Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(CNN)   Vegans get their organic panties in a twist after discovering they've been lusting after meat for years   (news.blogs.cnn.com) divider line 328
    More: Amusing  
•       •       •

24313 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Apr 2011 at 1:56 AM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



328 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-04-16 06:47:45 AM  

hitchking: 1. Animals can experience suffering

2. Most meat products entail very serious animal suffering.

3. Generally speaking, it is not ethical to do things that entail serious animal suffering.

Therefore, it is generally not ethical to eat most meat products.


How about this...

1. Animals can experience suffering

2. Mistreating livestock entails very serious animal suffering.

Therefore, it is generally not ethical to mistreat livestock.


see? it's neat, tidy, and doesn't require dubious claims or bare assertions.
 
2011-04-16 06:52:10 AM  
Anyone got that 'arguing on the internet is retarded' poster kicking around?
 
2011-04-16 06:53:48 AM  
seriously - wtf is the issue? The only thing that pisses me off about this is that often times the recipes I'd made didn't look like they showed in the magazine, and I wondered wtf I did wrong. Maybe I didn't - it was just a different image. It's not like they force-fed you meat via your eyeballs.


/vegan


//think this blogger needs to get a life
 
2011-04-16 06:56:29 AM  
hitchking:
log_jammin: hitchking: The point I'm making in this thread is about the ethics of eating meatmistreating livestock.

Okay, fine then. I'm happy to agree that that's the point I'm making. It'd be this:

1. Animals can experience suffering

2. Most meat products entail very serious animal suffering.

3. Generally speaking, it is not ethical to do things that entail serious animal suffering.

Therefore, it is generally not ethical to eat most meat products.


If you agree with that, I'm delighted to agree that I've been spending this whole time making a point about tiddlywinks.

I will agree with you that MOST animal products in the U.S. involve animal suffering. But, that is because we have gone to the CAFO, or Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation, an industrial-based animal production system.

I live on the big island of Hawai'i, and there are NO CAFOs here. Beef and chicken are free-range, especially the beef. The cows wander around the hills, eating grass, and doing other cow things. Now, an operation like THAT, as opposed to a drug and hormone sopped, torturous existence in a CAFO, is heavenly.

In a "normal" production environment, animals are treated well because it PAYS. No farm animal is (generally) subject to predation from other animals. Yes, at the end of life they will have an encounter with a butcher, but the lack of constant danger more than balances that out, IMHO. Farm animals, on reasonable farms, have a better, and longer, life than the same animals in the wild.

In summation, I think Americans should eat LESS meat than they do, in most cases. CAFOs should be eliminated as inhumane. Without CAFOs, less meat would be produced, which fits with the "less meat" idea pretty well. And, without CAFO living for food animals, animal cruelty, and pass-through problems such as hormones and antibiotics in our food supply, would be greatly reduced.
 
2011-04-16 06:59:55 AM  

hitchking: 1. Animals are not as psychologically complex as humans, but they can experience some emotions: including pleasure and suffering.


How do you define suffering, in other words where do you put your threshold. Many vegetarians seem to use some odd concept of experiencing pain as the threshold. Which would, hilariously enough, make me a monster since arguably the same process as pain happens when you run a neural network. And I've run a lot of those poor poor neural networks.
 
2011-04-16 07:01:34 AM  
hitchking:
Now, I disagree with your idea that requiring an egg's worth of protein gets rid of any moral argument. Doesn't that imply a natural=ethical thing, at least for meat above and beyond that one egg a month?

I suppose it depends on viewpoint. My viewpoint is that doing anything REQUIRED FOR SURVIVAL cannot be immoral. So, eating animal protein is not immoral. Once that point is established, how much one eats becomes an issue of gluttony, rather than the moral issue of meat consumption itself.
 
2011-04-16 07:04:00 AM  

GeneralJim: hitchking:
log_jammin: hitchking: The point I'm making in this thread is about the ethics of eating meatmistreating livestock.

Okay, fine then. I'm happy to agree that that's the point I'm making. It'd be this:

1. Animals can experience suffering

2. Most meat products entail very serious animal suffering.

3. Generally speaking, it is not ethical to do things that entail serious animal suffering.

Therefore, it is generally not ethical to eat most meat products.


If you agree with that, I'm delighted to agree that I've been spending this whole time making a point about tiddlywinks.

I will agree with you that MOST animal products in the U.S. involve animal suffering. But, that is because we have gone to the CAFO, or Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation, an industrial-based animal production system.

I live on the big island of Hawai'i, and there are NO CAFOs here. Beef and chicken are free-range, especially the beef. The cows wander around the hills, eating grass, and doing other cow things. Now, an operation like THAT, as opposed to a drug and hormone sopped, torturous existence in a CAFO, is heavenly.

In a "normal" production environment, animals are treated well because it PAYS. No farm animal is (generally) subject to predation from other animals. Yes, at the end of life they will have an encounter with a butcher, but the lack of constant danger more than balances that out, IMHO. Farm animals, on reasonable farms, have a better, and longer, life than the same animals in the wild.

In summation, I think Americans should eat LESS meat than they do, in most cases. CAFOs should be eliminated as inhumane. Without CAFOs, less meat would be produced, which fits with the "less meat" idea pretty well. And, without CAFO living for food animals, animal cruelty, and pass-through problems such as hormones and antibiotics in our food supply, would be greatly reduced.


I agree with virtually everything you wrote, and I think you agree with nearly everything i wrote.

It seems like we agree that it's wrong to bring unnecessary suffering to other animals. It seems like we agree that most of the meat products you can buy cause serious animal suffering. And I guarantee we agree that extremely humane meat production practices (using extremely stupid animals) actually may not cause that much suffering.

I think we have some other minor disagreements, but that's not a bad bit of common ground.

/okay NOW I'm off to bed
 
2011-04-16 07:07:03 AM  

smeag0l: /r/firstworldproblemsdoglover: I wish I had so few problems I could care about things like this.

ah.. the joys of firstworldproblems


Approves (new window)

Your GPS run out of battery (first world problem)
Got to wake up Saturday (first world problem)
You just delayed a honeymoon (first world problem)
Your vegan magazine been foolin' you(first world problem)
Half your friend list is spam accounts (first world problem)
And your center channel speaker's out (first world problem)
 
2011-04-16 07:08:44 AM  

after reading the comments, I can't figure out why no one has mentioned this:



animals have nerve endings, can experience pain. ignore the argument that they experience emotion, etc. Go for the basics - have nerve endings can experience pain

humans are the advanced species, and as such in nature it is perfectly normal to expect higher species to eat lower species

however, as higher species, we have an obligation to treat the thing that is giving it's life so that we can continue to live with some amount of respect - therefore do not cause it intense suffering before eating


This is the reason why I'm vegan. I don't think eating meat is wrong, I think the way that we raise animals for meat is really horrible, and cruel. The American Indians had a good philosophy - you kill an animal so you can eat it & survive, you say a small thank you prayer to the animal. That seems pretty reasonable.
 
2011-04-16 07:09:55 AM  

deffuse: Anyone got that 'arguing on the internet is retarded' poster kicking around?


www.crunkcodes.com

... and this, of course:

i51.tinypic.com
 
2011-04-16 07:15:19 AM  

hray: humans are the advanced species, and as such in nature it is perfectly normal to expect higher species to eat lower species


LIFE DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY
 
2011-04-16 07:29:18 AM  
img16.imageshack.us
 
2011-04-16 07:32:03 AM  
spyderqueen: I have a vegetarian friend who is vegetarian only because meat and her digestive system are not buddies. She HATES vegetarians and vegans like the ones in this article because a) she thinks they're morons and b) they make her feel a little embarrassed asking for the vegetarian options because she doesn't want to be associated with them.

She's gonna laugh her ASS off when I show her this article.

(She won't eat fake meat either, which is another reason we can be friends)


You know who ELSE was a Vegetarian only because meat did not get along with thier digestive tract?

Yes, I found a way to Godwin this.
 
2011-04-16 07:40:06 AM  
A certain person here could really stand to gain from taking a course in logic.
 
2011-04-16 07:48:39 AM  
Meat is good for you. Fats help improve your mood and ultimately provides you with better energy than sugary grains or processed oils and syrups (which are all pretty much chalked full of carbohydrates, something you do not need that much of unless you're running marathons all the time).

If you don't want to eat meat, that's fine---your decision. I won't stop eating my steak, because that's my decision. It isn't vegans that are annoying, it's jerkfaces that suggest that I need to do it their way because of preference.

Keep eating what you want and punch someone in the damn face if they try to force their beliefs on you---after carefully considering their argument, anyway. =)
 
2011-04-16 07:50:43 AM  

Ruiizu: It isn't vegans vegetarians that are annoying, it's vegan jerkfaces that suggest that I need to do it their way because of preference.


I find this tends to be the case
 
2011-04-16 07:52:37 AM  
I'm a vegetarian and i still scoff at that shiat about 'barfbags.'

clearly meat is delicious and (more or less) healthy. its perfectly biologist-approved food for humans. that's why the photos looked good

"its icky" is a really stupid reason.
 
2011-04-16 07:58:41 AM  

lewismarktwo: Vegans haven't been this gobsmacked since they realized half their shoes were made of leather. Wait till they realize it is impossible to take part in society without exploiting at least some animals!


There are a few stores that one can go to purchase shoes free of animal products. The best one can do in this society is minimize animal exploitation, but one can take prudent steps to insure that many aspects of one's lifestyle is animal exploitation free.
 
2011-04-16 08:19:42 AM  

hitchking:
3. The pleasure that humans get from eating meat (and trust me, I get a LOT), does not justify the amount of suffering that is caused by the practice.

So I think it is morally wrong to eat meat. I think that follows logically from the above points. If you disagree with any of the above points, or if you disagree with the conclusion I have drawn from them, please tell me exactly what pushes your chuckle button.

I should be clear, though: I do eat meat. I'm cutting back, but it's hard as shiat.


The balance is in favor of MEAT being moral enough to eat in your esteem...therefore people will chuckle at you. Every time you have eaten meat you have felt that an animal's suffering for you to eat it was justified unless you were force-fed like the yummy waterfowl with fatty livers that go nicely on ritz crackers. Your morals are reflected by how you act more than by what you say you "believe".
 
2011-04-16 08:20:04 AM  
I am 100 percent supportive of Vegans.

I think people who claim to be morally superior because they don't eat animals or animal products are detestable.

/there's a difference
 
2011-04-16 08:23:31 AM  
Tofurkey. I've never understood that. We're going to take tofu, shape it like a cooked animal and then go Dexter on it. Tofurkey is veg equivalent of the meatloaf baby. I like meatloaf, I like babies, I don't want to make meatloaf look like a baby so I can slice through its abdomen and eat its fingers. Friggin' creepy.

I don't know, I can see being mildly offended by this, especially the one where the bones were photoshopped out. You want truth in advertising. But, then again, I suppose its not too much different then Playboy. Men in general seem to be okay with the false depictions in that.
 
2011-04-16 08:32:35 AM  
We would love nothing more than to use only vegan photography shot by vegan photographers, and we hope to be there soon."

Replace the word vegan at the end of that sentence with practically another other demographic and you'd probably get sued.

We would love nothing more than to use only chosen people photography shot by white photographers, and we hope to be there soon." Uh huh.
 
2011-04-16 08:34:32 AM  
had me a bison and bacon burger yesterday and that muthafrkker was so so tasty

had to deal with vegan college students a few jobs back, basically over privileged assheads who had no lives and never got laid.

and they were really ugly.

live your life how you want, just don't tell me about it, okay?
 
2011-04-16 08:36:48 AM  

tirob: I am 100 percent supportive of Vegans.

I think people who claim to be morally superior because they don't eat animals or animal products are detestable.

/there's a difference


This. I could care less what/whom you choose to eat. Just don't knock me for eating a cheeseburger.
 
2011-04-16 08:37:08 AM  
Two things I dislike about most vegans is their propensity to not just eat how they want and shut up about it, but instead try to evangelize their food habits to everyone else around them. And secondly, their usual reason for not eating meat is some misplaced morality. It would be one thing if they simply used nutrition as their reasoning, and believed that it's healthier to not eat meat, which there is some evidence (though the design of human teeth shows us to be omnivores not herbivores). BUt most vegans think eating meat is "cruel" or "inhumane".

All non human animals are non-sentient biological machines. They are not self-aware, have no soul (if you believe in that at all), and are simply not on the same level as humans. Killing and eating an animal is no different than me taking the video card out of one computer and putting it in another. I'm using the parts of a machine to achieve some goal of my own. There is no moral aspect to it good or bad. Animals are biological machines that just exist. Use them if you want, or don't. But don't attribute some humanistic morality to them when there is none.
 
2011-04-16 08:40:27 AM  

Tourney3p0: hitchking:

Nah, people hate vegans. They really do. You may not. But a lot of people do.

Name one.


Me.
 
2011-04-16 09:01:32 AM  
Who farking cares?
 
2011-04-16 09:34:11 AM  
vegnews.com

Is it or isn't it? Now, we'll never know for sure.

Why did they hide their stock response in a PDF?

"Dear Readers: We can't make it with just vegan photos. They're not good enough..."

Their readers are up in arms:

by Erin

I don't see how anyone could find it "appropriate" to digitally remove bones from a photo of a piece of meat and call it vegan.

Posted: Apr 14 2011 11:36AMBy Patricia Northrop

that wasn't an apology. if anything, after reading your response, I no longer care to follow VegNews.

Posted: Apr 14 2011 11:37AMBy Angela

There is no excuse, no apology that will make up for the years of deception that you have brought upon your readers. It is pure lazyness. You say it would cost more to hire "vegan photographers"...Seriously? There are vegan photographers that would take amazing photos for your articles..for no charge.. I am appalled and saddened, this apology letter has done nothing to lighten the situation. I demand a full refund and until you change your ways, I will not re-subscribe.

Posted: Apr 14 2011 11:38AMBy lowrie ward

i still love you, too, but am sad. i'm sure you could find a fabulous vegan photog to offer services for cheap in exchange for advertising in your mag...

Posted: Apr 14 2011 11:38AMBy Marilyn

I still didn't see an apology in your letter for deceiving your readers!!

// I'm afraid things look gravy.
 
2011-04-16 09:36:14 AM  

frizzantik: i'd like to see you tear through an animals uncooked skin with those teeth

all the evolution arguements in general are a joke considering almost no one eats uncooked meat.. the meat has to be cooked for it to be soft enough to eat.

our "claws" are equally worthless for tearing and killing animals. it's only with the aide of tools can we bring down all but the smallest prey

so yeah, tools and fire are needed for most people to eat meat. not sure what Darwin would have to say about that


Check out the canines on this vegan.

Link
 
2011-04-16 09:45:50 AM  
"The pictures we've been drooling over for years are actually of MEAT!" she charged.

Boy that's just rich. Hey lady, the reason you buy that tofu that is shaped and flavored to look like meat is because you DROOL OVER THE THOUGHT OF MEAT. If you didn't, you'd just eat a salad or something. Get over yourself already.
 
2011-04-16 09:45:55 AM  

frizzantik: Greymalkin: Bear Grylls proves this every other episode between drinking his own piss.

You make a great point: Just because humans CAN drink their own piss, doesn't mean that I'm going to go around doing it.


Trying to change your argument I see, your premise which I was refuting was that it supposedly cannot be done. If you wanted to lead with the "shouldn't be done" argument you missed the boat.

But hey, rock on dude.. and no I haven't read Origin of Species. Have you? I can just picture you by the fire, glass of fine piss in hand, leafing through Darwin's masterwork..

Yes I have. Oh noes! You are making fun of me being educated and well read, how cutting! How I wish I could be as wilfully ignorant as you.
 
2011-04-16 10:00:30 AM  
i197.photobucket.com
 
2011-04-16 10:00:54 AM  
www.fileden.com
 
2011-04-16 10:08:08 AM  
I had an ex-g/f who was not only vegan, she was also extremely allergic to dairy and nuts. It was practically impossible to go out to dinner with her.

However she liked it in the pooper and always wanted me to pee on her face in the shower, so she had that going for her.

She also was a bit of a "Rainwoman" which was not as hot as you would think.

/never peed on her
 
2011-04-16 10:10:05 AM  

TomD9938:
"We would love nothing more than to use only vegan photography shot by vegan photographers, and we hope to be there soon."

These guys play hard-ball.


That's not going far enough! I want the camera to be built by vegans, and the raw materials for the construction of the parts of the camera to be mined by vegan miners.
 
2011-04-16 10:13:56 AM  

xdedd: I had an ex-g/f who was not only vegan, she was also extremely allergic to dairy and nuts. It was practically impossible to go out to dinner with her.

However she liked it in the pooper and always wanted me to pee on her face in the shower, so she had that going for her.

She also was a bit of a "Rainwoman" which was not as hot as you would think.

/never peed on her


Vegan poop on your pecker sounds smelly. Prolly be best off doing that in the shower, huh?
 
2011-04-16 10:24:17 AM  

hitchking: Pigs have a strong instinct to cuddle their young, but pigs grown for meat can't do so, because we keep them in cages where their piglets can suckle for milk, but the mother can't hold the piglets in her arms. She'll just use her hooves to try to scrape towards them, and she'll oink loudly, but she'll never reach her own offspring because we put (literally) prison bars between her and them.


You just made me cry.
 
2011-04-16 10:26:36 AM  

frizzantik: i am a vegetarian and i couldn't give a shiat..


That is because you're lacto-ovo
 
2011-04-16 10:34:22 AM  

Sobekneferu: Andulamb: Of course, had this been a "normal" cooking magazine that had been discovered to contain photos of foods made with dog, cat, horse, monkey, and dolphin, its readers would have reacted calmly.

Unlike now where the food has soap, glue and acetone added for cosmetic effect. Really, who gives a crap if the food in the photo would have been inedible?

Though I have noticed some vegans have this weird theory like animals that have already been killed and packaged will revive somehow if they just don't come into contact with them for any reason or permit anyone else to. So, like, somehow buying a magazine that had bought a picture that had a dead animal in it is the same as having killed the animal. Just like buying a hamburger for your coworker who gives you his own money to do so on the day you're supposed to get lunch, is the same as killing the cow yourself.


This is actually magical thinking, based on the Laws of Similarity, Contagion and Identification.

(I got interested in this when I was evaluating a copy of "The History of Magic" by Seligmann. What is fascinating is that certain experiments and results in modern physics (quantum entanglement, anyone?) appear - at least superficially - to validate magical "laws" that have been around for thousands of years. Or maybe those experiments and the interpretation are magical thinking....)

http://www.fyicomminc.com/spirit/laws_of_magic.htm

http://unurthed.com/2008/11/19/the-laws-of-magic/
 
2011-04-16 10:34:54 AM  
If they hate that, just wait to until the vegans find out about the magazine's Burger King ads.
 
2011-04-16 10:35:36 AM  

06Wahoo: If they hate that, just wait to until the vegans find out about the magazine's Burger King ads.


FTFM.
 
2011-04-16 10:41:19 AM  

GrendelMk1:

Oh, I'm sorry, you confused me with someone that shares your very specific moral code. You know what I find immoral? Parents denying their still-growing children a balanced diet for "moral" reasons. You know what else I find immoral? Pretending that things that aren't human are even vaguely close to as important as we are, and using this as a basis for pretending to be somehow "superior" or "morally correct".


I'm not a vegan, but that's one of the dumbest arguments that I've seen. Why is the ethical standpoint that humans aren't the only important organisms wrong? Because they're in the same species as I am?
 
2011-04-16 10:41:31 AM  
i.imgur.com

And...done.
 
2011-04-16 10:46:50 AM  
Hey Vegans!
time to get your softened panties in a twist again


What's Inside - Downy Coats Briefs With Horse Fat (new window)
 
2011-04-16 10:54:50 AM  

hitchking: GrendelMk1: By the way, if meat's so bad, why do I have pointy teeth and a digestive system designed to deal with it? Oh right, because meat is actually good for me in moderation.

It was evolutionarily advantageous for humans to be able to chew and digest meat. That's why we have canine teeth and a digestive system that can digest animal flesh. But that doesn't mean it's a moral thing to do.

It's called the "naturalistic fallacy", and it describes an attitude that says "this thing exists in nature, therefore it is morally good." If you're interested in learning more about why your canine teeth cannot morally justify eating meat, this Wikipedia article (new window) is a good place to start.


Mmmmmm.... no. The "Naturalistic Fallacy" argument is itself based on a fallacy. I refute it thusly: there can be no morality in a thing unless a thing is alive (exists); the concept of morality only applies to living things; if evolution is true (i.e.: we were not created 6,000 years ago) then artifacts of our evolution (i.e.: pointy teeth; physiological and PSYCHOLOGICAL need for meat) that were necessary for our evolution cannot be immoral.

I could give a much more rigorous argument for this, but I need more coffee and really don't give a shiat.
 
2011-04-16 11:04:08 AM  

hitchking: But that doesn't mean it's a moral thing to do.


Boo farking hoo hippy. 10 threads down idiot libs like yourself are arguing about the right to murder children for their own convenience.

Take your goddamn skewed morality and shove it right up your ass. You don't care abut humans but you want to pretend to care about animals?
 
2011-04-16 11:06:54 AM  
reading all these meat lovers v vegan comments has made me hungry for a steak...

I think I'll sponsor fizznatik and hitchking by tripling my meat intake for april.
 
2011-04-16 11:07:13 AM  

spyderqueen: I have a vegetarian friend who is vegetarian only because meat and her digestive system are not buddies. She HATES vegetarians and vegans like the ones in this article because a) she thinks they're morons and b) they make her feel a little embarrassed asking for the vegetarian options because she doesn't want to be associated with them.

She's gonna laugh her ASS off when I show her this article.

(She won't eat fake meat either, which is another reason we can be friends)


It's ok, we hate her too.
 
wee
2011-04-16 11:09:11 AM  

hitchking: So I think it is morally wrong to eat meat.


My food shiats your food.
 
2011-04-16 11:11:11 AM  

GrendelMk1: Oh, I'm sorry, you confused me with someone that shares your very specific moral code. You know what I find immoral? Parents denying their still-growing children a balanced diet for "moral" reasons. You know what else I find immoral? Pretending that things that aren't human are even vaguely close to as important as we are, and using this as a basis for pretending to be somehow "superior" or "morally correct".
You have an opinion, that's all. I look at a deer, I see a future receptacle for a high-velocity piece of jacketed lead. I look at a cow, I see future steaks and baseball gloves. I frankly don't CARE if it was "happy". I'm more concerned about human welfare, thanks.
It's still "evolutionarily advantageous" to get all the amino acids I need in the same meal. It's really nice to not need to very carefully balance my legumes and grains to make sure I don't make myself sick with a deficiency ;)
If you're so "morally concerned", become a serial killer. Best thing you can do is reduce the number of consumers, right? It's the right thing to do!


If you really cared about humans, you'd care about the environment we have to live in, and there's no way around it. Eating meat is bad for the environment, industrial farming is bad for the environment. Raising cows uses many many more resources than eating lower on the food chain, and produces a hell of a lot more waste.

Eating less meat does the exact same thing as reducing the number of consumers. And in the future we will all eat less meat, because the resources used to grow it will be stretched much thinner and we won't have any choice in the matter.

I've also noticed that people who care nothing about animals often also care nothing about their fellow human beings. Empathy is empathy--if you can't feel a thing for an suffering animal, you're probably a little short in the caring department for everybody else too, outside of your immediate family. I don't think I've ever met a person where this didn't hold true.
 
Displayed 50 of 328 comments

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



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report