Vegetarian Discussion: What Are The Ethics Regarding Cow Milk?

What Are The Ethics Regarding Cow Milk?
Posts: 250

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)

Blueshark
2006-09-21 12:03:25 EST
Vegetarians drink cow milk, yet dairy cows are put through an emmense
amount of pain and suffering in their lifetime.

Why is this suffering of less importance than say, the capture of a
fish?


Shrubkiller
2006-09-21 13:49:34 EST

Blueshark wrote:
> Vegetarians drink cow milk, yet dairy cows are put through an emmense
> amount of pain and suffering in their lifetime.
>
> Why is this suffering of less importance than say, the capture of a
> fish?


Vegetarians who indulge in fish and dairy are only fooling themselves.


Blueshark
2006-09-21 14:40:35 EST
Fool me one, you can't fool me twice...shame on you.

Definition of Vegetarian from Wikipedia:

Today, Indian vegetarians, primarily Lacto-ovo vegetarians, are
estimated to make up more than 70% of the world's vegetarians.

...

A lacto-ovo vegetarian (also known as ovo-lacto vegetarian, but
sometimes incorrectly referred to as octo-lacto vegetarian, as "octo"
means eight) is a vegetarian who consumes dairy products (i.e. milk and
its derivatives, like cheese, butter, or yogurt) and eggs.


shrubkiller wrote:
> Blueshark wrote:
> > Vegetarians drink cow milk, yet dairy cows are put through an emmense
> > amount of pain and suffering in their lifetime.
> >
> > Why is this suffering of less importance than say, the capture of a
> > fish?
>
>
> Vegetarians who indulge in fish and dairy are only fooling themselves.


D*@.
2006-09-21 15:33:36 EST
On 21 Sep 2006 09:03:25 -0700, "Blueshark" <duncan10@gmail.com> wrote:

>Vegetarians drink cow milk, yet dairy cows are put through an emmense
>amount of pain and suffering in their lifetime.

Like what?

>Why is this suffering of less importance than say, the capture of a
>fish?

· 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. ·

Here we see plowing:
http://tinyurl.com/8fmxe

and here harrowing:
http://tinyurl.com/zqr2v

both of which kill animals by crushing, mutilation, suffocation,
and exposing them to predators. We can see that planting
kills in similar ways:
http://tinyurl.com/k6sku

and death from herbicides and pesticides needs to be
kept in mind:
http://tinyurl.com/ew2j5

Harvesting kills of course by crushing and mutilation, and
it also removes the surviving animals' food, and it exposes
them to predators:
http://tinyurl.com/otp5l

In the case of rice there's additional killing as well caused
by flooding:
http://tinyurl.com/qhqx3

and later by draining and destroying the environment which
developed as the result of the flooding:
http://tinyurl.com/rc9m3

Cattle eating grass rarely if ever cause anywhere near
as much suffering and death. ·
http://tinyurl.com/q7whm


Dutch
2006-09-21 17:09:12 EST

"Blueshark" <duncan10@gmail.com> wrote
> Vegetarians drink cow milk, yet dairy cows are put through an emmense
> amount of pain and suffering in their lifetime.
>
> Why is this suffering of less importance than say, the capture of a
> fish?

The answer to all questions of this type are the same, "ethical vegetarians"
are mostly hypocrites.



Pearl
2006-09-21 18:22:57 EST
"Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote in message news:12h5vrpncsm9le6@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Blueshark" <duncan10@gmail.com> wrote
> > Vegetarians drink cow milk, yet dairy cows are put through an emmense
> > amount of pain and suffering in their lifetime.
> >
> > Why is this suffering of less importance than say, the capture of a
> > fish?
>
> The answer to all questions of this type are the same, "ethical vegetarians"
> are mostly hypocrites.

Quoth the "Animal Welfare" 'supporter' who eats factory farmed meat.

You're the biggest hypocrite here, ditch, and, on more than one count.



Dutch
2006-09-21 20:17:13 EST

"pearl" <tea@signguestbook.ie> wrote
> "Dutch" <no@email.com> wrote
>>
>> "Blueshark" <duncan10@gmail.com> wrote
>> > Vegetarians drink cow milk, yet dairy cows are put through an emmense
>> > amount of pain and suffering in their lifetime.
>> >
>> > Why is this suffering of less importance than say, the capture of a
>> > fish?
>>
>> The answer to all questions of this type are the same, "ethical
>> vegetarians"
>> are mostly hypocrites.
>
> Quoth the "Animal Welfare" 'supporter' who eats factory farmed meat.

"Factory farmed" is an ARA pjorative. Most of the meat I consume comes from
small and medium sized farms. Most of the food vegans eat is farmed by
large commercial operations.




Glorfindel
2006-09-22 00:04:45 EST
Dutch wrote:
> "Blueshark" <duncan10@gmail.com> wrote

>>Vegetarians drink cow milk, yet dairy cows are put through an emmense
>>amount of pain and suffering in their lifetime.

>>Why is this suffering of less importance than say, the capture of a
>>fish?

> The answer to all questions of this type are the same, "ethical vegetarians"
> are mostly hypocrites.

You only believe that because you were never able to continue
as one successfully. You judge others by your own lack of
character.

Ethical vegetarians are human beings rather than robots, and they
develop and modify their understanding over time and as circumstances
dictate. Their approach is to do what they feel they can in their
individual situation, since no one can do everything. Your answer
is to give up completely and sneer at others for trying at all. We
could all do better; we could all do worse, but none of us needs to
be ashamed of doing what we can. Every small good is still a good,
and better than your complete surrender to failure.


Blueshark
2006-09-22 03:27:42 EST
> Ethical vegetarians are human beings rather than robots, and they
> develop and modify their understanding over time and as circumstances
> dictate. Their approach is to do what they feel they can in their
> individual situation, since no one can do everything. Your answer
> is to give up completely and sneer at others for trying at all. We
> could all do better; we could all do worse, but none of us needs to
> be ashamed of doing what we can. Every small good is still a good,
> and better than your complete surrender to failure.

I have vegetarian since 6 years, and very strict vegan for 1.5 years.

However with contact with vegans I am extemely disillusioned and
disappointed with their lack of balanced ethics. So I have come to the
conclusion that ethics is not the driving force for veganism, based on
my extensive experience.

Also Veg§nism involves a lot one-sided information, propoganda. Of
course some, perhaps most maybe true, but I want to know all sides of
the story before I live my life subsisting on supplements and as an
outsider.

My conclusion is that fish is a fine source of nutrients, and I have no
problem with the ethics. I am against overfishing, but that is someone
elses job, I need to live to.

Glorfindel wrote:
> Dutch wrote:
> > "Blueshark" <duncan10@gmail.com> wrote
>
> >>Vegetarians drink cow milk, yet dairy cows are put through an emmense
> >>amount of pain and suffering in their lifetime.
>
> >>Why is this suffering of less importance than say, the capture of a
> >>fish?
>
> > The answer to all questions of this type are the same, "ethical vegetarians"
> > are mostly hypocrites.
>
> You only believe that because you were never able to continue
> as one successfully. You judge others by your own lack of
> character.
>
> Ethical vegetarians are human beings rather than robots, and they
> develop and modify their understanding over time and as circumstances
> dictate. Their approach is to do what they feel they can in their
> individual situation, since no one can do everything. Your answer
> is to give up completely and sneer at others for trying at all. We
> could all do better; we could all do worse, but none of us needs to
> be ashamed of doing what we can. Every small good is still a good,
> and better than your complete surrender to failure.


Dutch
2006-09-22 03:50:45 EST

"Glorfindel" <notgiven@all.com> wrote
> Dutch wrote:
>> "Blueshark" <duncan10@gmail.com> wrote
>
>>>Vegetarians drink cow milk, yet dairy cows are put through an emmense
>>>amount of pain and suffering in their lifetime.
>
>>>Why is this suffering of less importance than say, the capture of a
>>>fish?
>
>> The answer to all questions of this type are the same, "ethical
>> vegetarians" are mostly hypocrites.
>
> You only believe that because you were never able to continue
> as one successfully.

That's false, I did not *want* to continue being a vegetarian, although in
retrospect I never really was one, since apart from a short period I ate
eggs and dairy for the whole eighteen years. I had felt for a few years that
my iet was not serving me or my family well.

> You judge others by your own lack of
> character.

It took guts to accept the fact that I had been living a fantasy all those
years, that many people who eat meat were probably doing a better job than I
was in limiting their impact and benefitting the world. You've realized this
yourself in a moment of clarity, but you chose to go back into the illusion.

> Ethical vegetarians are human beings rather than robots, and they
> develop and modify their understanding over time and as circumstances
> dictate.

The primary example of that is how they create excuses for the latitude they
grant themselves and others on leather, dairy, and other code violations,
until they finally guilt themself into capitulating, after which they can
safely internalize the wrongness of those things. Circumstances, yeah..
convenience.

> Their approach is to do what they feel they can in their
> individual situation, since no one can do everything.

My criticisms are not aimed at people for doing "what they can" or whatever
they do or don't do, good for them, it's how they feel they have the moral
authority to condemn or control others.

> Your answer
> is to give up completely and sneer at others for trying at all.

I have not "given up completely", that implies there is a particular agenda
that I am morally obliged to follow, there is not. Some people eat eggs, or
dairy like pearl, some eat some fish, some eat some chicken, everyone has
the right to make these choices to "do what they can" (what they feel is
appropriate) without being treated like a monster.

We
> could all do better; we could all do worse, but none of us needs to
> be ashamed of doing what we can. Every small good is still a good,
> and better than your complete surrender to failure.

You can't resist comparing youself to me in order to make yourself feel
better. Your diet is your own business, I'm not asking you to justify it and
I don't expect anyone to ask me to do so.


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