It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Eating Meat is Unethical

page: 27
25
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 02:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: eNumbra

originally posted by: Son of Will

originally posted by: eNumbra

originally posted by: okrian
There is nothing of a response except 'I'm stuck in my ways and this is how it is'... the exact type of response and approach to life that we here at ATS try to leave behind.


The response presented is really more mocking in tone, because the vast majority of arguments presented against eating meat are exaggerations or outright falsehoods.


Am I going to keep eating meat because "I'm stuck in my ways"? You're goddamned right I am; but that's a gross oversimplification of my opinion. Nobody has ever presented a credible argument against the eating of meat.
Against factory farming maybe, but not against the consumption of meat.


If you can refute anything in my OP then please, do so. Don't just ignore it and say "Oh it's probably wrong."

I dare you to read it, and to *honestly* think about it instead of arrogantly assuming it's flawed or exaggerated. Show me your best game, if you really want to play. So far, none others before you have even made a dent in the OP's argument.

Why should I though? Your entire arguments hinges on the idea that humans are empathic and should feel for the creatures that they eat.

Your argument is literally an appeal to emotion fallacy.


That's an astute observation. For a website whose motto is Deny Ignorance, threads like this seem to attract a whole lot of it, from otherwise intelligent people.

Denying ignorance btw, includes not insulting people when they disagree with you and not forcing your opinions on people who don't share them.

originally posted by: Son of Will
I might be cocky myself, but at least I'm right. And I know it.)


Appeal to emotions? No. A bit ironic that you take a 100% logical argument, fail to see the logic because of emotion, and then dismiss it as an emotional argument. That's kinda funny, in a way.

It's an appeal to logic. You KNOW that all humans are empathetic creatures. That's a fact. You KNOW that all unnecessary aggression is considered wrong. You KNOW that you don't need meat for survival, because of the existence of millions of successful long-term vegans. These are all facts.

It's simply logical to extend what you know, logically, about yourself and your species, to your behaviors in general.

Consider it aligning your actions to eternal principles. It's a wonderful way to live, in fact. Stressful, since it forces one to think a lot more about their actions, but it really is like removing training wheels. You'll never want to go back.




posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 02:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
a reply to: Son of Will




All this because you're too arrogant to admit that you got the basic definition of "empathy" wrong. I love it =)



the only arrogance coming from this thread is from the OP you have literally personally insulted just about everyone on this thread with every post youve made

Youre the poster child for narcissistic arrogance



I'm responding in kind. If you don't like to be insulted, then maybe you shouldn't pick fights with others by insulting them.

If you continue to pollute my thread with your nonsensical, arrogant insults, I will continue to show you exactly why you're wrong. And I won't pull any punches doing so. I didn't plan on making any friends with this thread - but the amount of unprovoked hate, from people like yourself, was admittedly unexpected. You should be ashamed to ever consider yourself reasonable, based on your actions here.

"If you can't take the heat, get yo' ass out the kitchen." - Coolio



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 02:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: rukia
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Ironically, the OP lacks empathy.



When you, one day, understand an unpopular notion to be right, you will fight to defend it as well. I don't expect you to understand right now.
edit on 12 31 2015 by Son of Will because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 03:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Son of Will

Lol.
No matter what you think others think differently and your inane ramblings about the subject just make me hungry for meat.
It us obvious from this thread you like animals more than humans.
I accept some don't eat meat why can't you?.
who are you to judge anyhow does it make you feel better aattempting to push your own ethics on others?
You think anyone will read this thread and stop eating meat?...nope.
edit on 31-12-2015 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 03:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: DumpMaster
a reply to: Son of Will
Re: "Do hunters need to kill other animals for survival?

No?

So that makes it a choice. They choose to destroy sentient life where no need existed.

Fundamentally unethical. "


Wrong actually. Plants don't grow on ice.

Have you heard of the Inuit? The "Eskimo" people? They survive on an almost 100% meat diet, lots of seals and stuff.

They get all the stuff they need from the food because they consume ALL of the animal. They can't get plants up there and have been living like this for hundreds (or thousands?) of years.

You think eating plants doesn't take lives? The plants were alive until their lives were ended for your salads. How many millions of insects were killed so you can eat your salad? Lots in the harvesting of those plants and millions more with the pesticides used to kill the insects.


The Inuit are terribly unhealthy. It's popular to cite them as some kind of anomaly, but the hype is not based in reality.

Here's some facts about that: fanaticcook.com...



Whole health source has a post on mortality rates in an Inuit population from 1822-1836. "Excluding infant mortality, about 25% of their population lived past 60."

Life expectancy in the Inuit-inhabited areas of Canada, 1989 to 2003 "In 1991, life expectancy at birth in the Inuit-inhabited areas was about 68 years, which was 10 years lower than for Canada overall. From 1991 to 2001, life expectancy in the Inuit-inhabited areas did not increase, although it rose by about two years for Canada as a whole."

Cancer patterns in Inuit populations. "Although malignant diseases were believed to be almost non-existent in Inuit populations during the beginning of the 20th century, the increasing life expectancy within these populations showed a distinct pattern, characterised by a high risk of Epstein-Barr virus-associated carcinomas of the nasopharynx and salivary glands, and a low risk of tumours common in white populations, including cancer of the prostate, testis, and haemopoietic system."

The Inuit cancer pattern - The influence of migration "Significant higher risk of cancer of the bladder, breast, prostate gland, skin, brain and stomach was observed among Inuit following migration to Denmark. The SIR was not generally influenced by duration of stay. The high risk of carcinoma of the nasopharynx and salivary glands observed in Inuit populations is maintained after migration to a low incidence area."


Other links
informahealthcare.com...
www3.interscience.wiley.com...
www.ajcn.org...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
www.ajcn.org...



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 03:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Agartha

originally posted by: Son of Will
I might be cocky myself, but at least I'm right. And I know it. Which is why I'm cocky. By page 4, not a single criticism that holds water. I'm hoping for better game tomorrow. I know at least a few of you are clever enough to at least throw a dent in the OP.


No, you are not right, you think you are right, big difference.

So, you said that seaweed has B12, let me correct you: seaweed is an algae and the B12 it contains actually comes from bacteria:




Many seaweeds have been shown to have B12 analogues. Seaweeds are macroalgae, which are technically not plants. Some macroalgae contain an enzyme that can use cobalamin. These macroalgae do not make their own cobalamin, but rather have a symbiotic relationship with cobalamin-producing bacteria. Note that I am purposefully using the term "cobalamin" rather than "vitamin B12" because it is not clear if these cobalamins are active vitamin B12 in humans. (Smith AG, Croft MT, Moulin M, Webb ME. Plants need their vitamins too. Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2007 Jun;10(3):266-75. Epub 2007 Apr 16)


Vegans can only get B12 by taking supplements, which are not natural, are they? They are man made, highly processed.

The only way to grow plants with 'some' B12 is by using lots of animal manure or human faeces and the vegetables still have extremely low amounts of B12 but you still need animal products to achieve it! (Mozafar A. Enrichment of some B-vitamins in plants with application of organic fertilizers. Plant Soil. 1994;167:305–31).

Or you could grow vegetables using idroponics and enrich them with vitamin B12, which is like supplements: man made.

Unwashed vegetables, like you mentioned, can be very dangerous. You may be lucky and grow your own but the majority of people have to buy them and cannot risk not washing them. And if you think you get B12 from your vegetables you are wrong, you get them from tiny insects and bacteria that live on them.



I never said seaweed has B12.

Try again.

I say again - I may be cocky, but I am right. The trick is, don't argue a subject unless you've done your homework.



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 03:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Son of Will

My dad was a steakhouse fanatic. I understand, trust me.

BUT YOU UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF THE DARK SIDE OF THE FORCE!
GQ's Best Burger has no Meat



Meat will most likely go just like gas will with future technology. I really do not think the human race can switch over just yet with 19 billion chickens, 1 billion cows, 1 billion pigs any given day that are constantly slaughtered then renewed, plus add in we are eating the oceans bare, so there is more to this than just taste good.


I think you're right. It's gonna be a slow transition. But thankfully, for any big cultural change, only about 5% of the population seems to be needed to push the change through. while the remaining 95% will just "go with the flow", the path of least resistance.



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 03:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: artistpoet
a reply to: Son of Will




Dislike "preaching"?


Did I address my post to you ?



Or do you dislike it when you are reminded of your bad habits?
Did I address my post to you ?

I have many "bad habits" which I enjoy ... to what are you referring?



Because I'm making logical arguments that are either true, or false. If you can show anything I've said to be false, then please do so


Have I accused you of falsehood?




I have to apologize for this - I've noticed when I hit the "reply" button to one comment, and before hitting the "post" button I try replying to a different comment - but the text field which shows up is still for the original comment I replied to.

I must have been trying to respond to a different comment, and instead it ended up at you. Sorry about that.

I think I've seen the same thing happen with other people in other threads, so it might be a website thing.



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 03:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: rukia
a reply to: artistpoet

The only falsehood I'm accusing the OP of is saying that eating meat is unethical. Because that utterly lacks logic. It relies only on Pathos. Therefore it is invalid.


It's not pathos, it's logos. Eating meat is directly tied to the practice of slaughtering meat - and when every human in that chain of events is participating by choice, and not be necessity - the entire practice becomes unethical. That includes eating meat (although specifically it's buying meat, but eating it is also endorsing the practice as well). If one is unethical, the other is.

There's nothing emotional whatsoever going on here. I don't make emotional arguments. If you ever see me make one, I guarantee that I will apologize for it. That's not my style. Although I would argue that there is a place for Pathos/emotional arguments. Like showing people animal slaughter videos, or the video "Earthlings" - they may contain shock value, but they are also capable of conveying a degree of wisdom/understanding to someone watching them.

Like the Hodgetwins, famous youtube bodybuilders. They recently went vegetarian, and it was after watching "Earthlings". We really are emotional creatures, and denying our emotional response mechanism is denying something very powerful.
edit on 12 31 2015 by Son of Will because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 03:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Agartha

Vegans can only get B12 by taking supplements, which are not natural, are they? They are man made, highly processed.


Don't worry GMO will save the world and cows...


"We have identified the DNA that controls the production of the vitamin B12 binding protein in humans. By means of genetic modification, we have transferred this DNA to a plant that we have cultivated in a green house afterwards", says Erik Østergaard, Professor at Aarhus University.


www.iquestioneverything.net...




posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 03:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: BrokedownChevy
a reply to: Son of Will

Your argument isn't 100% iron tight. You're arrogant and you fail to accept different perspectives.


Arrogance implies an exaggeration of my abilities. I don't exaggerate.

The only different perspective I "fail" to accept is the one where unnecessary violence and aggression are considered acceptable.

Good day.



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 03:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Son of Will
Eating meat is directly tied to the practice of slaughtering meat - and when every human in that chain of events is participating by choice, and not be necessity - the entire practice becomes unethical.


Won't you think of the poor innocent vegetables you murder by pulling them out of the ground, letting them slowly die then throwing them in boiling water!

Eating vegetables is so obviously unethical, why do you refuse to see that?



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 03:38 AM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

The only thing this thread has proven is ethics are subjective.
Pity the op can not see it and fails to see the long term effects to species if we stop using them for meat and other things.



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 03:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Son of Will
Eating meat is directly tied to the practice of slaughtering meat - and when every human in that chain of events is participating by choice, and not be necessity - the entire practice becomes unethical.


Won't you think of the poor innocent vegetables you murder by pulling them out of the ground, letting them slowly die then throwing them in boiling water!

Eating vegetables is so obviously unethical, why do you refuse to see that?


That's actually a good point, apparently plants react to shrimp being boiled alive in front of them and are somehow able to recognize the researcher responsible for boiling them later and react to them. They are able to communicate to each other with poorly researched or understood electro-chemical processes... What are we supposed to eat if plants are indeed intelligent and sentient? They have about a billion year evolutionary jump on us, but nobody has a problem ripping them out of the ground and eating them alive.



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 04:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Son of Will



The Inuit are terribly unhealthy. It's popular to cite them as some kind of anomaly, but the hype is not based in reality.


Once again you show us the true power of your imaginative mind. Modern Inuit circa 1970 like your studies cites are very sick peoples because their ways of life have been perverted by "modern" life. If you want a real description of their life and health (something I doubt) in the context of their original way of life, check the work of Vilhjalmur Stefansson who studied them circa 1900.

As usual, taking out of context and perverted informations to feed your delusions.



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 04:27 AM
link   
a reply to: boymonkey74

No, this proves that people that eat meat don't think about ethics nor do they care.

There are millions of people reading this topic and they will not reply, they are meat eaters and they don't care about this topic. Few of you that talk here that eating meat is ethical are probably hard core meat eaters.

You can eat meat, nobody forbids you but you need to understand that today's meat cones from nasty place, you can google some mass meat industry videos and see how they are producing that tasty meat and trust me once your body and mind is cleared from this toxic meat you will function better.



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 04:31 AM
link   
a reply to: saadad

But be utterly miserable because of the lack of it.
I attempted it for a silly girl.
oh and I get all my meat locally and nor mass farmed my meat is happy meat.



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 06:19 AM
link   
a reply to: UniFinity

As has been shown you can get them from eggs and other sources but meat by far is the largest provider.



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 06:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Son of Will
Or let's try another angle. Let's say there is a community of vegans, living somewhere out in the wild. Could they theoretically get enough B12? Who knows?


No, they would not be able to and if you feel you have evidence that runs contrary to how the human body functions normally you need to post it.

The rest of your post is typical vegan apologetics and nonsense. A 'natural' human lifestyle includes the consumption of meat, the same as our ancestors.



posted on Dec, 31 2015 @ 07:34 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

yep, one guy copied the list. It is a great info. Although some type of mushrooms are also with b12, but with low amount, maybe that is why they were not included. And I think that there are even more undiscovered sources.

For anyone who wants to educate on b12 issue, here is a detailed article with a lot of info:
www.whfoods.com...

I would like to make one thing clear:

Even if you eat meat it is maybe not enough, absorption can be bad for b12 and is depended on many other factors like how food is prepared or how healthy your body is. And in such case not even meat as a source will be good enough and that is why there are as many meat eaters as vegetarians who are b12 deficient.

In other words, even if you eat meat all the time, there are just as many chances you get b12 deficiency as vegetarians who eat eggs or dairy products or mushrooms if you are not watching your general health or incorrect preparation of food.




top topics



 
25
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join