[Closed] animal lovers and eating meat

Ha ha, that's perfect MTG!
😛

Well posted, I was trying (and failing) to remember where I'd seen it posted ...

Yeah, I've heard most of those at one time or another.

"You're a vegetarian and you wear leather shoes! Ha!"

Yes, I don't eat my shoes, you pillock.

How can I demand if I only buy what is on offer/available?

If they are there I buy if not I don't. i.e. there is no demand from me but there is supply. So the equation of demand & supply does not make sense.

So if I do not demand who are they going to sell/supply? Certainly not me but some other maggots I guess.

But you have forgotten the fact that it could be the supermarket pushing the meat to you hence they create the demand themselves rather than ordinary maggots.

😆

I'm pretty much with Zulu Eleven's first post on Halal & Kosher meat. Often the lines between culture, race and religion become very blurred.

What concerns me is that when fast food places etc. offer Halal meat, they often offer it exclusively. I can see why they would, for simple economic & practicality reasons. But I would prefer to eat something that's been slaughtered by the methods that have been codified specifically to minimise suffering to the animal. Most likely codified by a committee who knew an enormous amount about it.

As for only eating certain bits, there's very little waste really - I know a butcher, and there's a reason the mince and shin beef is a lot cheaper - it needs shifting! And of course, if we didn't eat meat, most livestock would exist only in zoos.

[i]" And of course, if we didn't eat meat, most livestock would exist only in zoos."[/i]

Row 2, Column 4

[img] [/img]

Grows me own.

[img] [/img]

This is a bit like trying to justify owning pics of kiddy fiddling isnt it.With Chews logic having those pics is ok because he didnt do the fiddling, and buying them doestn not create demand for more.

Its frankly bollocks.

I like eating meat and I like killing stuff to eat, I dont think you should eat meat unless you are prepared to kill it or at least take responsibility for its death. (according tho TJ my moral compass needs recalibrating but lets face who listens to anyhting he says ) Chew your logic is not logic, its wooly thinking.

How can I demand if I only buy what is on offer/available?

I dont think you should eat meat unless you are prepared to kill it or at least take responsibility for its death

Junkyard to be honest I'm not into veggie baiting, I have respect for vegans/veggies. It boils my piss when meat eaters will not face up the fact that eating meat = killing for pleasure, becasue they cannot accept it. I am happy with my meat is murder ways, I don't see the need try and obfuscate the truth like other carnivores. I feel sure that in the future meat eating will be banned (maybe 50 years) hence I'm eating as much as I can until its too late...

toys19 - Member
Junkyard to be honest I'm not into veggie baiting, I have respect for vegans/veggies. It boils my piss when meat eaters will not face up the fact that eating meat = killing for pleasure, becasue they cannot accept it. I am happy with my meat is murder ways, I don't see the need try and obfuscate the truth like other carnivores.

+1 😀

[img]

width="500" height="375" alt="stalking 2009"[/img]

Chewkw, just because you buy what is already displayed on the shelf, doesn't mean you are not creating demand.

I used to work in stock control for a supermarket. Taking the chicken example again, it would only take five people like yourself to buy a chicken, and that would mean I would order an extra box of chickens for the same period the following week. As you know, the worst crime for a supermarket is to have empty gaps on the shelves, so if those five people then didn't bother to buy a chicken the following week, they may well get thrown out as waste when they don't sell. (although we would normally reduce them to about 20p to avoid this!)

Thinking about it, if I was ordering the meat, does that mean I was more 'guilty' than yourself? I would take the opposite view, I only order the chickens as people like yourself are buying them. Take battery hen eggs, if the choice was down to myself, I would only stock free range, but if people are buying battery, there is a demand and I have to (as I was merely an employee) order more to restock.

Zulu whats the pic that is missing?

Sorry toys, probably best seen here, page one, with associated banter 😀

http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/can-you-kill

What goes on in an abattoir is quite horrific and should be quite properly kept from the public's gaze.

And chewkw, seriously?! Big river in egypt? Denial. Get with the game man, you're just as culpable as every other meat eater. This airy fairy BS you're spouting just makes you sound stupid.

I will keep being awesome 🙂

Donk: "And chewkw, seriously?! Big river in egypt? Denial. Get with the game man, you're just as culpable as every other meat eater. This airy fairy BS you're spouting just makes you sound stupid."

LOL! Denial? I am not involved. They sell I buy what is available on display otherwise I will not demand simple.

😆

I can't think of anything to say that will help chewkw understand that he is talking nonsense, so I'm going to the gym.

Soobalias, back to your original question about halal stuff,

i've asked my token muslim friend about it, and he's got very strong views on the matter.

(to him) for meat to be considered as halal, the animal must be treated with respect througout it's life, and during, and after, it's death.

he finds it very hard to find 'halal' meat that even claims to satisfy this, and it seems that the halal standard is much less controlled and monitored than he thinks necessary.

consequently, meat he's happy to buy is quite expensive, consequently, he doesn't eat much, which is probably what his prophet partly had in mind in the first place.

my friend also thinks that the high animal welfare standards in the uk mean that some non halal meat is closer in spirit to the concept of halal, than most of the stuff sold as such simply because the animal was slaughtered with a knife.

from what i can understand, for the true concept of 'halal' read 'hugh fearnley whittingstall would approve'...

ahwiles, that's most interesting.

FWIW, I [i]think[/i] that if someone told me that I was definitely going to be imprisoned until fat enough, and then killed and eaten (simply because they wished to eat me), but went on to ask me how I would prefer to be killed I would ask them whether their question was some sick joke and refuse to express a preference.

The coin don't have no say. It's just you.

In addition, I can say with reasonable confidence that I am [b]not[/b] responsible for the suffering of Dairylea Dunkers, as I [b]never buy them[/b].

chewkw, you're ignoring me!

100!

To be fair to chewkw, it must take him some time to translate the question, then his response into English from his native tongue. He is making a better stab at it than I would.

I am not involved. They sell I buy what is available on display otherwise I will not demand simple.

Back to the stolen bike analogy, which you keep ignoring. They sell, you buy what's available, you're not involved, what's the problem?

Back to the stolen bike analogy, which you keep ignoring. They sell, you buy what's available, you're not involved, what's the problem?

I prefer my kiddy fiddling pics analogy...

Chewie doesn't have any idea about supply and demand, I think he is either a troll or in serious need of help to teach him how to think, I suggest he should start with an education.

clubber - Member

100!

Why you! D'oh!

toys19, sc-xc & Courgar,

I guess it's just a hard concept for you understand as you keep focusing on the market pull (customers demand) mentality but completely ignore the aspect of product push (supermarkets get you to buy), so simply associating all the responsibility to consumers I guess is rather naive is it not?

😯

Oh I get it now, if the supermarkets push the products and none of the customers buy, then the supermarkets will still stock the product then? I see now, of course how foolish of me not to see that, well done Chewbie you done as all proud mate with yer smart thinking.

chewkw, mate. With all due respect...you are |<-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->| about this far out. Have a little think about what you are saying (i.e. - pop down to planet earth, take the blinkers from off your eyes and read an 11+ text book). It's a little embarrassing.

That's it for me on this one, if you [i]really[/i] don't get it..there's no point trying to talk to you.

chewk you ignore all reasonable posts on this. Please explain to me why the murder/slaughter/butcher rate of animals would be unnafeected by everyone turning veggie. This is alogical conclusion of what you state as clearly what meat eaters do has no affect on their behaviour.

DONK do keep being awesome amoral but awesome 😉

Product push? Supermarkets *force* you to buy their produce? Are you -really- that feeble?

And you still haven't answered my question.

About the only thing that you could argue that supermarkets 'push' is loss leaders which could be things like milk or bread, designed to make consumers think that if staple items are cheaper than the competition, the rest of their trolley will also be cheaper.

To be honest I don't know if they still use loss leaders, seeing as they all use independent 'basket of good' type advertising now.

Chewk, I've not belittled your views, just put some reasonable questions forwards which may challenge the five rules you follow.

spooky_b329 - Member

About the only thing that you could argue that supermarkets 'push' is loss leaders which could be things like milk or bread, designed to make consumers think that if staple items are cheaper than the competition, the rest of their trolley will also be cheaper.

They do not have to be loss leaders so long as the price is acceptable to the consumers who think they got a bargain.

To be honest I don't know if they still use loss leaders, seeing as they all use independent 'basket of good' type advertising now.

It's already factor in otherwise people will feel it.

Chewk, I've not belittled your views, just put some reasonable questions forwards which may challenge the five rules you follow.

Not at all. The point is to challenge yourself to answer that five questions and to see how close or how far you are involved in the suffering of the animals or none at all. The questions are not intended to lead you to the extreme of answers i.e. be a vegetarian/vega or meat eating caveman. The extreme of views can be rather destructive as no matter how you view the world there is suffering by proxy (to animal or some other beings).

The 5 questions are to get you to know your link to the nature of things and to see if you are mindful in what you eat in practical reality. i.e. eat meat but must not kill the animal. Plausible? That's the question.

Cougar - Member

Product push? Supermarkets *force* you to buy their produce? Are you -really- that feeble?

And you still haven't answered my question.

I have already answered your question but your extreme views have prevented you from understanding them so I think your glass is too full. Empty a bit otherwise you will be unable to get new water in.

🙂

p/s: To the OP whichever method of slaughtering animal the end result will be the same. Animal suffering.

I have already answered your question

No, you haven't. How is eating meat that's already been killed any different, in terms of your 'rules,' from buying a bike that's been stolen?

but your extreme views

Extreme views? I'm veggie, you buffoon. I'm about as impartial as you're likely to find.

[b]chewkw[/b] unless the animal gets killed accidentally or in a manner incidental to the commercial production of food you are clearly partially complicit because you help create the market for which the animal [i]is[/i] killed. Unless you personally only eat roadkill or dead animals from the skip behind the vet's, or food discarded by others, you are a self-deluding solipsist with no proper understanding of logic or ethics.

I am a devout Carnivore btw. But you have to accept that eating meat involves a moral dimension and responsibility which you cannot shrug off by not personally directly ordering the death of the specific animal. 😕

water buffalo it knew it was going to be killed.

animals cannot contemplate death.

chewkw; if no one buys bikes will they still make them?

self-deluding solipsist

This whole thread has been worth it just for this tiny gem. 😀

Stoatsbrother - Member

chewkw unless the animal gets killed accidentally or in a manner incidental to the commercial production of food you are clearly partially complicit because you help create the market for which the animal is killed. Unless you personally only eat roadkill or dead animals from the skip behind the vet's, or food discarded by others, you are a self-deluding solipsist with no proper understanding of logic or ethics.

Yes, road kills - assuming it is a fresh rabbit accidentally killed - hit & run). Dead animals or from skip - No for hygiene reason.

Question: If you are vegetarian will you eat road kill meat? i.e. the rabbit - it did not suffer nor was it farmed. If not what is your reason for not eating it?

The self delusional takes thing to extreme. I don't as I accepted that the fact that someone must do the slaughtering and with the understanding that I am not the one that gives the order to terminate the animal's life.

The person(s) that is directly involved in my views are: The decision makers ranging from the farmers to the supermarket manager that order more animals to be killed.

I am a devout Carnivore btw. But you have to accept that eating meat involves a moral dimension and responsibility which you cannot shrug off by not personally directly ordering the death of the specific animal.

Like I said I eat meat, except beast of burden and few others, so as long as the animal is not killed on my behalf or in my name or for me. My intention is not link to the killing hence I do not have the direct link to the killing. I have no control over individual action. However, if I know the person is "unethical" in keeping the animal I will not go anyway near him/her.

Most arguments especially those with extreme views will try to link everyone up with the killings. The question is where do they stop? They are all proxy to suffering no matter how they try to argue. Think about it.

Cougar - Member

No, you haven't. How is eating meat that's already been killed any different, in terms of your 'rules,' from buying a bike that's been stolen?

The bike is stolen so do you need to be philosophical about that? It is stolen so don't buy it. Simple? What is there to compare?

The 5 questions are about killings & taking of lives.

The meat in the supermarket is not stolen. Simple.

Extreme views? I'm veggie, you buffoon. I'm about as impartial as you're likely to find.

Being a vegetarian is a good thing but what is your underlying reason for being a vegetarian? What is your principle in this? Where is your guide? Now you can be as philosophical about this as much as you want.

🙂

 

thomthumb - Member

animals cannot contemplate death.

All living beings will cling on to life no matter how "stupid" they might look, if you haven't noticed this then you need to start observing.

chewkw; if no one buys bikes will they still make them?

I don't know. You need to answer that question yourself.

Before, there was no Apple iPod/iPhone/iPad etc so why are people flocking to them now? Did Steve Job say that you must have one?

Elfinsafety - Member

This whole thread has been worth it just for this tiny gem.

[u][b]Only the delusional slaughters animal with a prayer.[/b][/u]

Holy scripture in one hand while the other hand with a knife.

eating animals is what made enabled us to grow big brains
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/aug/11/bones-stone-tools-meat-eating

some might say that only the delusional pray, full stop, but thats more of a qustion for the religion thread.

but to take your point in context, should we as a county allow the 'delusional' to slaughter animals?

somebody said earlier that any method of slaughtering results in animal suffering, i dont believe that to be entirely true. I think that the length and severity of suffering is completely in the control of the slaughterer as it were.

I might play with avoiding halal meat and see if it causes any dramas in my life

Anyway, bacon for brekkie this morning!

Chewkw if everybody in the world developed an overactive guilt complex and stopped buying meat the industry would stop immediatley, makng a lot of people unemployed (won't someone think of the poor farmers!) You buy meat so you are part of the process, if you're bothered about the treatment of the poor little animals stop buying meat and/or start lobbying for changes to the industry.

"I only meat because I don't want farmers to lose their jobs" is a more credible argument than your 5 questions.

The self delusional takes thing to extreme. I don't as I accepted that the fact that someone must do the slaughtering and with the understanding that I am not the one that gives the order to terminate the animal's life.
The person(s) that is directly involved in my views are: The decision makers ranging from the farmers to the supermarket manager that order more animals to be killed

As the ancestors of early humans turned to meat for sustenance, they were able to grow larger brains which in turn enabled them to make more sophisticated tools

All living beings will cling on to life

not wanting to die is entirely different to a cognitive understanding of death.

As a veggie of some 28 years I do love good veggie/omnivore set to.
Cougar, I was with you right up to the "I wear leather" bit.
If you buy and wear leather then you too are responsible for the farming of animals, after all leather is just another part of the "product".
The best argument I have heard on this one went:
"I don't eat meat because it's cruel to kill animals"
"But you are wearing leather"
"Yes but it's just a by product"
"So using a by product like leather is ok"
"Yes"
"You'll be delighted to know that you can now eat mink as the meat is justa by product of the fur trade"

Needless to say this did not go down well but it was entertaining.

Choosing to eat meat is a personal thing - but if you do it on moral grounds, at least be consistent.

If you are vegetarian will you eat road kill meat? i.e. the rabbit - it did not suffer nor was it farmed. If not what is your reason for not eating it?

I wouldn't, because it's made of meat. I'm not veggie for ethical reasons, I'm veggie because I don't like the idea of eating dead animals, it nauseates me.

The meat in the supermarket is not stolen. Simple.

But by your own argument, the murder of an animal is something you can feel guilty about, just like a theft.

What is your principle in this? Where is your guide?

Why do I need a guide? My guide here is rational thought; I don't need an external influence to provide a moral compass, I'm quite capable of making those decisions for myself. Philosophical enough for you? (-:

If you buy and wear leather then you too are responsible for the farming of animals ... Choosing to eat meat is a personal thing - but if you do it on moral grounds, at least be consistent.

I'm very consistent; you're making incorrect assumptions. I don't eat meat because it revolts me, I'd have difficulties in handling a dead animal's innards and so to go from that to putting it in my mouth (perhaps after some nice man has sanitised it for me first) is at best hypocritical.

Assuming they were of nutritional value, I might as well argue as to why I don't eat turds. It wouldn't be due to the animal cruelty involved in extracting the logs, it'd be because they're -turds- for god's sake. I don't eat meat because it's meat, it's dead flesh. It's disgusting and there's no reason for me to do it as there's plenty of alternatives that don't involve blood and guts, so why should I?

I'm aware that I'm an atypical vegetarian in my reasoning, and I deliberately didn't explain this until prompted just to see what assumptions people made. (-:

One of the nice things about it is, I think it gives me a fairly objective view compared to a lot of people. For instance, I've been in restaurants where colleagues have said to me "I'm going to order the steak... is that alright?!" Well, sure, so long as you don't expect me to chow down on your dinner, it makes absolutely no odds to me whatsoever what you want to put in your body.

I'm quite happy arguing pro / anti veggie / carnivore, because it attracts some really loopy fundementalists at both ends of the scale and they're always good fun.

roger as a veggie you may wish to look at the deaths of calfs [esp males whoa re usually shot at birth]in the milk indusry required to allow you to consume your cruelty free milk,butter and cheese.

[i]"eating animals is what made enabled us to grow big brains"[/i]
Row 5, Column 3

[img] [/img]

Meat is food, Eat it.

Animals are nice, love them.

Animals are b*stards, kill them. 8)

Simples

Cougar - Member

I wouldn't, because it's made of meat. I'm not veggie for ethical reasons, I'm veggie because I don't like the idea of eating dead animals, it nauseates me.

Sounds rather extreme to me because your tone is verging on hating on all things animal related.

But by your own argument, the murder of an animal is something you can feel guilty about, just like a theft.

I think you have just confused yourself there. Murderer kills and a theft steals. There is a huge different there. Former terminate life while the latter not in the context of the bike but both are wrong in their actions.

Why do I need a guide? My guide here is rational thought; I don't need an external influence to provide a moral compass, I'm quite capable of making those decisions for myself. Philosophical enough for you? (-:

Rational thought involves taking into consideration of all the possibilities/assumptions/probabilities into context without filtering out information in order to produce accurate conclusion.

If I understand your explanation correctly you filtered out/denied all or some of the external influences which in effect failed to take into account all possibilities. What you are doing is actually rather irrational since you have denied/ignored some of the information.

Philosophical? 😆 You have just demonstrated the irrationality in such issue.

Although you have classified yourself as a veggie I am sure you have done some proxy killing of animals, unless of course you decided to live in another planet. Even vegan might not be able to avoid killing animals ...

Rational? I say extreme.

😯

thomthumb - Member

not wanting to die is entirely different to a cognitive understanding of death.

The only one that cannot understanding death perhaps is vegetable.

Try observe and observe hard.

😯

my dad got called a racist in kfc today by a member of staff because he refused to eat what he had just bought when he realised it was halal slaughtered and demanded a refund... 😳

Not much to do with the thread but who cares..

Chewk any chance you can answer the point myself and others have raiseda number of times re your ludicrous claim that the murder of animals and your purchase of them are somehow unrelated as your behaviour does not influence or affect them? If this is true , as you assert, it would mean that if everyone turned veggie the meat industry would continue unaffected. Does this actualy seem even remotely likely?
You are either a pi55 poor troll or a pi55 poor thinker.
Cougar dont bite on

Sounds rather extreme to me because your tone is verging on hating on all things animal related

The only one that cannot understanding death perhaps is vegetable.

Try observe and observe hard.

Yeh he knows how it was treated as he works on farms for most of his working career he was mainly p1ssed off because he doesn't want to be served meat that has been slaughtered that way..

oh right I see treat it badly during its life but kill it humanely yes I see the sense in that now. 🙄
PS I fail to see how halal killing of a chicken by slitting the throat/ arteries is worse than an abbatoir where they cut the head off whilst the chicken hangs upside down by its legs using a machine.

because he's a racist

Jesus H.R.H Christ on a child's tiny tricycle. This shit's got too surreal even for me.

Taka; wtf is your dad complai

ning about halal meat in KFC for? I would have thought that'd be the least of his worries. 😯

The only one that cannot understanding death perhaps is vegetable.

Try observe and observe hard.

Sweet mother of children. That's adhesively Sutcliffe.

adhesively Sutcliffe.

Glue Peter.

*collapses into giggles*

back to that grid thing, where does it say:

'i have no moral difficulties eating meat - i'm happy with the way the animal lived and died, and now i'm happy eating it'

?

Sounds rather extreme to me because your tone is verging on hating on all things animal related.

Seriously, are you trolling or just dense?

I think you have just confused yourself there. Murderer kills and a theft steals. There is a huge different there. Former terminate life while the latter not in the context of the bike but both are wrong in their actions.

Both are wrong in their actions. Ok. So. Why is it not ok for you to buy a stolen bike (which is wrong, as you say) but is ok to eat an animal that's been killed? In both cases, you've not asked for the crime to be committed, in both cases the supply is there whether you buy the bike / meat or not. This is your argument in its entirity. Look.

[i]Consider these questions as they are about your intention.

1) Did you demand the bike to be stolen for your use?

2) Did the thief intentionally steal the bike for your use? i.e. they know you like expensive bikes so stole the bike awaiting your patronage.

3) Did you request the bike to be stolen for other to buy?

4) Did you tip off the thief or someone who you know would steal or buy it?

5) Did you steal the bike yourself for sale? [/i]

... so, if you can answer 'no' to all five of these, why is it wrong to buy a stolen bike?

If I understand your explanation correctly you filtered out/denied all or some of the external influences which in effect failed to take into account all possibilities. What you are doing is actually rather irrational since you have denied/ignored some of the information.

Although you have classified yourself as a veggie I am sure you have done some proxy killing of animals

I class myself as vegetarian because I don't eat meat. It's really quite a simple concept. It's only for ease of explaining to others that I feel any need for classifications and labels at all.

As for proxy killings, I'm assuming you mean like wearing leather, in which case yes. But then, I never claimed otherwise. Seems you're still labouring under the idea that I'm operating under some broken moral code which says I can't eat rabbits because they're cute or something.

Incidentally, go look up "extreme" in the dictionary. You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means. Compare these two vegetarians:

1) "sure, eat meat, it's your decision what you eat"

2) "meat? How dare you! Meat is murder, OMG, I can't believe you're going to eat steak, don't you know what they do to cows?"

roger as a veggie you may wish to look at the deaths of calfs [esp males whoa re usually shot at birth]in the milk indusry required to allow you to consume your cruelty free milk,butter and cheese.

🙂

FFS it is served in a bucket how well does he think it was treated when it was alive?

No, I mustn't do it...I must [u]not[/u] get involved and express my views on chewk's trolling/stupidity.

jon
(veggie of 27 years, 7 months)

P.s. Loving that Omnivore bingo. I'll print me a copy of that and keep it in my wallet to check off as and when I come across each "argument".

except that some of the bingo-sheet squares make a valid point.

a person may not eat meat, but they may still consume animals (leather, milk, cheese etc), they share some of the responsibility for the life/death of the animal.

fish are animals, they really are, i checked. Chickens too...

etc.

I haven't read all that.

We had veal last night. It was delicious.

Just scanned through this thread and wondered if anyone has explained to Chewkw how a supermarket stock replenishment system works? Or how a butcher determines what meat/cuts to stock?

Just scanned through this thread and wondered if anyone has explained to Chewkw how a supermarket stock replenishment system works? Or how a butcher determines what meat/cuts to stock?

Not sure he'd understand

except that some of the bingo-sheet squares make a valid point.

Only to the hard of thinking. That's kind of the point.