emphryio

I disagree with the moderator Brighid.
First of all, if a person doesn't eat meat because they think killing things just to eat them is wrong, then unless they are lying to themselves in order to be politically correct/tolerant of others, of course they are going to have righteous indignation towards meat eaters.

Secondly, maybe you're just worried this thread will turn into what past threads on the subject have turned into, but it seems you're over-moderating. Surely a person is allowed to occasionally express an opinion without writing a scientific paper to back it up on occasion?

brighid

The truth of an ascertation is not dependent upon the virtues of the person making a statement, or in this case holding a specific position (veganism.) So, it is entirely irrelevant to a discussion regarding the moral implications of veganism that you have not happened upon a vegan that you personally like. It is also irrelevant whether or not you did or did not make said comment on a whim.

Unfortunately we are limited by our personal experiences that lead us to our own subjective opinions. We are all entitled to those opinions, but that “fact” as you put it does not actually make the statements derived from those limited experiences true. Furthermore, your limited experience is merely anecdotal and your statements do nothing to further the discussion regarding the morality of veganism, or lack thereof. Therefore I have asked you, and everyone else in this thread to restrict their comments and avoid poisoning the well, making sweeping generalizations, etc.

I, and the other moderators do our best (but at times fall short because of time constraints, etc.) to make sure these discussions don’t derail into flame wars or outrageous attacks against minority members of our society. I can think of plenty of instances where your reasoning can be turned around upon you, atheists, homosexuals, blacks, and women as a justification for prejudice. In any case it is not right, even if you are entitled to that opinion.

If you made a statement stating something to the effect that blacks are lazy, stupid, raving fundamentalist Baptists and that you haven’t met a black you liked and therefore it’s “fact” that blacks are lazy, stupid, etc. I would site you on that as well. There is no difference if we simply substitute one group of diverse people ranking in the millions with another. No entire group of people is automatically this or that by default. Individuals should be judged upon their INDIVIDUAL actions, not based upon labels (like Jew, Christian, atheist, homosexual, etc.) and we should strive to eliminate such erroneous thinking from not only our mental framework, but also from our discussions within this setting.

Any further comments of this nature are subject to editing, or deletion by the moderators or this forum.

Brighid

AtlanticCitySlave

(1) That eating meat is instinctive is purely speculation. In fact, if you've ever read Peter Singer, you'll see he argues that children in fact usually reject meat, and it's only through constant pressure from their parents to eat it that they eventually do. (Children will also chew on grass, bugs, and just about anything else.)

(2) Contrary to popular belief, it's not that hard to get protein, as you can read in just about any nutrition book.

(3) This is just being selfish. I could just as easily say killing humans and cooking them up with mushrooms is tasty. Whether we get pleasure out of killing animals and eating them is, for the most part, beside the point.

(4) This is just a "two wrongs make a right" statement. The difference being that human beings have a moral sense, can say "gee, maybe it's wrong to kill this deer and eat it", whereas a tiger can't. Even if a tiger were to say "i like eating this", it doesn't follow you should eat it as well (obviously).

This post was so stupid I imagine it must be a joke. If you took some time to read "Animal Liberation" (which everyone should if their discussing animal rights, at the very least) everything you wrote would be easily responded to, let alone getting into the serious discussions concerning the moral status of non-human animals. Not all Vegans are the way you say they are anyway. It's a gross generalization. The majority of Vegans aren't breaking into laboratories to let animals out or anything else along those lines.

brighid

No that does not follow. Not all vegans restrict animal products from their diet entirely because they feel killing animals is wrong. Many do it because of personal dietary problems such as allergy to eggs, dairy and certain meats. Some choose this lifestyle for the reasons you mentioned and some do it for a combination thereof. It does not follow that if a person chooses this lifestyle that they will automatically feel righteous indignation toward non-vegans, or they are lieing or attempting to be politically correct. Perhaps they are attempting to be tolerant because they would like their minority view tolerated and equally respected. I don't see a problem with that and unless you have actual evidence that non-proselytizing, non-confrontational vegans are a)lieing or b)attempting to be politically correct it is improper to attribute these motives to an entire group of people. There are many other options then the few you listed that can encompass the reasons why a vegan would not feel as you have described.

Furthermore there are many vegetarians and vegans who hate their proselytizing brothers and sisters as much as anyone else and believe it is wrong to be self-righteous and indignant. We are talking about an incredibly diverse group of people here. I don’t know about you but I don’t like it when someone automatically comes to the conclusion (without any actual evidence of my personal nature) that because I am a woman that I am weak, stupid and inclined to gossiping, or that because I am an atheist that I worship the devil. Therefore I personally strive NOT to do such things to others, not only because I do not like it but because it is wrong because one simply CANNOT know what any person is like unless they have actual experience with a particular person.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but that does not mean one is entitled to express them in any way they see fit or that those opinions aren’t open to challenge or moderation within the context of this forum.

Brighid

seanie

I suspect Peter Singer is talking crap.

I've got an 18 month old child and I'm suprised just how much she enjoys meat (hot dogs especially). And that wasn't down to pressure from us.

Try pressurising a 1 year old. Go on. Try it.

If they like it they'll eat it, if they don't they won't. And it can all change the next day. The idea that kids are conditioned to eat meat against their will is nonsense.

People might like to pretend otherwise but meat does actually taste pretty good. That doesn't make it right but try telling me a bacon sarnie doesn't smell good.

Wyz_sub10

Maybe it's wrong to eat a deer, although I'm not sure why that would be. It might be wrong to eat carrots, too, but I would expect some rationale (although I haven't read "Animal Liberation" and perhaps some rationale is provided there).

I think some people try to project human circumstances onto animals, and then use those circumstances to justify why we should behave a certain way when dealing with them.

Don't read anything more into this than what I am saying, though.

Grizzly

As moderators, we are concerned that threads remain civil, and in the past, this topic has shown itself to degenerate quickly into ad hom attacks and sweeping generalizations (all vegans are evil, all meat-eaters are satan spawn, etc...). Brighid gave fair warning that this will not be tolerated. I don't think it was a case of over-moderating, just a gentle nudge to keep the discussion on high ground.

Grizzly
Moderator-at-large

Rusting Car Bumper

I didn't make any comments about the moral implications of any diet... let alone veganism. I simply stated a fact that in my experience they act like fundies. Now other people have given extreme examples of exactly that sort of behavior.

If one is permitted to give examples where Xian belief leads to detrimental behavior then why can't one do that for other beliefs as well?

Is it not fair to compare people of belief X to belief Y if the speaker feels such a comparison is warranted? Its done all the time on the these boards and in argument of all kind!

My dearest brighid... All experiences and evidences are anecdotal. If anyone was to withhold judgement until such time as scientific sampling was acheived then most of us would hold no beliefs whatsoever and no people could have have justifiably held beliefs until relatively recently when such scientific viewpoints were understood.

Further, if such a position you claim is a legitimate way for you to doubt my claim (which by the way made no generalizations but merely summarized my experiences) then I can then legitimately doubt any claim you made to the contrary on the same grounds. That is I can object to your personal experience as not being proof of anything.

Your objection, which boils down to objecting to a claim based on a limited sample size, is not a legitimate objection in this case. I, for example, love the taste of apples. I therefore say apples taste wonderful. Suffice it to say I the percentage of the worlds apples that have passed which I have sampled is much lower than the percentage of the worlds vegans I've met.

Can I now not claim that apples taste wonderful?

Indeed. Having been a moderator on these boards here myself, I understand that reading CAREFULLY the opinons of others is of prime importance.

Its important to read disclaiming statements such as this:

Note the emphasized statements where I disclaim the parts from experience and even note they are subject to change.

I certainly hope the you won't stoop to the level of censorship because you find that people honestly expressing monority viewpoints to which you disagree.

People say all manner of things regarding fundamentalist Christians on these boards. They are far worse than anything I've said and in fact what I said wasn't bad at all. All I said was that my experience interacting with vegans was that they remind me of Fundie Xians. Well.. Thats a fact. It's not in dispute.

Others rail against fundies with no hope of reform and treating them with a uniform zeal of contempt.

I find it odd you object to people honestly relating their personal experiences EVEN given proper disclaimer that they merely were personal experiences.

DC

[ October 09, 2002: Message edited by: DigitalChicken ]</p>

Glory

I used to work for a health food distributer. From time to time I would give out samples of his products in stores. One of the more popular items was a vegan "doughnut". This pastry was vegan and sugar free. It was sweetned with fruitjuice and actually tasted pretty good. Roughly half of the people I gave samples to had the same question. They wanted to know if it was also fat free. I explained that if it were fat free it would be powder. There would be nothing in it to give it the remotest resemblance to a pastry. Vegan, sugar free and fat free? Nothing is ever enough for these people. It seemd to me that these people were not fully in touch with reality.

Glory

brighid

Digital Chicken,

I will address your comments in a PM so as to avoid further derailing this thread. However, I won't be able to address this issue until tomorrow.

Brighid