want to fight climate change? go vegan

a reply to: Bob Sholtz
Really, you know people that can eat and digest grass? Most humans I know don;t have the stomach for that, literally.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Lets look at how many geniuses there are in the world , how many that have shaped the knowledge we have in our text books, and have driven us to the stars, and see how many of them eat meat....and how many are vegan...

There is a huge number actually and the history is very interesting. If I were to list them all it would be a book, but they are out best and finest in every area.





Pythagoras is famous among mathematicians and high school students for his triangle-explaining theorem. Vegetarians know him, however, as an outspoken advocate of animal rights in ancient Greece. According to Ovid, Pythagoras believed that "animals share with us the privilege of having a soul" and also that "for as long as men massacre animals, they will kill each other. Indeed, he who sows the seed of murder and pain cannot reap joy and love."

Like many Greek philosophers of the day, Plato, too, was a vegetarian. He believed that as a society begins to eat more meat, it requires more doctors. This not totally unfounded opinion led him to make some famous statements about keeping a natural diet, notably that "the gods created certain kinds of beings to replenish our bodies...they are the trees and the plants and the seeds."

Da Vinci was a vegetarian who would buy caged birds then set them free. He explained this practice, saying "if man wants freedom why keep birds and animals in cages? Truly man is the king of beasts, for his brutality exceeds them. We live by the death of others. We are burial places! I have since an early age abjured the use of meat."


Gandhi wrote extensively about vegetarianism and once said that "I do feel that spiritual progress does demand at some stage that we should cease to kill our fellow creatures for the satisfaction of our bodily wants."

Gautama Buddha may not have been the first vegetarian but he was certainly one of the earliest prominent figures to talk about giving up meat.


Pythagoras (570 BC – 495 BC) a vegetarian himself, was the inspiration for Pythagorian vegetarianism

Leonardo da Vinci (1452–1519) was among the first celebrities from the European Renaissance era who supported vegetarianism

In the Platonic Academy the scholarchs (school heads) Xenocrates and (probably) Polemon pleaded for vegetarianism.[25] In the Peripatetic school Theophrastus, Aristotle’s immediate successor, supported it.

Benjamin Franklin (one of the Founding Fathers of the United States) became a vegetarian at the age of 16, but later on he reluctantly returned to meat eating.[73] He later introduced Tofu to America in 1770. [74] Colonel Thomas Crafts Jr. (who read The Declaration of Independence in Boston, 1776) was a vegetarian.[75]


en.wikipedia.org...

13 Great Vegetarians From History
www.treehugger.com...-top

a reply to: Bob Sholtz

The feed mostly on grass though, with occasional supplements which aren't really suitable for human consumption.

The thing is, man is a hunter, we eat meat.

Ok, some of the practises involved in supplying the meat are questionable, but we are what we are.

Vegetarians I can understand though, some people may not like the taste, some are sickened at the thought of eating flesh......but vegans...I just find them plain odd. There is certain nutrients we require from various animal sources, and to eliminate them all together is just silly.

a reply to: captaintyinknots

Seriously? Stop trolling. You made your decision based on how things made you feel.

i JUST told you my moral basis. it is unnecessary killing. that is my reason for not doing it. you're trying to create a strawman that you can attack...

I didnt state you were wrong.

then why are you bringing it up? you're dodging the question.

Yes there is. Neither one has anything to do with eating meat, however, so your point is moot and irrelevant.

yes it does. it is the difference between causing harm to preserve yourself and causing harm without a reason.

It had nothing to do with natural order.

that's your opinion. hitler's opinion on natural order was quite different.

An anti-Semitism based on reason, however, must lead to systematic legal combating and elimination of the privileges of the Jews, that which distinguishes the Jews from other aliens who live among us. The ultimate objective must, however, be the irrevocable removal of the Jews in general.

www.historylearningsite.co.uk...

after all, removing jews is the natural order of things, and you respect natural order, right?

I personally appreciate vegans and wish there were more of them. Less mice, more cheese.

As for me, nah-ah! The premise of the OP is completely lost on me since I neither believe in Anthropogenic climate change nor in the theory that CO2 is a polutant. Beyond that, I don't exactly live in a vegetarian friendly environment. I can put up 400 lbs of salmon and 600 lbs of moose, caribou, and elk along with a couple dozen geese and ducks every summer/fall and feed my family through the winter. I'd need a hell of a lot more land than I have access to to build the greenhouses required to grow all the veggies I'd need to survive a single winter, however.

Furthermore, I like the taste of blood.

a reply to: woogleuk
cows are fed mostly grain, actually. grass-fed beef is a rarity.

a reply to: captaintyinknots

You know a person is getting desperate when they start comparing eating meat to hitler and genocide...good lord this is pathetic.

HOW UTTELRY LOW AND DISGUSTING to bring Hitler into it....BOB SCHOLZ Shame Shame Shame!!!
Reductio ad Hitlerum

en.wikipedia.org...

"According to Strauss, the Reductio ad Hitlerum is an informal fallacy that consists of trying to refute an opponent's view by comparing it to a view that would be held by Adolf Hitler or the Nazi Party.

According to Strauss, Reductio ad Hitlerum is a form of ad hominem or ad misericordiam, a fallacy of irrelevance, in which a conclusion is suggested based solely on something's or someone's origin rather than its current meaning. The suggested rationale is one of guilt by association. Its name is a variation on the term reductio ad absurdum.

Reductio ad Hitlerum is sometimes called "playing the Nazi card." According to its critics and proponents, it is a tactic often used to derail arguments, because such comparisons tend to distract and anger the opponent"

a reply to: Bob Sholtz
All the cows I ever met on the east coast ate grass in fields. I thought most vegans were into the whole gluten free fad these days anyways. They wouldn't want the grains fed to those other cows anyways.

a reply to: Bob Sholtz

i JUST told you my moral basis. it is unnecessary killing. that is my reason for not doing it. you're trying to create a strawman that you can attack...

Yes, you did. AND THEY ARE BASED ON EMOTION. Your OPINION is that its unnecessary. YOUR. OPINION.

then why are you bringing it up? you're dodging the question.

I cant even follow you...did you forget your meds today? I didnt bring anything up, nor did I say you were wrong. I said it is wrong to think that YOUR OPINION should be law for everyone. That YOUR OPINION is nothing but that, and has no place in trying to tell others what is right and wrong for them.

yes it does. it is the difference between causing harm to preserve yourself and causing harm without a reason.

No it doesnt, as we are talking about the food chain, not self defense and not murder.

that's your opinion. hitler's opinion on natural order was quite different.

The natural order of this planet is backed up by science. "Hitler liked genocide" is not natural order. It has nothing to do with natural order.

Please, stop trolling.

after all, removing jews is the natural order of things, and you respect natural order, right?

Nope. Natural order is the food chain. It is the water cycle. It is the air cycle.

It has NOTHING do to with some guy's opinion.

Seriously, this is pathetic.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight
hitler justified his genocide on the natural order of things. the amount of animals killed for consumption, and the means of their deaths, far exceed anything hitler did.

so how is my comparison wrong?

originally posted by: Bob Sholtz
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight
hitler justified his genocide on the natural order of things. the amount of animals killed for consumption, and the means of their deaths, far exceed anything hitler did.

so how is my comparison wrong?

Hmmm, food consumption vs eradication of a race of people....

You are so obviously trolling at this point.

a reply to: Bob Sholtz
Did the nazis eat the jews, gays and gypsies?

I actually went vegetarian 2 months prior to my pregnancy. Then after getting pregnant I started to get all sorts of cravings for meat (along with other things), which surprised me since I usually don't even like the taste!

I don't have a problem with people who choose to eat meat. For me it was a taste preference and ethical choice. I plan to go back to being a vegetarian once my child is on solids and weaned off of breast milk.

I do, however, believe that our culture consumes an overabundance of meat. Our ancestors didn't have meat so freely available to them on a daily basis, and today we just need to make a quick stop at the supermarket to get some. It would be one thing if we kept our old farm practices, but the practices and ethics of mass-production of our commercial meats of today is disgusting and shameful to say the least. I feel that many people living in our country today have lost the connection and respect with the land and animals that we once had. This saddens me.

a reply to: captaintyinknots

The natural order of this planet is backed up by science. "Hitler liked genocide" is not natural order. It has nothing to do with natural order.

you still haven't defined natural yet.

No it doesnt, as we are talking about the food chain, not self defense and not murder.

we are talking of self preservation versus killing without reason. that can apply to murder as easily as eating habits; if you cannot see that you are blind and nothing anyone can say will help you.

Natural order is the food chain.

that's your opinion.

a reply to: TKDRL

Did the nazis eat the jews, gays and gypsies?

the question isn't what the nazis did, but why.

was there a real reason to commit genocide? no.

is there a real reason to eat animals? no.

you may say "of course there is! for food." to that i ask you how i am still alive.

originally posted by: Robohamster
I actually went vegetarian 2 months prior to my pregnancy. Then after getting pregnant I started to get all sorts of cravings for meat (along with other things), which surprised me since I usually don't even like the taste!

I don't have a problem with people who choose to eat meat. For me it was a taste preference and ethical choice. I plan to go back to being a vegetarian once my child is on solids and weaned off of breast milk.

I do, however, believe that our culture consumes an overabundance of meat. Our ancestors didn't have meat so freely available to them on a daily basis, and today we just need to make a quick stop at the supermarket to get some. It would be one thing if we kept our old farm practices, but the practices and ethics of mass-production of our commercial meats of today is disgusting and shameful to say the least. I feel that many people living in our country today have lost the connection and respect with the land and animals that we once had. This saddens me.

Excellent and non biased viewpoint!!!

You respected those whom perhaps believed differently than you, and you did one FINE JOB explaining what's wrong with our food chain by your grocery store explanation!

a reply to: captaintyinknots

Hmmm, food consumption vs eradication of a race of people

appeal to emotion. animals killed for food consumption is far, FAR greater than the amount of animals killed by hitler.

a reply to: Bob Sholtz
Maybe your version of alive is much different than my version of alive. Some morons think they are alive, yet all they do is park their asses in front of the TV and play with the remote and the xbox controller. Me, I am outside doing stuff all day. Can't do that eating like a tulip. Live life like a tulip, I am sure eating like one is sufficient. Yes there is a reason to eat meat. Because I prefer to be healthy, than a pasty, scrawny tulip.

a reply to: Bob Sholtz

In philosophy, the natural order is the moral source from which natural law seeks to derive its authority. It encompasses the natural relations of beings to one another, in the absence of law, which natural law attempts to reinforce.

en.wikipedia.org...

Natural law, or the law of nature (Latin: lex naturalis), is a system of law that is determined by nature, and so is universal

en.wikipedia.org...

we are talking of self preservation versus killing without reason. that can apply to murder as easily as eating habits; if you cannot see that you are blind and nothing anyone can say will help you.

So, in other words, you are doing whatever you can to attach a negative stigma to meat eating.

that's your opinion.

No, its not. Please, have a look at the links provided.

a reply to: TKDRL

Moments after apparently carrying more weight than anyone ever before, German strongman Patrik Baboumian let out a roar and a couple seemingly unlikely words: “Vegan power.”

www.thestar.com...

These nine vegetarian athletes rose to the top of the sports world — without any help from meat.

www.mnn.com...