites etc are just crap... It's simply a choice.

I'm now a vegetarian, not because I don't want to kill animals, I probably killed more by myself than all the gfyers together (yeah yeah hunting), but simply because I now really take care of my health, and also that for me food is now fuel and no longer a therapy...