Meat

Im kind of vary anything the person says in the video since psychology is infested by psuedo science nonsense.

god is not an argument

>I find there are no moral objections religion-wise
Morality goes beyond religion.

I dont think anyone has posted a reason not to eat besides "my feelings" so "my feelings" is a perfectly valid counter argument.

Plants don't even have pain receptors.

Nor are they self-conscious.

How about "there's no reason to stoo eating meat"? Its the truth, besides it works for people that dont believe in god also.

>to stop
Damn typo

It conflicts with other values you have, like the doctrine of not causing unnecessary pain.

Do you believe it's okay to torture stray animals? Why, why not?

>Why do we still eat meat?
Because meat is sweet narcotic

This.
Culture + customs in my opinion.

>like the doctrine of not causing unnecessary pain.
I dont think they suffer in a farm, they're only alive for human consumption and thats the reason they are all around the globe (talking about cows)

>Do you believe it's okay to torture stray animals? Why, why not?
Obviously not okay, but i dont think we torture them, we just kill them for consumption, otherwise they live good lives, they get food and a roof, they're way better off than they would be being stray.

>I dont think they suffer in a farm,
Factory farming, which is the vast majority of meat production, has miserable conditions for animals.

>they're only alive for human consumption
This fact doesn't justify meat consumption. In fact, the implication might be the very opposite: If you bring something into existence, you have to bear responsibility for it.

If you birthed a child, would you be allowed to do as you please with it just because you brought it into existence for whatever reason?
No, you would have to bear responsibility for it. You'd have to care for it, bring it up.

>Obviously not okay,
Why? What's wrong with torturing beings?

>I dont think they suffer in a farm
We do cause harm to animals and not only to those that we are raising to be our food in factory-farming system but also to those we keep around for other resources and even entertaiment.

>they're only alive for human consumption and thats the reason they are all around
I agree that most of those animals are alive because of us but in my eyes that means we are even more responsible for their well-being.

> otherwise they live good lives, they get food and a roof, they're way better off than they would be being stray.
I dont think this is exactly true for most of the domesticated animals meybe with the exclusion of our companions/pets.

If you want check out some documentaries like Earthlings. I also dont think its intentional torture but we do cause a lot of suffering to animals.

>fish are bugs

>Why do we still eat meat?

Many of us don't!

> #
>I dont think anyone has posted a reason not to eat besides "my feelings"

You can reduce any "should" argument to that. Why shouldn't you hunt and eat other humans? "Muh feelings."

Yes, indeed, whats your point?

I think Stirner memes should be taken as admission of being wrong.

I cant really find anything being said wrong so far. Unless you think morality isnt subjective and isnt based on feelings.

C.S. Lewis already debunked that.

Morality is objective.

careful, you're gonna trigger all the atheist commies.

But it can be consistent or inconsistent.

Because it tastes good

/thread

Imagine, the entire world eats a vegan diet:
A farmer harvests his crops
The crops are transported to the shops
The shops sell the crops

Three people are employed

Now, imagine a world where people eat meat
A farmer harvests his crops
The crops are transported to another farm
The crops are fed to the cows
The cows are slaughtered and transported to the shops
The shops sell the meat

Five people are employed.

The meat industry feeds and houses millions of people. Therefore, it there slaughter of animals in justified.

>it there the slaughter of animals is justified
*the slaughter of animals is justified

>Humans have become more intelligent
Take a trip out of your ivory tower suburban city environment. Any time.

>"moral law whose source cannot be found in the natural world"
>debunked

Because it tastes good. Fuck animals.

>what is a conscience

Plants react to damage so they must be able to signal that they are hurt which is exactly what pain is.

But is conscience not based on one person morality and social norms?

Not passive aggresive here just trying to understand

youtube.com/user/CSLewisDoodle/videos

Without a central nervous system though? I can have a cut that will scab over but it's not related to feeling the pain of the cut.

Not something that bolsters the case for MIND-INDEPENDENT AND OBJECTIVE PRESCRIPTIVE FACTS

Because veganism and vegetarianism are alot of time full of pseudoscientific bullshit and demonizes one of the most healthy and nutritious foods you can eat. Choosing to eat or not to eat meat is neither moral or immoral, Not eating meat also doesn't make you a better person and merely boils down to choice. Eating meat also isn't bad for you, isn't the devil that cause heart disease/ cancer, etc. like many believe and on the contrary is quite healthy for you. Meat also tastes very good and their are nutrients that are only found in meat, and in nutrient quantity and well as quality meat outdoes almost all other foods. Not to mention meat has complete proteins, and is hands down the best protein source
>chaosandpain.blogspot.com/2010/07/vegetarianism-and-veganism-best.html
>chaosandpain.blogspot.com/2010/07/vegetarianism-and-veganism-are-as.html
>press.endocrine.org/doi/full/10.1210/jcem.85.1.6291
>anabolicmen.com/fats-and-testosterone/
>chaosandpain.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-simplicity-of-dieting-it-really-is.html?m=1
>breakingmuscle.com/fuel/why-all-humans-need-to-eat-meat-for-health
>authoritynutrition.com/7-evidence-based-health-reasons-to-eat-meat/
>saragottfriedmd.com/does-meat-cause-cancer-revisiting-the-meat-igf-1-and-cancer-connection/
>rawfoodsos.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/minger_formal_response2.pdf
>deniseminger.com/2010/08/03/the-china-study-a-formal-analysis-and-response/
>deniseminger.com/2010/07/07/the-china-study-fact-or-fallac/
>foodrenegade.com/the-china-study-discredited/
>deniseminger.com/the-china-study/

Down with the began agenda!

You can get all your nutrients without killing animals.
Vegetarians can get B12 from dairy products and eggs, making it not necessary to kill the animal.
And Vegans can get B12 from supplements (not natural).
Also, studies show that people that don't eat meat live longer.

There is no real reason to eat meat other than for the taste.

If all people stop eating meat, most of those precious animals who you want to save will be risking extinction, stuff like chickens and cows may be fine as long its not full veganism.

Also what about meat eating animals? Is it fine to kill animals to feed those you want them to be released in wild and hunt on their own?

>You can get all your nutrients without killing animals.
Sure
>Vegetarians can get B12 from dairy products and eggs, making it not necessary to kill the animal.
>And Vegans can get B12 from supplements (not natural).
Yes, they can but they wouldn't have supplements from outside sources if they just included meat in their diet
>Also, studies show that people that don't eat meat live longer.
Bullshit and only works when you compare those diets to unhealthy people eating the Standard American Diet. Veganism/Vegetarianism isn't healthier, the people eating just happen to be healthier than unhealthy people eating a shitty diet. If those people were compared to healthy, fit people who exercised and dieted properly, the fit person who ate meat would live just as long if not longer and be just as healthy if not healthier
>There is no real reason to eat meat other than for the taste.
Yes there is and I not only listed them but gave evidence for them in my post. Be vegan or whatever if you want just accept your doing things in a less effective/counterproductive way most of the time, be honest about the downsides, don't bullshit about your diet being heathier when it's not and don't lie about meat being unhealthy and about it doing things to you it does and/or doesn't do

I don't even.

It baffles me that you think you can estimate the amount of people involved in the production this way.

Also, you can just add an arbitrary amount of other intermediary or refinement steps to the crops side (like sorting by quality, people producing threshers, soil, pesticides, research) or reduce some steps on the meat side (like transportation for local ranchers).

Lastly, "it's moral because more people are employed" is a very weak argument to me.

Also accept that your diet is merely a choice. No more no less

>eat or not to eat meat is neither moral or immoral
What part about forcing your will on other being and causing harm, suffering is not immoral?

>. Choosing to eat or not to eat meat is neither moral or immoral,
That's what we're arguing about in this thread, but thanks for just deciding that you're right without giving any arguments.

>Because veganism and vegetarianism are alot of time full of pseudoscientific bullshit
All dietary sciences, and actually medicine in general, has huge problems with pseudocience.

You're a loony

yes
Morality is a construct that has societal purpose but beyond that it is mere a fake construct.

>If all people stop eating meat, most of those precious animals who you want to save will be risking extinction
A generation of animals would be lost, but countless future generations would be saved the pain. Those animal species wouldn't cease to exist, by the way, because people like many animals even without eating them.

Wrong.

There is a universal moral law, a standard.

You only think that because your brain is more inclined to require rules.

You do realise that because of people that are stubborn and addicted to meat, scientists are developing cultured meat.
Meat is only consumed because people are addicted to the taste, because it's considered normal since primitive times, and because people don't seem to care about the animals.

Also, a lot of people in the world, even the intelligent people don't think, investigate or care about this issue, they just consider killing animals for food normal or even necessary, even with alternatives.
The taste is so addictive that people lose reason.

youtu.be/MOfZtuKeTyM

I suggest a compromise. People will stop eating animal produced meat but in return it'll become perfectly legal to hunt and kill vegans for food.

I propose just killing vegans, and using the skulls of PETA members as trophies.

you are completely deluded

>forcing your will on other being and causing harm, suffering

that's a good thing

Nigga meat tastes good and I don't give a fuck about your moral justification.

Only reason why I consider going veggie is to teach myself how to cook better

survival of the fittest.

i dont give a fuck, show me as much gore as you want, i have slit many goats throats and eaten them after with my uncle, and i can tell you.

there is nothing more satisfying than feeling power.

Have you ever saw a vegan one would call masculine? I for sure did not.

Fun fact: Animal fat is neccesary for proper production of testosteron.

>as soon as all vegans are eaten, there is no more meat to eat
>everyone becomes vegan because of lack of meat
>people can hunt vegans again
>the meat supply never ends

It was an oversimplification to illustrate how more people are employed by increasing the amount of steps from raw material to finished product, it wasn't supposed to be an accurate and detailed analysis of the production chain of beef.

>Also, you can just add an arbitrary amount of other intermediary or refinement steps to the crops side (like sorting by quality, people producing threshers, soil, pesticides, research) or reduce some steps on the meat side (like transportation for local ranchers).
Yes, but if you want to boil it down to an extreme you're left with:

Farmer
Shop

vs.

Farmer
Other farmer
Shop

>Lastly, "it's moral because more people are employed" is a very weak argument to me.
Why? People are fed, housed, given clothes, education by the meat industry. People that can grow up to become scientist, engineers, politicians, therapists, the people that will support society in the future.

ya, that American weightlifter at the 2016 Rio games

veganism is for rich ppl.

Wouldnt survive in a harsh environment w/o meat.

Inuits are alcoholic but not stupid

>masculine

Do you mean muscular?
This guy on Youtube is pretty buff and he's vegan.
In this video he shows what he eats in a day, he overeats because he works out, a normal person doesn't need to eat as much.

youtu.be/vGpy6h0LbQM

Reminder.

Explain why or fuck off, if you can't or don't want to contribute to the thread.

>Yes, but if you want to boil it down to an extreme you're left with:
Your oversimplifaction is just a comparison of quality (number of categories of workers). It doesn't account for quantity (number of workers within the categories), which I'd say is what is the actually essential thing here.

It may simply be the case that the reality looks like this:

2000 Farmers (consisting of 10 types) growing grain
15 Shop workers

vs.

500 Farmers (consisting of 50 types) producing meat
15 Shop workers

The grain industry then employs more people despite having less types of people involved.

>Why? People are fed, housed, given clothes, education by the meat industry. People that can grow up to become scientist, engineers, politicians, therapists, the people that will support society in the future.
How about we do everything as inefficient as possible then? Get rid of machines, plow the fields by hand again. Imagine how many people we could employ in farming, if we got rid of tractors.

You're not living in a postapocalyptic world or stranded on a pacific island. Your rules of conduct should fit to that reality, rather than the "what if" that isn't and will probably never be the case.

Honestly, if we simply stopped eating cows we would probably reverse human induced climate change.

>but thanks for just deciding that you're right
You're welcome
>without giving any arguments.
Except I did

> all nutrition needs from other sauces
I can smell the fallacy here

Are you mad? Have mad papers, do you?

Our eating the bastards is the only thing keeping their numbers from exploding exponentially and frying us all in cow-fart.

The unnatural number of cows only came about due to human breeding, they'll go down once the demand disappears.

You try to abstain from meat anywhere besides India where agriculture can be continuous and you're just gonna starve.

Youre honestly doing an animal a favor when you shoot it with a gun. Most animals do not die peacefully from old age, most are eaten alive by predators. The problem with vegetarians and animal lovers is they refuse to accept that animal suffering is an inevitability. Suffering is apart of life, get over it.

PETA will not let that happen.

see We are breeding a large unnatural amount of animals just for human consumption, they wouldn't exist otherwise.
I think these animals would prefer to not exist than to be confined and slaughtered for food.

>vegans believe farm animals have existential crises
Goddamn dude

>Because God told us we can?
God told Noah he could, before him everyone was vegetarian.
Lrn2bible

It's not a "what if" question dude.

More than half of the world couldnt eat vegan even if they wanted to.

It's not insulting when i said it's a rich ppl thing, just a reality.

I think you are overestimating the cognitive ability of farm animals. You are imposing your human feelings on to an animal whos brain is far more simple than your own. Do they feel pain, yes. Does it really matter, no. Because these animals are born to be made it to a product as efficiently and quickly as possible. They're "feelings" basically consit of "ouch, eat, fuck". They dont prefer to be anything.

What? It can be even cheaper.

Those animal product prices are pretty far fetched.

You dont get it. Its not about money. Ils about where and how you live.

You shouldn't hunt and eat other humans because it will really suck when other humans decide to gang up and hunt and eat you you fucking retard.

No matter how many cows i eat, all the cows aren't going to gang up and try and eat me. Maybe they should be a bit more evolved, then i might care about what a cow thinks.

Because the killing animals thing is a fucking joke.

If you want to help animals, you promote yourself to the top of a social hierarchy so you can enact actual rule and laws protecting certain animals.

Instead people turn into faggots who can't grasp the notion that virtue-signalling is not the same as doing something "virtuous".

So they display their faggot special snowflake faggotry instead of thinking "what would actually be effective?".

Why live? Your existence is predicated on the destruction of countless animal and plant matter.

I actually did look through all your sources and didn't find a single thing proving this statement:

>Choosing to eat or not to eat meat is neither moral or immoral,

Note that I don't give a fuck about the dietary viability or how natural it is to eat meat, and neither should anyone else for this thread. This is Veeky Forums, not Veeky Forums, which means that this thread is either about the history of meat consumption and vegetarianism or about its ethics.

If you actually think that your post addressed either of that, which it didn't, unless I oversaw something in your links, then one still has to point out that just posting an assortment of links is really poor form. Argue your point yourself.

What's your actual point?

This seems like an incoherent rant.

Well, does it apply to you or the other half?

No? Then clearly there is room for veganism, and just how much room there is is simply a matter of refinement.

> They're "feelings" basically consit of "ouch, eat, fuck". They dont prefer to be anything.
Is it morally permissible to slaughter and cook a human baby then? Their cognitive world isn't particularly developed either and doesn't go beyond "ouch, mmmhh, zzZZzz" and whatever onomatopoeia there is for pooping.

What about people with extreme mental retardation?