Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The AntiChris · 03-29-2002, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Corwin:


I eat meat for a number of reasons. I happen to like it. I happen to like it very much. In fact I happen to like it to the point where Bambi just isn't terribly safe from me. (Although legal issues restrict me to Bambi's daddy. No problem... he has a bigger rack and more meat on him anyway...) I also happen to be healthier when I eat meat. So bring me a steak. Rare. No fuck that. BRING ME A LIVE COW!!!!! I'LL CARVE OFF WHAT I WANT.... AND RIDE THE REST HOME!!!!!!!

There. Now that I've gotten that off my chest... and cleared the air on that topic... fuck the rest. What the hell am I doing bringing up these points? YOU are the ones that are supposed to be defending vegetarianism.

I don't have to defend jack shit. YOU argue that vegetarianism is somehow more moral? Back it up. I'm not under any obligation to justify eating meat, for the reasons I've already given.

Go back and read the first post in the thread.

Why do I have the feeling that Corwin is not totally comfortable with his position?

Corwin doth protest too much, methinks.

Chris

Corwin · 03-29-2002, 02:06 PM

Both of these are economic and political issues and have nothing to do with eating meat itself. Put simply agriculture doesn't have to be terribly destructive to the environment. Am I terribly thrilled with the idea of modern assembly line farming? No. Do I avoid using its products where possible? Yes. Am I a fanatic about it? No.

Corwin · 03-29-2002, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Why do I have the feeling that Corwin is not totally comfortable with his position?

Corwin doth protest too much, methinks.

Chris

Youthinks incorrectly. I'm completely comfortable with eating meat. Multiple and loud protests are required when dealing with some people, in order to get the point across.

Pomp · 03-29-2002, 02:17 PM

The AntiChris,

Why do I have the feeling that Corwin is not totally comfortable with his position?

Corwin doth protest too much, methinks.

I personally find this sort of comment rather offensive. Vociferously defending one's right to engage in an activity does not imply that one is harboring some secret guilt over the activity in question.

Corwin · 03-29-2002, 02:34 PM

<<deleted because it made no sense and NO jokes about 'so what makes this one different?'

>>

[ March 29, 2002: Message edited by: Corwin ]

The AntiChris · 03-29-2002, 02:56 PM

Pompous Bastard:

Quote:

I personally find this sort of comment rather offensive.

Clearly you are easily offended.

Whilst I had no intension of offending you personally, I surely cannot be expected to be aware of every board member's acute sensibilities.

In my view, Corwin's response went way beyond what I would regard as a reasonable "vociferous defence" and was designed to invoke a negative response from his opponents in order to avoid addressing their reasoned arguments. In my experience this is not the response of someone who is completely at ease with their position.

Your experience may be different.

Chris

Nohweh · 03-29-2002, 03:04 PM

Thank you Corwin! At last the truth is out. Those of us who eat meat do so because we like it, any other argument for doing so is IMO completely spurious.

I believe that it is morally wrong to inflict unnecessary suffering on any animal for such a trivial reason. To inflict pain on any defenceless living creature, is both cowardly and degrading. Those of us who eat meat should be aware of the cruelties involved in the production of it and do whatever we can to force the meat industry to lift its game. So the meat will cost more to produce and will cost the consumer more. So what. Maybe then we will eat less of it and our health will improve accordingly.

Pompous Bastard!! That is the first post of yours that I have seen where you really are pompous!

[ March 29, 2002: Message edited by: Nohweh ]

Nohweh · 03-29-2002, 03:10 PM

Double post deleted. I really should have gone to bed last night.

[ March 29, 2002: Message edited by: Nohweh ]

Corwin · 03-29-2002, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Thank you Corwin! At last the truth is out. Those of us who eat meat do so because we like it, any other argument for doing so is IMO completely spurious.

Our opinions differ. I consider the other arguments to be entirely valid. However... 'because I like it' is also valid.

Quote:

I believe that it is morally wrong to inflict unnecessary suffering on any animal for such a trivial reason. To inflict pain on any defenceless living creature, is both cowardly and degrading. Those of us who eat meat should be aware of the cruelties involved in the production of it and do whatever we can to force the meat industry to lift its game. So the meat will cost more to produce and will cost more. So what. Maybe then we will eat less of it and our health will improve accordingly.

I don't consider my health and diet to be trivial. Can the system be reformed somewhat? Sure. Most systems can. Is there a huge amount of 'suffering' involved? Not nearly as much as some people would have you believe. When all is said and done slaughter is pretty quick and painless. (Although part of the problem I have with Kosher laws is that they are needlessly cruel.)

Quote:

Pompous Bastard!! That is the first post of yours that I have seen where you really are pompous!

Pompous? Not really. Calling someone on a logical fallacy? I suppose that can seem pompous if you're wrong.

Pomp · 03-29-2002, 04:03 PM

The AntiChris,

Whilst I had no intension of offending you personally, I surely cannot be expected to be aware of every board member's acute sensibilities.

I'm just stating my opinion. In my experience, most people find the suggestion that their stated beliefs do not accurately represent their true beliefs rather offensive.

In my view, Corwin's response went way beyond what I would regard as a reasonable "vociferous defence" and was designed to invoke a negative response from his opponents in order to avoid addressing their reasoned arguments. In my experience this is not the response of someone who is completely at ease with their position.

I haven't been following Corwin's arguments very closely, so I can't speak to this. At any rate, you obviously aren't obligated to censor yourself to avoid offending me, nor would I want you to.

Carry on!

03-29-2002, 02:34 PM	#255
Corwin Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 4,369	<<deleted because it made no sense and NO jokes about 'so what makes this one different?' >> [ March 29, 2002: Message edited by: Corwin ]</p>

03-29-2002, 03:04 PM	#257
Nohweh Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 802	Thank you Corwin! At last the truth is out. Those of us who eat meat do so because we like it, any other argument for doing so is IMO completely spurious. I believe that it is morally wrong to inflict unnecessary suffering on any animal for such a trivial reason. To inflict pain on any defenceless living creature, is both cowardly and degrading. Those of us who eat meat should be aware of the cruelties involved in the production of it and do whatever we can to force the meat industry to lift its game. So the meat will cost more to produce and will cost the consumer more. So what. Maybe then we will eat less of it and our health will improve accordingly. Pompous Bastard!! That is the first post of yours that I have seen where you really are pompous! [ March 29, 2002: Message edited by: Nohweh ]</p>

03-29-2002, 03:10 PM	#258
Nohweh Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 802	Double post deleted. I really should have gone to bed last night. [ March 29, 2002: Message edited by: Nohweh ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-29-2002, 02:06 PM	#252
Corwin Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 4,369	Both of these are economic and political issues and have nothing to do with eating meat itself. Put simply agriculture doesn't have to be terribly destructive to the environment. Am I terribly thrilled with the idea of modern assembly line farming? No. Do I avoid using its products where possible? Yes. Am I a fanatic about it? No.

03-29-2002, 02:17 PM	#254
Pomp Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Indianapolis area Posts: 3,468	The AntiChris, Why do I have the feeling that Corwin is not totally comfortable with his position? Corwin doth protest too much, methinks. I personally find this sort of comment rather offensive. Vociferously defending one's right to engage in an activity does not imply that one is harboring some secret guilt over the activity in question.

03-29-2002, 04:03 PM	#260
Pomp Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Indianapolis area Posts: 3,468	The AntiChris, Whilst I had no intension of offending you personally, I surely cannot be expected to be aware of every board member's acute sensibilities. I'm just stating my opinion. In my experience, most people find the suggestion that their stated beliefs do not accurately represent their true beliefs rather offensive. In my view, Corwin's response went way beyond what I would regard as a reasonable "vociferous defence" and was designed to invoke a negative response from his opponents in order to avoid addressing their reasoned arguments. In my experience this is not the response of someone who is completely at ease with their position. I haven't been following Corwin's arguments very closely, so I can't speak to this. At any rate, you obviously aren't obligated to censor yourself to avoid offending me, nor would I want you to. Carry on!

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.