Veganism
- Thread starter Harryburgundy
- Start date
CassidyAce
Senior Retro Guru
Re:
'Over the hill' is probably the best answer to that.
'Over the hill' is probably the best answer to that.
gradeAfailure
Senior Retro Guru
Re:
People in general:
Poke fun at vegans.
Post up about how sh*t cancer is.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23169929 < study that shows vegans have significantly lower cancer rates than (otherwise equally-healthy) omnivores.
People in general:
Poke fun at vegans.
Post up about how sh*t cancer is.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23169929 < study that shows vegans have significantly lower cancer rates than (otherwise equally-healthy) omnivores.
LumPi Panda
Retro Guru
- Feedback
- View
Re:
I think it's morally abhorrent to eat anything that cannot defend itself.
Also, if you are vegan/vegetarian for dietary intolerance reasons, are you entitled to just kill animals anyway?
Like not driving a car, so burning lots of plastic bags to balance things out? Carbon neutral etc.
I think it's morally abhorrent to eat anything that cannot defend itself.
Also, if you are vegan/vegetarian for dietary intolerance reasons, are you entitled to just kill animals anyway?
Like not driving a car, so burning lots of plastic bags to balance things out? Carbon neutral etc.
if people want to eat meat then fine. If they don't then fine by me. To many people telling other people what they can and can't do. I go through life minding my own business. The world would be a better place if more did it.
gradeAfailure
Senior Retro Guru
Re:
It is an unavoidable fact (yes, fact - read the advice of the WHO, countless climate scientists, etc) that current factory farming practices and levels of animal product consumption are massively detrimental to the climate and the health of the populace as a whole.
Heaven forbid we should put a few people's backs up in trying to improve things for everyone, and not be unwilling participants in some horrific animal cruelty in the process..
Would the world be a better place if we weren't advised to not drive cars so much? Or not advised to repair/reuse/recycle stuff? Or not advised to not waste water or electricity?
It is an unavoidable fact (yes, fact - read the advice of the WHO, countless climate scientists, etc) that current factory farming practices and levels of animal product consumption are massively detrimental to the climate and the health of the populace as a whole.
Heaven forbid we should put a few people's backs up in trying to improve things for everyone, and not be unwilling participants in some horrific animal cruelty in the process..
RickTheUncivil
Old School Grand Master
- Feedback
- View
Re: Re:
which is why i don't eat sprouts. poor, defenceless sprouts.
A pig or a cow, now I hear those b*gg£rs can really put up a fight.
LumPi Panda":khf9sme9 said:
which is why i don't eat sprouts. poor, defenceless sprouts.
A pig or a cow, now I hear those b*gg£rs can really put up a fight.
- Feedback
- View
CassidyAce
Senior Retro Guru
Re: Re:
Two closely related independent clauses, without a conjunction linking them: I think I would have liked to have seen a semicolon after 'nourished' instead of the comma on that grammar card. :shock:
Should we mind our own business or try to intervene? Surely there are some occasions when we really should mind our own business and some, especially those involving innocent victims, when minding our own business, or failure to act, is itself wrongful. It's where we draw the line that's the issue. Where we draw the line will depend on judgements we've already made about what's morally important and what isn't. If you believe that we should mind our own business when it comes to the meat industry then, surely, that's because of a prior judgement that the suffering of animals doesn't really matter that much - at least not as much as humans' freedom of choice. But what's the reasoning behind that judgement?
Interesting. It would be good if there were some follow up work on whether it's meat eating per se or eating meat produced by modern farming methods that results in higher rates of cancer - or even whether there's any difference in rates between the two. I wouldn't be surprised if there's some discrepancy between them, even if both result in higher rates of cancer than non-meat-eating.
Two closely related independent clauses, without a conjunction linking them: I think I would have liked to have seen a semicolon after 'nourished' instead of the comma on that grammar card. :shock:
Should we mind our own business or try to intervene? Surely there are some occasions when we really should mind our own business and some, especially those involving innocent victims, when minding our own business, or failure to act, is itself wrongful. It's where we draw the line that's the issue. Where we draw the line will depend on judgements we've already made about what's morally important and what isn't. If you believe that we should mind our own business when it comes to the meat industry then, surely, that's because of a prior judgement that the suffering of animals doesn't really matter that much - at least not as much as humans' freedom of choice. But what's the reasoning behind that judgement?
gradeAfailure":7lt9v71t said:
Interesting. It would be good if there were some follow up work on whether it's meat eating per se or eating meat produced by modern farming methods that results in higher rates of cancer - or even whether there's any difference in rates between the two. I wouldn't be surprised if there's some discrepancy between them, even if both result in higher rates of cancer than non-meat-eating.
Attachments
Similar threads
