LueyFubar
RPG Townie
Hitler bad, Fubar Good
Posts: 508
|
Post by LueyFubar on Sept 8, 2003 14:35:49 GMT -5
Today's fast food nation is enough to make anyone want to eat a huge cabbage. Let's face it, Kentucky Fried Chicken keep hundreds and hundreds of chickens all cooped up in a box, being fed and left to die if they can't get to the food. The recent photos are rather awfull, it showed a chicken eating the corpse of another chicken who'd died. www.kfccruelty.com/Lots of stuff on there.
|
|
|
Post by TranceRolin on Sept 8, 2003 15:08:17 GMT -5
Okay, I didn't watch the entire video because it seemed too . . . Bullnuts-ey. That clipping of beaks in the beginning is cruel, but you will find that EVERY SINGLE CHICKEN in the video besides there DOES NOT have a clipped beak, and that all of the chickens had the same exact leg movement leading me to believe that it was just a repeating clip.
Lots of cruel things are done, but this thing exaggerates A LOT.
|
|
|
Post by theblakeman on Sept 10, 2003 18:58:05 GMT -5
I barely have time to care about other PEOPLE much less other animals. Just like people dying in third-world countires, I don't give a d**n.
|
|
|
Post by The Patryn on Sept 11, 2003 2:17:54 GMT -5
Food is food. It's that simple.
|
|
|
Post by The~Inquisitor on Sept 11, 2003 12:35:01 GMT -5
Eating eggs and drinking milk or having ANYTHING which is made from either of those products is equally cruel and they are also good for you. Face it, other animals are good for our food.
|
|
Zheil
RPG Townie
Posts: 920
|
Post by Zheil on Sept 11, 2003 18:49:24 GMT -5
It's like a giant circle of eating each other. Sounds weird there, doesn't it?
EDIT: I like KFC, whether or not they have severe livings for chickens, as long as I can taste their chewy legs! Mwa ha ha!
|
|
|
Post by Lankyrie on Sept 12, 2003 12:55:47 GMT -5
I say vegetarianism is stupid, for why: 1. We need iron, and you won't get that from vegetarians. Iron is necessary to have good blood. If you don't have good blood, you're going to suffer. Lot of sleepyness, dizzy. 2. Animals is gorwing up more and more, then there is no space for them. Of course some animals die, but you know what? Animals can give birth for 5 animal babies. So there is no space for humen. Anything else?
|
|
Pat
RPG Townie
Posts: 254
|
Post by Pat on Sept 12, 2003 17:11:01 GMT -5
I say vegetarianism is stupid, for why: 1. We need iron, and you won't get that from vegetarians. Iron is necessary to have good blood. If you don't have good blood, you're going to suffer. Lot of sleepyness, dizzy. I know for a fact that pickles have A LOT of iron. I dont know about anything else but im sure vegans are doing something to get iron.
|
|
|
Post by SleepyTemplar on Sept 12, 2003 18:58:14 GMT -5
However, the same nutrients can be obtained through product substitutes, and are often better for you. Unfortunately, you refuse to admit this because in doing so your entire position is undermined.
Iron is easily obtained for vegetarians and vegans. Products such as whole grain flours/cereals, green leafy vegetables, and legumes provide significant sources of iron (For example, my breakfast cereal provides 60% of the DRA for iron PER serving). I should also point out that several meat substitutes are usually fortified in iron, and other foods may be fortified with iron.
So your first point doesn't fly.
The reason why we have so many animals is because they are raised for food. If we weren't busy clearing down the rain forest for cattle farming and feeding the majority of grown grain for feeding cattle, the population certainly wouldn't be as large as it is. It's silly to suggest that somehow animals will overpopulate areas- populations thrive only in relation to the resources the area has. If there is enough food to feed such animals, they most certainly will not survive long enough to reproduce.
SICK:
I am a philosopher in college. I specialize in philosophy of religion, morality, and epistemology. Naturally, on anything I argue for or against, I will want to see what sort of objections exist to better understand whether my position is tenable or not. It's what some of us call the "search for truth".
You haven't answered my question in regards to eating you. Certainly, there exists the possibility in such an action, but my question was whether there is something wrong with devouring you while you are still alive.
Actually, if you begin a thread over it, I'll gladly debate the topic. However, I would be wishing to listen a good reason why one shouldn't trust their senses to provide predominantly accurate information.
Evolution applies only to genetic makeup and changes in allele frequency, not behavioral changes as you are suggesting.
Species evolve to adapt to their environment. It's not directional, towards a higher purpose, nor has anything to do with intellect.
Reason is the only means of gaining knowledge, and the only means of evaluating positions to discover truth and falsity. The two positions you can take to deny this are skepticism, which denies we can have knowledge, and fideism, which places faith in a higher position than reason. Should we pursue this topic, I will gladly go into why both positions are faulty. Whether such a discussion will be worthwhile for me will depend on how much epistemology you know.
|
|
|
Post by SickAndWretched on Sept 14, 2003 18:20:02 GMT -5
Well the only thing I have to say to all that is.. that eating meat to most probably is very pleasurable and you can gain the same pleasure from eating "wannibe meat".. y'know.. Its probably all subconsious, but most people gain a certain gradification from ingesting another animal. It has nothing to do with whether its morally correct or healthy. And as for the suffering of others.. look at history and entertainment. Humanity likes voilence and suffering.. we almost gain a sexual pleasure from it.. (ok.. maybe thats over doing it. but just trying to make a point)..
:: off-topic :: Now.. I noticed that your style of debating.. It seems to me that you mainly focus on what is easy to defend. There's been some points that we have brought up that you seemed to ignore and went straight for the weaker points.. Nothing wrong wit that.. though its poilet to give credit where credit is do.. y'know?.
|
|
|
Post by SleepyTemplar on Sept 14, 2003 23:53:15 GMT -5
Examples? I've yet to see an objection I didn't respond to in regards to vegetarianism being justified. I'm also quite puzzled as to what these "stronger points" I've ignored are. After all, when one argues, one is supposed to invoke the principle of charity and attack the strongest version of all arguments.
If it's morally wrong, which I have argued that it is, then it doesn't matter if people believe otherwise or derive pleasure from it. That a person believes murder is right doesn't make it so- even if the majority agrees with him.
Suppose, however, that my argument is sound, and it establishes that eating meat is immoral. Furthermore suppose that people do ingest meat for sheer pleasure. This means such people are in the wrong, and it would be a problem needing to be fixed. There is a concept called "moral progress", which we use in regards to events such as minor groups gaining civil liberties to signify that immoral actions were corrected. That immoral actions exist, and that pleasure is derived from them is no basis for saying they should not be corrected.
I fail to see the point. That violence happened in the past is no reason to continue it. That humans enjoy violence and suffering does not make it moral, nor desireable.
I'm still awaiting an answer as to whether it is wrong to kill you and eat you.
|
|
|
Post by Kamau on Sept 15, 2003 5:17:09 GMT -5
Meat taste good.
|
|
|
Post by The~Inquisitor on Sept 15, 2003 8:53:17 GMT -5
That's the spirit, Kamau. Be a normal person and eat meat don't be one of those hippy guys who complain at anything which is slightly unmoral (Which is everything in their eyes). I wish vegetarians would stop trying to stop us eating meat, they should let us enjoy our lives instead of eating hiddeous Quorn meals and other crappy substitutes. You shouldn't suggest meals like that, I have had one and it tasted NOTHING like meat AT ALL and I threw up after the first bite. (True story)
|
|
|
Post by SleepyTemplar on Sept 15, 2003 10:14:56 GMT -5
I wish you would learn how to debate, Inquisitor. It is a bit annoying when you repeat the same drivel, oblivious to what I've said again and again about such faulty reasoning. As I've stated previously, pleasure should not be derived from gratuitous suffering to creatures capable of suffering. In regards to creatures with the capacity to suffering, we hold a prima facie concern in preventing suffering, as one of the major purposes of morality is to reduce or remove suffering.
Creating strawmen is not a good way to argue, either. Not all vegetarians are "one of those hippy guys who complain at anything which is slightly unmoral (Which is everything in their eyes)." Other than being ignorant of what morality is (which is probably why you're a moral relativist), in this debate I have provided a valid logical argument for the conclusion. You have yet to demonstrate a false premise in the argument, and instead have chosen to say things like "Who cares if it's moral?". I, and several other vegetarians I know, are not hippies, nor do we view everything as immoral (unmoral is not a word).
Hence, if you're going to post in the debates section, please use arguments for your position. In your case, you need to stop using the same ones over and over and address my response to them.
I've had many of them and they do taste like meat, and I haven't thrown up after a single one. Either you've picked out a brand that had a bad taste or you've psychologically convinced yourself that meat substitutes taste bad.
If human meat tastes good, does that mean one should kill their parents and eat them? Anything wrong with that scenario?
|
|
|
Post by TranceRolin on Sept 15, 2003 18:48:49 GMT -5
Well, in reality, isn't morality just the popular trend of an area and/or time? Right now, most people eat meat, so it is morally acceptable- And for the most part, incouraged to do so . . . Just substitute eating meat with practically anything else. So saying that it is immoral to eat meat is just going by the opinion of one group, and not the majority of the populace.
Generalization; The unbreakable arguement XD
(Note: Just for that line, I KNOW that ST is gonna go after me >_<)
|
|