Pescetarianism (and I guess vegetarianism in general)

[EverPhoenix]

psychokind wrote:

EverPhoenix wrote: protecting animals? not likely, there's enough demand for animals to be bred for food, you aren't saving any of them. theyll be killed anyway, and sold. worst case, they are still getting killed and are dying in vain since you wont eat the meat. (a bit of a stretch, but still funny to consider) well, that's entirely wrong. the more people are vegan, the less animals will be killed for food

true, in the long run. short-term, and unpublicised, this wont be found until its too late for a generation or 2 of animals.

and... another image to add to the gallery

[psychokind]

Jason Tandro wrote:

psychokind wrote: EverPhoenix wrote: protecting animals? not likely, there's enough demand for animals to be bred for food, you aren't saving any of them. theyll be killed anyway, and sold. worst case, they are still getting killed and are dying in vain since you wont eat the meat. (a bit of a stretch, but still funny to consider) well, that's entirely wrong. the more people are vegan, the less animals will be killed for food And that means more cows will remain alive, producing more greenhouse gases! Oh my god. I guess the "green" thing to do is eat LOTS and LOTS of beef!

ah too bad! that would have been awesome

ontopic: I honestly think western civilization is eating too much meat. It came down to a degree where even people willing to spend more money on expensive meat have to buy antibiotic contaminated shit with all kinds of additives. it's become impossible for the states to control the food industry - it's too large.

I'd say people who want to get access to cheap meat every day should be forced to visit a killing fabric, a slaughterhouse and a sausage factory at least once a year. that way many should lose their appetite, and maybe we go back to more quality meat.

[inferiare]

The stuff my store sells is the only meat I'll buy; the farm that sends it to us have their cows and such out on an open range so they're not stuck in a box. They've got plenty of good quality meat coming from their farm (they're a privatized farm so they're their own company and not owned by someone else so they set their own standard.)

@Fazermint: ahahaha Fazermint: vocalizing the pain for fish everywhere. Though, I will say eating more veggies/fruits IS healthier, ya need em with meat too to get all the benefits. You could eat veggies and fruit til your blue in the face (wait... orange works better ohohoh I made a funny) and sure, you get good benefits... but the most comes from EATING MEAT

@EP: not liking the taste works for me. It's up there with not being able to eat it.

[Fazermint]

psychokind wrote:

EverPhoenix wrote: protecting animals? not likely, there's enough demand for animals to be bred for food, you aren't saving any of them. theyll be killed anyway, and sold. worst case, they are still getting killed and are dying in vain since you wont eat the meat. (a bit of a stretch, but still funny to consider) well, that's entirely wrong. the more people are vegan, the less animals will be killed for food

Well, that's entirely wrong. The animals get slaughtered regardless of demand. Well, this is the case for all industrial countries, in which the biggest portion of vegetarians reside. The high demand of the industrial society requires a constant stream of products, and slaughtering animals for selling is planned on a large scale rather than on a day-to-day basis. Being a vegetarian only results in products not being sold, passing their expiration date and rotting. Luckily there are enough carnivorous people to keep the value chain going.

[psychokind]

Fazermint wrote:

day-to-day basis

exactly. but if 500 million people decide today that they will be vegans, it won't take more than a couple of years for the slaughter-rate to decrease tremendously. the lifespan of meat stock is 6-9 months.

meat is still a product from a certain market, and although this market is highly influenced by subvention and (somewhat communist) product planning, it can't overcome demand if it reaches a certain degree. think of BSE in europe - the beef market spinned heavily just because people didn't want to buy beef anymore. there is a huge need for cattle next to meat since it's ingredient for a lot of things (mobile phones, cars, digicams) though.

means: I was entirely right even though my statement was very unprecise. I believe we're not yet far enough to slaughter animals "regardles of demand" - though we reached a point where you sometimes can't explain the masses of killed animals otherwise.

[Fazermint]

@Psycho, you have some good points there. Still, vegetarians do no good. If it would go as far as stopping the distribution of meat products, farmers would just lose their income.

If you truly care about the animals, you'll want to buy ecological food products. That means that the animals had a decent life before they hit the shelves. But no matter how many times I tell this to vegetarians, no one listens

[inferiare]

There's also the fact that, while yes the natural life cycle will take effect, we'd be hit with a bigger animal population. Sure, parts of the animals would be used for otherthings, but it would be largely wasted. Why waste every other part of a cow and let it rot when you can use it for food to feed people?

[Fazermint]

inferiare wrote:

There's also the fact that, while yes the natural life cycle will take effect, we'd be hit with a bigger animal population. Sure, parts of the animals would be used for otherthings, but it would be largely wasted. Why waste every other part of a cow and let it rot when you can use it for food to feed people?

Agreed.

The problem is that those that pity animals think that animals have human thoughts. The thing is, though, that they do not.

[Jason Tandro]

Fazermint wrote:

inferiare wrote: There's also the fact that, while yes the natural life cycle will take effect, we'd be hit with a bigger animal population. Sure, parts of the animals would be used for otherthings, but it would be largely wasted. Why waste every other part of a cow and let it rot when you can use it for food to feed people? Agreed. The problem is that those that pity animals think that animals have human thoughts. The thing is, though, that they do not.

Eh, I don't know that I agree with that at all. Jiminy Cricket lies, you know. You are not the only animal who can "think" or "reason". Anybody who's ever owned a cat or a dog knows that animals are very capable of thought, reasoning, understanding cause and effect and even emotions.

That won't stop me from eating animals but I don't want there to be outright cruelty to them either.

[Fazermint]

@Jason

Lol I got it from John Locke from Lost XD

But I hear ya. Animal cruelty is a bad thing, which is why I suggest that vegetarians buy ecological/biological/organic food.

[Shiva Indis]

Hey yo, there's no moral justification for your dietary choices that won't offend somebody. Probably deeply - but I think that's part of the fun.

But if you chose to make fish your main source of protein, it might be good for your health.

[SoulBlazerFan]

We don't have to worry about the animals being wasted and people going hungry... if I can find it, I'll post the link, but apparently a Japanese doctor invented a new form of food made of half soy... and half human feces.

Yep, so now you can tell your friend to eat shit... and it not be offensive.

[Jason Tandro]

SoulBlazerFan wrote:

We don't have to worry about the animals being wasted and people going hungry... if I can find it, I'll post the link, but apparently a Japanese doctor invented a new form of food made of half soy... and half human feces. Yep, so now you can tell your friend to eat shit... and it not be offensive.

My dad actually told me about that. Americans have always cornered the market on crap, and now we can make even more money off it!