Vegan extremists

[anonymous-user]

otolith said:

I don't think it should be more expensive per se, but I think that would be an inevitable consequence of how I would choose to have it produced.

It would be more expensive to produce. I think a whole chicken is about 50p to 75p to make.

I actually believe animals are fair closer to humans than we think, and there should be animal code of conducts, things like a far life for a fair death. I have no issues eating meat and always try to get the better quality stuff, but sometimes you can't.
I actually think killing animals to eat should be part of curriculum, to bridge the current gap.

Edited by Thesprucegoose on Sunday 3rd February 15:14

[Evanivitch]

Willy Nilly said:

More SOP on a dairy farm in the UK https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgXhgLQqMQ8

It's amazing how free they are to spend their entire winter eating, sleeping and stting in the same spot. No wonder they're in a rush to the milking shed!

[LDN]

DoubleD said:

LDN said:

DoubleD said:

LDN said:

grumbledoak said:

Can I add

It's not fine to inflict this on others. Humans need meat to thrive. Babies require animal products to survive. That reality is not altered by how Holy your diet makes you feel.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/18574603/ns/us_news-crim...

We’ve been over this umpteen times. The NHS and dietic associations all state that babies / children can be brought up on a vegan diet. Fact.

Many children die of malnourishment, on meat diets / brought up by parents who eat meat.

And to finish off; the very article you linked to states:

“No matter how many times they want to say, ‘We’re vegans, we’re vegetarians,’ that’s not the issue in this case,” said prosecutor Chuck Boring. “The child died because he was not fed. Period.”

You really are a special type of thick. Or..... maybe, you’re being disingenuous. Either way; it doesn’t take a lot to shoot this type of nonsense down.

Can we stick to facts rather than more name calling.

Funny you don’t ask Oak to stick to facts, when the very article he posted up contadrcits the point he was making! Thick / disingenuous... which is it? No name calling here.

I wasnt saying that what you said was or wasnt a fact. What im saying is, lets stop the name calling.

Seems funny you’re having to defend other posters rather than discuss facts. I’ll say it again. I’m not name calling; I’m calling a spade a spade. And... again, the very article he posted up contradicts the point he was trying to make. What is that if it’s not either thick or disingenuous? It’s one or the other.

[DoubleD]

LDN said:

DoubleD said:

LDN said:

DoubleD said:

LDN said:

grumbledoak said:

Can I add

It's not fine to inflict this on others. Humans need meat to thrive. Babies require animal products to survive. That reality is not altered by how Holy your diet makes you feel.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/18574603/ns/us_news-crim...

We’ve been over this umpteen times. The NHS and dietic associations all state that babies / children can be brought up on a vegan diet. Fact.

Many children die of malnourishment, on meat diets / brought up by parents who eat meat.

And to finish off; the very article you linked to states:

“No matter how many times they want to say, ‘We’re vegans, we’re vegetarians,’ that’s not the issue in this case,” said prosecutor Chuck Boring. “The child died because he was not fed. Period.”

You really are a special type of thick. Or..... maybe, you’re being disingenuous. Either way; it doesn’t take a lot to shoot this type of nonsense down.

Can we stick to facts rather than more name calling.

Funny you don’t ask Oak to stick to facts, when the very article he posted up contadrcits the point he was making! Thick / disingenuous... which is it? No name calling here.

I wasnt saying that what you said was or wasnt a fact. What im saying is, lets stop the name calling.

Seems funny you’re having to defend other posters rather than discuss facts. I’ll say it again. I’m not name calling; I’m calling a spade a spade. And... again, the very article he posted up contradicts the point he was trying to make. What is that if it’s not either thick or disingenuous? It’s one or the other.

Ok well I tried

[Evanivitch]

Thesprucegoose said:

I actually think killing animals to eat should be part of curriculum, to bridge the current gap.

Edited by Thesprucegoose on Sunday 3rd February 15:14

I completely agree.

And I don't mean that in a "let's scare the kids from ever eating meat" I mean it in a genuine here's what happens, make your own arguments.

Kids cover topics like graffiti art and 'dangerous' animals in English classes, but I imagine you'd get more parents complaining than children.

[LDN]

DoubleD said:

LDN said:

DoubleD said:

LDN said:

DoubleD said:

LDN said:

grumbledoak said:

Can I add

It's not fine to inflict this on others. Humans need meat to thrive. Babies require animal products to survive. That reality is not altered by how Holy your diet makes you feel.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/18574603/ns/us_news-crim...

We’ve been over this umpteen times. The NHS and dietic associations all state that babies / children can be brought up on a vegan diet. Fact.

Many children die of malnourishment, on meat diets / brought up by parents who eat meat.

And to finish off; the very article you linked to states:

“No matter how many times they want to say, ‘We’re vegans, we’re vegetarians,’ that’s not the issue in this case,” said prosecutor Chuck Boring. “The child died because he was not fed. Period.”

You really are a special type of thick. Or..... maybe, you’re being disingenuous. Either way; it doesn’t take a lot to shoot this type of nonsense down.

Can we stick to facts rather than more name calling.

Funny you don’t ask Oak to stick to facts, when the very article he posted up contadrcits the point he was making! Thick / disingenuous... which is it? No name calling here.

I wasnt saying that what you said was or wasnt a fact. What im saying is, lets stop the name calling.

Seems funny you’re having to defend other posters rather than discuss facts. I’ll say it again. I’m not name calling; I’m calling a spade a spade. And... again, the very article he posted up contradicts the point he was trying to make. What is that if it’s not either thick or disingenuous? It’s one or the other.

Ok well I tried

The devil loves a trier

[Willy Nilly]

Evanivitch said:

Willy Nilly said:

More SOP on a dairy farm in the UK https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgXhgLQqMQ8

It's amazing how free they are to spend their entire winter eating, sleeping and stting in the same spot. No wonder they're in a rush to the milking shed!

I know from experience that as the nights draw in it's harder to kick them out into the field after milking and during the winter you could leave the gates open on the yard and they pretty much all stay put. Even if a few do go out, they normally come running back when they hear the feeder wagon coming. You noticed too how they wander back on their own to be milked? Very often in the summer when they are out, if you are late brining them in to milk they'll be waiting at the gate for you, but none of that fits in with the vegan propaganda.

You can very often move sheep with a feed bag and you can successfully lie to them, ie, no food actually needs to be in the bag. You can move cattle with a feed bag, but there had better be something to eat in it or you won't move them twice. Pigs are a bit tricky, you need a board to steer them. Pig nuts can be used as a means of coaxing them to where ever you want to go but they don't always work, they'll eat them and still bugger off while you're faffing about.

[Willy Nilly]

Thesprucegoose said:

I think meat should be more expensive. So farmers, the animals are treated better. Chickens do live a stty life, nothing natural about it.

You are free to buy free range poultry. I'm not sure how well the really intensively farmed birds would do clucking around a farm yard, not very would be my guess. They even use hardier strains of the same breed of pigs to go on out door units. In the USA they use different strains of the same breed of cattle to deal with the extremes of weather they have there.

[Kenny Powers]

Davos123 said:

The fact that you're comparing sentient life with a fking television should give you a hint at the problem.

Says the guy who was comparing the natural circle of life to raping babies

[Davos123]

Kenny Powers said:

Says the guy who was comparing the natural circle of life to raping babies

Killing babies actually. Are you saying infanticide isn't a perfectly common phenomenon amongst loads of species? How is it less a part of the natural circle of life than animals eating other animals?

[Evanivitch]

Willy Nilly said:

I know from experience that as the nights draw in it's harder to kick them out into the field after milking and during the winter you could leave the gates open on the yard and they pretty much all stay put. Even if a few do go out, they normally come running back when they hear the feeder wagon coming. You noticed too how they wander back on their own to be milked? Very often in the summer when they are out, if you are late brining them in to milk they'll be waiting at the gate for you, but none of that fits in with the vegan propaganda.

I'm not even vegan, I'm just capable of looking at the system objectively.

They wait at the gate because that's habit, I know people that good for lunch at 1200h on the dot, they're not hungry, it's habit. Habit isn't an excuse to add constraints.

So what would the consequence be if the cattle were granted free roaming access in and out of barns in winter? Efficiency? Productivity? A rough field?

[Kenny Powers]

Davos123 said:

Killing babies actually. Are you saying infanticide isn't a perfectly common phenomenon amongst loads of species? How is it less a part of the natural circle of life than animals eating other animals?

Raping. Killing. Eating. All interchangeable in the mind of the average vegan, it seems

[Davos123]

Kenny Powers said:

Raping. Killing. Eating. All interchangeable in the mind of the average vegan, it seems

Not going to answer the question then? I'm not advocating we don't eat, I'm advocating we don't kill to eat because we don't need to and it causes unnecessary suffering. You can't justify it on the basis other animals do it because appeal to nature arguments are nonsense, there is lots of behaviour exhibited by animals which is undesirable so each behaviour has to be assessed on its own individual merits, not justified purely because other species do it, from sniffing each other's arses as a greeting to infanticide to what we eat.

[Kenny Powers]

Crikey Davos. You’re like the Terminator - absolutely can’t be reasoned with. Ever.

(or some such)

[DoubleD]

Justifying eating another animal is down to personal opinion and isnt the decision of 1 person.

[Davos123]

DoubleD said:

Justifying eating another animal is down to personal opinion and isnt the decision of 1 person.

Where has anyone said it's their decision?

[Davos123]

Kenny Powers said:

Crikey Davos. You’re like the Terminator - absolutely can’t be reasoned with. Ever.

(or some such)

I'll take that as acknowledgement you're talking out of your arse.

[LDN]

Kenny Powers said:

Crikey Davos. You’re like the Terminator - absolutely can’t be reasoned with. Ever.

Problem being for you; is that he has logic on his side. You have sarcasm. And not a witty strain at that

[Rollin]

Davos123 said:

Kenny Powers said:

Raping. Killing. Eating. All interchangeable in the mind of the average vegan, it seems

Not going to answer the question then? I'm not advocating we don't eat, I'm advocating we don't kill to eat because we don't need to and it causes unnecessary suffering. You can't justify it on the basis other animals do it because appeal to nature arguments are nonsense, there is lots of behaviour exhibited by animals which is undesirable so each behaviour has to be assessed on its own individual merits, not justified purely because other species do it, from sniffing each other's arses as a greeting to infanticide to what we eat.

Yes we do have to. On a massive scale and either directly or indirectly. Sometimes the cute cuddly ones, sometimes not. To think otherwise is totally deluded.

Granted, you can try to minimise this and guess what?....You don't have to be a self righteous vegan to do that.

[Davos123]

There's a whole Wikipedia page to explain to you why your line of reasoning is a fallacy: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature

HTH