[Touringlawyer]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Without humans intervention, the modern domesticated cows wouldn't exist. Cows were created by humans over thousands years by selective breeding. Humans created the modern cows for milk/meat/leather. Humans don't mess with wild cows (Gaur), that populate the forests of Asia. If everybody turns vegan, cows will go extinct in 20-30 years. Only wild cows will remain.
Simple, humans (let alone their stomach) are result of natural selection. By the proven evolutionary science we know that. We are neither designed nor engineered.

Humans have evolved to eat/drink whatever they eat/drink now. We can't design humans, yet. So when somebody starts saying human stomach was designed for... you can pretty much discard whatever that follows. It doesn't matter whether they are pro-meat or pro-veg. It is just mythology.

I have no quarrel with the 'fact' that humans created the modern cow or that modern cow is the result of intervention by humans through selective breeding.

Let me jot down for discussion purposes, some of the many other interventions made by humans with nature: extreme deforestation, burning fossil fuel, disposal of all waste into water sources and oceans, organised agriculture in the form it is practised today, farming of animals etc.

Just citing below some articles about human interventions and the impact of it on the environment.

https://www.nature.com/news/one-thir...ulture-1.11708

http://www.onegreenplanet.org/animal...e-environment/

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...mpact-on-earth

The point that I am trying to make is, only because we have acted in a certain manner in the past (by our interventions with nature) does not justify our continuation of the practice today. A lot of what was done in the past thousands of years have been discontinued by humans upon application of mind and continuous struggle of the affected ones. Eating non-vegetarian food, consumption of animal milk, abuse of animals for their skin, wool etc., in my opinion, are such practices which need discontinuation for being unethical and unjust, besides being counter-productive and environmentally degrading, which affects us humans directly.

Originally Posted by dailydriver

Been a vegetarian for 25 years now. I like being that. But whenever someone asks me why I don't consume meat, I simply smile and say that its just a personal preference. I can go at length graphically describing the actual reasons; but I take care not to. I don't want to downplay their choices, or to tell them something that will make their mealtimes hard and melancholic.

The purpose of the thread will perhaps be better served if we dwell more on the benefits of veganism than on the ethics of it. The last two pages have deconstructed food choices a bit too much (I too have been guilty here).

Let me ask you this: If you were to be friends with an individual and you have personal knowledge of the fact that he is committing marital rape, (which is perfectly legal and non-criminal act in India), will you question him on his conduct or will you not discuss it because ultimately he is exercising a personal choice. That is my dilemma, as I see it. If you think that a particular conduct is wrong because it is unjust or unethical, it is (in my opinion) one's duty to point it out / highlight it (if not fight for it). That is how through movements, women have earned right to equality, homosexuality has been decriminalised, slavery has been abolished etc. and many many more.

To tell a serial child rapist not to rape because rape is a bad thing and it would cause pain to a child, simply because that would/might cause him mental discomfort in his act of rape, is not right. The same reasoning holds true here.

No habit / belief / faith of humans, simply because it has been followed for thousands of years, justify any conduct, simply because it is someone's choice.

Reiterating what I said earlier, we humans (through generations and thousand of years) have caused innumerable interventions with nature, almost all of them destructive and at the cost of other life forms and nature, so it is our duty to question and analyse our own past conduct and examine what all we did was wrong and to make a conscious effort to discontinue it.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by Touringlawyer

To tell a serial child rapist not to rape because rape is a bad thing and it would cause pain to a child, simply because that would/might cause him mental discomfort in his act of rape, is not right. The same reasoning holds true here.

Wait... are you equating meat-eaters with child rapists?

Originally Posted by Touringlawyer

Reiterating what I said earlier, we humans (through generations and thousand of years) have caused innumerable interventions with nature, almost all of them destructive and at the cost of other life forms and nature, so it is our duty to question and analyse our own past conduct and examine what all we did was wrong and to make a conscious effort to discontinue it.

You won't be able live a single week without messing with nature. You think agriculture is natural? Agriculture is bad for the nature too. Where do you get your water? Thanks to dams and canals that bring the river water to your city, or by digging a well to tap into ground water. That's messing with nature.

I pointed out very earlier in this thread that humans can't survive without messing with nature. It is an illusion if you think you can do it.

[Touringlawyer]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Wait... are you equating meat-eaters with child rapists?

Yes and No.

No, because here I was simply giving an analogy and trying to highlight that the applicable rationale is the same.

Yes, because I actually (even to most humans astonishment) see animal abuse in no way secondary or less degrading to human abuse. Please do watch some videos of how hot dogs are made (chickens fed live into a machine); leather is made (in many cases, to obtain soft leather, young calves are skinned alive, including also by pouring boiling water on them); to obtain milk (male calves are beheaded and their heads are actually hung in front of the female cow to induce the cows to keep giving the milk).

Please do think as to why should human suffering and pain be at a higher pedestal (and therefore to be prevented) to animal suffering and pain. Both suffer physical and emotional trauma.

Originally Posted by Samurai

You won't be able live a single week without messing with nature. You think agriculture is natural? Agriculture is bad for the nature too. Where do you get your water? Thanks to dams and canals that bring the river water to your city, or by digging a well to tap into ground water. That's messing with nature.

I pointed out very earlier in this thread that humans can't survive without messing with nature. It is an illusion if you think you can do it.

I agree to some points and disagree with some.

I agree to the fact that agriculture is not natural and that we mess with nature to bring water to us, by digging a well, building dams, canals etc. And my stated position is that a lot of this is wrong and with time, agriculture in its current form will stop. In the articles that I had referred in my earlier post, you would see that there is already a huge push to change the form of agriculture as is currently practised, simply because the current form of agriculture is unsustainable and destructive of the environment and thus humans themselves.

I disagree when you say that we cannot survive without messing with nature. Yes, our current lifestyles cannot co-exist with nature, no doubt about that. But I disagree if you say that we simply cannot exist without messing with nature. As I have said earlier, that is a larger discussion and perhaps would require another thread.

[bblost]

I doubt anyone can be a Vegan without the support of a supermarket and the supply chain system it brings with it.

Lets just take a hypothetical situation. The world as we know it is over. Civilization as we know it is finished.

Just remember that every animal you will encounter is edible. That includes the cattle, cats, dogs, pigs, insects, snakes.

There are very few such creatures, which once killed cannot be consumed.

Its the exact opposite with plants.
The number of edible plant species is almost nothing when compared to number of edibles animal species.

This entire concept of Veganism being natural is itself based on an artificial construct called "farming".

Edit: Hotdogs are made by feeding in live chicken into a machine?
I am sorry. But have you ever seen the amount of feathers a chicken has?

[hdus001]

Originally Posted by Touringlawyer

But the difference here being, our wheat consumption does not involve depriving a calf of its mother's milk; our wheat consumption does not involve killing the male calf, so that the milk that the calf would consume could be snatched by us humans. In short, our wheat consumption does not directly (or perhaps indirectly as well) does not cause physical or emotional pain to a sentient being.

Well a lot of insects, animals, bugs and birds do get directly impacted by farming, probably far more in number than those calves. Many sentient beings that we consider pests and hence kill with pesticides have just as much a right to live as other animals. Also a bit of googling might dispel the "does not involve killing the male calf" in the dairy industry.

I've enjoyed reading thru this thread, its indeed rare to see such a civil, logical discussion around all this.

For me personally, the unsustainability of meat-eating sounds like the strongest reason (leaving aside any emotional reasonings) for reducing meat consumption. It takes far too many resources to produce meat, in terms of land needed to grow fodder, water etc, and those are finite resources so won't scale well. But then again you could argue the same about other common passions like cars, travelling etc too

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted by Touringlawyer

marital rape ... serial child rapist

There comes the tipping point!

You have, in your zealousness to put forward a noble cause like veganism, gone overboard and brought in issues that are too far fetched to be associated with this discussion. I could counter them with similar, stronger arguments, but as I have maintained earlier, I do not want to spoil anyone's experience of eating peacefully. So, I will stop this inane debate.

May everyone enjoy the type of meal he craves for, deserves and requires.

The music of life is in danger of being lost in the music of the voice.

[fiestarry]

Today's urban dwellers are too far removed from the grisly reality of animal and poultry breeding, the cruel treatment of those beings and their brutal slaughter. They have become habituated to consuming meat that doesn't resemble the animal. And over a period of time, they have deliberately shut out the need to recognise and associate the food they consume, to the animal or bird that has been killed, skinned and chopped up. It will only be an astonishing few who can ever kill any bird or animal and prepare it for a meal. Almost no one can stick a knife in a live animal and watch it bleed at their feet and shriek its way to death. Therefore, having insulated themselves from the brutality of the meat industry, they would put forth meaningless arguments which come from the tips of their city school bred tongues rather than their hearts. This is why, today's city dweller is an avid animal lover ( read dog lover). He wants to pour his unrequited love on an animal which serves him no purpose other than to look at him with endearing eyes. His anger and blood lust is quenched temporarily when he bites into the flesh of the sad bird or animal that stood no chance to represent its own cause. And the meat industry won't give them a chance ever, will they.?

[roy_libran]

Why can't everyone just eat what suits their taste-buds and morality, without feeling compelled to pontificate on why their choice of food is the best, most healthy and most moral?
Humans, and particularly our understanding of nature, has hardly evolved yet to the point where we understand all ramifications of every choice that we make, whether in the short or long term.
The fundamental problem for this planet, when it comes to food supply and choices, is not the type of foods, but the multitude of humans!

Disclaimer - I am an unapologetic meat eater, who has had the experience of killing, dressing, chopping, cooking and eating live animals, and am perfectly at ease with the entire idea even now. But, I can see why it may not work for everyone.

[bblost]

fiestarry,

The same can be said for plants as well.
The Urban dwellers are too far removed from the hard realities of farming and cultivation.
Not even a small percentage of people will be able to grow anything at all.

[V.Narayan]

All philosophers, who find
Some favourite system to their mind

In every point to make it fit,‎
Will force all nature to submit.‎
- Thomas Peacock, a British Poet

The essence of the poem sounds like what is happening on this thread. Vegans must understand they do not have a monopoly over 'The Truth'. We all are simultaneously knowledgeable and blind in equal measure.

In my home my wife, mother & I are egg-veg, 2 of the kids eat every thing that walks & flies, my aunt is a vegan (without knowing there is a term for it).... and the youngest has turned vegan because she wants to experiment.

What we need on this thread is toleranceatarianism. Gosh I might have just invented a new word :-)

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by Touringlawyer

Yes, because I actually (even to most humans astonishment) see animal abuse in no way secondary or less degrading to human abuse. Please do watch some videos of how hot dogs are made (chickens fed live into a machine); leather is made (in many cases, to obtain soft leather, young calves are skinned alive, including also by pouring boiling water on them); to obtain milk (male calves are beheaded and their heads are actually hung in front of the female cow to induce the cows to keep giving the milk).

I don't need to watch PETA propaganda videos. You see, I grew up around farms and estates. While growing up, I have watched my grandmother, mother & aunts kill our home grown chickens with their warm bare hands. I even helped them in chasing and catching the chicken before the kill. These were free range chickens, allowed to run wild whole day and come home to the coup at night. See, there is a silver line.

What you are is a victim of PETA video propaganda. You have been fed a bunch of lies, and literally brainwashed into calling your fellow humans child rapists. I suggest you seriously think how these PETA videos have twisted your thought process to this extent.

Originally Posted by bblost

Edit: Hotdogs are made by feeding in live chicken into a machine?
I am sorry. But have you ever seen the amount of feathers a chicken has?

I swear.... Those of us who visit butcher shops actually see these meat grinding machines. I can't even imagine how a live animal can be fed into it. I think they fed a live chicken into a wood chipper machine, and showed it to the naive PETA audience as the truth. So the actual people who did that are PETA filmmakers.

Originally Posted by Touringlawyer

But I disagree if you say that we simply cannot exist without messing with nature. As I have said earlier, that is a larger discussion and perhaps would require another thread.

No. You are talking fantasy.

Originally Posted by fiestarry

Today's urban dwellers are too far removed from the grisly reality of animal and poultry breeding, the cruel treatment of those beings and their brutal slaughter.... And the meat industry won't give them a chance ever, will they.?

You are right in one sense. Urban dwellers are far removed from reality. So you need to listen to someone like me who grew up in rural areas. Urbanites can practice veganism only because someone in rural areas will mess with the nature. In fact, I reviewed a book couple months ago. In that fantasy scenario, laws of electromagnetism dies one day, leaving the world bereft of almost all technology. Food can't be transported via automobiles or stored using refrigeration. So 99% of the world population just dies, leaving only rural people who know how to farm or hunt. Vegans are forced turn into meat eaters. The book is very detailed on these matters. Read it, if you really want to understand how civilization worked before technology. Veganism is not natural at all.

[dark.knight]

Of all the threads, this seems to be the most hilarious one.. the minute I saw this thread getting created, I grimaced in pain, for this debate will never end and each side is going to get offended/hurt/amused by the other. For a super-fastidious forum such as this one it is all the more "irritating" if I may be so daring to say, each side trying to make more and more detailed, painfully structured arguments so as to be victorious and be satisfied that they've either defended themselves or converted the other.

Trust me in this, this thread is going nowhere. I say end all arguments related to veganism and even vegetarianism and let people be who they want to be, I'm sure in a post apocalyptic world I'd for sure, die of starvation than stray from my ideology, and no, there is no point in telling me again that I may change because there is no apocalypse and there won't be one in all likelihood.

All my life, I've never expected strangers/acquaintances/friends to understand my diet, all I wanted was no comments when my food is put on my plate, no questions on where I get my protein or fats, and no "you're missing the taste", the last guy who did say that got such a tongue lashing that he shrunk into the shadows. In turn I've never commented on others diet.. the world is what it is.. period. You either create change within yourself and be the change or you let the existing situation continue unquestioned. If my earlier self had known that I wouldn't have broken off what was a really great relationship just due to dietary preferences, it sure didn't matter to her but what the heck it was college time and we all make mistakes then.

My only request is that vegans do not go overboard with their comments so as to attract the attention of non-vegans, and vice versa. We all have opinions that we hide akin to what's inside our underwear, we don't want to drop them down do we?

This is perhaps the most slippery slope I've seen, I've been offended equally by omni/vegan/vegetarians alike.. I think a don't ask/don't tell policy is well advised here. Bedroom talk cannot be put on the forum.

Also there is nothing wrong in claiming to be an animal lover if you like cats or dogs. It has to begin somewhere.

[kiku007]

Originally Posted by Touringlawyer

Yes and No.

Please do watch some videos of how hot dogs are made (chickens fed live into a machine)

Could you please check if they fed a live cow for beef sausage and a live pig for pork sausage?

Very interesting story this is.

[GeneralJazz]

Originally Posted by Touringlawyer

I disagree when you say that we cannot survive without messing with nature. Yes, our current lifestyles cannot co-exist with nature, no doubt about that. But I disagree if you say that we simply cannot exist without messing with nature. As I have said earlier, that is a larger discussion and perhaps would require another thread.

I hope you are not serious! The very fact that you and I have survived so far is proof that we are messing with nature. If we weren't, we probable would have been eaten as a baby, died due to disease/parasites, killed for a mate, killed by a mate, died from starvation and so on. There are n number of ways to die in the wild. The fact that we have eliminated many of them are proof that we are messing with nature.

[am1m]

Originally Posted by dailydriver

There comes the tipping point!

You have, in your zealousness to put forward a noble cause like veganism, gone overboard and brought in issues that are too far fetched to be associated with this discussion.

You said it man! Sadly, for a lot of people veganism becomes like a religion and like any religion often becomes illogical, preachy and begins to turn off the very people who might be seriously considering a logical shift. Instead of considering the science, the arguments go into emotional hyperbole, exactly like this one seems to have.

Either way, coming back to the (hopeful) purpose of this thread. Would really like to hear the viable alternatives to milk. Soya milk I guess. Does it have the same nutrients? Is it as easily accessible? And what about cost?