FARK.com: (4172752) Rejected PETA Superbowl ad once again proves that when they rely on next-to-naked hotties engaging in foreplay people never remember their "message" only the . . . wait, what were we talking about again?

If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

		Rejected PETA Superbowl ad once again proves that when they rely on next-to-naked hotties engaging in foreplay people never remember their "message" only the . . . wait, what were we talking about again? (huffingtonpost.com)		319
		More: Obvious

• • •

21746 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Jan 2009 at 8:18 AM | Favorite | share:

Share this link:

URL:

http://fark.com/go/4172752

Bookmark:

Article Comments close

319 Comments (+0 »)

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

The Icelander		2009-01-28 10:08:26 AM

halfof33: The Icelander: Which is why all other primates live there.

FAIL.

You're right. Not primates, great apes.

\Gorilla: Rain forest
\\Chimpanzee: Rain forest
\\\Orangutans: Rain forest

factoryconnection		2009-01-28 10:09:42 AM

YannickNoahsFark: If by healthiest you mean ingesting the hormones and antibiotics that are in the meat supply, I have no reply....

You've shifted your argument deliberately. You are now arguing against excessive processing and chemical saturation in farm-raised livestock, which is fine, but it isn't the same argument.

Would you eat wild deer or duck?

ISouldBeWorking: People seem to be arguing the first point, somehow thinking it will logically lead to the second point. This is not the case.

The way I see it is a passionate response to an impassioned and inaccurate position. Peta's stance of "meat is murder" and "animals deserve equal rights" is not natural, and turns people off to their message. It also does the disservice of making groups that promote animal welfare look insane by association. Thanks for nothing, b*tches (and the men that join because they want to f*ck them).

Our consumption of food in general, meat in general, and resources to produce meat is excessive and environmentally perilous. A logical stance would be: reduce our intake, eat less meat of better quality. An irrational stance would be: meat is murder, and you're a murderer of both animals and the planet.

Go ahead, be a vegetarian... I'd do it if not for pork, too. If you're really into not enjoying food, be a vegan. You'll still be killing animals (farmers take care of the rabbits that try to eat their crops, for instance), so don't get preachy about their rights.

brubakan		2009-01-28 10:11:43 AM

Oh_Enough_Already: While I understand people - rather reasonably - scoffing at PETA's fundamentalist/extremist "meat is murder blah blah blah" ideology I can't be the only person equally troubled by far too many folk's gleeful blood lust when it comes to hunting.

Where is the respect for the animal who's life you took?

The gratitude for the sustenance it has provided you?

For far too many folks they approach hunting not as as "sporting" endeavor wherein they're going after this or that animal for food but, rather, merely some sort of macho endeavor where they seek to feel good about themselves by exerting dominance over another creature (or other men perhaps) merely by killing it.

When I read about "canned hunts" and/or hunters outfitted with more firepower and technology than your average Marine Battalion it kind of makes me sick.

Is that truly "hunting" the same way that patiently stalking a deer or an elk that you'll then eat is?

This same mentality all too often translates into not only a lack of respect for "lesser" creatures but a propensity to outright abuse them simply for their own amusement.

Which, in turn, is unquestionably a form of narcissistic sociopathy that can and does manifest itself in the form of the abuse, mistreatment and violence towards other humans.

I've hunted, have many relatives who've hunted and I'm friends with many hunters. This is inevitable when you grow up in the Midwest.

Unfortunately though there seems to be an ever more prevailing mentality that hunting is not about "sport" and it need not be "fair" and it's some sort of zero-sum game where all that matters is the kill and any and all means, methods or absurdly disproportional firepower is acceptable - sustainability, respect and morality be damned - as long as you kill something.

This then is where the "murder" element of PETA's "all meat is murder" canard starts to gain a little traction.

Actually, I see what you are saying regarding the "macho" hunting thing, and do agree it is stupid.

But as a vegan, I actually do endorse hunting for those who want meat. The reason being, at least the animal you are hunting got a chance at a life free of cages.

Just sayin'

idsfa		2009-01-28 10:14:44 AM

Clearly a bunch of space cases.

ronaprhys		2009-01-28 10:15:34 AM

YannickNoahsFark: If by healthiest you mean ingesting the hormones and antibiotics that are in the meat supply, I have no reply....

Again, you're being dumb. That's twice in one thread. Quit that and argue the points well.

I'm not talking about the hormones and antibiotics, that's another discussion. Hell, one could make the same arguments about the herbicides, fungicides, and pesticides on plants and call it even, no? I'm speaking in an evolutionary sense. Quite simply put, there is no accepted academic research that would say anything other than eating a varied diet, including meat, vegetables, fruits, legumes, nuts, and all is anything but the healthiest overall diet.

halfof33		2009-01-28 10:16:07 AM

The Icelander: You're right. Not primates, great apes.

\Gorilla: Rain forest
\\Chimpanzee: Rain forest

You hear that people, old Half-y is right.

That being said, Chimps eat meat with relish.

Oh_Enough_Already		2009-01-28 10:16:07 AM

factoryconnection: Oh_Enough_Already: While I understand people - rather reasonably - scoffing at PETA's fundamentalist/extremist "meat is murder blah blah blah" ideology I can't be the only person equally troubled by far too many folk's gleeful blood lust when it comes to hunting.

How many? What proportion? Are most hunters engaged in kill 'em all-style massacres through the woods with no intention of consuming their prey? Please educate us with studies, links, something.

You may be right, but that isn't my experience, as all the hunters I know dress the kill and get it butchered for food. I knew a ton of deer hunters in PA and now I live in SC, so you'd better believe that there are a lot of hunters around here. Some even donate the extra meat (over-full freezer) to charity. I know many that bow-hunt, use black-powder rifles, and other non-high-tech solutions to up the difficulty, too.

Hunting as you've described it is what I've done and what I respect.

But too many places these days are offering canned hunts where you literally go and just execute some all but domesticated animal that's ushered out into a fenced in pen simply so you can have the "pleasure" of killing it.

Where's the "sport" in that?

I kind of feel the same way about many kinds of trophy hunting and "safaries" where people kill some exotic/semi-endangered animal just to have a trophy mounted on their wall.

Take a camera instead.

Christ, I mean the Masai go out an kill lions, mano-a-lion, with a spear.

That's HUNTING.

Being flown by helicopter to some "preserve" and shooting a bear with a three thousand dollar scoped rifle from 500 yards out doesn't exactly impress me.

Incumbent in hunting or fishing or any "sporting" endeavor has to be the possibility of failure.

Absent that possibility it's just some sort of macho/show-off/over compensation pissing contest like people who buy ginourmous SUVs and the biggest thing they ever "haul" is a Tiffany lamp from an antique store.

factoryconnection		2009-01-28 10:16:20 AM

Silovik: difficulty? Come to Southern Ontario where you could honestly walk up and stab a deer if you were so inclined.

Unregulated hunting and suburban sprawl destroyed the natural predators. Over-regulated hunting (in response) prevented humans from taking over that role. Lyme Disease is a signature, downstream effect from this pendulum process. There are far too many deer, like you said, but just because they make it easy doesn't mean hunters should be impugned. I'd rather get shot and killed quickly than get hit by a car and die of starvation, if I had to choose.

The Icelander: See, I don't eat meat (or milk) with hormones and antibiotics in it. I buy grass fed, organic, locally raised beef from the farmer's market. It's not any more expensive, and it's a lot tastier than the factory farmed shiat.

Lucky bastard. And you are within an easy drive of the Strasburg Railroad Museum... is there anything that Lancaster can't do?

(answer: sell beer in grocery stores)

ExperianScaresCthulhu		2009-01-28 10:17:46 AM

espiaboricua: valencia: Why is it okay for PETA to exploit women but not animals?

It's only exploitation when the women are forced to do something. These PETA nutjobs get near-naked in public willingly. Therefore, there's no exploitation going on.

The [Irony] is that a lot of PETA types claim to be feminists... but see nothing wrong with the PETA stunts that involved half-naked women because it's all "... for the cause..."

Speaking of................. while never using men, they also never use older women, or non-white women, or not-quite-slim women (non-slender vegans do exist). But they're down with silicone tittays like Pamela Anderson. What's up with that as well? How is that natural?

factoryconnection		2009-01-28 10:18:37 AM

Oh_Enough_Already: But too many places these days are offering canned hunts where you literally go and just execute some all but domesticated animal that's ushered out into a fenced in pen simply so you can have the "pleasure" of killing it.

Agreed. I don't find that philosophically defensible as "sport" either.

ExperianScaresCthulhu		2009-01-28 10:19:02 AM

ronaprhys: What I want to know is where was that chick going to stick the pumpkin? Or what did she plan on doing with it? Seems that the stalk would be, well, uncomfortable. And as for putting it in anything, if she can fit that in her I'm not sure that's sexy in the slightest...

maybe she was going to violate it with her strap-on dildo, 'lesbian porn intended for straight men' style.

yrevajmot		2009-01-28 10:21:28 AM

Shame on PETA! Do you know how many chickens are going to be choked now? And just think of all the dolphins that will get flogged and monkeys spanked!

As for vegetarians having better sex, well yeah sex with crazy chicks is always better. But it's not because they don't eat vegetables.

CBR ME ASAP		2009-01-28 10:21:35 AM

Fether: /I do my part

All I have to say is I wish I was one of the test subjects for THAT study.

Cheers, I too wish I was a part of that study. But I can't complain, I've been on a few hunts like that.

Joce678		2009-01-28 10:21:48 AM

What_do_you_want_now: Favorite Questions to Stump PeTA idiots:

1) Why do we have teeth designed for the tearing and shredding of meat? Proper Herbivores only have teeth for the gripping and them crushing of plant life.

That won't "stump" anybody, it just shows you as an idiot.

Your body can process meat but it's mainly designed for carbs and there's no connection between:

a) Being able to eat meat at an evolutionary level

and

b) Mass factory farming just so you can eat way more meat than your body has a use for.

Meat production is responsible for a fifth of all greenhouse gases, huge food wastage (giving corn to cows/chickens) and more deforestation than any other cause.

Meat should be a treat, not a staple.

3) So, who's the naked hottie?

I'm not a total vegetarian but I agree with the principles of PETA ... in the same way I agree with the principles of Greenpeace. Both are against farking up the planet.

Problem is, both organizations have attracted all the extremist nutters and membership/support of them should be avoided at all costs.

PETA does have way hotter chicks though.

brubakan		2009-01-28 10:22:44 AM

factoryconnection: YannickNoahsFark: If by healthiest you mean ingesting the hormones and antibiotics that are in the meat supply, I have no reply....

You've shifted your argument deliberately. You are now arguing against excessive processing and chemical saturation in farm-raised livestock, which is fine, but it isn't the same argument.

Would you eat wild deer or duck?

ISouldBeWorking: People seem to be arguing the first point, somehow thinking it will logically lead to the second point. This is not the case.

The way I see it is a passionate response to an impassioned and inaccurate position. Peta's stance of "meat is murder" and "animals deserve equal rights" is not natural, and turns people off to their message. It also does the disservice of making groups that promote animal welfare look insane by association. Thanks for nothing, b*tches (and the men that join because they want to f*ck them).

Our consumption of food in general, meat in general, and resources to produce meat is excessive and environmentally perilous. A logical stance would be: reduce our intake, eat less meat of better quality. An irrational stance would be: meat is murder, and you're a murderer of both animals and the planet.

Go ahead, be a vegetarian... I'd do it if not for pork, too. If you're really into not enjoying food, be a vegan. You'll still be killing animals (farmers take care of the rabbits that try to eat their crops, for instance), so don't get preachy about their rights.

I see your point. Also, as far as the rabbits go, I understand that there are some casualties that are inevitable (I have had rabbit problems in my own garden did not kill them). My thing is, the part that is environmentally raping the planet is the factory farming of beef. It is also a very cruel process to boot. And again, I HATE PETA. They make the rest of us look bad.

/I chose the lifestyle for health/environmental reasons.
//Doesn't hate meat eaters live and let live

Cyclone Jack		2009-01-28 10:25:03 AM

Smidge204: "Studies show vegetarians have better sex[Citation Needed]"

THIS.

Silovik		2009-01-28 10:27:37 AM

factoryconnection: Silovik: difficulty? Come to Southern Ontario where you could honestly walk up and stab a deer if you were so inclined.

Unregulated hunting and suburban sprawl destroyed the natural predators. Over-regulated hunting (in response) prevented humans from taking over that role. Lyme Disease is a signature, downstream effect from this pendulum process. There are far too many deer, like you said, but just because they make it easy doesn't mean hunters should be impugned. I'd rather get shot and killed quickly than get hit by a car and die of starvation, if I had to choose.

I completely agree, and I think in correlation with the huge amount of deer, we have wolves coming back down into southern ontario and also the highest amount of vehicle accidents involving deers in Canada.

I prefer to fish, but we need more hunting to keep the deer pop down.

With that said, the amount of deers and their closeness to human populations has made them a poor quarry for any sport hunting. Like I said, you could walk up and stab one. Now bare-knuckle hunting that would be sporting.

Molavian		2009-01-28 10:29:33 AM

ddelorm: What_do_you_want_now: Favorite Questions to Stump PeTA idiots:

1) Why do we have teeth designed for the tearing and shredding of meat? Proper Herbivores only have teeth for the gripping and them crushing of plant life.

I am very much NOT a vegetarian. Love me some steak. Found this interesting, though:

When you look at the comparison between herbivores and humans, we compare much more closely to herbivores than meat eating animals. Humans are clearly not designed to digest and ingest meat.

* Meat-eaters: have claws
Herbivores: no claws
Humans: no claws

* Meat-eaters: have no skin pores and perspire through the tongue
Herbivores: perspire through skin pores
Humans: perspire through skin pores

* Meat-eaters: have sharp front teeth for tearing, with no flat molar teeth for grinding
Herbivores: no sharp front teeth, but flat rear molars for grinding
Humans: no sharp front teeth, but flat rear molars for grinding

* Meat-eaters: have intestinal tract that is only 3 times their body length so that rapidly decaying meat can pass through quickly
Herbivores: have intestinal tract 10-12 times their body length.
Humans: have intestinal tract 10-12 times their body length.

* Meat-eaters: have strong hydrochloric acid in stomach to digest meat
Herbivores: have stomach acid that is 20 times weaker than that of a meat-eater
Humans: have stomach acid that is 20 times weaker than that of a meat-eater

* Meat-eaters: salivary glands in mouth not needed to pre-digest grains and fruits.
Herbivores: well-developed salivary glands which are necessary to pre-digest grains and fruits
Humans: well-developed salivary glands, which are necessary to pre-digest, grains and fruits

* Meat-eaters: have acid saliva with no enzyme ptyalin to pre-digest grains
Herbivores: have alkaline saliva with ptyalin to pre-digest grains
Humans: have alkaline saliva with ptyalin to pre-digest grains

Based on a chart by A.D. Andrews, Fit Food for Men, (Chicago: American Hygiene Society, 1970)

We're really NOT carnivores. But meat really DOES taste good.

You don't need to evolve intelligence to sneak up on a blade of grass.

mofomisfit		2009-01-28 10:29:49 AM

oakleyblades
How many endurance/strength athletes do you know who are Vegetarians?

That answer is not a lot because the human body can't sustain muscle mass and health without massive quantities of protein.

Human=Omnivore

Eat what you want.

Oh bullshiat. Plenty of vegetarians are healthy, and there's a gulf of difference between 'healthy' and 'endurance/strength athlete.'

ronaprhys		2009-01-28 10:33:53 AM

Joce678: What_do_you_want_now: Favorite Questions to Stump PeTA idiots:

1) Why do we have teeth designed for the tearing and shredding of meat? Proper Herbivores only have teeth for the gripping and them crushing of plant life.

That won't "stump" anybody, it just shows you as an idiot.

Your body can process meat but it's mainly designed for carbs and there's no connection between:

a) Being able to eat meat at an evolutionary level

and

b) Mass factory farming just so you can eat way more meat than your body has a use for.

Meat production is responsible for a fifth of all greenhouse gases, huge food wastage (giving corn to cows/chickens) and more deforestation than any other cause.

Meat should be a treat, not a staple.

3) So, who's the naked hottie?

I'm not a total vegetarian but I agree with the principles of PETA ... in the same way I agree with the principles of Greenpeace. Both are against farking up the planet.

Problem is, both organizations have attracted all the extremist nutters and membership/support of them should be avoided at all costs.

PETA does have way hotter chicks though.

Who here is arguing for the mass production of meat? Please find me that person. The argument (jokes about bacon aside) is that meat is part of a healthy and balanced diet. I disagree that it should be a treat, but I also disagree that it needs to be part of every meal.

Mind you, the argument about our teeth is a counter to those saying that we simply don't need meat and comparing us to gorillas and the like. It points out that meat was essential to the development of our species. This doesn't lead to factory-farming is good. Making that connection is simply incorrect.

As for the last part, PeTA is a hypocritical organization run by farktards. Regardless of the level of hotties. I can understand promoting sustainable methods of food production and support that - but that's not their position. Their position is "no use", not sustainable use.

Multi-Vitamin		2009-01-28 10:34:41 AM

Better at sex?

Well...maybe for women but the vegetarian/vegan diet is actually counterproductive to testosterone levels in men unless they supplement.

There are not many plants that have bioavailable levels of zinc and essential fatty acids which have a direct effect on testosterone.

The Icelander		2009-01-28 10:34:44 AM

halfof33: That being said, Chimps eat meat with relish.

Relish?

El Dudereno		2009-01-28 10:35:18 AM

YannickNoahsFark: Pro Zack: YannickNoahsFark: I mean gorillas get to be a pretty good size and strength without meat, don't they?

fortunately they don't have to support brains the size of ours.

So we need meat to think? I think Einstein would disgree with you...(yes, he was veg)

No, we needed meat to evolve the type of brain that would allow us to start the agricultural revolution that made fully vegetarian diets possible for humans. The killing and eating of large, fatty animals (usually by a group of humans) allowed our ancestors to get a lot of energy for relatively little effort, and allowed them to form settlements which evolved into agricultural societies.
But don't let that get in the way of anecdotal evidence.

Multi-Vitamin		2009-01-28 10:35:21 AM

Multi-Vitamin: Better at sex?

Well...maybe for women but the vegetarian/vegan diet is actually counterproductive to testosterone levels in men unless they supplement.

There are not many plants that have bioavailable levels of zinc and essential fatty acids which have a direct effect on testosterone.

Forgot to mention that studies also show that soy based products also lower testosterone in males.

Sticky Hands		2009-01-28 10:35:44 AM

YannickNoahsFark: ddelorm: What_do_you_want_now: Favorite Questions to Stump PeTA idiots:

1) Why do we have teeth designed for the tearing and shredding of meat? Proper Herbivores only have teeth for the gripping and them crushing of plant life.

I am very much NOT a vegetarian. Love me some steak. Found this interesting, though:

When you look at the comparison between herbivores and humans, we compare much more closely to herbivores than meat eating animals. Humans are clearly not designed to digest and ingest meat.

* Meat-eaters: have claws
Herbivores: no claws
Humans: no claws

* Meat-eaters: have no skin pores and perspire through the tongue
Herbivores: perspire through skin pores
Humans: perspire through skin pores

* Meat-eaters: have sharp front teeth for tearing, with no flat molar teeth for grinding
Herbivores: no sharp front teeth, but flat rear molars for grinding
Humans: no sharp front teeth, but flat rear molars for grinding

* Meat-eaters: have intestinal tract that is only 3 times their body length so that rapidly decaying meat can pass through quickly
Herbivores: have intestinal tract 10-12 times their body length.
Humans: have intestinal tract 10-12 times their body length.

* Meat-eaters: have strong hydrochloric acid in stomach to digest meat
Herbivores: have stomach acid that is 20 times weaker than that of a meat-eater
Humans: have stomach acid that is 20 times weaker than that of a meat-eater

* Meat-eaters: salivary glands in mouth not needed to pre-digest grains and fruits.
Herbivores: well-developed salivary glands which are necessary to pre-digest grains and fruits
Humans: well-developed salivary glands, which are necessary to pre-digest, grains and fruits

* Meat-eaters: have acid saliva with no enzyme ptyalin to pre-digest grains
Herbivores: have alkaline saliva with ptyalin to pre-digest grains
Humans: have alkaline saliva with ptyalin to pre-digest grains

Based on a chart by A.D. Andrews, Fit Food for Men, (Chicago: American Hygiene Society, 1970)

We're really NOT carnivores. But meat really DOES taste good.

I don't think that people are going to let science and logic get in the way of a good argument - I mean this is Fark, right?

All that shows is that humans are not cats or dogs.

maybe he should have compared us to other great apes, he would have the mostly vegetarian Gorilla to support his view, but the more closely related Chimpanzee eats just about whatever it can kill (including other primates and occasionally other chimps) in addition to vegetable matter.

Grass Hopper		2009-01-28 10:38:41 AM

El Dudereno: YannickNoahsFark: Pro Zack: YannickNoahsFark: I mean gorillas get to be a pretty good size and strength without meat, don't they?

fortunately they don't have to support brains the size of ours.

So we need meat to think? I think Einstein would disgree with you...(yes, he was veg)

No, we needed meat to evolve the type of brain that would allow us to start the agricultural revolution that made fully vegetarian diets possible for humans. The killing and eating of large, fatty animals (usually by a group of humans) allowed our ancestors to get a lot of energy for relatively little effort, and allowed them to form settlements which evolved into agricultural societies.
But don't let that get in the way of anecdotal evidence.

If you think you need an agricultural revolution to have a fully vegetarian diet, that man's gorilla would like a word with you.

Multi-Vitamin		2009-01-28 10:40:00 AM

mofomisfit: oakleyblades
How many endurance/strength athletes do you know who are Vegetarians?

That answer is not a lot because the human body can't sustain muscle mass and health without massive quantities of protein.

Human=Omnivore

Eat what you want.

Oh bullshiat. Plenty of vegetarians are healthy, and there's a gulf of difference between 'healthy' and 'endurance/strength athlete.'

Vegetarians perhaps, but there is a good reason why children should not be feed a vegan diet....so it would stand to reason that if it is clearly unhealthly for an infant, it "should" be unhealthly for optimum growth and development of children, teens, and adutls.

Vegan Couple Kills Infant with Diet (new window)

jpbreon		2009-01-28 10:44:40 AM

ronaprhys:

Gorillas also don't have the teeth we've got and adults can eat up to 50lbs of food a day to maintain themselves. Given that, it's a pretty bad comparison. The simple fact that you seem to keep avoiding is that eating meat has been instrumental to our overall evolution. Secondly, eating a balanced diet that includes meat is the healthiest overall diet for us.

People who eat a good mixture of all foods seem to be the healthiest. I try to eat vegetables and fish, in particular, but my diet is really open-minded. I would say that anyone who avoids entire food groups is in some way short-changing themselves.

Multi-Vitamin		2009-01-28 10:44:59 AM

Grass Hopper: El Dudereno: YannickNoahsFark: Pro Zack: YannickNoahsFark: I mean gorillas get to be a pretty good size and strength without meat, don't they?

fortunately they don't have to support brains the size of ours.

So we need meat to think? I think Einstein would disgree with you...(yes, he was veg)

No, we needed meat to evolve the type of brain that would allow us to start the agricultural revolution that made fully vegetarian diets possible for humans. The killing and eating of large, fatty animals (usually by a group of humans) allowed our ancestors to get a lot of energy for relatively little effort, and allowed them to form settlements which evolved into agricultural societies.
But don't let that get in the way of anecdotal evidence.

If you think you need an agricultural revolution to have a fully vegetarian diet, that man's gorilla would like a word with you.

The gorillas vs humans comparison is like comparing a avacado to a grapefruit.

Two totally separate species, different muscle fiber makeup, different digestive biology, totally different evolutionary branch.

Most if not all anthropologists theorize that our ancestors development of advanced brain function was directly related to our increased consumption of protein.

Since there was no agriculture back then, I can only assume that anthropologists are referring to MEAT.

brubakan		2009-01-28 10:44:59 AM

Multi-Vitamin: mofomisfit: oakleyblades
How many endurance/strength athletes do you know who are Vegetarians?

That answer is not a lot because the human body can't sustain muscle mass and health without massive quantities of protein.

Human=Omnivore

Eat what you want.

Oh bullshiat. Plenty of vegetarians are healthy, and there's a gulf of difference between 'healthy' and 'endurance/strength athlete.'

Vegetarians perhaps, but there is a good reason why children should not be feed a vegan diet....so it would stand to reason that if it is clearly unhealthly for an infant, it "should" be unhealthly for optimum growth and development of children, teens, and adutls.

Vegan Couple Kills Infant with Diet (new window)

Ok, so they were bad parents? You can raise a kid on a healthy vegan diet. Every diet has potential problems if it is not executed responsibly with lots of research.

/Won't raise vegan kids
//vegetarian maybe

tedbundee		2009-01-28 10:45:19 AM

Shakespeare's Monkey: Kind of obligatory, but I'd rather see this.

/link is hot and NSFW, but that's like your opinion man.

oh MAN I love that

/atheist

ronaprhys		2009-01-28 10:47:33 AM

Grass Hopper: If you think you need an agricultural revolution to have a fully vegetarian diet, that man's gorilla would like a word with you.

Gorillas aren't humans, last I checked. And chimps are closer to humans than gorillas and do eat meat when they can.

Seems to me that scholarly evidence stands in the way of your viewpoint.

halfof33		2009-01-28 10:49:43 AM

Dear Cecil:

In reading through your column "Vegetarians Go Ape," I noticed an unusual fact that you seemed to expose with great confidence. You stated that "Jane Goodall established more than twenty years ago that wild chimpanzees kill other animals once in a while and eat the meat with relish." I question the accuracy of this. Where would wild chimpanzees obtain relish? --Guru Singh Khalsa, Los Angeles

Thanks Cecil.

aresef		2009-01-28 10:50:55 AM

Multi-Vitamin: mofomisfit: oakleyblades
How many endurance/strength athletes do you know who are Vegetarians?

That answer is not a lot because the human body can't sustain muscle mass and health without massive quantities of protein.

Human=Omnivore

Eat what you want.

Oh bullshiat. Plenty of vegetarians are healthy, and there's a gulf of difference between 'healthy' and 'endurance/strength athlete.'

Vegetarians perhaps, but there is a good reason why children should not be feed a vegan diet....so it would stand to reason that if it is clearly unhealthly for an infant, it "should" be unhealthly for optimum growth and development of children, teens, and adutls.

Vegan Couple Kills Infant with Diet (new window)

I remember that story. Those vegans were doing it wrong. Soy milk and apple juice? Come the hell on.

I wasn't raised vegetarian--I made the switch a few years ago--so I can't say about whether or not it's more beneficial to raise kids one way or the other. But I found that I had a lot more energy and I felt a lot better once I stopped putting meat in my body. Sure, this is pretty anecdotal, but seriously, give vegetarianism a shot. You might start liking tofu.

FrizzleFry		2009-01-28 10:51:50 AM

ddelorm: What_do_you_want_now: Favorite Questions to Stump PeTA idiots:

1) Why do we have teeth designed for the tearing and shredding of meat? Proper Herbivores only have teeth for the gripping and them crushing of plant life.

I am very much NOT a vegetarian. Love me some steak. Found this interesting, though:

When you look at the comparison between herbivores and humans, we compare much more closely to herbivores than meat eating animals. Humans are clearly not designed to digest and ingest meat.

* Meat-eaters: have claws
Herbivores: no claws
Humans: no claws

* Meat-eaters: have no skin pores and perspire through the tongue
Herbivores: perspire through skin pores
Humans: perspire through skin pores

* Meat-eaters: have sharp front teeth for tearing, with no flat molar teeth for grinding
Herbivores: no sharp front teeth, but flat rear molars for grinding
Humans: no sharp front teeth, but flat rear molars for grinding

* Meat-eaters: have intestinal tract that is only 3 times their body length so that rapidly decaying meat can pass through quickly
Herbivores: have intestinal tract 10-12 times their body length.
Humans: have intestinal tract 10-12 times their body length.

* Meat-eaters: have strong hydrochloric acid in stomach to digest meat
Herbivores: have stomach acid that is 20 times weaker than that of a meat-eater
Humans: have stomach acid that is 20 times weaker than that of a meat-eater

* Meat-eaters: salivary glands in mouth not needed to pre-digest grains and fruits.
Herbivores: well-developed salivary glands which are necessary to pre-digest grains and fruits
Humans: well-developed salivary glands, which are necessary to pre-digest, grains and fruits

* Meat-eaters: have acid saliva with no enzyme ptyalin to pre-digest grains
Herbivores: have alkaline saliva with ptyalin to pre-digest grains
Humans: have alkaline saliva with ptyalin to pre-digest grains

Based on a chart by A.D. Andrews, Fit Food for Men, (Chicago: American Hygiene Society, 1970)

We're really NOT carnivores. But meat really DOES taste good.

We're omnivores. Monkeys eat plants, bugs, occasionally each other. No way you are going to get all the protein, fiber and trace elements you need eating just one or the other.
We evolved to eat anything and everything we could find, and to move around alot resulting in varied diet.
Now that I think about it Agent Smith was right, were more like viruses.

El Dudereno		2009-01-28 10:52:50 AM

Oh_Enough_Already: While I understand people - rather reasonably - scoffing at PETA's fundamentalist/extremist "meat is murder blah blah blah" ideology I can't be the only person equally troubled by far too many folk's gleeful blood lust when it comes to hunting.

Where is the respect for the animal who's life you took?

The gratitude for the sustenance it has provided you?

For far too many folks they approach hunting not as as "sporting" endeavor wherein they're going after this or that animal for food but, rather, merely some sort of macho endeavor where they seek to feel good about themselves by exerting dominance over another creature (or other men perhaps) merely by killing it.

When I read about "canned hunts" and/or hunters outfitted with more firepower and technology than your average Marine Battalion it kind of makes me sick.

Is that truly "hunting" the same way that patiently stalking a deer or an elk that you'll then eat is?

This same mentality all too often translates into not only a lack of respect for "lesser" creatures but a propensity to outright abuse them simply for their own amusement.

Which, in turn, is unquestionably a form of narcissistic sociopathy that can and does manifest itself in the form of the abuse, mistreatment and violence towards other humans.

I've hunted, have many relatives who've hunted and I'm friends with many hunters. This is inevitable when you grow up in the Midwest.

Unfortunately though there seems to be an ever more prevailing mentality that hunting is not about "sport" and it need not be "fair" and it's some sort of zero-sum game where all that matters is the kill and any and all means, methods or absurdly disproportional firepower is acceptable - sustainability, respect and morality be damned - as long as you kill something.

This then is where the "murder" element of PETA's "all meat is murder" canard starts to gain a little traction.

Meh. I hunt for three main reasons:

1) I enjoy eating the meat. There's nothing quite like a good venison tenderloin or some homemade jerky.
2) The deer population is out of control around here because the first whities to settle the place killed off all their predators and planted all kinds of food for them. Getting three or four deer each year is my small contribution to better ecology - along with the money I spend that goes to conservation projects.
3) I enjoy the comeraderie of family and friends out in the woods and praries of SD. It's peaceful and quiet for the most part.

It isn't some manly competition to see who can kill something with a huge gun - I hunt with a muzzle-loader, a bow, and a single-shot rifle depending on the tags I get. Spending money on anything but basic camo or orange, gas, ammo/arrows, and one good set of optics just seems silly.

Canned hunts like the ones you describe disgust me. If you can't get close enough to an animal in the wild to get a good fatal shot on it, you shouldn't be hunting in the first place. "Hunting" in one of those glorified zoos in Texas should be banned.

kiam		2009-01-28 10:56:26 AM

"Then there's the revelation by the Center for Consumer Freedom that People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) kills thousands of animals every year at its Norfolk, Virginia headquarters. The Center notes that, between 1998 and 2003, PETA put to death more than 10,000 dogs, cats, and other creatures they dub "companion animals" and, get this, raked in nearly $29 million in 2004 from people who thought PETA wouldn't ever harm any animal. In the years noted, PETA killed 78.3% of the animals they received."

yea, Peta is a standup organization alright.

kiam		2009-01-28 10:57:23 AM

oh and:

PETA has been caught killing pets and dumping the bodies into dumpsters in the backs of shopping centers. Not only are they murderign animals that they have been paid to find homes for, but they are dumping the bodies in other peoples' dumpsters. This is a major public health concern, not to mention the fact that these ethical vegans are raking in piles of money from other gullible vegans who think that PETA actually stops cruelty to animals.

BelDion		2009-01-28 10:59:39 AM

Came for next-to-naked hotties engaging in foreplay...

Left crying.

lukelightning		2009-01-28 11:00:56 AM

That being said, Chimps eat meat with relish.

Wrong wrong wrong. They eat it with A-1 Steak Sauce.

Except when they are eating other chimps... for that they like a nice Chianti.

abb3w		2009-01-28 11:05:27 AM

YannickNoahsFark: Eat some nuts for fat..

Aside from the pun, olives are better.

/ribeye steak, medium rare, pls.

El Dudereno		2009-01-28 11:06:07 AM

Grass Hopper: El Dudereno: YannickNoahsFark: Pro Zack: YannickNoahsFark: I mean gorillas get to be a pretty good size and strength without meat, don't they?

fortunately they don't have to support brains the size of ours.

So we need meat to think? I think Einstein would disgree with you...(yes, he was veg)

No, we needed meat to evolve the type of brain that would allow us to start the agricultural revolution that made fully vegetarian diets possible for humans. The killing and eating of large, fatty animals (usually by a group of humans) allowed our ancestors to get a lot of energy for relatively little effort, and allowed them to form settlements which evolved into agricultural societies.
But don't let that get in the way of anecdotal evidence.

If you think you need an agricultural revolution to have a fully vegetarian diet, that man's gorilla would like a word with you.

That man's gorilla has evolved a digestive system that can process fibrous fruits and other plant matter that would go right through our systems unchanged. Eating animal flesh (especially after the discovery of fire) allowed us to evolve to expend less energy digesting food and more energy in our brains.

/*tips hat to the gorilla*

Sticky Hands		2009-01-28 11:07:59 AM

FrizzleFry: We're omnivores. Monkeys eat plants, bugs, occasionally each other. No way you are going to get all the protein, fiber and trace elements you need eating just one or the other.
We evolved to eat anything and everything we could find, and to move around alot resulting in varied diet.
Now that I think about it Agent Smith was right, were more like viruses.

naw, agent Smith simply had a poor understanding of the animal world, and even life in general.

Everything expands and gobbles up resources until it hits pressure from competitors, from predators, or until those resources run out. Non-native species do it all the time (see Australia's problems with rabbits and cane toads). Insects do it on a regular basis (locusts are a great example). Deer populations will expand until the food supply runs out and they starve by thousands. (assuming you get rids of the pressure of predators).

I give Agent Smith a pass though, since he was programed into a different situation and likely never experienced a world with excess resources of any kind. Hell, the crickets I keep to feed my toads will do it: lay so many eggs that the food is consumed and the vast majority starve long before they are big enough to look like anything more than a dot.

//Yes I have thought way to much about this, WAY to much.

Mr_Fabulous		2009-01-28 11:11:59 AM

Soracloud: I'll eat 10 servings of Asparagus then blow my load in some PETA girls mouth. Then she'll change her tune.

You've just raised an interesting question that I'd never considered before.

EXCUSE ME, FARKETTES (AND ANY GAY FARKERS): Does semen actually taste different after someone's eaten asparagus? Or anything else, for that matter?

Inquiring minds want to know.

sparkyfarky		2009-01-28 11:12:19 AM

Gee, how is it that the deer population has gotten way out of control when they only have one baby per deer per season?? Hmmmm, could it be that human population in this country has gotten way out of control or has sprawled into way too many areas??? (Ex: woman has EIGHT babies at once using a fertility drug when there are millions of orphaned children who need homes)....ARGHHHH!!!

Sticky Hands		2009-01-28 11:13:36 AM

Sticky Hands: //Yes I have thought way to much about this, WAY to much.

Apparently so much that I left out a couple of "o"s there (among other things, I'm sure).
Please place them in their rightful places

//maybe I should spend less time "thinking" and more time proofreading.....

sparkyfarky		2009-01-28 11:16:55 AM

sparkyfarky: Gee, how is it that the deer population has gotten way out of control when they only have one baby per deer per season?? Hmmmm, could it be that human population in this country has gotten way out of control or has sprawled into way too many areas??? (Ex: woman has EIGHT babies at once using a fertility drug when there are millions of orphaned children who need homes)....ARGHHHH!!!

Sorry for that....I'm not a PETA person, just hate that deer pop. explosion crapsky...

Silly_Sot		2009-01-28 11:21:13 AM

Smarshmallow:
For most of our history, humans didn't have access to "massive amounts of protein." Humans can live perfectly healthily on a vegetarian diet. The only thing that's hard to get is one of the b vitamins. Furthermore, they can do it without affecting you or your sensitive ego one bit.

If they can, why do they have to be such monumental screaming douchebags about their little "vegetarian" cult?

Forecaster18		2009-01-28 11:24:30 AM

Want. (new window)

factoryconnection		2009-01-28 11:26:48 AM

Mr_Fabulous: EXCUSE ME, FARKETTES (AND ANY GAY FARKERS): Does semen actually taste different after someone's eaten asparagus? Or anything else, for that matter?

Inquiring minds want to know.

My old girlfriend could tell when I'd consumed Sprite; I didn't drink it often. Being outside of your specified polling group, I can't offer first-hand knowledge.

Displayed 50 of 319 comments