Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

 
Post Reply
Page 6 of 33  •  Prev 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 33 Next
Switch to Forum Live View How to Get Diabetes
7 years ago  ::  Aug 11, 2011 - 11:55PM #51
Roodog
Posts: 10,168

Aug 11, 2011 -- 10:51PM, Mlyons619 wrote:


Aug 11, 2011 -- 10:38PM, solfeggio wrote:


Enough already with the 'fundamentalist' crap.  Vegetarianism/veganism is a lifestyle, not a religion.  It has nothing to do with basing beliefs on some ancient nonsense.  It has everything to do with eating a healthier diet as well as treating our fellow animals decently.




Then please do all of us a favor and leave off with the preachie garbage you always assume when you start going off on this subject.  You are also aware that cats, even your beloved domesticated companions, are CARNIVOROUS and will hunt small animals and birds if they have their way.


Or maybe you ought to stick with dialoging about cats...unless you are going to turn around and start preaching about how dog lovers are such an evil lot...




Mlyons,

A fanatic is someone who will not change the subject or keep their mouth shut about it.


Does anyone fit that description here?

For those who have faith, no explanation is neccessary.
For those who have no faith, no explanation is possible.

St. Thomas Aquinas

If one turns his ear from hearing the Law, even his prayer is an abomination. Proverbs 28:9
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Aug 12, 2011 - 12:06AM #52
Mlyons619
Posts: 16,955

I'm fanatical about FACTS.

"No freedom without education"
            --Thomas Jefferson

"NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition"
            -- Monty Python
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Aug 12, 2011 - 1:15AM #53
solfeggio
Posts: 10,753

Well, mylons, you really do have a foul mouth, don't you?  Take pleasure in insulting people with whom you don't agree, do you? 


I am curious, though, as to why you and some other posters are so zealous in your condemnation of somebody who is, after all, only trying to make a case for kindness to animals and a better, more healthful diet for us all. 


Maybe people like you are part of the reason the human race is so fu*ked up.

Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Aug 12, 2011 - 1:51AM #54
Mlyons619
Posts: 16,955

Well, neener-neener-neener to you too.


Foul-mouthed?


You mean like condemning out of hand anyone who is not a "vegan?"


Your cats are NOT vegan - they are, in fact, CARNIVORUS, quite naturally.


Is that what makes me foul mouth.  Expression a FACT you don't want to hear?


That's the only foul word I recall using, y'know...

"No freedom without education"
            --Thomas Jefferson

"NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition"
            -- Monty Python
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Aug 12, 2011 - 2:25AM #55
Wanderingal
Posts: 5,504

Jane says--


"I like Angie Harmon's new Get Milk promotion. Americans drink milk and many of our children have thrived on it. Just how it is."


 


WGal replies


 


Not really.


What the  Milk ads WON'T tell you is how many ADULTS--as well as a number of CHILDREN--are lactose intolerant.


Milk is certainly NOT "healthy" for many adults--or for many children.


You've bought the advertising without questioning the motive behind it.....


 


 







Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Aug 12, 2011 - 2:27AM #56
Wanderingal
Posts: 5,504

Aug 12, 2011 -- 1:51AM, Mlyons619 wrote:


Well, neener-neener-neener to you too.


Foul-mouthed?


 




Yep--foul-mouthed really does describe your posting style to ANYONE who disagrees with you.


 As someone who is often the target of your foul-mouthed nastiness I really should know.




Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Aug 12, 2011 - 7:38AM #57
Abner1
Posts: 6,624

Solfeggio wrote:


> Enough already with the 'fundamentalist' crap.  Vegetarianism/veganism is a lifestyle,


> not a religion.


I already addressed this at length - whether it is a lifestyle or a religion varies with the person and how they approach it.


> And yes, plenty of people go veggie or become vegans for health reasons.  My husband


> and I went veggie years ago for health reasons.


Then your statement didn't really apply even to yourself.


> You mentioned some questions from another thread which I did not answer.  I'm afraid


> I don't know to which questions you refer.  Please repeat them, and I'll endeavour to


> give you some answers.


OK, I'll recreate them in the next post.  I think they're important enough to deserve their own.

Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Aug 12, 2011 - 7:54AM #58
Abner1
Posts: 6,624

OK, here are some questions for Solfeggio (and any other vegetarians or vegans involved in this thread who find them interesting).  The set-up is as follows:  These are a series of questions about the morality of eating meat in a series of hypothetical situations based on possible technological advances.  In answering these questions, we will explore the three main reasons that vegetarians and vegans give why eating meat is immoral: because of the pain and suffering of animals, because of the damage to the environment, and because of its health effects on the eaters.


1) Let's say that scientists came up with a way, perhaps similar to hydroponics, to grow meat tissue in a vat.  This did not change the health qualities of the meat, nor did it lessen the damage to the environment, but it did prevent there being any pain or suffering of any animals since the lumps of tissue had a brain.  Under those circumstances (environmental damage, health effects, but no suffering), would it be morally acceptable for people to eat meat?  Would you eat meat made that way?


2) Let's say scientists came up with a way to genetically engineer animals such that the resulting meat was as healthy for the eater as vegetables, but did nothing to change the suffering or the environmental damage.  Under those circumstances (suffering, environmental damages, but no health effects), would it be morally acceptable for people to eat meat?  Would you eat meat made that way?


3) Let's say scientists came up with a sustainable agriculture system for raising animals such that animal agriculture was no more environmentally damaging than plant agriculture, but did nothing to change the suffering or the health effects.  Under those circumstances (suffering, health effects, but no environmental damage), would it be morally acceptable for people to eat meat?  Would you eat meat made that way?


1+2) Growing genetically engineered meat in a vat, scientists find a way to make meat without suffering or health effects, but it still damages the environment.  Would it be morally acceptable for people to eat that meat? Would you eat meat made that way?


1+3) Improving the system for growing meat in a vat, scientists find a way to make meat without suffering or environmental damage, but it still has health effects.  Would it be morally acceptable for people to eat that meat?  Would you eat meat made that way?


2+3) Growing genetically engineered animals under a sustainable agriculture system, scientists find a way to make meat without environmental damage or health effects, but the animals still suffer.  Would it be morally acceptable for people to eat that meat?  Would you eat meat made that way?


1+2+3) The trifecta: Scientists, growing genetically engineered meat in an optimized production system in a vat, come up with a way to make meat without suffering, health effects, or environmental damage.  Would it be morally acceptable for people to eat that meat?  Would you eat meat made that way?


And finally, was there any pattern about your answers that indicates anything about your core reasons for deciding that eating meat is immoral?  And were there any of the above hypothetical circumstances under which you would be willing to eat meat?


I think the answers will be illuminating.

Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Aug 12, 2011 - 11:59AM #59
Roodog
Posts: 10,168

Aug 12, 2011 -- 12:06AM, Mlyons619 wrote:


I'm fanatical about FACTS.





I wasn't talking about you, Mlyons.....

For those who have faith, no explanation is neccessary.
For those who have no faith, no explanation is possible.

St. Thomas Aquinas

If one turns his ear from hearing the Law, even his prayer is an abomination. Proverbs 28:9
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Aug 12, 2011 - 12:43PM #60
jane2
Posts: 14,295

Aug 12, 2011 -- 2:25AM, Wanderingal wrote:


Jane says--


"I like Angie Harmon's new Get Milk promotion. Americans drink milk and many of our children have thrived on it. Just how it is."


 


WGal replies


 


Not really.


What the  Milk ads WON'T tell you is how many ADULTS--as well as a number of CHILDREN--are lactose intolerant.


Milk is certainly NOT "healthy" for many adults--or for many children.


You've bought the advertising without questioning the motive behind it....




As a matter of fact one of my daughters was lactose intolerant when very young. She outgrew it. I like the promotion, probably by US dairy. We're a dairy family--milk, yogurt, real butter in small amounts and some ice cream.


Each of us can choose and not many of us are ill-informed. When our son was in high school his choice of evening snack was cereal and milk. He as state champion in the mile and two mile; he still runs. Ran for GA TECH on scholarship.



discuss catholicism
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 6 of 33  •  Prev 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 33 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook