Crafty old McDonalds.

Natzi concentration camps were closed 60 odd years ago.....that analogy has no relation too what i am saying .

You want all Meat production too stop ???? you pay the families this will harm. Take a loan from america they have billions sloshing around somewere . You want your ideals thrust on others (possibly)..thats just never go too happen and i think you know it. I do.

 

some times people must change their livlihood for progress to happen, And its usually a slow change, if the change were to happen which i dont expect it to, it would have to happen by people who were growing up getting other jobs than replacing those in the meat industry that were going out. There would not be less jobs, just diferent ones, and if they fit into a vegitarian world, they would be jobs that fit more what the world needs today.

 

progress? what on earth are you talking about. Please dont tell me that you think humans will progress by giving up meat.

 

what are you, just against everything thats a good idea? dont worry you dont have to defend it, its not going to happen, though i do maintain that it would be a good thing if it did.

 

good idea by whose standards?


hitler thought eugenics was a good idea, that killing jews, gays, and others was a good idea, i'm glad we didnt take HIS word on what was a good idea

 

hitler also wore pants whats your bloody point

 

that just because someone thinks its a good idea doesnt MAKE it a good idea.

 

Who said someone thinking it was the only reason? The reasons would be a whole other topic as they would form a well over 50 page discussion and you wouldent agree with me anyhow from what ive seen of you before, if presented with a good argument you meerly repeat yourself, so instead of making a case for veganism fresh for you heres a link to a rather good case for it

http://vegetarians.netfirms.com/cgi-bin//YaBB.pl?board=vegtalk_bd;action=display;num=1085512131

and please before you go calling it bullcrap do some research, and if your not going to do honest research then please tell me so at the beginning of your next response to save me the trouble of reading it.

 

please, dont send me to a link to astrocat and tell me its research.


My reasoning for why we should allow the continuation of the meat industry is simple: its the peoples choice, its their right to decide if they want to.

Saying "its better" for the world puts everything on a slippery slope..where do we stop? We DONT need cars..and they sure as hell hurt animals..so lets get rid of them. Where do we stop? Where you decide is acceptable?

 

ok, merga, i told you to do research, i did not say i was giving you research, and i didnt say we should ban meat, i said people should work towards giving it up. See this is why i didnt want to be drawn into arguing with you, because you dont argue, you just fight

and about the car thing, yes we should also stop using cars nearly as much, whats that got to do with it?

you act like your opinions are just opinions then read mine like im a nazi dictator just cause you dont like them, well im not forcing you not to eat meat any more than your forcing me to eat meat. Atleast i have looked into it, searched for truth, and made a change in my life despite the fact that i didnt want to admit the wrong i had already done. I didnt turn vegan to get atention or to be supirior, i did it because if you look past all the bull its whats healthy for your body and your planet.

 

lol what i said was that confrontational?

so, can you not answer my question? Where does it end? Everytime someone says "hey this is good for the earth!" should we just oblige?

Humans arent good for the earth. Lets just kill ourselves and do the world a favor

 

it never ends, who said it ends, it is life, an ongoing quest to improve what we are that should never end.

 

that is a scary thought. We are not gaining freedoms as time goes on..we are losing them.

There needs to be an end into the personal intrusion into peoples lives. You have no business telling someone how to eat and i have no business telling you how to eat. Not everything is a public matter, and everything should NOT be a public matter.

The sooner people realize that, the better off we will be.

 

i agree with you, how many times must i say it i do not think it should be forced on people by anyone, I think it would be good for more people to choose to do it on their own, if i were a senator then you could assume im talking about the governemnt but im just a person whos talking, im just taling about people, why do you expand my statements into something you can attack? and if you think we should have all freedoms we can and not have public rules based on individual opinions then how come you think women being topless in public should be illegal, is that not a pulic law enforced because of what some people think is right? im just pointing out a flaw in your logic, not trying to bring that debate here. But it seems to me you think everyone should be free...to do what you think is right.

 

This is just a bullshit attitude you've got here, megara. You're in a vegetarian forum. You know we're all likely to believe that people giving up meat is a good thing. You've made your opinion clear on this a number of times, so now you're just being disruptive. Try and behave with a bit of respect, eh?

 

That's not an argument. I could equally say that the reason that you bang on about mcd's being great is because you can. It's meaningless.

Whether you like it or not, links do not constitute an argument. They constitute someone else's opinion. If I asked you who was best at running the country, and you provided a link to the Labour party manifesto, I could then provide a link to the Conservative party manifesto. This wouldn't be a debate, this would be the opinions of two organisations. A debate would be if we discussed the alternative points of view, and explained why we believed certain points or didn't believe others. It would be assessing the merits of the arguments put forward by the manifestos.

Huh? An analogy doesn't have a time limit! Of course it's a good analogy. It's a very similar case..... two institutions which involve suffering, which would adversely affect jobs if they were closed down.

Like Pablo said, this would never happen overnight. My ideal is a world that moves slowly towards vegetarianism, because a ban on eating meat would be both impractical and unlikely. However, my original point stands. Economic hardship is no excuse for perpetuating cruelty.

Again, this isn't a rational argument. If I wanted murder to be illegal, you wouldn't say that I wanted my ideals thrust on others - you would say I wanted to protect someone. The basis for your opinion is that you clearly see the lives and the suffering of animals as of secondary importance to human economic prosperity. This isn't a view to which I subscribe.

 

]


You can just as easily say that you have NO right to any of our freedoms except the ones that are spelled out in the constitution. The fact is, the meat industry IS allowed by law, it is a right, it IS ingrained in our society. To say otherwise is foolish. Free societies make a choice on what they deem acceptable. America and the UK have both deemed the meat industry as a right of the people. Most rights that we have, from logging on the internet to driving down a car are decisions by the people.

the right to the meat industry is just as valid as 99.99999% of our 'freedoms' and can be granted and taken away just the same.

 

I'm not an american, so I couldn't particularly give a fuck about the constitution.

We've been down this route before. Being legal does not make something morally right. This is why laws evolve and change, as society's notion of what is right and wrong changes.

What's your point? When your 'right' to drive a car has polluted the planet to the point of extinction, will you still be defending that 'right'? The only point I can see here is that our 'rights' are those of foolish children, ignorant of the effects of their actions.

No offence intended, but I really don't know why you're still here. I think we've established that you don't agree with the opinins of most veggies here, and they don't agree with you. I don't think there's likely to be much change in either of our opinions, so what's the point of this continued debate?

 

yikes, do i sense some hostility in you? You know, people will take you a lot more seriously if you drop your hostility towards your fellow man.


Yes the constitution applies to the US, but you too are a nation based on the rule of law, so talking about laws is hardly a moot point.

I never made an assertion that it was morally a right or wrong for that matter, i just said it was a right of the people. Yes, societies can 'evolve' or they can deevolve if you may. Societies can change laws, the point is, the right to eat meat is just as firm as any of our other rights that are not considered inalienable. You can take away their right to eat meat, you can also take away their right to walk down the street or swim in the ocean just the same. I dont want my freedoms taken away. Thankfully, i am in the overwhelming majority, and your kind is in the overwhelming minority(btw, i'm still waiting for any credible source on most western nations being like 10-15% veggie/vegan). I dont think i have to worry about my right to be taken away in my lifetime.


Do you drive a car doktor? Do you take the bus? Do you do anything that pollutes this earth? I would hate for you to be a foolish, ignorant child.


I am here because i want to be here. Disruptive? Yes, cause i am spamming all veggies threads.....not ones that involve 'society progressing' by not eating meat. I think that is a ridiculous statement and i dont care if i heard it on the street infront of my house or on the internet, i'm going to call bullshit just the same.


You yourself can grow up, doktor.

 

It's funny you should mention that, because I was just having exactly the same thought. I don't feel any hostility towards you, but I do find it rude the way you jump into many threads in this forum and disparage the views of the vegetarians here. I can respect your view that eating meat is acceptable, whilst still disagreeing with it. You, however, seem incapable of showing the same courtesy in return. Surely you're the instigator of any hostility here, with the attitude that you adopt towards vegetarians? You have every right to disagree with us, but I find your continued disrespect for our point of view to be hostile.

But freedoms need to be determined by what is considered to be morally acceptable. To talk about 'freedoms' without a moral context is meaningless. Would you say that you wanted to keep the freedom to rape, steal, kill?

I've already explained that to you once.

What the fuck are you talking about? We've already had this converasation. Like I've said many times before, I make no claim to moral perfection. Nobody leads a life that's beyond moral questioning. We all participate in some form of exploitation or environmental destruction. As far as I'm concerned, our whole species is made up of foolish, ignorant children. I don't exclude myself from the collective responsibility that we should all be taking.

And where exactly did I say that you were spamming all the veggie threads? My point was that we've reached a stage where you know our opinions, and we know yours. We're not going to agree, so why go over the issue repeatedly?

Nice. Close your post on an insult. Way to earn people's respect.