Why aren't you a vegan!?

FeirmeoirtTed

Deleted User wrote: »

What about the weight of the moral question though?

For example, a century or two ago, the idea of "homosexuality" being a "morally acceptable" behavior would have been frowned upon, but because most people believed that and, at the time, the suppression of homosexuality ensued.

Here, it's the maltreatment of animals, often severely. Just because the vast majority of people are meat eaters doesn't make the practice a justifiable or good one, if you see what I mean.

So, in terms of this moral standpoint - yes, the majority are in favour of eating meat, but that surely wouldn't justify maltreatment of animals in the same way that the vast majority against homosexuality was justified many decades ago etc.

Many people are disgusted at "trophy hunting", yet spend the next hour eating a medium-rare steak?

Where's the consistency?

How do you feel about abortion?

FeirmeoirtTed

FeirmeoirtTed wrote: »

How do you feel about abortion?

A necessary evil.

gormdubhgorm

Deleted User wrote: »

Cards on the table, I'm not a vegan.

That said, it's very hard to argue against the common vegan. After all, almost nobody argues that there is some positive benefit toward the infliction of suffering on animals.

Nobody would argue in favour of collecting dogs in the back of a truck, and sending them off for slaughter in some local abatoir. But that's precisely what happens with the other sentient animals.

The process is often brutal, but even if it were pain-free, the argument goes that animals shouldn't be killed in the same way we wouldn't recommend it for horses or dogs.

I can't really think of a valid argument against veganism. You'd think, then, that I would convert to veganism, but I haven't - and won't. It's a purely selfish endeavour, then, because I'm being hypocritical about how I would react if I saw dogs treated in the same way as farmed animals.

True, there are evolutionary reasons for eating meat. I think the argument now is that there are sufficient plant alternatives.

So, why aren't you a vegan?

Perhaps you have a valid position I, or others here, haven't thought of.

But thus far, I can't frame a case against it.

To be honest I think you are aright. You are only looking at it from the one angle. In my view it is the vegans who are the ones who are hypocritical. For ones who are so environmentally conscious and in-tune with nature they eat unnaturally.
Humans have incisors for a reason. Meat gives us the many nutritional benefits a healthy lifestyle needs. Meanwhile the vegans have to supplement this artificially! I never understood this dichotomy in thier mindset nature loving, but going completely against nature.
I know a family relative who is a staunch vegan and she has developed severe sun allergies (it cannot be a confidence)
From my point of view I accept my role as human at the top of the food chain, and enjoy meat. In fact for me it is not a proper meal without a piece of meat. Meat is the first thing I go for on the plate.

Rest your mind easy OP you are behaving as nature intended, enjoy your meat.
If others want to be vegan let them off. But you have no reason in the world to feel guilty for eating meat/fish etc it is perfectly natural. The non vegans are the ones who are really true to nature, that is the irony of the whole thing.

suicide_circus

i love cooking and trying to cook dishes from all different cuisines. Vegan is just too limiting.

gozunda

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Not pushing it at all!. My OP is an authentic one; a legitimate case of where I understand the vegan arguments, but can't bring myself - nor will I ever - to become a fully, paid-up subscriber to all-things vegan. Ultimately, the best I can come up with is that we should sideline the emotional case for purely pragmatic reasons. As for the post you quoted, that was part of a wider political analogy, and in it, I used vegan and bland food interchangeably to make a point.
Still no answer to this, any takers:

Hmmm - doesnt come across as that at all...
The argument as presented - "dog thou" is at best completely bogus and unfortunately endlessly peddled by various evangelical vegan campaigners and the likes of PETA. However It does not stand up to even the most basic scrutiny. Plenty of posters have given well thought out answers here to that tbh. And btw no one is rounding up animals randomly as you suggest. Animal agriculture is highly regulated and comes with a wealth of standards and legislative requirements.

That some don't like eating meat or dairy has absolutely nothing to do with the non sequitur of not 'eating dog'. See the link on this topic as detailed if you really are in any doubt.

YFlyer

emaherx wrote: »

I'd wager last year's drought effected potato and cereal crops worse than it did any cattle farm.

I doubt it.

Unearthly

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

To be honest I think you are aright. You are only looking at it from the one angle. In my view it is the vegans who are the ones who are hypocritical. For ones who are so environmentally conscious and in-tune with nature they eat unnaturally.
Humans have incisors for a reason. Meat gives us the many nutritional benefits a healthy lifestyle needs. Meanwhile the vegans have to supplement this artificially! I never understood this dichotomy in thier mindset nature loving, but going completely against nature.
I know a family relative who is a staunch vegan and she has developed severe sun allergies (it cannot be a confidence)
From my point of view I accept my role as human at the top of the food chain, and enjoy meat. In fact for me it is not a proper meal without a piece of meat. Meat is the first thing I go for on the plate.

Rest your mind easy OP you are behaving as nature intended, enjoy your meat.
If others want to be vegan let them off. But you have no reason in the world to feel guilty for eating meat/fish etc it is perfectly natural. The non vegans are the ones who are really true to nature, that is the irony of the whole thing.

Appeal to nature fallacy. It's an extremely poor lowest common denominator argument

gozunda

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Irish beef is fed on maize and soy from the Americas though, as well as our own grass. We have so many cattle on the island that we can't grow enough food for them.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/farming/we-depend-two-times-more-on-imported-animal-feed-than-our-neighbours-832683.html
Anyway, regarding vegans, I don't understand why they trigger everyone so much. I'm not sure I've ever even met one, yet people go on like they're everywhere all up in your faces trying to change the way you eat. The world is eating more and more meat globally, so you can all relax.

Thelonious - it has been detailed many many times in response to these endless anti farming rantings - that livestock here are fed relatively very small amounts of supplementary feedstuffs - mainly during winter months when the animals need to be housed for animal health and welfare reasons. The reason we import a range of these feedstuffs (mainly made up of the wastes of the human food industry btw) is that we dont grow arable crops particularly well here due to our climate and topography.

We have less cattle here than we had in 1973 when Ireland joined the EU. So your statement about 'many cattle' is complete bolloxology.

Anyway, regarding omnivores (ie those eating a normal diet) - I don't understand why they trigger a small number so much. Tbh - I'm really not sure some have ever even met one, yet people go on like they're everywhere all up in your faces trying to change the way you eat. If you want to eat plants no problem! The rest of the world is eating a fairly balanced diet based on a range of plant and animal derived foods, so you can all relax.

emaherx

YFlyer wrote: »

I doubt it.

Based on what? Your own gut intuition or have you any insight into the struggle of Irish farms through the drought. I know of many crops which failed or produced very small yields last year, but the cattle survived.

ted1

gozunda wrote: »

Thelonious - it has been been detailed many many times in response to your endless anti farming rantings - that livestock here are fed relatively very small amounts of supplementary feedstuffs - mainly during winter months when the animals need to be housed for animal health and welfare reasons. The reason we import a range of these feedstuffs (mainly made up of the wastes of the human food industry btw) is that we dont grow arable crops particularly well here due to our climate and topography.

We have less cattle here than we had in 1973 when Ireland joined the EU. So your statement about 'many cattle' is complete bolloxology.

Anyway, regarding omnivores (ie those eating a normal diet) - I don't understand why they trigger everyone so much. Tbh - I'm really not sure some ever even met one, yet people go on like they're everywhere all up in your faces trying to change the way you eat. If you want to eat plants no problem! The rest of the world is eating a fairly balanced diet based on a range if plant and animal derived foods, so you can all relax.

We eat plenty of imported meat here , and that number will grow as a Result of the EU South America deal

YFlyer

emaherx wrote: »

Based on what? Your own gut intuition or have you any insight into the struggle of Irish farms through the drought. I know of many crops which failed or produced very small yields last year, but the cattle survived.

Well a tonne of potatoes may need about 22,000 litres of water. 1kg of meat requires between 5,000 and 20,000 litres of water whereas to produce 1kg of wheat requires between 500 and 4,000 litres of water.

btw were the cattle not brought to the abbaitors much earlier than normal?

FeirmeoirtTed

Deleted User wrote: »

A necessary evil.

There's a level of hypocracy in there for all vegans, what makes animal meat/ produce more morally abhorrent?

gozunda

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

How do they promote that? If everyone was a vegan, far less land would be required worldwide to feed the population. Much of the world's agricultural land is used to grow food to feed animals to feed humans.

Another daft plant industry fallacy. The facts is that what is fed to animals - whether pets, livestock or otherwise - is mainly composed of the the left overs and by products of the human food industry. Which bit of that is hard to understand?

And no 'much of the worlds agricultural land' is NOT used to grow food to feed animals. Most produces food for humans and animals get fed the leftovers.

And also most of the worlds permanent pasture - where grass is grown - is not suitable for arable production and we use livestock to convert that grassland into something we can eat.

Tbh the constant witterings against agriculture without end - come across at best as party political broadcasts from the ministry of vegan propaganda. But hey that seems simply to be part of the whole thing ...

emaherx

YFlyer wrote: »

Well a tonne of potatoes may need about 22,000 litres of water. 1kg of meat requires between 5,000 and 20,000 litres of water whereas to produce 1kg of wheat requires between 500 and 4,000 litres of water.

btw were the cattle not brought to the abbaitors much earlier than normal?

Ah you have no idea what you are talking about.

An almost one tonne cow for the 3 month drought period needed to drink 60L to 100L a day so about 8,000 liters. The thing about cows though is they don't die of thirst if it doesn't rain because they can still walk to a river.


A field of potatoes though cannot.

silverharp

Unearthly wrote: »

Appeal to nature fallacy. It's an extremely poor lowest common denominator argument

you havnt said anything useful here.if there happened to be a movement that said exposure to sun light was wrong for whatever reason , appealing to nature would be appropriate.

gozunda

YFlyer wrote: »

I doubt it.

Is it that you doubt anything or anyone which points out the usual rubbish anti animal farming propaganda is for a want of a better description complete cow manure?

Perhaps you believe what was actually reported about the drought no?

https://amp.independent.ie/business/farming/tillage/harvest-2018-cereal-harvest-estimated-as-smallest-since-1995-37566081.html

https://www.thejournal.ie/cereal-harvest-forecast-4145585-Jul2018/

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/potatoes-stop-growing-in-parched-earth-of-north-county-dublin-1.3578483

Unearthly

silverharp wrote: »

you havnt said anything useful here.if there happened to be a movement that said exposure to sun light was wrong for whatever reason , appealing to nature would be appropriate.

It's a stupid argument.

What are the rules? What is natural? Is it natural to drink cows milk over human milk?

It was pointed out earlier that when you go down the natural route you end up in very murky territory where terrible acts could technically be natural depending on the rules

YFlyer

emaherx wrote: »

Ah you have no idea what you are talking about.

True according to Teagasc crop production is down. Be interesting to know what the average tonnage of beef per beast was in 2018 compared to other years in this decade?

YFlyer

gozunda wrote: »

Is it that you doubt anything or anyone which points out the usual rubbish anti animal farming propaganda is for a want of a better description complete cow manure?

Perhaps you believe what was actually reported about the drought no?

https://amp.independent.ie/business/farming/tillage/harvest-2018-cereal-harvest-estimated-as-smallest-since-1995-37566081.html

https://www.thejournal.ie/cereal-harvest-forecast-4145585-Jul2018/

That wasn't the question.

emaherx

YFlyer wrote: »

True according to Teagasc crop production is down. Be interesting to know what the average tonnage of beef per beast was in 2018 compared to other years in this decade?

Very little difference I'd imagine. The animals killed early as you pointed out were mostly old cull animals. It makes sense for any farm struggling for fodder to send these off early.

gozunda

ted1 wrote: »

We eat plenty of imported meat here , and that number will grow as a Result of the EU South America deal

Whose pushing that? And more importantly What has that got to with the reply to the previous poster other than being another bit of whataboutery?

But to reply - we eat even more imported horticultural and arable crops produced in areas with few if any environmental or ethical standards than imported meat. And those products are neither environmentaly beneficial or good for the climate. The vast bulk of such imports also have huge food miles. And afaik the Mercosur deal is yet to fully ratified. But the nice thing is that people should and will buy Irish products even if there are eejits out there pushing this ****e.

silverharp

Unearthly wrote: »

It's a stupid argument.

What are the rules? What is natural? Is it natural to drink cows milk over human milk?

It was pointed out earlier that when you go down the natural route you end up in very murky territory where terrible acts could technically be natural depending on the rules

given that humans have only been farming cows for not very long i would say cow milk isnt essential if nature is used as a standard especially not with corn flakes :pac: . However there has never been a vegan society and given that nutritional science is ropey and incomplete at the best of times it would be risky to eliminate animal nutrition from a diet. there could be several bodily processes that expect animal products in some form where absorption rates could be poor from plants. so yeah i'd bet on not second guessing "nature"

Lefty Bicek

Speaking as a beekeeper, I can say that some of the Vegan Society's arguments against the consumption of honey as being anti-vegan are... emotive, half-baked, unscientific, uninformed tripe.

https://www.vegansociety.com/go-vegan/honey-industry?fbclid=IwAR0Tox5B0lhbw3sZ_X-FH7EqeHYkayjWyp555Op8ZNT5VewZxJxtvzJNdKo

Not that deplorable practices do not exist. They do. There is, for example, a highly distressing documentary about the bees on the California almonds. I mean, gut-wrenching stuff.

More generally, I can see why people, including a lot of beekeepers, object to eg wing-clipping, or intense harvesting. I get all that.

But really, my point is about the silly, anthropomorphic, irrational, cuddly toy arguments that the screechy minority (as it always is) trot out. All credibility is gone.

BarryD2

There was an entertaining ding dong debate on RTE radio this morning between a spokeswoman for veganism and a lad here from the ICMSA I think it was. She was fairly forthright and he lost the rag a bit towards the end. You'd want a fact checker though to follow up on the claims that each was making. Couldn't help but feel that both were gilding the lily a bit.

YFlyer

gozunda wrote: »

Whose pushing that?

The process food market.

gozunda

YFlyer wrote: »

That wasn't the question.

There wasn't a question (no question mark btw)

To this comment

emaherx wrote: »

Droughts affect all food production in all countries whether meat or plant based, thankfully don't happen here very often. I can only remember 2 droughts here, last year and 1995.

I'd wager last year's drought effected potato and cereal crops worse than it did any cattle farm.

You posted

YFlyer wrote: »

I doubt it.

I simply pointed out that the arble and horticulture sector were devastated by the drought conditions experienced.

So no it was not just our livestock sector which was impacted - all food production was. That's not hard to understand unless some are deliberately choosing to cherry pick only one agricultural sector for the purposes of pushing an agenda

YFlyer

gozunda wrote: »

There wasn't a question.

To this comment



You posted



I simply pointed out that the arble and horticulture sector were devastated by the drought conditions experienced.

So no it was not just our livestock sector which was impacted - all food production was. That's not hard to understand unless some are deliberately choosing to cherry pick only one agricultural sector for the purposes of pushing an agenda

The question was. I'd wager last year's drought effected potato and cereal crops worse than it did any cattle farm?

gozunda

YFlyer wrote: »

The question was. I'd wager last year's drought effected potato and cereal crops worse than it did any cattle farm?

Perhaps go talk to a potato farmer who lost an entire years crop due the drought and ask how he / she felt about that ...

emaherx

YFlyer wrote: »

The question was. I'd wager last year's drought effected potato and cereal crops worse than it did any cattle farm?

I still stand over that statement. Keep cattle here myself and last year was a struggle but nothing compared to my tillage neighbors. I buy straw off one from the same field every year. Last year there were 47 bales on it, this year over 120 I can only assume the grain yield was down by the same amount. I know potatoes did particularly bad too.

It had no effect on my cattle numbers only l had to monitor grass and water and rotate more often.

YFlyer

gozunda wrote: »

Perhaps go talk to a potato farmer who lost an entire years crop due the drought and ask him how he / she felt about that ...

I'll talk to Sam Spud then.