The Vegans

kilkenny12

kylith wrote: »

What??


Raw meat is delicious.



Fruits are vegetable matter. Cereals are vegetable matter. Vegans eat only vegetables. Saying fruit aren't vegetables is like saying clogs aren't footwear.

Most people think of vegetables as carrots, lettuce, onions etc. Most people do not refer to all plant foods as vegetables.

Most people do not want to eat raw meat. End of.

What about the canibalism? Humans have eaten other humans to survive in the past.

Yurt2

kilkenny12 wrote: »

What about the canibalism? Humans have eaten other humans to survive in the past.

FFS.

kilkenny12

Yurt! wrote: »

FFS.

What? Someone pointed out that if we didn't eat meat, we would have went extinct. Same goes for eating humans.

kylith

kilkenny12 wrote: »

Most people think of vegetables as carrots, lettuce, onions etc. Most people do not refer to all plant foods as vegetables.

So what? Doesn't mean fruits aren't vegetables.

kilkenny12 wrote: »

Most people do not want to eat raw meat. End of.

Their loss, imo. Same as you'd say it's their loss if they don't want to eat vegetables.

kilkenny12 wrote: »

What about the canibalism? Humans have eaten other humans to survive in the past.

What about the cannibalism? If it were a choice between eating my best friend's leg and starving to death I'd have that femur on the barbecue before you could say 'pass the mustard' and so would you. But other than that I really don't get your point.

kylith

kilkenny12 wrote: »

What? Someone pointed out that if we didn't eat meat, we would have went extinct. Same goes for eating humans.

You seem to have misunderstood: if our ancestors millions of years ago had not adapted to eating meat as a food source it is unlikely that they would have been able to get enough calories to grow our large, neuron dense brains. Modern humans would not have gone extinct, they would never have evolved in the first place.

Eating members of your own species is a terrible long-term survival strategy which is why it is something that only happens in most species in extremis.

AnimalChin

doovdela wrote: »

There are different types of vegetarians. There is the strict vegan that doesn't eat any animal products its all plant and substitutes for meat. A vegan is strict vegetarian no animal products what so ever. That is what I mean.

There are others that are vegetarians but eat one type of protein - fish/chicken/beef (polo, paleo) for the fish/chicken types and laco vegans for those that include dairy and laco ovo (dairy and eggs). So they are different types they don't have to be strict vegetarians.

I am friends with people who are variations of the different types of vegetarians, myself included.

That is the dumbest thing I've read in a long time.

You and you're friends aren't remotely vegetarian. If I was vegan/vegetarian I think I'd be well p1ssed at the frivolous nature of your post and disregard for animals while promoting yourself as holding the same values without any of the integrity.

eviltwin

kylith wrote: »

What??


Raw meat is delicious.



Fruits are vegetable matter. Cereals are vegetable matter. Vegans eat only vegetables. Saying fruit aren't vegetables is like saying clogs aren't footwear.

Vegans eat only vegetables? Course they don't

kylith

eviltwin wrote: »

Vegans eat only vegetables? Course they don't

OK, they eat fungii too.

Greentopia

wretcheddomain wrote: »

I think the first half of this quoted post reflects the problem with many vegans - that they must feel the need to enforce their views about meat onto a child who has not had the opportunity to think about the issue, or try the food for themselves. I find it very selfish for a parent to act in this way.

The opportunity to think about the issue is given when the parents explain about the cruelty that is involved in factory farming. Most children love animals and do not want to see animals harmed I'm sure you would agree right?-that's normal, so what benefit is it to kids to keep them in the dark about how that meat ended up on their plates? I don't believe in telling kids a comfortable lie or lying by default by not telling them the truth about the lives of farm animals and how they are butchered for their meat so that kids know nothing about it only that a piece of meat has ended up on their plate. I think that is doing kids a disservice.

If they grow up thinking meat is just another food 'product' that comes wrapped in cellophane in the supermarket and not a dead animal that has been slaughtered for them, and are kept ignorant about what happens in a slaughter house, that furthers the disconnect many of us now have (unless we're brought up on a farm) from the reality of where our food comes from and the inherent cruelty involved in intensive livestock farming.

I'm not advocating traumatising young children with graphic images of cattle getting bolt guns to the head and being disembowled, there are videos and documentaries available that are suited to children but still tell the truth about the industry.

When a child is given that information and is no longer in the dark about where meat comes from many if not most would then choose to no longer eat meat. If I was shown documentaries like Cowspiracy when I was a child I sure as hell would never have eaten meat again.

And some vegan parents would have fed their kids meat prior to them becoming vegan, so those kids would know what meat tastes like.

Ok I'm not a parent so you can disregard this if you like, but I can promise you if I did have a child I would not feed them meat and dairy until they are old enough to understand about where meat comes from, then I would inform and educate my child about the meat industry as I would anything else I thought my child needs to know to progress and learn, then armed with that information I would enquire if they still wanted to eat meat. Having accustomed their tastebuds to yummy plant based food-I'm a good cook and being no longer in the dark as to the reality of factory farming I would be very surprised if any child then chooses to start eating animal flesh.

If they did I wouldn't buy it for them but wouldn't stop them from buying it outside the home with their own pocket money if they wished. How could I demand that? to do so would be counter-productive and would send them running to the nearest McD's anyway as kids like to rebel. But under my roof? no. When they move out when they go to college they are free to do as they like.
That in my view is far from being selfish, it is active responsible parenting.

And from a health point of view I believe predominantly plant based is the healthiest human diet of them all. Longitudinal studies around the world have shown that populations who live the longest eat that way. Scientific studies of the 'blue zones' like Okinawa, Nicoya Costa Rica and central Sardinia where people routinely live to over 100 and stay healthy and active well into old age show that their diet plays a big part in it-not the whole story, but it is a big part. In these regions most people are vegetarian or eat meat only on special occasions. And the meat they eat is not processed crap with all sorts of additives or factory farmed meat like here. Fish and seafood is a part of their diet.

Now I eat almost as those people do because I have a big interest in health and fitness. So why would I not want to feed a child of mine the same optimal way? why would I want them to have the dubious satisfaction of eating processed, intensively reared meat or processed meat products like burger meat or bacon or sausages that have trans fats, additives and preservatives like Sodium Nitrite that encourage the formation of cancer, colourants, E numbers, salts, fillers and god knows what else, or poor quality battery hen chicken meat pumped full of water that goes into that chicken baguette? no thank's!

And do remember the best quality fresh meat that is farmed in a way involving the least cruelty from whatever animal-e.g. organic, free range hens or pigs, apart from anything else is bloody expensive! a plant based diet is far cheaper as well as being healthier. I'm not going to spend my money supporting an industry I fundamentally disagree with and is unhealthy for me nor would I want it for a child of mine.

Greentopia

kylith wrote: »

In fact, the truth is the opposite to what you claim - humans cannot process raw vegetables anywhere near efficiently enough to live on it. You would need to do nothing but sit and eat for hours on end to get the calories that you need just to keep your body running.

I know HCLF raw vegans who eat a mostly fruit diet though-I have days where I eat fully raw too although not often (it's expensive!)-and yes it does take more food and calories to maintain weight, but mono meals of say 20 bananas with coconut water and spinach in a smoothie would be about 2000 calories alone. That's how raw vegans who are high carb do it. Smash in 5 or more punnets of strawberries, a tray of mangoes, a few kilos of oranges. Basically eat until full. HCRF veganism done properly is about abundance and enjoying a wide variety of lots of tasty fruit and veg, not calorie restriction. I love days like that but unfortunately apart from berries, apples and imported bananas good quality fruit can be hard to find in this country. Or it stays unripe until it goes off.

I don't know anyone in the HCRV world who is healthy and eats enough calories who would be so stupid as to advocate only eating vegetables as you miss out on valuable vitamins from fruit that way and most vegetables do not have high calorific content.

Venus In Furs

wretcheddomain wrote: »

False consensus is actually a lonely place to be, as everyone pats each other on the back saying how great each other's posts were.

I'd much rather stick my neck out with an unpopular view that I believe in, rather than agreeing with the fluffy consensus of folks here.

Yes - I believe many vegans do possess a morally superior complex in the same way many religious people possess precisely the same complex.

Many does not imply most, or all - which is where many of you have fallen short, and continue to cling onto a false argument that I never actually espoused.

So people disagreeing with you and genuinely agreeing with each other = false consensus and a clique and patting each other on the back, but if all wholeheartedly agreed with you it wouldn't be any of the above?
You should have just said from post #1 that you only wanted to read responses that were in agreement with you.
People's observations of vegans are that not many of them claim moral superiority. Can't all be lying.

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Thus, the claim to be vegan is simultaneously the insult that all of us are somehow less morally in-tune than they are.

People disagree with this, seeing veganism as simply a lifestyle choice which is fine once the person doesn't congratulate themselves for it.
Are you sure you have cause to be so annoyed?

I don't agree with them imposing it on young children or animals though.

wretcheddomain

Venus In Furs wrote: »

People's observations of vegans are that not many of them claim moral superiority. Can't all be lying.

People disagree with this, seeing veganism as simply a lifestyle choice which is fine once the person doesn't congratulate themselves for it.
Are you sure you have cause to be so annoyed?

I don't agree with them imposing it on young children or animals though.

I'm glad you agree on the children and animals component. Many of the observer's you mention conveniently forget many posters here have denounced the idea that children and some pets should be fed a vegan diet.

The group here is a select few who, yes, pat each other's posts on the back with a thanks. The content of their posts, when you actually analyse it, is very weak indeed.

I didn't claim all vegans claim moral superiority. I've clarified this about seven times. I've said many vegans, in the same way many religious people, claim moral superiority. My argument is not that all vegans inherently think they are morally superior. That is palpably false, but continues to get trotted out here as a red herring.

My argument is pretty simple and has nothing to do with the straw men the regular posters here continue to build up, and it is this: that implicit in veganism is the idea that their lifestyle choice is more ethical and, by extension, if everyone were vegan the world would be more ethically profitable. As you can see, I'm not referring to people here, rather the definition.

I'm saying the implicit ethical grounds on which veganism is based as just as shaky as the religious claim that their set of ideas has a moral edge too. I'm drawing a simple comparison without painting everyone who follows those ideas. But, yes, many vegans and many religious people engage in a militant form of their faith - but many many more vegans and religious people do not.

blatantrereg

wretcheddomain wrote: »

I'm glad you agree on the children and animals component. Many of the observer's you mention conveniently forget many posters here have denounced the idea that children and some pets should be fed a vegan diet.

The group here is a select few who, yes, pat each other's posts on the back with a thanks. The content of their posts, when you actually analyse it, is very weak indeed.

I didn't claim all vegans claim moral superiority. I've clarified this about seven times. I've said many vegans, in the same way many religious people, claim moral superiority. My argument is not that all vegans inherently think they are morally superior. That is palpably false, but continues to get trotted out here as a red herring.

My argument is pretty simple and has nothing to do with the straw men the regular posters here continue to build up, and it is this: that implicit in veganism is the idea that their lifestyle choice is more ethical and, by extension, if everyone were vegan the world would be more ethically profitable. As you can see, I'm not referring to people here, rather the definition.

I'm saying the implicit ethical grounds on which veganism is based as just as shaky as the religious claim that their set of ideas has a moral edge too. I'm drawing a simple comparison without painting everyone who follows those ideas. But, yes, many vegans and many religious people engage in a militant form of their faith - but many many more vegans and religious people do not.

Are vegans necessarily morally superior because of one ethical choice - no.

Is it an ethical choice to be vegan - yes.

Is it okay for people to derive self esteem from ethical choices - yes. [In fact it's ideal: Basing self esteem on being a decent person is healthy and results in psychological robustness (as opposed to crumbling if you get a B/lose your job/get rejected/have a bad hair day/etc etc.)]

Is it okay for people to judge others because they don't have the same ideologies - no.

The Bishop Basher

Interesting thread and I've learned quite a bit from reading it...

I'm an avid carnivore but my wife is strict vegetarian.

I absolutely agree and endorse the view that people have a right to eat whatever they want but i'm uncomfortable with the element of choice being taken away from children.

Our kids were raised on both diets. There were always 2 options and they could pick.

Our eldest was clearly trending towards vegetarian from a very young age. She still eats a bit of chicken but that's about it. The younger one would suck the marrow out of a raw bone. She is most certainly a carnivore.

It does seem that there is an innate element to it as my wife also hated meat from a young age. She was made eat it till 16 at which point she became full veg.

However the quickest way to get kids doing something is to ban it. You'd have to wonder how many of these vegan kids will be munching big macs like they're going out of fashion first chance they get.

Where I absolutely disagree however is forcing a vegan diet on pets. It's just wrong. There might be alternatives out there that they can survive on but anyone that owns a dog knows the difference in handing them a piece of fruit and a piece of raw meat. They love it and would always opt for meat based protein in the wild. This is even more important for cats as they really only survive on meat. If vegan's can't be responsible enough to overlook their own dietary choices and feed their pets the food they prefer, they really shouldn't have pets.