NBC passes on Thanksgiving commercial.

[Chronic]

Maybe because there is no issue with not eating meat? I have no issue with people not being raped.

K you've missed the point.

I didn't miss the point, I just think that opinion is ridiculous.

Trying to make people do something you want them to do is fascism. You have your own opinions and you should not force them on others....Because it is there choice and you have absolutely no right to criticize some ones beliefs or opinions."

What you say doesn't apply because eating meat is not an opinion, it's an action. You're not being criticized for your opinions or beliefs, it's your actions. Reducing it to a mere choice, like jeans or shorts, is short-sighted.

If you don't have the right to criticize someone's opinion or beliefs how the hell can you have the right to kill something for pleasure?

"I have the right..." or "this is my opinion" is usually the last thing a person can say before "I have no arguments".

I have the right to purchase shoes made my a 9-year old.

Also, that's not what facism is.

I doubt that you would appreciate a Jehovah Witness knocking on your door forcing there beliefs on you, so you shouldn't do it to others.

The religious comparison just doesn't work. But replace it with a better example (something where my spending habits are causing death/suffering) and it'll be like I said in my first post, I wouldn't have a problem with it. If I'm doing something wrong, that has serious consequences, I would be grateful if someone informed me.

 

[Casey]

Maybe because there is no issue with not eating meat? I have no issue with people not being raped.

Awesome.

 

[masta247]

Maybe because there is no issue with not eating meat? I have no issue with people not being raped.

rape is illegal, till something is legal it's his own choice and an option. You can't do much about it except saying that you find it wrong. Because something feels morally wrong to you it doesn't have to be morally wrong to someone else or most people in that matter. Maybe it's not wrong to him and his morals fully allow it?
It's good making someone think about what he is doing for a second, make him aware that he's eating an animal since most people tend to forget about it after it's processed. However after he does his thinking and still knows that he wants to eat meat then he can. It's his right and it's perfectly okay, it's not running out of arguments since it is a huge argument itself unfortunately.
I said "unfortunately" because there are various issues I care about, that people are unaware of and those who are aware don't care. Unfortunately most vegetarians also contribute to them while thinking they are somehow morally superior which is stupid.
On my "what should be changed" list there are things that are way higher than banning eating meat but I don't really feel like forcing these opinions. Instead I do what I can to be fair to my own beliefs and it makes me feel good enough.

What you say doesn't apply because eating meat is not an opinion, it's an action. You're not being criticized for your opinions or beliefs, it's your actions. Reducing it to a mere choice, like jeans or shorts, is short-sighted.

It is a choice like this for most people.
It's also not seeing the problem that you see or feeling that it's less important/not worth giving up on own pleasure if it's not forbidden and doesn't threat person's wellbeing.

I have the right to purchase shoes made my a 9-year old.

And I bet you do while not being aware of that.
That's one of these problems I've mentioned above. Most things these days are made for a total cost of a few cents up to a dollar for a piece. It doesn't matter if it's made by a 9 year old or a woman with numerous children who can't even feed one while working in a Nike factory 12/7.
On the other hand if these factories wouldn't exist many of these people would starve to death. A few dollars/day and 9 year olds working is still better than no dollars/day and 9 year olds dying. For numerous people it's a blessing that they can work there.
Then again if someone did something about starving people; for example giving them food instead of burning/destroying it to save economy and let people die they wouldn't have these problems. That would generate different problems starting from Nike becoming either no longer affordable or prospering well.

The point is that most things are not as easy as they seem.

 

[ARon]

It would have been better if they mentioned organic farms and free range farms and whatnot. Instead they just attack and look like little 12 year old bullies picking on younger kids.

The thing that pisses me off the most about PETA is that they show love for these animals so much but forget to show it to humans, especially the ones who don't agree with their way of thinking.

 

[masta247]

yeah it's like you're no longer human from the day you first tried a chicken.

 

[Chronic]

I'll reply to masta later.

It would have been better if they mentioned organic farms and free range farms and whatnot.

Which you can't trust unless you've actually visited them. Especially in America you cannot trust the tags. Free range just means they're not in a cage. "Technically" these chickens are free range

Better? Yes. Good? No.

 

[Casey]

It would have been better if they mentioned organic farms and free range farms and whatnot. Instead they just attack and look like little 12 year old bullies picking on younger kids.

The thing that pisses me off the most about PETA is that they show love for these animals so much but forget to show it to humans, especially the ones who don't agree with their way of thinking.

PETA are just trying to even out the playing field.

 

[ARon]

Shut up Casey lol

I'll reply to masta later.



Which you can't trust unless you've actually visited them. Especially in America you cannot trust the tags. Free range just means they're not in a cage. "Technically" these chickens are free range

Better? Yes. Good? No.

So then why not even go and mention that in a commercial or make that more public. PETA has a goal but their priorities and way of doing things are just wrong.

 

[Shadows]

You non-meat eaters are focusing too much on turkeys.

what about ham?

 

[Prize Gotti]

What you say doesn't apply because eating meat is not an opinion, it's an action. You're not being criticized for your opinions or beliefs, it's your actions. Reducing it to a mere choice, like jeans or shorts, is short-sighted.

No, its a choice, I choose whether or not to make the "action" to eat meat. No force commits you to do something, other than yourself. Nothing made you stop eating meat, you stopped eating meat because you wanted to, because you made that decision. Yes there was thing that you saw that influenced the decision, but you choose to allow them to influence you. The sheer proof of this is the fact that everyone knows what happens to the animals in the food process, yet they understand that these animals have died for a reason, and they made the choice to carry on eating meat because they understand the purpose.

You may say that people those people are immoral and unethical, but there is no such things as morals and ethics, those things are just peoples opinions. If they were "real" (so to speak) they wouldn't change. But they do change, and they change through choice, choice of some one believes what is right and what is wrong. So what you choose is "wrong" is your decision, there is nothing to say you are right, and there for you should not preach to others your opinions.

Every single thing that happens in your life, in the existence of the universe and the entirety of time is a choice. There is no such thing as fate. There is not one example of anything you can can give where a choice was not directly or indirectly involved.

One thing i missed about "the right to kill for pleasure". I dont eat meat for pleasure, i eat meat because i need to eat, sure i could live on vegetables alone, but id lack vital vitamins etc. When some one throws in "but there are alternative sources for those things", yes there are, unnatural sources, sources that wouldn't exist if man hadn't created them. If it wasn't for those unnatural sources, you'd be fucked.

 

[S O F I]

One day, something new will be said in a meat debate.

 

[Chronic]

One day, something new will be said in a meat debate.

Well Prize Gotti just broke out with some nihilism that completely ignores biology.

 

[Prize Gotti]

Well Prize Gotti just broke out with some nihilism that completely ignores biology.

Indeed i did break out with nihilism, because there is no purpose. Our only purpose is to die, there is no other reason, if our purpose was to live, we wouldn't die. Life is just something to filled the void in between birth and death. What you do with life is your choice.

Not sure how it ignores biology though?

 

[Duke]

This discussion has totally spiralled off-topic. Gotti is on some underlying abstract philosophical socialogical deal while Chronic is kept with the specific animal torture thing.

At least make sure you're actually debating the same thing. This makes me cringe.

 

[S O F I]

I think something else to take away from this debate is the increasing divide among people based on life-style choices that are judged on moral and ethical grounds. For some reason, I can't help but think that Chronic will chronically dislike Prize Gotti for his views on meat. But I can't blame him. The difference between Prize Gotti and I is that I don't try to make an argument (anymore) and justify my actions. I know eating meat is wrong and a vegan diet is more ethically and morally right, but I just can't feel for a chicken the way Chronic can and that's just the way it is. Pictures of chickens in cages make me uncomfortable but don't provoke action. It's terrible but I'm compassionate in other ways and I guess that's just the way it is.

 

[Prize Gotti]

I think something else to take away from this debate is the increasing divide among people based on life-style choices that are judged on moral and ethical grounds. For some reason, I can't help but think that Chronic will chronically dislike Prize Gotti for his views on meat. But I can't blame him. The difference between Prize Gotti and I is that I don't try to make an argument (anymore) and justify my actions. I know eating meat is wrong and a vegan diet is more ethically and morally right, but I just can't feel for a chicken the way Chronic can and that's just the way it is. Pictures of chickens in cages make me uncomfortable but don't provoke action. It's terrible but I'm compassionate in other ways and I guess that's just the way it is.

I've not attempted to justify eating meat. My entire point is that if whether you choose to eat meat or not, it is your decision. To think either decision is the correct one is wrong, and you should never claim that it is right choice and force that belief on others.

 

[Da_Funk]

K you've missed the point. Trying to make people do something you want them to do is fascism. You have your own opinions and you should not force them on others.

I doubt that you would appreciate a Jehovah Witness knocking on your door forcing there beliefs on you, so you shouldn't do it to others.

Certainly I've brought up some pro-meat eating points in previous discussions. But I'd never try and force some one to eat meat. Why? Because it is there choice and you have absolutely no right to criticize some ones beliefs or opinions.

If you choose to not eat meat, then it is your choice, i have no issue with that.

I agree in theory. However, when you hold a retarded belief, for which there is no basis, you deserve to be ridiculed at every step and every turn. Such retarded beliefs would include: eating meat (something I do), beleiving in a religion, or any type of higher power.


Maybe its just me and my personality. I try to quantify and understand everything. If there is something I don't understand I don't rest until I understand it. Should I chill and just let it be? Probably, but thats not and never will be me.

 

[S O F I]

I've not attempted to justify eating meat. My entire point is that if whether you choose to eat meat or not, it is your decision. To think either decision is the correct one is wrong, and you should never claim that it is right choice and force that belief on others.

It's not about what's right or wrong in absolute terms, but what's right or wrong relatively. If you eat meat, it's more morally and ethically wrong than being a vegetarian.

As Duke said, you're on some philosophical tip claiming that essentially no behavior on Earth is wrong.

 

[roaches]

In fact, me and my cousin are both spokespersons (spokespeople?) for PETA, we've filmed commercials for them before and we launched PETA in India by offering copies of our album as competition prizes, which was a very successful endeavour since we were the hottest band around in India at that time (around the same time we headlined at the MTV Awards there and did a song for a Bollywood movie).

Congratulations!

 

[Casey]

sure i could live on vegetables alone, but id lack vital vitamins etc. When some one throws in "but there are alternative sources for those things", yes there are, unnatural sources, sources that wouldn't exist if man hadn't created them. If it wasn't for those unnatural sources, you'd be fucked.

That's because you have been raised on a diet that gets those vitamins from eating meat. If you had been raised your whole life on a vegetarian diet then you would already be used to eating the things that provide your body with what it needs.

As for unnatural sources, I'm not sure what you are talking about. Do you mean things like multivitamin supplements etc? I exist on a vegan diet and don't take any supplements and I am very healthy.

I'm not lacking in anything. When I first became vegetarian I took supplements because I hadn't yet adjusted my diet accordingly.

And even if it WAS necessary to take man-created substances to have a healthy vegetarian/vegan diet, that's still better than killing an animal.