A secular debate about eating meat.

[fordo]

[Robert_S]

Actually, Sandinista, I know the kind of length a tru vegetarian has to go to eat right by his rules (used to know a macrobiotic follower, and spent some extended time living with a relative who won't touch flesh, fish nor egg)

If they allow themselves dairy and aren't allergic to it or lactose intolerant,they can get most of the nutrients missing from plant foods from dairy.

Of course, dairy cattle are possibly the least humanely treated of modern farm animals.

Unless I spend a little bit more and get it from a free range dairy. Doing so isn't all that hard on my food budget. My staples of brown/wild rice, lugumes, multi-vitamins and some fresh fruits and veggies don't cost that much really.

[JimC]

Actually, Sandinista, I know the kind of length a tru vegetarian has to go to eat right by his rules (used to know a macrobiotic follower, and spent some extended time living with a relative who won't touch flesh, fish nor egg)

If they allow themselves dairy and aren't allergic to it or lactose intolerant,they can get most of the nutrients missing from plant foods from dairy.

Of course, dairy cattle are possibly the least humanely treated of modern farm animals.

Unless I spend a little bit more and get it from a free range dairy. Doing so isn't all that hard on my food budget. My staples of brown/wild rice, lugumes, multi-vitamins and some fresh fruits and veggies don't cost that much really.

Costs and food miles are important issues for a number of reasons. We eat meat-free meals a few times a week; I enjoy some types of vegetarian dishes (though often with some cheese, I must admit...)

We grow as many of our vegies as we can, and wherever we can, we get the remainder from local farmer's markets. Free range chickens and eggs only, and we look at the advice about sustainable fisheries when we buy fish.

The lactose intolerance thing is interesting - my wife has to buy lactose free milk, but seems to be able to eat cheese with no ill effects...

[Warren Dew]

The lactose intolerance thing is interesting - my wife has to buy lactose free milk, but seems to be able to eat cheese with no ill effects...

The lactose is water soluble, so most of it stays with the whey rather than with the curds from which cheese is made. I was sufficiently lactose intolerant that cheese was a problem for me, last I checked, but many lactose intolerant people can handle cheese or even good quality ice cream. I suspet the severity of the reaction depends on one's gut flora.

[JimC]

The lactose intolerance thing is interesting - my wife has to buy lactose free milk, but seems to be able to eat cheese with no ill effects...

The lactose is water soluble, so most of it stays with the whey rather than with the curds from which cheese is made. I was sufficiently lactose intolerant that cheese was a problem for me, last I checked, but many lactose intolerant people can handle cheese or even good quality ice cream. I suspet the severity of the reaction depends on one's gut flora.

Makes perfect sense...

[lordpasternack]

There's no debate.

Some of us like eating meat.

Some don't.

End of story.

That's fascinating - but I don't think the debate is about people's gustatory and dietary convenience preferences - and I think you perceived that perfectly well. The debate, as the OP makes kinda clear, is about the ethics of eating meat - and by corollary the ethics of the treatment of the animals prior to and during slaughter. Assuming you understood that at time of replying to the thread, this makes this contribution at the very least completely vacuous, if not quite disingenuous...

[Coito ergo sum]

There's no debate.

Some of us like eating meat.

Some don't.

End of story.

That's fascinating - but I don't think the debate is about people's gustatory and dietary convenience preferences - and I think you perceived that perfectly well. The debate, as the OP makes kinda clear, is about the ethics of eating meat - and by corollary the ethics of the treatment of the animals prior to and during slaughter. Assuming you understood that at time of replying to the thread, this makes this contribution at the very least completely vacuous, if not quite disingenuous...

Look at you, LP! Droppin' chronic plates on his ass! Way to put the smack down!

[sandinista]

There's no debate.

Some of us like eating meat.

Some don't.

End of story.

That's fascinating - but I don't think the debate is about people's gustatory and dietary convenience preferences - and I think you perceived that perfectly well. The debate, as the OP makes kinda clear, is about the ethics of eating meat - and by corollary the ethics of the treatment of the animals prior to and during slaughter. Assuming you understood that at time of replying to the thread, this makes this contribution at the very least completely vacuous, if not quite disingenuous...

Look at you, LP! Droppin' chronic plates on his ass! Way to put the smack down!

[JimC]

There's no debate.

Some of us like eating meat.

Some don't.

End of story.

That's fascinating - but I don't think the debate is about people's gustatory and dietary convenience preferences - and I think you perceived that perfectly well. The debate, as the OP makes kinda clear, is about the ethics of eating meat - and by corollary the ethics of the treatment of the animals prior to and during slaughter. Assuming you understood that at time of replying to the thread, this makes this contribution at the very least completely vacuous, if not quite disingenuous...

If you had bothered, you would have seen somewhere in this tortuous thread a statement which recommends purchasing decisions based on animal treatment regimes...

My intention with that throw-away post was to make it clear that it is pointless to tell an omnivore to stop consuming meat; they will quite rightly tell you to fuck off...

On the other hand, making arguments about the minimising of pain and suffering by food animals is both reasonable and realistic...

[epepke]

My intention with that throw-away post was to make it clear that it is pointless to tell an omnivore to stop consuming meat; they will quite rightly tell you to fuck off...

Well, the last statement in the OP is "Or, is it just tasty?" so comments like that are not outside the scope of the OP by any means.

Perhaps an omnivorous diet is richer in nutrients that facilitate literacy.

[zmonsterz]

I'm a vegetarian and people often say to me 'But meat is so so delicous!' and I agree with them but then I tell them that its not about me disliking meat, its about the ethics of it. I know that me being only one person won't make much of a difference by not consuming meat but I will make a difference. Even a smaller one. Perhaps if I'm vegetarian for the rest of my life then I'll save a couple of dozen cows, sheeps, pigs and chicken from being killed. I'm saving a couple of animals by taking away my demand from the market for them. I believe that animals shouldn't be slaughtered like they are in abbatoirs (spelling? meh).

[Coito ergo sum]

[lordpasternack]

There's no debate.

Some of us like eating meat.

Some don't.

End of story.

That's fascinating - but I don't think the debate is about people's gustatory and dietary convenience preferences - and I think you perceived that perfectly well. The debate, as the OP makes kinda clear, is about the ethics of eating meat - and by corollary the ethics of the treatment of the animals prior to and during slaughter. Assuming you understood that at time of replying to the thread, this makes this contribution at the very least completely vacuous, if not quite disingenuous...

 :lay:  :lol: 

If you had bothered, you would have seen somewhere in this tortuous thread a statement which recommends purchasing decisions based on animal treatment regimes...  ;) 

My intention with that throw-away post was to make it clear that it is pointless to tell an omnivore to stop consuming meat; they will quite rightly tell you to fuck off...

On the other hand, making arguments about the minimising of pain and suffering by food animals is both reasonable  and realistic...

Why quite rightly? It's all very relative to culture and cultural conditioning, you know?

Do you think people of certain cultures would "quite rightly" tell you to fuck off for suggesting/telling them not to have sex with children, or eat babies, or cut the genitals of minors, or anything else? 

Some people like it, you know. Some people don't. There's no debate.

[sandinista]

I'm a vegetarian and people often say to me 'But meat is so so delicous!' and I agree with them but then I tell them that its not about me disliking meat, its about the ethics of it. I know that me being only one person won't make much of a difference by not consuming meat but I will make a difference. Even a smaller one. Perhaps if I'm vegetarian for the rest of my life then I'll save a couple of dozen cows, sheeps, pigs and chicken from being killed. I'm saving a couple of animals by taking away my demand from the market for them. I believe that animals shouldn't be slaughtered like they are in abbatoirs (spelling? meh).

Good post zmonsterz, I would say that you are making a difference, not only by saving some animals (which is great!) but hopefully by exposing people around you to the vegetarian option and the brutality of the meat industry. Since stopping eating dead animals many many years ago a lot of friends and family members have also stopped eating meat. Sometimes it just takes an individual to inform people, to make them think about what they are consuming. With all the pro-meat propaganda on television and billboards it's only right to counter that by sharing your experiences and philosophies on animal suffering.

[Coito ergo sum]

I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals. I'm a vegetarian because I hate vegetables.