Rubbish, We wiped out there natural predators, and still cull animals that kill other animals naturally that we cull... we need to stop intervening. Its a mess. Predators if left to there own devises will raise in numbers to match there food, and this is only more true with the introduction of wolfs into Scotland that WE wiped out years ago. You think that if there was no humans that there would be millions of deer? or do you think some God will intervene? Nature can control populations, and has done a long long time before we walked the earth. And i agree with you with some of the man made breeds, that they will die in the first few years if not sooner but the animals as a specie not individual breeds will live on without us, but balance would be restored, its inevitable. Its will happen if you like it or not, before or after humans kill them self's.
I've clearly missed something in the title of this thread. Something about vegetables? Please tell me the tubers aren't rioting now.
If you left all those deer etc they'd be in to you're food production, if you intend to keep current population levels then i'm afraid we need current intensive farming methods which includes keeping the "domestic" animal population under control. Fact is we don't have wolfs so we need to control the population of deer etc. If you want to reintroduce large predators to the highlands then you can bloody well live there.
So the suggestion that we should replace all the animal based farms with vegetable farms was what, then? Just a passing fancy? Very much doubt that. I've never had food poisoning from a BBQ, nor take-away, and nor do I know anyone who has. In fact, the only time I've ever known someone to get food poisoning was from eating gone off vegetables. Or so I assume, the person is a vegetarian after all. So.. You dislike capitalism, but are quite happy to fund it? *cough*hypocrite*cough* And thank god they don't, they taste far better than I would. I tried vegetarianism for three months - My mother is a vegetarian and has been for some time, she knows her away around vegetarian food, and yet every single meal was a disappointment. No, it wasn't just that Quorn rubbish - Although someone once did try to pass that off as real meat on my plate. FYI, it tastes as little like meat as socks do. Ah, you're the "ohno pain and suffering (Incidentally, as far as I'm concerned, there are three distinct types of vegetarian: 1: Animal Welfare - The kind, like yourself, who are concerned that the animal is treated badly. 2: The fussy eater - The kind that 'don't like the taste'. It's just fussy. 3: The kind that have been brought up vegetarian and have no interest in changing their diet. I know a couple of those. Lovely people. If only because "being vegetarian" isn't the only thing they know how to talk about.)" type. I wondered which one you were. I've never punched anyone to get my point across, my point is already made. Punched people for outlandish stupidity? Yes. That I have done. That's the other thing that bothers me about vegetarians. Aside from a select few, every last *******ing one of them has given me a lecture about something or other. A lecture that was not asked for, nor all that logical (IE: I had a chicken sandwich for lunch and got a 45 minute whinge-a-thon). That, and they are all too often so bloody smug. "I'm vegetarian, what do you do for the planet?" Those words have come out of a vegetarians face at me, and I have never been quite so disgusted by smugness in all my life. 1: Animal welfare type: Reduce demand on meat production. Not eating meat in excess would be a good start. 2: Fussy eater: Let them do whatever they want, and ignore them when they start on the "Eugh, how do you eat that" crap 3: Raised Vegetarian: Leave them be, so long as they're not the smug 'in your face' type. Those need punching in the mouth until they realise no one actually gives a ****, except other vegetarians. (The "Smug" episode(s) of South Park come to mind).
Carnivore: sharp teeth Human: tool user (sharp stick) Carnivore: strong acid to digest food Human: Tool user (fire) Herbivores: Constantly growing flat grinding teeth Humans: Teeth roughly split between slicing and grinding I think you massively misunderstand the term omnivore. Humans have very few specialisations that many other animals demonstrate this allows us to live virtually every where in the world and eat what ever is abundant often this is vegetables and often this is meat. We are not particularly well suited to eat either. Just to add to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_chimpanzee So chimps just like us really enjoy a bit of fruit, but one of their favourite meals is a monkey... which buy the way is made of meat.. Chimps are much like us omnivorous, they have very similar teeth and digestive systems. They have not mastered fire. But a crow would eat that burned dear because they'll eat every thing. We cook our meat because we've learned we can extract more energy from it, we season it because we have the option, I can eat an unseasoned stake which has be only lightly cooked so could my dog. I prefer some salt my dog isn't all that partial to it...
At the risk of sounding big-headed, I think I'm lucky in that I'm able to completely give up things I enjoy quite easily so long as I've got a good reason for doing so. I've given up alcohol, tea and coffee all at once for lent at times just to re-assure myself I'm not dependent on them (and to clean my body up a bit). Meat was very much a similar thing; my 3 favourite dishes were all meat or fish based ones before but I'd gradually come round to believing that I couldn't justify being carniverous on a moral basis and decided to try giving it up during the week. As it happened, I just kept going and haven't struggled since. Quorn's a funny business but a reasonable stop-gap for those accustomed to making meat-based meals and wanting something familiar until they've learnt some more creative alternatives. As it happens, I prefer Quorn mince to the beef stuff so I'm able to cook a nice enough lasagne and bolognese without getting withdrawal symptons. If it makes you feel any better, I've never once gone into detail about why I'm vegetarian without being asked first, and even then I've got to be careful about being preachy. That said, I'm very confident in my reasoning for it so when I get challenged about it once in a while on the internet I have a tendency to act like a d**k and start fighting back
i've always hated the vegitarian/omnivour debate. man learned we could eat meat millions of years ago, it may have been raw, they may have caught parasites and bacteria , but they ate meat even before we had fire. we don't eat raw meat other than beef now because of parasites(cooking kills them) but that ham you eat isn't normally cooked, although you can buy cooked ham, it's normally cured with salt, smoke or other methods like nitrites and nitrates. its down to personal choice, if you wanna be a vegi fine, i myself prefer meat than fruit and veg. don't tell people they are immoral for eating meat, they are not. humans like most omnivours eat what ever is available. anyway, how did hello rioters become a debate about vegitarians and omnivours
I was just wandering that myself I'll try to refrain from picking at your post in the hope of getting the thread back on topic, not that it necessarily needs to.
pick fault with my post if you must, but i don't think i said much that is incorrect, maybe about hams, as it seems most except specialist hams are now cooked, oh and my spelling could be better omnivore not omnivour
It was more the point that you made about it not being immoral to eat meat; I understand we all probably work on different moral codes, but I think anyone who thinks it's okay to eat some meat but not others is being inconsistent and must have forgotten to carry the 1 at some point in their justification of it.
in my book meat is meat, wether its from birds, fish or any other animal. i wouldn't eat human meat as there are potential hazards, like beef cattle shouldn't be fed feed made from beef cattle.
Then liratheal, im sorry to say, she is not a very good cook ...or not given chance for your taste to come a custom to change??? Im vegan, so even more restricted in ingredients than what your mother is/was, i have amazing food full of flavor, colour and nutrients. [if i can be bothered lol.. or invited to eat at a friends]
Even though it's unintentional, that seems like a very convenient way of avoiding a moral question with a practical response. I don't like having to get hypothetical as it's incredibly difficult to answer honestly, but if human meat was as tasty and good for us as that of a pig or a salmon would it then be considered okay to eat it? Likewise, would you happily eat someone's pet dog if they decided it'd make a good roast after it died? I'm not trying to be confrontational about this: I'm just as interested to see if my own beliefs stand up as much yours.
i would have no problem eating any meat, be it dog human or cat, if it was a healthy animal, and was considered to be edible. i am a little fussy, i dont think i could eat snails, just because they look slimey.
nope i wouldn't, but thats just me, i don't like the thought of killing another human, i don't like the idea of the death penalty either
Compromises, remember? We tend to think eating humans is wrong because basically it's impolite to eat your neighbour. We also (arguably unjustifiably) rank people as higher than animals because of that whole sentience thing (or, as thehippoz would argue, that soul thing). Basically as a comedian once said: the problem for animals is that they can't cry, scream and complain like humans can. Fishing would quickly stop being fun if the fish, on being pulled out of the water, went: "Ouch! OUCH! What are you, insane?!? Let me go you ****ing psycho, I have a wife and children! Help! HELP!!! This psycho is trying to KILL ME!!!". Basically, eating a human involved killing him. Which is considered murder, and is frowned upon. Animals are considered less-than-human, so killing them is OK (and history shows that if people are deemed sub-human, killing them becomes OK too. Even to slaughter them as cattle and make lampshades of their skin). But if, say, he is already dead and you are starving on top of a cold, snowy peak of the Himalayas after a plane crash, then eating a human may become an acceptable survival strategy.
Totally, and I completely understand that we've got to this stage because of a multitude of accepted social codes and compromises which tell us instinctively that we shouldn't kill a fellow human being and that animals are subservient to our species; but I'm merely questionning whether, when we detach ourselves from cultural and social standards, we can truly justify killing some species but not others. Like I said before, I'm totally okay with the plane crash analogy and likewise would acknowledge it's probably justifiable to kill animals if our survival depended on it, but neither of these apply to what I'm talking about.
