Vegetarianism

[obfuscator]

Which is why he's not publicly traded?

[Skeptical]

I'm not quite sure what it is you're asking.

 

Formation of a corporation would mean that he loses control over the farm, since he now has a legal obligation to the shareholders over the environment, his workers, and animals. He's not worried about externalizing costs, because he doesn't have anything to externalize: no one needs to pay for his profit, since enough can be enough.

[Saru Inc]

I was going to go vegatarian today. So I just ate chinese. I'm pretty sure none of it actual meat anyways. Most likely cardboard or something.

[Bloodstain]

Has anyone posted about soil erosion and desertification yet?

[Assume Nothing]

I was going to go vegatarian today. So I just ate chinese. I'm pretty sure none of it actual meat anyways. Most likely cardboard or something.

 

How can you be sure it's not meat? You'd be surprised. I've worked from the inside.

[Skeptical]

There will almost certainly be some meat in it, as well as an unholy quantity of salt and trans-fats.

[Giordano]

Dont't certain spieces and condoments have meat in them?

[Kevin]

I'm very pro-vegetarianism and save the animals and stuff, so I eat my meat raw. Much nicer than subjecting a poor defenseless animal to the ordeal of being fried. )-:

[Assume Nothing]

I'm very pro-vegetarianism and save the animals and stuff, so I eat my meat raw. Much nicer than subjecting a poor defenseless animal to the ordeal of being fried. )-:

 

Lol, I hope that's sarcasm.

 

Meat is no longer an animal, that can feel anything.

[Giordano]

I think he saw the one show on the Food Channel where some Chinese restaurant boiled/deep fried little chicks alive. Poor sob got confused with everything else was cooked that way.

[Assume Nothing]

I think he saw the one show on the Food Channel where some Chinese restaurant boiled/deep fried little chicks alive. Poor sob got confused with everything else was cooked that way.

 

That's the thing you see. Harsh treatment of animals exist, but that doesn't mean that all animals slaughtered for meat is treated that way. People really need to become more educated about how the food industry works

[Dupin]

The only arguement i can say for vegetarianism is you can support a much larger population if everyone was a vegetarian. Plants get 100% of the energy of the sun, something eating the plants gets 10% of that energy, something the animals that ate the plants get 10% of that energy.

 

Thats why theres always more prey then predators in the wild. That is the only arguement for vegetarianism i find to be acceptable, any moral arguements on "eating meat is wrong" are for the most part a pointless debate to have with someone.

Yea, that's silly. First of all, we have more food if we eat meat because we have more options available. Second, our main limiting factor is a lack of space, not a lack of food.

[Alg]

The only arguement i can say for vegetarianism is you can support a much larger population if everyone was a vegetarian. Plants get 100% of the energy of the sun, something eating the plants gets 10% of that energy, something the animals that ate the plants get 10% of that energy.

 

This and the above. You get more food per unit of land from plants, so a diet with more plants would be the way to go if we have to sustain a massive population. Of course, none of that matters if we can't distribute it well, deal with water shortages or soil infertility, or have a population that is simply too big to sustain.

[Assume Nothing]

The only arguement i can say for vegetarianism is you can support a much larger population if everyone was a vegetarian. Plants get 100% of the energy of the sun, something eating the plants gets 10% of that energy, something the animals that ate the plants get 10% of that energy.

 

This and the above. You get more food per unit of land from plants, so a diet with more plants would be the way to go if we have to sustain a massive population. Of course, none of that matters if we can't distribute it well, deal with water shortages or soil infertility, or have a population that is simply too big to sustain.

 

Poor distribution is a root cause of the world hunger problem. Seeing that the average American throws away roughly half their food, having twice as much surely means throwing out more, right?

[Alg]

Poor distribution is a root cause of the world hunger problem. Seeing that the average American throws away roughly half their food, having twice as much surely means throwing out more, right?

That would be part of what I meant. The West in general, but especially the States, takes food for granted. We throw away a lot of what we buy personally, and there's probably a huge amount that never gets bought to begin with. We produce more than we need.

 

Though of course, transporting that food across continents would probably have a pretty serious environmental impact, so distribution may not be feasible for a different reason...

 

Really, we're screwed no matter what :razz:

[Skeptical]

No, we're not screwed no matter what.

 

Without intending any offense to Mask, a defeatist attitude is never the best mindset. We can do better: people can see that just when they buy from a farmer's market, choose local produce, or refuse to eat something from a can. We can say no to crushing foreign agriculture through subsidized grains disguised as "foreign aid". We can refuse to allow Monsanto to patent life, and sue farmers for planting seeds. GMOs are not required to prevent human hunger. We don't have to buy factory-farmed steak: it's not just that you're either too poor or too cheap to afford anything else.

 

People can't expect one "solution" to the problem: it's not just a matter of the food supply, but of a blend of education, empowerment, organization, politics, economics and grass-roots refusal to continue supporting a system that is so obviously a construct of exploitation, greed, and suffering. The world does not have to function for the top 5%.

[Alg]

That's just the way I am. Some kind of cheerful cynic :razz:

I was pretty much just saying that many solutions have flaws. Transporting food across continents and oceans would, with our current technology, contribute to global warming. It takes a lot of fuel to transport all of that food across a country, which is why locally grown foods are good. The unfortunate thing is that not every country can grow its own food due to climate and whatnot.

[Skeptical]

At which point people need to make concessions.

 

If I choose to live in Canada, I will not eat constantly purchase pineapple, I will not purchase apples out of season, etc.

 

And yes, bunker fuel is an example of where my skepticism comes into play concerning global warming: when the amount of allowable sulfur was decreased, people called foul, since it actually has a cooling effect, as well as contributing to tens of thousands of premature deaths through lung disease. On topic, though, I have to say that there is likely quite a bit of room for improvement in how we transport food: use of trucks instead of railroads comes to mind.

[Kevin]

I'm very pro-vegetarianism and save the animals and stuff, so I eat my meat raw. Much nicer than subjecting a poor defenseless animal to the ordeal of being fried. )-:

 

Lol, I hope that's sarcasm.

 

Meat is no longer an animal, that can feel anything.

 

No I'm being totally serious. I believe frying or boiling or roasting or griling meat is disrespectful toward the meat and should be stopped. It is a very wrong and painful procedure. But I understand these tactics are employed by majority.. thus I try to purchase as much meat as possible and eat it raw to spare it otherwise being cooked by another customer.

[Assume Nothing]

I'm very pro-vegetarianism and save the animals and stuff, so I eat my meat raw. Much nicer than subjecting a poor defenseless animal to the ordeal of being fried. )-:

 

Lol, I hope that's sarcasm.

 

Meat is no longer an animal, that can feel anything.

 

No I'm being totally serious. I believe frying or boiling or roasting or griling meat is disrespectful toward the meat and should be stopped. It is a very wrong and painful procedure. But I understand these tactics are employed by majority.. thus I try to purchase as much meat as possible and eat it raw to spare it otherwise being cooked by another customer.

 

Meat no longer feels pain after it's dead (unless you cook things alive), and it doesn't stop it from being dead.

[The Observer]

Some people convert to vegetarianism because they see animal cruelty in other countries such as some in Asia. It sucks to see that.

[Kevin]

I'm very pro-vegetarianism and save the animals and stuff, so I eat my meat raw. Much nicer than subjecting a poor defenseless animal to the ordeal of being fried. )-:

 

Lol, I hope that's sarcasm.

 

Meat is no longer an animal, that can feel anything.

 

No I'm being totally serious. I believe frying or boiling or roasting or griling meat is disrespectful toward the meat and should be stopped. It is a very wrong and painful procedure. But I understand these tactics are employed by majority.. thus I try to purchase as much meat as possible and eat it raw to spare it otherwise being cooked by another customer.

 

Meat no longer feels pain after it's dead (unless you cook things alive), and it doesn't stop it from being dead.

 

Ah, but it would be wrong to fry, boil, roast or grill meat dead or alive. That's what vegetarianism is all about: preservation of animalkind, and thus further destruction of plant-life. And that's why I started a campaign called project S.P.A.M: Stop People Afflicting Meat.

 

Mission - DON'T HURT THE MEAT! Be a good vegetarian! Annihilate the veggies instead! *Eats carrots and lettuce ruthlessly*

[Assume Nothing]

I'm very pro-vegetarianism and save the animals and stuff, so I eat my meat raw. Much nicer than subjecting a poor defenseless animal to the ordeal of being fried. )-:

 

Lol, I hope that's sarcasm.

 

Meat is no longer an animal, that can feel anything.

 

No I'm being totally serious. I believe frying or boiling or roasting or griling meat is disrespectful toward the meat and should be stopped. It is a very wrong and painful procedure. But I understand these tactics are employed by majority.. thus I try to purchase as much meat as possible and eat it raw to spare it otherwise being cooked by another customer.

 

Meat no longer feels pain after it's dead (unless you cook things alive), and it doesn't stop it from being dead.

 

Ah, but it would be wrong to fry, boil, roast or grill meat dead or alive. That's what vegetarianism is all about: preservation of animalkind, and thus further destruction of plant-life. And that's why I started a campaign called project S.P.A.M: Stop People Afflicting Meat.

 

Mission - DON'T HURT THE MEAT! Be a good vegetarian! Annihilate the veggies instead! *Eats carrots and lettuce ruthlessly*

 

Popular misconception; Plants can't feel anything. They are sentient beings, hence, you shouldn't kill them for food. Nor should you breath, for you are killing thousands of microbes every breath you take. For anyone that disregards microbes as 'living organisms'; You are a size-ist. Be ashamed. Be very ashamed

[Kevin]

I'm very pro-vegetarianism and save the animals and stuff, so I eat my meat raw. Much nicer than subjecting a poor defenseless animal to the ordeal of being fried. )-:

 

Lol, I hope that's sarcasm.

 

Meat is no longer an animal, that can feel anything.

 

No I'm being totally serious. I believe frying or boiling or roasting or griling meat is disrespectful toward the meat and should be stopped. It is a very wrong and painful procedure. But I understand these tactics are employed by majority.. thus I try to purchase as much meat as possible and eat it raw to spare it otherwise being cooked by another customer.

 

Meat no longer feels pain after it's dead (unless you cook things alive), and it doesn't stop it from being dead.

 

Ah, but it would be wrong to fry, boil, roast or grill meat dead or alive. That's what vegetarianism is all about: preservation of animalkind, and thus further destruction of plant-life. And that's why I started a campaign called project S.P.A.M: Stop People Afflicting Meat.

 

Mission - DON'T HURT THE MEAT! Be a good vegetarian! Annihilate the veggies instead! *Eats carrots and lettuce ruthlessly*

 

Popular misconception; Plants can't feel anything. They are sentient beings, hence, you shouldn't kill them for food. Nor should you breath, for you are killing thousands of microbes every breath you take. For anyone that disregards microbes as 'living organisms'; You are a size-ist. Be ashamed. Be very ashamed

 

But if I don't breathe, my body will not serve a promising vessel to those poor bacteria. I am sacrificial but not unreasonable; the genocide of hundreds of microbes globally will not stir my sympathies like the demolition of the homes of thousands of dependent bacteria would.

[Assume Nothing]

I'm very pro-vegetarianism and save the animals and stuff, so I eat my meat raw. Much nicer than subjecting a poor defenseless animal to the ordeal of being fried. )-:

 

Lol, I hope that's sarcasm.

 

Meat is no longer an animal, that can feel anything.

 

No I'm being totally serious. I believe frying or boiling or roasting or griling meat is disrespectful toward the meat and should be stopped. It is a very wrong and painful procedure. But I understand these tactics are employed by majority.. thus I try to purchase as much meat as possible and eat it raw to spare it otherwise being cooked by another customer.

 

Meat no longer feels pain after it's dead (unless you cook things alive), and it doesn't stop it from being dead.

 

Ah, but it would be wrong to fry, boil, roast or grill meat dead or alive. That's what vegetarianism is all about: preservation of animalkind, and thus further destruction of plant-life. And that's why I started a campaign called project S.P.A.M: Stop People Afflicting Meat.

 

Mission - DON'T HURT THE MEAT! Be a good vegetarian! Annihilate the veggies instead! *Eats carrots and lettuce ruthlessly*

 

Popular misconception; Plants can't feel anything. They are sentient beings, hence, you shouldn't kill them for food. Nor should you breath, for you are killing thousands of microbes every breath you take. For anyone that disregards microbes as 'living organisms'; You are a size-ist. Be ashamed. Be very ashamed

 

But if I don't breathe, my body will not serve a promising vessel to those poor bacteria. I am sacrificial but not unreasonable; the genocide of hundreds of microbes globally will not stir my sympathies like the demolition of the homes of thousands of dependent bacteria would.

 

Wrong. A dead organism is easier to invade than a living organism.