Why Become A Vegetarian?

[No DUplicitous DUpe]

Why Become A Vegetarian?
<snip>
Meet Hamid, a hypothetical child in sub-Saharan Africa. He's two years old, two and half feet tall and weighs 20 pounds. He has tiny hands and tiny feet and piercing dark eyes. Each day his little tummy rumbles in pain because he struggles to get enough to eat. He will likely die soon.

If so, he will become one of 16,000 children who die each day from hunger, one child every 5 seconds. If famine doesn't kill him a disease may sweep through his hunger ravaged body and finish the job.

None of us wants little Hamid to die or to live so miserable a life. Yet there are millions more children just like him in many parts of the world and they and their parents reach out to us for help.

One way we can help is to become vegetarians. It takes far less land and other resources to raise fruits, vegetables, grains and nuts than it does to raise animals for slaughter. And wide spread rain forests and ancient timber lands have been cleared and are being cleared to raise animals for slaughter.

If the industrialized nations cut back on their meat production and instead grew healthier foods, there would be far more food to share with the world and we would all be taking better care of our bodies by eating healthier.

But there is another reason I became a vegetarian. Karma - What goes around comes around. I didn't want any living creatures being killed so I could eat their flesh. They are living, thinking beings just as I am.... Continued at http://sane-ramblings.blogspot.com/
<snip>

[Goblinmonger]

1. This should be good.

Put me down for 15 in the "how many posts until the PETA bashing starts" pool and 5 in the "how many posts until we learn that vegetarians are too self-righteous" pool.

[Oregone]

4. You know...

You dont have to be self-righteous or a PETA lover to be a vegetarian. This is a false meme and it creates a terrible stereotype.

I was raised piscatarian and remain one today. Im not self-righteous about it. Its a decision based on a variety of factors including health, environment, tradition, etc. But by all means, I don't wear it on my sleave or hold anyone to it like some true moral standard.

I don't even think much about what others eat. When I do, I don't give a damn, as long as they kill it themselves. :)

[Goblinmonger]

9. ummmm, I'm a vegetarian.

I'm just commenting that these threads always devolve into what I indicated above. Not making the argument myself.

[leftstreet]

19. I'd never heard that word before

"piscatarian"

I googled it and was disappointed to find it wasn't something kinky.

:hi:

Guess I'm a piscatarian, too.

[OneGrassRoot]

26. I appreciate the new word as well! :)

:hi:

[Dorian Gray]

40. I think you're right

but the OP was all that wrapped up in a bow for the other side.

Us meat eaters are the reason that African children are starving, don't you know?

But the whole topic should be good for getting our minds off the swine flu!

[paulsby]

80. the post is rubbish

i have no problem with vegetarianism. used to be one myself.

however, the assumption (never proven) is that the resources we use to produce meat in our country(s) would otherwise be diverted to any # of countries where there is starvation.

it also ignores the fact that most hunger issues in the world are due to politics (see: for example warlords in somalia) NOT scarcity of resources.

for pete's sake, we pay some farmers in this country NOT to grow food.

i get a fair amount of my meat, fwiw, from the products of hunting and fishing anyway.

[BoneDaddy]

108. Well, many of them are

and many of them are not. Both are true, but to deny that many vegetarians are not self righteous judgemental, ultra superior people would be disingenous.

[underseasurveyor]

2. As a friend of mine puts it.......

'I won't eat anything that has a face or a mother.'

[katanalori]

37. and as I put it.....

I don't eat anything that tries to run away from me.

[Ninga]

3. I wish I were as noble as you. I am a vegan because I feel so much better eating plant based

foods....no dairy, no eggs and good-bye to dark circles under my eyes, joint pain, and eczema!



:hi:

[gblady]

6. Feeling healthy....

that's the reason I'm vegan, too...
Makes an amazing difference.

[Coyote_Bandit]

5. I'll skip the popcorn

but I'm guessing some of the commentary in this thread is going to lengthen my ignore list.....

[hughee99]

7. Is this a problem of production

or one of distribution? At this time, I think we're capable of producing enough food, it's just not getting to them.

[paulsby]

81. exactly

for pete's sake, we pay some farmers NOT to grow, and we have easily enough resources for everybody to eat.

[TheCoxwain]

8. I am a Vegetarian myself - but I see no point in your proselytizing post..

each one to his own is a good motto.

I see no good in trying to pin the blame for the poor health of sub-saharan child on someone who is not a vegetarian. It is patently unfair.

[Goblinmonger]

10. Damnit

I was off by 3.

[TheCoxwain]

13. I like your dancing frog

[Goblinmonger]

14. It's a goblin, silly

In honor of my name.

[TheCoxwain]

16. Sorry about that - I like your dancing goblin

:)

[county worker]

11. Speaking as a vegetarian I don't agree with that idea.

We now have the capacity to feed the world. We choose not too because it is not profitable to do so.

Secondly even if the food was available distribution is a big problem. Many governments are obstacles to feeding their own people.

I believe that vegetarians need to make a personal choice for themselves and let others make lifestyle choices for themselves without having a guilt trip put on them which I think this OP is.

[Oregone]

21. Although one problem with the "let everyone be" argument...

Is that of global warming. This creates a significant threat to mankind, and deforestation, fertilization, refrigeration, transportation and countless other carbon heavy activities involved in large scale meat production are harmful to everyone's environment.

You can say its just a personal lifestyle choice, but on the other hand, such choices can impact the entire globe.

Id prefer a campaign that said, if you want to eat meat, kill it yourself (and if you want veggies, grow them yourself or buy local). If just 10% of everyone's large-scale argri-based food changed to local/organic, it will dramatically help combat global warming. "Grow a tomato plant, catch a salmon, bowhunt a deer."

The problem is that the current form of agriculture is devastating the globe.

[county worker]

29. We all do things that impact the globe in a negative way.

I can't stand here and list somebody else's sins like that. I doesn't do any good to do that.

[Oregone]

30. Uh, so we shouldnt seek to address something like this? Global Warming will take a concerted effort.

Do you not understand the magnitude of the problem ahead of us? Industrialized agriculture isn't the only culprit, but it is a major one. How can you just ignore that, and not advocate a lifestyle change at all?

[MineralMan]

31. It needs to be addressed, certainly.

Becoming a vegetarian isn't addressing it, though. That's an individual choice of what to eat, and that's all it is.

The lifestyle change that would make a difference is to commit a percentage of your income to organizations that are actively feeding people today. That way, little Hypothetical Hamid would eat, instead of hypothetically dying.

That's what my wife and I do, even though we still eat meat a couple of times a week. 2%.

[Oregone]

38. I didn't advocate becoming a vegetarian. Did you read my post?

I am advocating shifting some percentage of your food intake from industrialized agriculture to local/organic. Hunt, fish, grow, or buy local.

This prevents carbon emissions from deforestation, transportation, refrigeration, fertilization, etc.


"The lifestyle change that would make a difference is to commit a percentage of your income to organizations that are actively feeding people today."

This will not prevent Global Warming. I do not think there is much validity to the OPs argument. I mentioned, on the other hand, a more valid argument for some for of vegetarianism (or at least local/organic food consumption as a lifestyle change) is to live a more carbon neutral life.

[MineralMan]

45. OK. I didn't say you did advocate that. Your post

is just one more in the thread, and related to the others which did advocate vegetarianism. You called for a lifestyle change, so I suggested one that actually has an effect.

[JuniperLea]

41. I was thinking of donating to an organization...

That sends small farm animals to people in need. Chickens for their eggs and to eat, goats for their milk to produce cheese, and goat meat is a delicacy in some parts too. Sheep, for wool and meat too. They send the fertile animals in pairs too, and give instructions on care and feeding, and yes, they send feed too.

Give a man a fish, and all that.

The problem with these threads, imho, is the preachiness. I had an enzyme deficiency that caused me to be unable to digest meat. Tried a lot of things; became a veg with the help of a nutritionist. Still, my hair fell out and my nails became brittle... and my skin about crawled off my body. It's not for me. I tried for over five years, and went to several very well-known and respected nutritionists. I eat very little beef, a little pork, and a little chicken, and seafood. I eat cheeses and eggs too. Everything in moderation, except I eat far more veggies than anything else. I'm good, my hair grew back:)

I cannot believe that vegetarianism is for everyone.

Edited to say: enzyme therapy. We kill off the natural bugs with all the phony junk we eat, pesticides, metals, and anti-biotics too.

[MineralMan]

46. Here's an excellent organization, mentioned in another post.

My wife and I have donated to it:

http://www.heifer.org/

[JuniperLea]

62. Perfect!

Thanks!

[Dorian Gray]

118. I love Heifer!

Imagine if all of us who could afford it sent an animal today? It would make a huge impact.

[MineralMan]

51. You're correct. Vegetarianism isn't for everyone.

It has to be a personal choice, based on many factors. When my ex-wife was recovering from cancer (she's still fine, some 20 years later) she took advice from a "friend," who told her that becoming a vegetarian would heal her body. I supported her choice and adopted vegetarianism, too. I studied it to make sure I was preparing a complete diet for her. Despite that, she developed severe anemia and became very ill. Her doctor ordered her to add meat back into her diet. Within a month, the anemia was gone and her health restored.

I did fine on the vegetarian diet, and still only eat meat a couple of times a week.

[JuniperLea]

63. You're a stand up guy, MineralMan...

Good for you for supporting your wife like that. Good to hear she's a survivor, too!

[Cronus Protagonist]

71. If you eat meat a couple of times a week, you're not a vegetarian

Think about it. Using your standard, I'm a vegetarian while I eat the veggies on my plate and I only take a couple of bites at the sausage! The only difference is time.

[MineralMan]

85. I do not claim to be any sort of vegetarian.

I was for a couple of years, but went back to being an omnivore.

[Cronus Protagonist]

87. Better for you now, I think.

However, you did say "I supported her choice and adopted vegetarianism, too.", so I hope you cna understand why one would think you did claim to be a vegetarian!

[county worker]

58. It is not my job to run your life or any body else's. You fix you and I'll fix me.

The rest of the world needs to fix themselves. That isn't your job.

Besides, you are not going to get any support your way either.

[Oregone]

64. So why limit carbon emissions? Why care about fuel efficiency? Why care about fucking anything?

Why vote? Why not just hunker down and "cultivate your garden", protected with guns?

For good measure, fuck Al Gore and the his lame prize. He needs to fix himself, and Ill fix me.

[handmade34]

67. I always told my kids

...the more people there are, the more rules we need. We are all here kinda stuck with each other and together we have to figure this thing out. Your posts are great!

[county worker]

68. Your reply has nothing to do with what I said.

Your not going to solve those problems by going around taking everyone else's inventory for them. You can join organizations that work on these problems and put out information and get people to support your ideas. There are many other ways.

Going on a web site and telling people who eat meat that they are causing global warming is not going to get us anywhere. People are not going to stop eating meat, at least not in time to end global warming.

All you are doing is putting your guilt trip on everyone else. It's got a name. The reaction formation. Read up on it.

[Oregone]

69. I honestly don't know what the hell you are talking about anymore

Taking everyone's inventory away? WTF?

There is nothing wrong with informing people of the consequences of their actions and advocating changes that can help the entire globe. When a problem is bigger than us, one's own actions alone cannot make a difference.

[county worker]

70. Taking someone else's inventory is an old alcoholics anonymous saying.

One of the 12 steps is to take an inventory of your past wrong doings and make amends for them. When you point out other people's wrong doings that's called taking someone else's inventory.

Yes there is something wrong with informing people of the consequences of their actions. That puts you in the position of a moral authority. You are not anyone's moral authority.

Like I suggested, read up on "reaction formation" and find out what is bugging you about you. Then you will not feel the need to take other people's inventory.

[Oregone]

73. "Yes there is something wrong with informing people of the consequences of their actions"

What?!?

"That puts you in the position of a moral authority. You are not anyone's moral authority."

Its not a moral position! Its fucking science. Industrialized agriculture is a large contributor to carbon emissions through many, many mechanisms.

If we aren't allowed to advocate and implement policy for the betterment of mankind out of fear of hurting people's feelings about their "morality", just package us up and send us all to hell in a handbasket already.

We are in the position now that we must educate people about energy/resource conservation. Its isn't about morality. Its about survival. And when it comes to survival, your feelings can go fuck themselves.

[county worker]

74. This is going no where

[Oregone]

75. Clearly

So we can agree to disagree. I will continue to feel that it is important to keep educating the public regarding mechanisms (if not also regulating via policy) that contribute to Global Climate Change. And if any of this activity makes you cry and feel guilty, you can rest assured I give two shits about your piddly feelings.

[county worker]

76. You surely don't suprise me

[BoneDaddy]

110. Amen and ty

I felt the same way when I was a vegetarian, but now I am back to eating "things with faces and mothers".

[MineralMan]

12. I guess my contributions to food aid charities don't count,

since I'm a meat eater. Oh, well...I tried.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

15. Somebody give that kid a big juicy, nutritious piece of meat.

http://www.heifer.org/

[TahitiNut]

17. Give me his address and I'll send him a Big Mac.

:shrug:

[MineralMan]

25. He has no address. He's hypothetical, you see...

created by the blogger who wrote the post. After telling about little Hamid Al-hypothesis, he continues at length in the blog, describing what a good fellow he is since he isn't eating meat. He advises you to do the same. Three paragraphs on poor Hamid and ten on saving the animals and how good he feels about himself.

Not a single word about organizations that are actively buying, shipping, and distributing food to non-hypothetical children all over the world, and how donations of cold, hard cash enables them to feed more non-hypothetical children. Not a word.

But, he's feeling good about himself. That's what's important.

[MineralMan]

18. A very good organization.

I highly recommend it.

[MineralMan]

20. Seriously, now: Your ceasing to eat animal products

does precisely nothing to feed that kid. Nothing. What does help to feed him is direct monetary donations to organizations who are bringing food to him. While it may make you feel better to not eat meat, it doesn't help the cause of world hunger directly, or even indirectly.

The food is available. Someone just has to buy it, transport it, and distribute it. If you want to help, that's what helps children like the boy you described. Being a vegetarian is a choice. Donating actual money is another choice. Do as you choose.

[MadHound]

22. Meet No DUplicitous DUpe, a conscientious vegetarian

He likes his food to be organic, preferably heirloom. The trouble is, now that he and his fellow vegetarians have persuaded everybody to also be vegetarian, the amount of grazing animals, and hence manure, has dropped dramatically, forcing farmers to increase their use of petroleum based fertilizers. Now there is virtually no truly organic food left to be found, the price of oil has skyrocketed, as has the price of food. Darn those unintended consequences.

Do I think that most Americans eat too much meat, certainly. Do I agree with the factory farming of livestock, of course not. But the fact of the matter is that there has to be a balance in everything, including eating and farming. In a normal, organic farming cycle, you generally plant a three-four year rotation of crops on a particular field, followed by a year of livestock grazing in order that the animals can manure it, thus providing the soil with necessary fertilizer. If you don't do this, then either the production in that field goes down dramatically, or you're forced to use petroleum based fertilizer.

Yes, we've gone too far in one direction however we don't correct this imbalance by going to far the other direction. We need to find that happy middle, that spot where everything balances.

[handmade34]

65. your argument is absurd...

...we all know that not everyone is going to become vegetarian. What most of us are maintaining is that if everyone would cut meat consumption some if not radically, it would positively affect the earth. Your comments about lack of manure to fertilize cropland is ridiculous. Farmers use chemical/petroleum based fertilizers because it is convienient for them- that is it! There are many forms of natural fertilization, from compost to seaweed. I have farmed for many years and your assessment of crop farming in not accurate, rotation with animals is a good thing but not neccessary. Green manure is one solution out of many. All people cutting down their consumption of meat could only encourage production of locally grown organic food. Even though I am vegetarian, I see some consumption of meat as appropriate both for people's nutritional needs and for the environment.

You are right - what we need is balance and right now factory farms are causing extreme imbalance and serious problems for our earth. What you eat, unfortunately does affect your neighbors and me. That happy middle spot is going to happen as soon as you and I and everyone else consider each other when we make our life choices.

[Marrah_G]

23. Nice piece of flamebait !

[MineralMan]

27. Marked futher by the absence of the OP from the thread

after posting it. Feh!

[No DUplicitous DUpe]

34. I'm enjoying all the comments....

But the OP is not mine. I'm just helping a friend get some feedback on his columns. I don't happen to agree with this one either, but the conversation is interesting.

[MineralMan]

35. Whatever. If that was your goal, why not say so in the original

post? Instead, you just plopped it out there and left it in a steaming pile, then left.

[No DUplicitous DUpe]

39. I'll be more clear in the future.

And I'm flying to my daughter's college graduation tomorrow, so I'm kind of too busy to babysit the posting today.

But if the column inspires people to comment, great. All opinions are welcome. And for the record, I love eating all foods.

[Touchdown]

50. It's a him? I thought it was Sally Struthers

He's obviously channeling her.

[MineralMan]

52. Nah...click the link in the OP.

You can read the rest of the self-serving blog post there.

[No DUplicitous DUpe]

36. Flamebait ???

That is a term I never use. I think people should be respectful of others opinions, even if they disagree.

[HamdenRice]

24. As someone who has lived and traveled in Africa, I have to say this is bullshit

The reason it's bullshit, is that the OP doesn't really understand the markets for food. There are some international markets, like the maize and wheat that are traded across vast distances. But there are also local markets for food, such as when farmer Sipho sells millet at the local market where Hamid's mother purchases it.

This is also slightly racist, although it's a very common attitude/misunderstanding on DU. It comes from the fact that most Americans don't realize that the vast majority of the food that Africans eat is grown in Africa by other Africans. That is to say, the vast majority of food moves through local markets.

If I eat a hamburger that came from a corn fed cow that was slaughtered in Texas, I really have not taken the food out of Hamid's mouth.

On the other hand, if I invest in a tangerine plantation in Gabon that displaced Hamid's father and I buy that tangerine in France, yes, I might be said to be taking food from Hamid's mouth.

Ensuring that Hamid eats will not come from us producing more and dumping it in Hamid's country where it will put local farmers out of business. It will come from investing in Hamid's mother and father as small scale commercial farmers, as well as the neighboring farmers, enhancing their ability to grow more food locally.

That said, I'm in favor of reducing meat consumption, but not for simplistic or misleading reasons.

[Matariki]

33. excellent post. n/t

[ZombieHorde]

104. "This is also slightly racist" No, its not even close to racist.

Misunderstanding how a market works on any particular continent does not make someone slightly racist.

[superduperfarleft]

28. Veganism/Vegetarianism would have little effect on food supply.

While raising animals for food uses an unbelievable amount of water and grain that could potentially be consumed by humans, and causes huge amounts of environmental damage, most often famine is caused by the political climate in an area, not by western nations using up some imaginary pool of food that the entire world eats from.

It's as naive as saying that the billions spent in Iraq could provide x amounts of health insurance for US citizens. The money could be used for that, but in reality it probably wouldn't be.

And vegetarians kill plenty of animals too. Where do you think veal calves come from, and what do you think happens to the male chicks born to someone who raises chickens for eggs?

[Lisa0825]

42. What does veal have to do with vegetarians? nt

??

[superduperfarleft]

43. The calves in veal crates have to come from somewhere.

And Momma Cow has to have a reason to produce milk all the time.

[uppityperson]

82. Is this your line of reasoning? Vegetarians eat cheese. Cheese comes from milk.

In order to get a cow to produce milk, she must have a baby. Which is taken away from her and put into a crate to become veal.

So, vegetarians are responsible for veal.

Is this right?

[superduperfarleft]

83. Of course it's not that simple...

But vegetarians still consume animal products, which are produced by an industry which kills animals. So vegetarians are never blameless in the killing of animals.

Of course, this was nothing more than an afterthought to the point I was trying to make when responding to the OP. If this is the beginning of an incredibly long sub-thread full of snark and deleted messages like every single other thread ever on DU concerning veganism/vegetarianism, let me know, because I'll go do something else.

[uppityperson]

84. Omnivores eat dairy products, vegans don't

It all depends on what you eat rather than your designation and I agree that people who eat dairy or eggs contribute to animal mistreatment.

I do snark but rarely get deleted

[Matariki]

32. How about just cutting down on meat instead?

I've seen studies that show that 'little Hamid' wouldn't weigh only 20 pounds if he also had small amounts of meat in his diet. That his brain would function better and he would be more likely to grow better. And by small amounts of meat, I really do mean small. I think the study was something like a tablespoon a day or something like that.

[closeupready]

44. I disagree with the statement "None of us wants little Hamid to die" -

I think there are plenty of people who wouldn't give diddly-squat if he did or didn't. And if, as his name seems to indicate, he is muslim, plenty of people would blame HIM for his own death, suggesting that his failure to accept Christ as his personal savior doomed him.

[MineralMan]

47. Hypothetical Hamid will never die. He's immortal.

He can be brought back to life with just a thought, unlike real children. Even Sally Struthers can resurrect him. You can, too.

[closeupready]

48. Absolutely. However, my response is still valid.

It speaks only to what observers WISH upon Hamid, hypothetical or not. :)

[MineralMan]

53. Cool! I knew that in a hypothetical way. Really.

[stuntcat]

49. #1 for me is Environment.

The animal torture/concentration camps are why I first went vegetarian, then I learned what the industry does to the Earth and realized that's the real big difference it makes.

[MineralMan]

55. So, you're OK if I eat what I hunt for and fish for, then....right?

They're part of the environment.

[stuntcat]

60. yah!

I mean, not that it matters what I'm okay with :) But I have a friend who only eats what he catches himself!

If I had my own farm I might feel a little different about it. My husband eats meat so I'm glad it's easy now to find stuff that's raised and fed naturally.

I went to a chicken plant late one night and it scarred me for life.. you just can't un-see things like that.

[Iggo]

54. For your poops. (n/t)

[NeedleCast]

56. Meet NeedleCast

He likes hot dogs.

[RaleighNCDUer]

57. The 'karma' reason actually makes more sense than the 'lack of food'

reason.

There is PLENTY of food. It's just in the wrong places. It is a matter of political will and proper distribution, not a lack of available food.

This child in sub-Saharan Africa - call it Darfur - is not starving because there's no food. He starves because he is living in a war zone - where there is a genocidal war against his people, and armed men are deliberately keeping food from reaching him.

It has nothing to do with vegetarianism.

[ElboRuum]

95. NO WAY!!!

No, it HAS to be vegetarianism. No really, I mean it. Because if it wasn't, then... then... then... that whole blog post that someone tossed of in five minutes flat is just someone blowing acrid smoke out of their behind... and what would become of the internetz if someone did THAT?!?? ZOMG!! I'TS SERIES!!!

For the comedically impaired: :sarcasm:

[FamousAmos]

59. Consider it done

I've been thinking about this for a long time, thanks for the perspective.

[DatManFromNawlins]

61. Lemme get this straight...

Little Hamid is ultimately starving, not because of a lack of resources here, nor a lack of contributions to starving nations, but policies of his own government, and YOUR solution is to not eat meat?

That makes about as much sense as trying to weld two pieces of metal together with a frozen marshmallow.

I really love the dumb little hypothetical leading into the religious pitch.

The only difference between you and a Jehovah's Witness is that you're too lazy to go door to door.

[NeedleCast]

66. The issue is with the ability to distribute the food, not the amount of food available

Not that people with an agenda don't know this already...

[flvegan]

72. I knew this wouldn't go well.

[Ignis]

102. We really should mention PETA a few times.

I'm trying to bump my popcorn stock!

[Marrah_G]

117. I think the OP knew it wouldn't also

[demmiblue]

77. I don't know which is worse... the gun nuts, or

the anti-veggie warriors.

[ElboRuum]

97. I know how you feel...

I find myself asking myself the negative of that very same question.

[noiretextatique]

78. americans have a real problem being told what to do

or being told that our unsustainable 'lifestyle' and insane consumption habits negatively impacts people in third world countries.
it's called "preachy."

[Ron Green]

105. Yeah, but we don't have a problem telling other people what to do.

It's part of Empire - not listening, but talking and killing and despoiling and enslaving.

I wish we'd endure some "preachy" advice once in a while.

[noiretextatique]

120. privilege

twisted, tired imperial privilege

[Recursion]

79. What this thread needs is some flamebait:

http://www.lierrekeith.com/vegmyth.htm

(Personally, I agree with this guy, but I've learned never to actually debate diet with people.)

[scheming daemons]

86. Sorry... I'm a human. Humans are omnivores....

..our bodies have evolved to the point where we very efficiently garner nutrients from meat... even much more so than we do from fruits and grains.


become a vegetarian if you wish... but you're denying your own human nature when you do.

[Ignis]

101. Hmm, so vegetarians should all be dead, then?

I mean, if they're "denying...human nature" by eschewing meat, shouldn't they just keel over?

:shrug:

Gotta love these pseudo-scientific replies.

[Maru Kitteh]

88. Self preservation, ecological preservation, for my fellow humans & for the animals

That's why we did it. The order changes according to how we feel any given day but the end choice is the same.

[stuntcat]

112. ecological

for real,
The only thing I'm 100% totally completely sure of is that rich 1st-worlders' consumption of factory meat is one of the biggest things ACTUALLY KILLING the entire living planet.
The way we've learned to live is just not natural.

[Vickers]

89. I just ate some BBQ ribs.

Yummy!

[mike_c]

90. At 53, I've recently become a vegetarian....

I had to do it for health reasons. I've been a carnivore all my life. I like meat. I enjoy eating it. I really resisted the idea of giving it up.

I've been happily surprised to find that I don't miss it. I'm demonstrably healthier-- over the last 2 months my circulating uric acid has declined from 9.6 mg/dl to 4.2 mg/dl, my cholesterol level has declined and my HDL/LDL ratio has improved. I'm also taking half the blood pressure medicine I took prior to switching, and losing weight, so it's likely that I'll be able to eliminate that med as well.

I'm eating diverse and interesting meals-- no deprivation or anything like that. It's been sort of an adventure, learning how to eat out without ever using the words "medium rare." I feel good, I'm reducing my resource footprint, I enjoy the food choices immensely-- what's not to like?

[Maru Kitteh]

93. Good for you. Glad to hear your health is better.

Health was our first reason too. It works.

[Ignis]

103. Congrats on your improved health!

I'm curious, have you been using meat analogues, or just obtaining protein from veggie/legume sources? I ask because most of my 40+ veggie friends seem to avoid faux meats, while the younger ones enjoy them. I'm curious if this is primarily age-related or health-related.

:hi:

[mike_c]

107. mostly not eating them, although not dogmatically....

I ate a Boca burger for dinner last night, for example. But I've had that four pack of Boca burgers for over a month and have only eaten two.

Mostly, I don't feel much need to emulate meat in my diet. The veggie possibilities are so diverse and tasty that there doesn't seem to be much need. I do like the fact that meatless meat analogues are available as another set of choices-- I just don't feel driven to recreate carnivore meals with substitutes. I know some people are. The Boca burgers were more for convenience at the end of a long day, the same reason I'd have eaten a hamburger most of my adult life.

One of the vegetarian cookbooks I read recently described the problem some folks have with switching to a vegetarian diet. Imagine a typical steak house meal-- a slab o' meat and two vegetable side dishes. Take away the meat and you're left with two uninspiring side dishes that were never meant to be the centerpiece of a meal. That's NOT the way to approach vegetarianism, but lots of folks apparently do. Substituting a faux meat dish as the centerpiece is one way to solve the problem, but learning to cook interesting, healthful, and good tasting vegetarian main dishes is a better approach, IMO.

on edit: Oh, and I'm not vegan, so that increases the possibilities tremendously. I eat eggs and dairy products, honey, and so on. And I simply avoid meat as a component on my plate-- I still occasionally use meat stocks and such for flavor in some dishes, season my veggies with a little lemon and butter, and so on.

[Ignis]

109. Great point about learning to cook.

Going veggie will certainly inspire you to try out a wide variety of foods and recipes! I wooed my wife with my cooking, and I have to thank my years of slogging through meals of beans-and-rice at university for forcing me to learn how to cook. ;)

Thanks for your perspective.

[Maru Kitteh]

128. We'll have a boca burger now and again but for the most part, we eat many of the same things

we always ate - without the meat.

Protein doesn't have to come from legumes and nuts although they are a part of our diet (always were). There's plenty of protein in yummy, quality bread or even the ordinary kind, rice, pasta, quinoa, and all kinds of grains and other foods.

People worry WAY too much about getting "enough" protein. You don't need that much but the USDA has conditioned us our whole lives to believe we'll waste away into invalids without 16oz of red meat every day. The opposite is much closer to the truth.


Guilty pleasure? Morningstar veggie bacon. DAMN is that stuff good on a BLT.

[Ignis]

131. True enough, but ...

I encounter many younger vegetarians who simply remove the meat from their diets without ensuring they meet their nutritional requirements in other ways.

I'm not necessarily saying that everyone needs 100g of protein daily, but it's also a shame to see vegetarians eat nothing but carbs and maybe a few veggies. :) That sort of diet can really do a number on your waistline without enough exercise in the mix.

[Bryn]

91. That's so reasonable, so logic

I love being vegetarian. :)

[dysfunctional press]

92. make mine meaty.

i remain an unrepentant omnivore, who will happily enjoy eating animal flesh for the rest of my days.

[ElboRuum]

94. Ugh, not another one of these posts...

OK, folks. Who's going to start the obligatory smoking thread after this?

[byronius]

98. I don't think smoking directly involves the screams of intelligent creatures.

Pigs are smarter than dogs. Yet the factory farms that force-grow them routinely beat the shit out of them, yank limbs off, and mass-slaughter screaming herds that know exactly what's happening to them.

Yeah, smoking kills. Whatever. But pork is philosophically a different story altogether.

Perhaps if one smoked bits of tortured animals, I would object. But tobacco has no nervous system, and does not form family units, as pigs do. Very different issue.

Second-hand smoke?

Eh. I still kinda like the aroma.

[ElboRuum]

100. So the answer to my question is... you?

Don't know where you got it to think I want to debate this "meat is murder" garbage. I don't. Do what you want with what you want. Your life, your rules. My life, my rules. A screaming pig, to me, does not elicit empathy. Never has. Never will. Sorry if that makes me a bad person. And just so you know, I do smoke bits of pig. I call it "bacon".

[byronius]

122. So wise, so wise.

[ElboRuum]

129. Whatever, whatever.

[byronius]

96. People who mock my vegetarianism as 'weakness' stop laughing after they lose the arm-wrestling.

Then I pose the kicker: if it's okay to eat animals -- why aren't people on the menu? Especially weak, small people who can't defend themselves -- because 'natural dominance' is always at the core of any meat-eater's arsenal. Always.

After I pose this conundrum, I generally edge towards them with a suppressed look of hunger.

They get my point.

Just because you 'can' do something is not reason that you 'should' do something. Mocking declarations of how tasty the stupid creatures are, or humorous disregard for the pain and suffering of such creatures, are so easily turned on the mocker as they are prepared for roasting.

Makes 'em re-think it from a new perspective, so to speak.

PS: Conservatives are excellent when stuffed with dressing and baked for several hours.

Baste often.

[Ignis]

99. Eat the Rich!

...The Poor are tough and stringy! :rofl:

[superduperfarleft]

114. If I weren't meant to eat babies and the disabled

Why are they made out of meat?

[byronius]

121. That is frickin' hilarious!

[flvegan]

123. I get the "I can't believe you're a vegan" at the gym all the time.

[ZombieHorde]

106. Does anyone else find this article to be ironic?

The blog is called "Ramblings of a Sane Man" and then goes on to use karma as an argument.

[Ignis]

111. So all Buddhists are insane?

:shrug:

[ZombieHorde]

113. All the ones I know are pretty crazy. nt

[Ignis]

115. Well, that's certainly a good reason to be a bigot!

After all, this African-American guy cut me off one time in traffic, so I can assume that all AAs are mean, insensitive jerks!

:dunce:

[ZombieHorde]

116. Karma being crazy does not make me a bigot.

Do you not understand the difference between a person's race and a person's opinion concerning the supernatural?

[Ignis]

119. I suspect you're just ignorant.

Many Americans' only experience with the concept of karma is through the lens of TeeVee and The Movies.

You do realize that Buddhism is a non-theistic philosophy, and that the concept of karma does not necessitate a belief in an Invisible Sky-Daddy, an afterlife, or any other religious trappings, right? Right?

Perhaps you could--oh, I don't know--read a fucking book on the philosophical concept you're claiming results in insanity in a good portion of the world's population?

I promise it won't hurt too much.

[ZombieHorde]

124. I have read many books on the subject, and you're right, it didn't hurt too much.

The definition of karma the author of the pro-veggie blog was using was obviously a supernatural one.

You do realize that Buddhism is a non-theistic philosophy

Buddhism is a religion according to the Dali Lama, the U.S. Government, and the dictionary definition of the word religion. If Buddhists did not consider themselves to be religious, then they would not have received their tax exempt status they enjoy here in the states.

you're claiming results in insanity in a good portion of the world's

I made no such claim. I claimed that the Buddhists I personally knew were crazy (and still are) and that karma is crazy, but I can see how you would misinterpret my statement. I am familiar with the non-supernatural versions of karma, but that use of the word is extremely rare to hear, at least for me. The one Buddhist monk I personally know believes in the supernatural type of karma.

[Ignis]

125. Such as? (nt)

[ZombieHorde]

127. Such as what? Are you asking for a list of books I've read?

If so, for what purpose?

[Ignis]

130. To understand your frame of reference.

If you've spent 10 years studying the Diamond Sutra, that's one thing. If your understanding of the philosophical underpinnings of Buddhism comes from an article entitled "Why Every Atheist Needs to Hate Buddhism Because They're Tax-Exempt," that's another.

You may disagree with the utilitarian philosophy of John Stuart Mill, for example, but to call it (and those who work within its framework) "crazy" requires a thorough understanding of both philosophy and psychology.

I'm not trying to be flippant, but most Americans have no idea what they're talking about regarding Buddhism, and our cultural bias is to dismiss Eastern philosophies as purely religious/culture-bound/woo-woo. That shit may have flown in the 1950s, but not today.

[ElboRuum]

133. In what way is it not religious culture-bound woo-woo?

It has never ceased to amaze me how typically rational people look at so-called "Eastern philosophies" as anything less than religion. Is it the multi-millenial history? Is it the antiquity? What has reasonable human beings flummoxed into thinking that "Eastern philosophies" are any different than Christianity, Islam, etc.? Just because Buddhism has no godhead doesn't make the idea of qi, karma, and other such non-entities any more real. Religion is any organized system of belief around unprovable "truths". How is Buddhism any different in this regard?

[Ignis]

134. So the Western Enlightenment was Christian?

After all, the philosophies of the Enlightenment arose within the context of a Christian Europe, and reflect the cultural trappings of that religion. In fact, this is obviously not the case, and it's perfectly logical to separate out a philosophy from the religious, cultural, and societal trappings that color its foundation.

Your definition of religion includes any ethical code, whether or not it involves gods/spirits/demons as the driving force. That's far too broad, and as such makes the term meaningless.

Neither Buddhism nor Jainism requires a belief in nor worship of any god, goddess, creator, spirit, demon, etc. They are practicable philosophies that use metaphors (amazingly good ones, I think, considering the age in which they were written and the tortured translations they've been put through) to describe how to live a life of compassion, non-violence, and service to humanity, while avoiding the perils of narcissism, materialism*, and exploitation.

Funny how that sounds quite similar to Secular Humanism, eh?

* - I use this word in its contemporary sense, not in a Marxist one.

---

Also, please do try to dial back your implication that I'm some sort of New-Age, crystal-waving, gullible idiot simply because I'm able to separate an ethical code, philosophy, or morality from its religious and cultural source. Your implication that there is no such thing as "Eastern philosophy"--that it's all simply woo-woo/religion--is incredibly chauvinistic.

I doubt that you would you say the same about any Western philosophy, so please keep your own cultural bias in mind before you throw finger-quotes at me. :)

[ElboRuum]

136. Cultural Bias? I doubt it...

Firstly, my definition of religion does NOT include any ethical code, merely ones which introduce preternatural forces. Karma is portrayed as an actual thing, a force, which has no basis in provable fact such as to call its existence into question. An ethical code does no such thing. It is one thing to say that such-and-such is an ethical/unethical action because of this-or-that reason, it is quite another to say that such-and-such is an ethical/unethical action because of the presence of a force which makes sure that it is so. See the difference?

Second, you really didn't answer my assertion, which is to say, what are the contrasting factors between "karma" vs. "mana" vs. "God" vs. "The Flying Spaghetti Monster" which somehow separates Buddhism from the rest as a philosophy rather than religion? From an honest perspective, they are all purported to be actual extant entities or forces which have no basis in provable fact. To take it a step further, the existence/non-existence of these things CANNOT be proven. In this case what difference is there between "God" and "karma" other than what you call it and what "powers" it wields? Answer: there isn't one. Buddhism is a religion. Buddhism scraped of its preternatural trappings might not be a religion, rather a true philosophy, but then what difference is there between many moral codes when they say the same basic principles. How is "a life of compassion, non-violence, and service to humanity, and avoiding the perils of narcissism, materialism, and exploitation" as you've portrayed Buddhist philosophy different from Christianity scraped of all of the God references? None that I can see. In fact, just about every commonly accepted moral code sounds EXACTLY like secular humanism once deprived of its "deity".

"Also, please do try to dial back your implication that I'm some sort of New-Age, crystal-waving, gullible idiot simply because I'm able to separate an ethical code, philosophy, or morality from its religious and cultural source."

You haven't separated it at all. Buddhism/Jainism != Eastern Philosophy! While Eastern philosophy may have its underpinnings in Buddhism et. al., it must be stripped of its "deities" to qualify. Once this is done, it is NOT BUDDHISM anymore, it is another thing.

"Your implication that there is no such thing as "Eastern philosophy"--that it's all simply woo-woo/religion--is incredibly chauvinistic."

I never implied that there is no such thing as Eastern philosophy. I rather clearly stated that Buddhism is a religion and made no statement or implication otherwise. Perhaps you should dial back your tendency to cast about aspersions of intolerance where they do not necessarily apply.

[Ignis]

138. Again, what are your sources of information?

Please list the deities one is required to believe in and/or worship in order to be a Buddhist.

Please provide quotes from the sutras that specify that one must believe in and/or worship anything in order to be a Buddhist.

Please provide your working definition of karma, and explain (with quotes from the sutras) how it requires a belief in the supernatural. If this is indeed the case, explain how the concept of karma is not covered by the Four Noble Truths, and thus requires some belief in a supernatural force or deity to continue to influence each individual's perception of reality.

---

A quick response to your point of the universality of moral codes:

Christianity stripped of God would be meaningless, because there would be no "reason" to be good or to reject evil.

Buddhism stripped of Buddha would still be Buddhism, as the only driving forces behind the morality are empathy, compassion, and self-awareness.

A cursory examination of the history of Buddhism/Jainism would reveal this, so I'm not sure why you're so confused. I can only assume that your sources of information are flawed, trite, biased, and/or antagonistic.

:shrug:

[ZombieHorde]

140. I am inbetween the two examples you offered.

philosophy and psychology

I don't think the word "crazy" really means anything in the realm of psychology. I believe the word is more colloquial than technical. I was not trying to diagnose anyone with any actual illness.

purely religious/culture-bound/woo-woo

Some of it is, such as literal reincarnation.

[Ignis]

141. Literal reincarnation is not a required belief.

Fair point on the crazy bit, though. I'm sure we could find common ground in another example with more outlandish beliefs. Xenu, anyone? ;)

In that spirit--and keeping your specific example of literal reincarnation in mind--please understand that the concept of karma is not at all what Hollywood has portrayed it to be: There is no Great Watchmaker, anthropomorphic deity, or other force that will mete out judgment on your actions and reward/punish you as a result. To dramatically oversimplify, it is the concept that our perception of reality is influenced by our intentions and our actions.*

All that being said, I understand you were simply trying to be funny. I apologize for being heavy-handed, but I don't believe the concept of karma as a practicable ethical code should be dragged down to the level of literal reincarnation.

* - I'm sure some real Buddhists (I'm only a student/fellow-traveller) will grumble about that definition, but it comes much closer to the working definition as it is actually applied within Buddhism than the Hollywood version.

[ElboRuum]

132. Buddhism, by any reasonable definition, is a religion.

"You do realize that Buddhism is a non-theistic philosophy, and that the concept of karma does not necessitate a belief in an Invisible Sky-Daddy, an afterlife, or any other religious trappings, right? Right?"

It doesn't matter that there isn't a "god" or "gods" in the traditional sense, karma is still an unknowable, unprovable postulated force whose entire existence is predicated upon the desire to believe that it exists. I've heard many arguments claiming Buddhism to be a "non-theistic" philosophy. But by any reasonable definition, this is religion. Just because there is no godhead within it does not make it any less so.

[uppityperson]

126. If I become a vegetarian, Hamid will have enough to eat? Wrong

My meat comes from local area, fed on local grass and grains. I don't see how stopping eating that would help Hamid unless I donated money and/or time to some organization to help get food there, along with education, health care, farming ability.

If I were to stop eating meat, that would in no way help him at all. Helping him directly would though.

And as far as Karma, we are all related, carrots, cows, me. Don't try to guilt trip me about that as it really isn't going to work and it only makes your other arguments weaker.

[turmeric]

135. If I had enough posts under my belt, I'd rec this!

My goodness, even those who refuse to even consider going vegan could help by cutting back! It's so strange to me that when it's mentioned that using one's car less (or eschewing it altogether) would be personally and massively beneficial, there are some that scream and refuse to even discuss it!

[ElboRuum]

137. I think you need to understand something...

Although most of the worst offenders won't admit it, there are some who simply won't be satisfied with their own personal decisions, rather attaching an undercurrent of moral superiority when others don't support their view by making those same choices.

Once you adopt an air of moral superiority and (occasionally) an authoritarian tone, you have just successfully ended the discussion. You do not sway anyone through condemnation or condescension. This is what is happening. It's not so strange to see this phenomenon. It's actually quite common.

For example, why should it seem strange that when it's mentioned that using one's car less would be personally and massively beneficial that some would refuse to discuss it? I live in an area which makes a car a necessity, not a choice. To have someone condescend to me that they know better about my personal situation and imply that I don't care about the environment because I refuse to use my car less (not for spite, but out of practical necessity), it is just the type of obstinate narcissism which accomplishes nothing except to turn the conversation ugly. Personally, I generally just dismiss such threads as pot-stirrers.

[WonderGrunion]

139. We'd conserve even more resources by switching to

Soylent Green. :hide:

[upi402]

142. kick

Reading 'Diet for a Small Planet' helped me along the path and made me aware of the world past the end of my nose.

Hippies were right, as it turns out. And the right was wrong.
:wow:

[Touchdown]

143. You can't be a vegetarian and a liberal at the same time.

You will be reported if you don't show up every Wednesday for the weekly aborted baby back barbecue.;)

[Zomby Woof]

144. My two pennies as an omnivore

I do not understand the need for some omnivores (no one is exclusively a carnivore - although I know a few people who come close) to undermine or criticize destructively the vegetarian or vegan dietary choice. It is a sound choice not only for personal health reasons, but for increasingly apparent reasons concerning environmental health, and very importantly, the humane aspect of animal treatment and so forth.

Having expressed my respect for these choices, that begs the question on why I haven't completely abandoned meat from my diet. Well, I have scaled back considerably over the past few years, and that is related to the three reasons outlined above. As of this point in my life, I can't quite make the leap to quit eating meat altogether - it's not just because of flavor, or a feeling that I can't live without it - it's also the power of habit and the ease of access and meats' prevalence. If something is readily available, I tend to eat it (hence the reason I have banned ice cream from the freezer - it has helped me lose weight to do so). I suppose these theories could be dismissed as excuses or personal weaknesses, but I figure by at least reducing my meat intake, I acknowledge that I am not completely powerless in changing my diet, nor in helping the environment or stopping animal cruelty.

The most important thing, however, is that I have never stopped considering a vegetarian diet. I have not used the reasons in the preceding paragraph as excuses to give up the idea. As long as the idea remains viable, and possible, it makes sense for me to educate myself on vegetarianism/veganism, instead of deriding it.

Yes, I realize there are people on both sides of the dietary wars who aggravate and annoy the other camp, but since I eat meat, I feel I should only speak up on what fellow meat-eating omnivores get wrong. To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson's defense of free religious choice, a person choosing a vegetarian/vegan diet neither picks my pocket or breaks my leg. Can we meat-eaters say the same about our choice?

I will continue to ponder my choice, and as I do, will seek dialogue with vegetarians/vegans, not confrontation and derision.

[Ignis]

146. Thanks for this great post, ZW!

I'm sure we could use a little more tolerance on both sides of this fence. :hi:

[Joe Fields]

145. I like eating dead animals.

[jmowreader]

147. Another way to write that...

Meet Hamid, a hypothetical child in sub-Saharan Africa. He's two years old, two and half feet tall and weighs 20 pounds. He has tiny hands and tiny feet and piercing dark eyes. Each day his little tummy rumbles in pain because he struggles to get enough to eat. He will likely die soon.

Hamid lives, if what Hamid endures on a daily basis can truly be called living, in a country with a corrupt dictator. There's no real problem with food supply. In fact, it's arguable that we have far too much food. Hamid's problem is his country's dictator, who confiscates all the food imported into Hamid's country. Soldiers' children in Hamid's country eat well, but because Hamid's father was killed in an uprising a year ago Hamid's basically screwed.

The hypothetical non-governmental organization Gardens for the Hungry attempted to establish community-supported agriculture in Hamid's country. They helped his countrymen plant 53 percent of Hamid's country in every kind of crop you can think of, from corn to lettuce. Two days before harvest, Hamid's dictator sent his soldiers to the villages and confiscated all the crops. Chopped 'em off right down to the roots, threw 'em in a truck and drove away.

We at Soldiers for the Hungry sympathize with Hamid's plight, and offer the only solution that will possibly work. For the low, affordable donation of only $20 per month, Soldiers for the Hungry will airdrop a sniper team into Hamid's country in the middle of the night to shoot Hamid's dictator. Once he's dead, traditional NGOs who work in the field of food distribution and CSA operations can begin the work of saving Hamid's people from starvation--and, considering that Hamid's countrymen were able to plant 150,000 hectares of food and raise over 10,000 goats to marketable size after having never grown so much as a blade of grass in the last 10,000 years, we're pretty sure they'll succeed.

Soldiers for the Hungry: We save children by killing dictators. Give today.