Vegetarian Discussion: Sorry, Vegans: Brussels Sprouts Like To Live, Too

Sorry, Vegans: Brussels Sprouts Like To Live, Too
Posts: 289

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11   Next  (First | Last)

DC
2009-12-24 14:13:23 EST
NY Times

In his new book, \ufffdEating Animals\ufffd (Amazon.com:
http://snurl.com/EatAni ), the novelist Jonathan Safran
Foer describes his gradual transformation from omnivorous,
oblivious slacker who \ufffdwaffled among any number of diets\ufffd
to \ufffdcommitted vegetarian.\ufffd Last month, Gary Steiner, a
philosopher at Bucknell University, argued on the Op-Ed
page of The New York Times http://snurl.com/ttw8w that
people should strive to be \ufffdstrict ethical vegans\ufffd like
himself, avoiding all products derived from animals,
including wool and silk. Killing animals for human food and
finery is nothing less than \ufffdoutright murder,\ufffd he said...

But before we cede the entire moral penthouse to \ufffdcommitted
vegetarians\ufffd and \ufffdstrong ethical vegans,\ufffd we might consider
that plants no more aspire to being stir-fried in a wok
than a hog aspires to being peppercorn-studded in my
Christmas clay pot. This is not meant as a trite argument
or a chuckled aside. Plants are lively and seek to keep it
that way. The more that scientists learn about the
complexity of plants \ufffd their keen sensitivity to the
environment, the speed with which they react to changes in
the environment, and the extraordinary number of tricks
that plants will rally to fight off attackers and solicit
help from afar \ufffd the more impressed researchers become, and
the less easily we can dismiss plants as so much fiberfill
backdrop...

Continued: http://snurl.com/ttw97




Ex-PFC Wintergreen
2009-12-24 15:17:43 EST
DC wrote:
> NY Times
>
> In his new book, “Eating Animals” (Amazon.com:
> http://snurl.com/EatAni ), the novelist Jonathan Safran
> Foer describes his gradual transformation from omnivorous,
> oblivious slacker who “waffled among any number of diets”
> to “committed vegetarian.” Last month, Gary Steiner, a
> philosopher at Bucknell University, argued on the Op-Ed
> page of The New York Times http://snurl.com/ttw8w that
> people should strive to be “strict ethical vegans” like
> himself, avoiding all products derived from animals,
> including wool and silk. Killing animals for human food and
> finery is nothing less than “outright murder,” he said...
>
> But before we cede the entire moral penthouse to “committed
> vegetarians” and “strong ethical vegans,” we might consider
> that plants no more aspire to being stir-fried in a wok
> than a hog aspires to being peppercorn-studded in my
> Christmas clay pot. This is not meant as a trite argument
> or a chuckled aside. Plants are lively and seek to keep it
> that way. The more that scientists learn about the
> complexity of plants — their keen sensitivity to the
> environment, the speed with which they react to changes in
> the environment, and the extraordinary number of tricks
> that plants will rally to fight off attackers and solicit
> help from afar — the more impressed researchers become, and
> the less easily we can dismiss plants as so much fiberfill
> backdrop...
>
> Continued: http://snurl.com/ttw97

"vegans" are not "more ethical" for refusing to consume animal products.
In fact, the very fact of being "vegan" is an indication that the
person describing himself as such is morally bankrupt, because
"veganism" isn't about doing the right thing at all; it's purely about
making an invidious, sanctimonious comparison with others and then
patting oneself on the back.

D*@.
2009-12-25 14:12:47 EST
On 24 Dec 2009 19:13:23 -0000, DC <remailer@reece.net.au> wrote:

>NY Times
>
>In his new book, “Eating Animals” (Amazon.com:
>http://snurl.com/EatAni ), the novelist Jonathan Safran
>Foer describes his gradual transformation from omnivorous,
>oblivious slacker who “waffled among any number of diets”
>to “committed vegetarian.” Last month, Gary Steiner, a
>philosopher at Bucknell University, argued on the Op-Ed
>page of The New York Times http://snurl.com/ttw8w that
>people should strive to be “strict ethical vegans” like
>himself, avoiding all products derived from animals,
>including wool and silk. Killing animals for human food and
>finery is nothing less than “outright murder,” he said...

· Vegans contribute to the deaths of animals by their use of
wood and paper products, electricity, roads and all types of
buildings, their own diet, etc... just as everyone else does.
What they try to avoid are products which provide life
(and death) for farm animals, but even then they would have
to avoid the following items containing animal by-products
in order to be successful:

tires, paper, upholstery, floor waxes, glass, water
filters, rubber, fertilizer, antifreeze, ceramics, insecticides,
insulation, linoleum, plastic, textiles, blood factors, collagen,
heparin, insulin, solvents, biodegradable detergents, herbicides,
gelatin capsules, adhesive tape, laminated wood products,
plywood, paneling, wallpaper and wallpaper paste, cellophane
wrap and tape, abrasives, steel ball bearings

The meat industry provides life for the animals that it
slaughters, and the animals live and die as a result of it
as animals do in other habitats. They also depend on it for
their lives as animals do in other habitats. If people consume
animal products from animals they think are raised in decent
ways, they will be promoting life for more such animals in the
future. People who want to contribute to decent lives for
livestock with their lifestyle must do it by being conscientious
consumers of animal products, because they can not do it by
being vegan.
From the life and death of a thousand pound grass raised
steer and whatever he happens to kill during his life, people
get over 500 pounds of human consumable meat...that's well
over 500 servings of meat. From a grass raised dairy cow people
get thousands of dairy servings. Due to the influence of farm
machinery, and *icides, and in the case of rice the flooding and
draining of fields, one serving of soy or rice based product is
likely to involve more animal deaths than hundreds of servings
derived from grass raised animals. Grass raised animal products
contribute to fewer wildlife deaths, better wildlife habitat, and
better lives for livestock than soy or rice products. ·

The Consulate
2009-12-25 20:49:32 EST
It is almost impossible to believe humans are such dicks.

Anything that you can pluck from the trees or plants such as
say an apple that falls to the ground or a brussel sprout is
not life and does not live.
A potato that grows roots is life and does live.

An apple that falls to the ground can be eaten with a
totally clear conscience, providing that you plant the seeds
back into the ground.

But a brussel sprout is totally different to a potato, a
potato is life and grows and lives, but a brussel sprout
once removed from the plant is not life and will not grow.
The plant however where the brussel sprout comes from is
life, but not the sprout.

Do humans really need this explaining?
Unbelievable just how stupid humans are.

Anything that can be taken from plants or trees that cannot
sustain life are OK to eat with a clear conscience.
You should not eat seeds, or any product or animal or
creature that can sustain their own life.

And being vegan is not about giving yourself a pat on the
back, it is eating what you know you can eat with a totally
clear conscience.

Milk and eggs also cause suffering to the animals and birds
concerned. These also cannot be consumed with a clear
conscience.

A vegan merely respects other life and accords life to
others, knowing full well that having a clean conscience and
eating to live rather than living to eat are far far better
than the greed and gluttony of the masses.



The Consulate
2009-12-25 20:57:41 EST
There is no requirement at all for humans to eat meat or
fish.
The reason humans do is that they place their enjoyment of
eating and their gluttony and greed BEFORE the respect and
sanctity they should give to other life.

OBVIOUSLY the sanctity and respect toward other life takes
priority over human greed and gluttony and their very
superficial desires for taste sensations.

Humans are a vegetarian animal by nature, they are not
naturally flesh-eaters.
Horses and apes and many animals, live admirably and grow
strong on vegetarian diets.
And humans are another animal just like they.

They are just more filthy and more stupid and more greedy.



The Consulate
2009-12-25 21:07:44 EST
We find it revolting to see prawn cocktail flavoured crisps,
or beef flavour, or chicken flavour.

These are living, breathing, sentient animals and birds and
fish.

And yet to humans, all they are is "snacks".

We find that repulsive, and evident of a population who are
brain dead and do not think.

If humans want milk, they should get their pregnant women
after childbirth and bung them in a cold shed place suckers
on their mammary glands and see how they like it.
If they do not like it, then don't do this to others.

And next time a young human male behaves badly, have him
neutered, and if he does not like it then don't do this to
others.


Ex-PFC Wintergreen
2009-12-25 21:53:09 EST
On Dec 25, 5:49 pm, "The Consulate" <consul...@icecool.com> wrote:
> It is almost impossible to believe humans are such dicks.

You speak from experience, obviously.

Dutch
2009-12-25 22:51:08 EST

<*h@.> wrote in message news:al3aj5dstdmb0udn3vfoadukaufkngv02c@4ax.com...
> On 24 Dec 2009 19:13:23 -0000, DC <remailer@reece.net.au> wrote:
>
>>NY Times
>>
>>In his new book, "Eating Animals" (Amazon.com:
>>http://snurl.com/EatAni ), the novelist Jonathan Safran
>>Foer describes his gradual transformation from omnivorous,
>>oblivious slacker who "waffled among any number of diets"
>>to "committed vegetarian." Last month, Gary Steiner, a
>>philosopher at Bucknell University, argued on the Op-Ed
>>page of The New York Times http://snurl.com/ttw8w that
>>people should strive to be "strict ethical vegans" like
>>himself, avoiding all products derived from animals,
>>including wool and silk. Killing animals for human food and
>>finery is nothing less than "outright murder," he said...
>
> · Vegans contribute to the deaths of animals

No boilerplate bullshit


Ex-PFC Wintergreen
2009-12-25 23:34:39 EST
On Dec 25, 5:57 pm, "The Consulate" <consul...@icecool.com> wrote:
> There is no requirement at all for humans to eat meat or
> fish.
> The reason humans do is that they place their enjoyment of
> eating and their gluttony and greed BEFORE the respect and
> sanctity they should give to other life.

There is no moral problem with eating meat.

D*@.
2009-12-26 12:05:45 EST
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 01:49:32 -0000, "The Consulate"
<*e@icecool.com> wrote:

>A vegan merely respects other life and accords life to
>others, knowing full well that having a clean conscience and
>eating to live rather than living to eat are far far better
>than the greed and gluttony of the masses.

· Vegans contribute to the deaths of animals by their use of
wood and paper products, electricity, roads and all types of
buildings, their own diet, etc... just as everyone else does.
What they try to avoid are products which provide life
(and death) for farm animals, but even then they would have
to avoid the following items containing animal by-products
in order to be successful:

tires, paper, upholstery, floor waxes, glass, water
filters, rubber, fertilizer, antifreeze, ceramics, insecticides,
insulation, linoleum, plastic, textiles, blood factors, collagen,
heparin, insulin, solvents, biodegradable detergents, herbicides,
gelatin capsules, adhesive tape, laminated wood products,
plywood, paneling, wallpaper and wallpaper paste, cellophane
wrap and tape, abrasives, steel ball bearings

The meat industry provides life for the animals that it
slaughters, and the animals live and die as a result of it
as animals do in other habitats. They also depend on it for
their lives as animals do in other habitats. If people consume
animal products from animals they think are raised in decent
ways, they will be promoting life for more such animals in the
future. People who want to contribute to decent lives for
livestock with their lifestyle must do it by being conscientious
consumers of animal products, because they can not do it by
being vegan.
From the life and death of a thousand pound grass raised
steer and whatever he happens to kill during his life, people
get over 500 pounds of human consumable meat...that's well
over 500 servings of meat. From a grass raised dairy cow people
get thousands of dairy servings. Due to the influence of farm
machinery, and *icides, and in the case of rice the flooding and
draining of fields, one serving of soy or rice based product is
likely to involve more animal deaths than hundreds of servings
derived from grass raised animals. Grass raised animal products
contribute to fewer wildlife deaths, better wildlife habitat, and
better lives for livestock than soy or rice products. ·
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11   Next  (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron