Confused By Certain Vegan Arguments

I've always understood the argument against eating pigs/cows/chickens for the moral aspect. I don't agree with it, but I understand it. I do agree with the environmental argument as well, but simply try to lessen my own environmental impact via other means.

However what I do not understand is the moral argument against the following:
>fish
>shellfish
>honey

I can't understand people considering most fish moral entities. Even more so considering something like a clam or a bee a moral entity. Now the environmental argument I can still see, but anyone who tries to moralize that eating a clam is somehow torturing a creature (a creature without a brain or the capacity to feel pain mind you) is beyond me.

Other urls found in this thread:

honeyflow.com/
nytimes.com/2017/07/25/business/diesel-emissions-volkswagen-bmw-mercedes.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

You're assuming that vegans are psychological healthy people with rational motivations. They are not.
Veganism is a form of delusional behavior.

>vegan arguments
nice oxymoron

>fish
There is good evidence that even though fish are not very intelligent, they largely experience pain the same way we do, and therefore it would be immoral to cause unnecessary suffering for them.
>shellfish
I'm not so sure about them, although I don't eat them anyway.
>honey
With modern hive methods that don't even need you to put bees to asleep to extract honey continuously I really don't see the problem with honey whatsoever.

For clarification I'm a vegan for both moral and nutritional reasons.

>but anyone who tries to moralize that eating a clam is somehow torturing a creature (a creature without a brain or the capacity to feel pain mind you) is beyond me.

It's simpler to preach "avoid ALL animal products" than it is to try and come up with a list of exactly which ones are or are not morally wrong.

That's one of my main complaints with Veganism. I'm all in favor of reducing animal suffering, eliminating the horrors of factory farming, and so on. But you don't have to cut out all animal products to achieve those goals. You just have to cut out certain types.

But I guess if someone's goal is to belong to a special club to have smug moral superiority over others then the practical details don't really matter.

>Confused By Certain Vegan Argument
So are vegans
The trick is not to think about it too much

>There is good evidence that even though fish are not very intelligent, they largely experience pain the same way we do, and therefore it would be immoral to cause unnecessary suffering for them.
I agree that undue suffering is important for all livestock industries, but it also comes down to an argument of human utility vs. animal comfortability.

>I'm not so sure about them, although I don't eat them anyway.
Evidence points to shellfish being unable to feel pain in a similar way to more developed species.

>nutritional reasons.

I always found this curious. Why do you think that cutting out a large number of potential nutrient sources from your diet to be beneficial? I do agree that the typical Western diet contains unhealthy amounts of many animal-derived foods. But eliminating all of them seems counterproductive, especially given that many vital nutrients are far more bioavilable from animal sources than from plant sources.

Veganism is a cult.
There is no point in trying to find reason in their beliefs.

Find a strict vegetarian if you want to talk to a non-psycho regarding morals. Talk to a vegan if you want to be indoctrinated.

this right here

the most nutritious/healthiest diet is one that is mostly plant-based but contains some meat--mainly things like fish and organ meats

The bio availability thing is a non-issue if your diet is largely whole plant foods. Obviously certain vitamins like B12 will need to be supplemented, but this is a minor inconvenience compared to the overwhelming evidence that animal foods have a net negative effect on the body. I've been vegan for about a year now happily (I don't crave meat or try to simulate it with shitty soy products) and in my most recent bloodwork everything was great, and my cholesterol was lower than ever (I'm genetically pre-disposed to high LDL). I think it's really a matter of perspective. People are so conditioned to think that cutting out animal products is a massive sacrifice, but this is just because they lived their whole lives with a diet centered around them. Being vegan doesn't mean eating salad all day (not implying this is what you believe, but I hear it very often).

>that animal foods have a net negative effect on the body.
But that's not even close to true. I've seen plenty of studies discussing things like over-consumption of certain animal based foods being detrimental to one's health. Or that certain specific foods were unhealthy. But that's part of the problem we're discussing in this thread. It's lumping all things together, rather than focusing on the specific ones to avoid.

"perspective" or "conditioning" might explain people's preferences for meat, but they have nothing to do with the actual, measurable, differences in bioavailability for various nutrients.

You stated that you were vegan for both moral an nutritional reasons. Perhaps your moral reasoning is dominating the nutritional motivation? Because if you were looking at this purely based on a scientific analysis of nutrition you'd be eating mostly plants but including things like cold-water ocean fish and mammalian liver.

>liver
That would fuck my LDL levels up big time.

The nutritional side came first for me. After I made the switch I started researching veganism more and the moral motivations came a few months later. Perhaps I am generalizing, but oily fish high in omega 3s is the only counterexample I've heard that has some merit, and even then it's not any more advantageous than a plant-based source like ground flax, walnuts, etc.

>vegan
>argument
you can't argue with mentally ill people

>>honey
>With modern hive methods that don't even need you to put bees to asleep to extract honey continuously I really don't see the problem with honey whatsoever.

I just want to clarify, both the traditional (traditional as in old as time itself) and modern way to do it is to blow some smoke into the hive to fool the bees there is a forest fire. This makes them want to stay inside the hive and less interested in buzzing around stinging you to death.

I've never heard of any other way to harvest honey.

>I've never heard of any other way to harvest honey.
Literally doesn't matter what you've heard of. Seriously, go fuck yourself.

honeyflow.com/

Yes in my opinion neither is really harmful to bees, but the more extreme vegans would perceive the traditional smoke method as causing suffering.

>But I guess if someone's goal is to belong to a special club to have smug moral superiority over others then the practical details don't really matter.
/thread

The same argument holds? It's not like the average dairy cow is treated better than beef cattle. I would probably eat cheese if it wasn't incredibly expensive to ensure you're getting it ethically produced.

Some vegans do eat shellfish. They have their own hard to remember name where you're pretty much vegan, but you'll still eat shellfish.

The only vegan I've ever known said she did it to help her "astral project" whatever the fuck that means. When she wasn't pretending to do magic she was bitching about white people while being a complete fucking hypocrite. They aren't rational people, it's a virtue signaling cult.

No they don't.
Biased sources are biased sources. Vegans aren't out to find or promote truth. It's the same reason, but reversed, for why I wouldn't listen to a Hormel rep on the matter.

the word you're thinking of is pescatarian

>I've only ever known one vegan, and she was crazy
>Therefore all vegans are a virtue signaling cult
>But I'm not the irrational one, the vegans are

Really makes you think

>>Therefore all vegans are a virtue signaling cult
No you retard. Those of us who say that veganism is a cult do so because of how the founders of the goddamn movement describe it and its ethos. Vegan is not the same thing as a strict vegetarian. Hell, that's why there's a different word to describe it. It's a goddamn extremist mentality for which there is no compromise even to the point of ridding the world of things like pets.

If you call yourself a vegan and don't adhere to the more extreme views espoused, you might want to stop calling yourself a vegan because it doesn't mean the milquetoast "I don't eat meat and think farming is kinda screwed up" that you think it does, and all you're doing is helping normalize the same kind of extremists that ALF/ELF were.

That refers to vegetarians who eat fish. Normal fish. Not shellfish only.

So if I don't consume any animal products I'm not a vegan? Most people have the perception that vegan = vegetarian + abstaining from milk, eggs, etc, so that's why I use that term. If I said "strict vegetarian" people would assume I avoid meat and strictly adhere to my diet but still consume dairy and eggs, which isn't true.

>So if I don't consume any animal products I'm not a vegan?
If you don't follow the extremist bullshit that they add in, yes you are not a vegan.
>Most people have the perception that vegan = vegetarian + abstaining from milk, eggs, etc, so that's why I use that term.
That's partially because idiots like you keep normalizing the term to make the ideology seem less insane, but it's not that much work to just tell them "hey, I'm a veggie who doesn't eat dairy or eggs".
>If I said "strict vegetarian" people would assume I avoid meat and strictly adhere to my diet but still consume dairy and eggs, which isn't true.
People who assume that are retards, but like above, it's not that hard to go ahead and specify that you don't do dairy or eggs as well.

But quite seriously, yeah, I am being a bit of a dick about this, but look up and read about the views of Donald Watson and the Vegan Society. That's not something any thinking person would want to support or further.

There are courteous ways to cure people of ignorance, and there's the cunt's way.

You fucking cunt.

I don't disagree about "official" vegans being fucking insane, but you're fighting a seriously losing battle by trying to change the commonly used phrasing.

ITT: strawmen

I disagree. People are coming around on the insanity of PETA, it just takes time and vigilance.

Literally, no. Veganism actually has a written and published set of views. They're literally just a google search away.

What's more is that they cult like behavior is especially true in how they are happy to let others coopt the term which makes them seem more populous than they actually are and allows for indoctrination by inches, which is exactly how cults work.

Livestock animals don't suffer tho. It would fuck up the meat if they were under duress. The conditions aren't ideal for humans but remember livestock animals are actually quite hardy comparatively. Not as tough as wild animals tho wild nature, now that's a harsh life for an animal under constant stress and never anybody around to give you food or medicine.

Look, I know that you don't think you're an idiot, but you are. Saying literally and actually a lot doesn't strengthen your baseless argument.

vegetarians ae cucks

what does "the way we do" mean?

It's not baseless. The fact that you think it's baseless is proof that you're just a useful idiot who doesn't look into any views that you espouse. Do you also think National Socialism is a just dandy economic system?

that may be true but no one is holding a gun to your head making you hit send before you have all your facts straight. also part of his fury might be derived from the fact that he basically trounced a part of the vegan argument with a few seconds amount of research.

also everyone one of these threads is more about the argument than the actual topic, sooooo....

I assume user is referring to the physical structure of the human body--types of nerves, regions of the brain that process pain, etc--which is quite different from the physiology of a fish.

Your syntax is embarrassing.

the same moral superiority you're displaying by figuratively having your cake and trying to eat it too? do you really give a shit about where your food comes from if it meets whatever health standard you care about? could you taste the difference in a blind taste test? are you planning on actually doing anything about "factory farms"? or is it all something you just use as a preface when defending your preference to having meat when you feel you need to?

I'm still not wrong though.

When a vegan argues their point they're biased, when some autistic fat neckbeard shoveling down mcchickens does it, it's "facts"?

so you'd pay for any cheese that has the label "ethically sourced"? lol do you just take their word for it? how could you possibly know? you sound like a whole foods browsing sheep

Fat neckbeards haven't created an organization that would entirely cripple modern healthcare if it had its way.

Neither are treated very poorly at all.

Huh, I stand corrected. Though I do recall hearing of something like this once before. But I still haven't heard of any method that puts bees to sleep before you harvest the honey.

People were saying that in the 1990s. Nothing's changed and PETA is just as irrelevant. People choose to be vegan without PETA being a part of it

Ah yes, can't let big pharma have anything less than a monopoly goy!

Who said anything about protecting Big Pharma?

I'm talking about how vital animal testing is in the drug creation process. Or would you have us start testing on poor brown kids?

fish are living creatures you murder for meat
"moral entities" stop being a little faggot either you kill living breathing things and eat them or not, if youre do, youre a little faggot

Why is killing wrong?

> Triggered little monsanto shill is obvious

lol

Remember kids.

Meat is murder.

And don't forget to eat 12 to 15 servings of Monsanto Certified Organic(tm) produce a day!

>And don't forget to eat 12 to 15 servings of Monsanto Certified Organic(tm) produce a day!

I WILL, MR. MONSANTO SIR!!!

THANK YOU FOR SPREADING YOUR MESSAGE OF PEACE, LOVE, AND HEALTHY EATING!!

Kek this so much

>why is murder wrong
>waaaaah ad hominem because cant cope with murder

>inexplicably bringing up Monsanto out of nowhere
Is this a new meme?

its some delusional head cannon this bitch has as to why he thinks its okay to keep living beings in cages and murdering them

Vegans are being repeatedly BTFO so they shift topics.

well what's the difference between a chicken and a fish really?

Lol
>Flock and herd animals don't want to be huddled up in a clump together
>It is possible to murder a non human

Looks like someone doesn't understand the definition of murder

>i heard that some vegans feel this way and even though they dont affect my life in any way and i dont actually know them i feel a need to let you guys know that i disagree with some of the arguments that i heard they make against other people

The enviromental argument is bullshit, think about how they get their food, they definitely wouldn't be able to source all their food locally and would have to ship in a lot of vegetables just to be able to get enough to actually survive, the ships and aeroplanes used to ship veggies worldwide around belch out massive amounts of pollutants since they don't have any exhaust cleaning equipment not to mention the farming equipment used to plant, harvest and maintain crops, not too sure on what the exhaust systems on those are like but if it's like the old tractors and farm equipment they'll vent the exhaust straight to the atmosphere without running through a catalytic converter

>seething so hard he doesn't even know who brought up monsanto

>I pretend that the Vegan Society doesn't exist and doesn't actually define what Veganism is.

It's not immoral to cause unnecessary suffering. It's not even unnecessary. It's entirely necessary that fish suffer so that I can eat them. Otherwise I wouldn't be able to eat them, and that's unacceptable.

Food has no moral value except in the pleasure it causes me.

Calm down and collect your thoughts, try again after a warm glass of milk

I heard California was considering retrofitting some tractors and irrigation pumps with diesel cleaners but they haven't done anything yet as far as I know. Veganism would definitely be a cluster fuck for the environment though. Most cattle are raised on native range land for most of their lives, which is good because native range land prevents things like dust bowls.

fish perceive pain in a different way such that some people think makes it morally OK to kill and eat them but not chickens/cows/etc.

FYI, "clean diesel" is dirtier than regular diesel.

Don't feel assed to go into the details now, but what happens is you futz around with the exhaust which robs power which makes you burn more diesel to make up for it. A penny-wise, pound foolish situation.

>Or would you have us start testing on poor brown kids?
No, I'd use the retarded and comp their family the cost of care and medication.

Probably why I haven't heard about it since the VW scandal

Fish can't scream.

When I was a kid at summer camp I always volunteered to kill and gut the fish. Best to get that first whack square on the head or else they'll flop more and two and three whacks will be harder to get in

Yeah, there's a lot of bullshit surrounding diesel out there.

Like we should run the US on diesel and not gas. You can get enough higher fuel economy out of the diesel cycle (not to mention the fuel flexibility where conversion to running off propane or NG is retardedly simple) that it more than makes up for the fact that each gallon burned releases more carbon (The numbers are in the neighborhood of 30% dirtier but 60% better fuel economy, when properly tuned). Add in that diesels run at lower rpms, which means two additional facts: you don't change the oil nearly as often (although diesels use more oil in the engine, but you can go 3-6x as long between oil changes, so that's still in favor of diesel) and the engines wear out much more slowly which allows us to keep cars on the road for longer before they need to be replaced. The auto industry would get fucked, but who gives a shit about those assholes who keep making disposable cars?

As to the VW thing, it wasn't just them:
nytimes.com/2017/07/25/business/diesel-emissions-volkswagen-bmw-mercedes.html

You're misinformed. Look at the conversion from ALA to DHEA. Plant omega threes are not even close to effective to reach the therapeutic dose for omega threes without supplementation. Human beings need to consume fish or omega three supplements to achieve a desired balance between omega6 and omega3. Educate yourself before spewing complete misinformation as you're liable to do more harm than good.

Um no that's the exact opposite of what I said

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about

You are aware that the cattle and chickens you eat aren't raised behind the deli counter right?

The weak should fear the strong, and animals are weak.

Not a vegan myself, but I'd guess the morality wouldnt be based on whether the animal is more or less inteligent, but rather that it wasn't meant to live in cluttered underwater farms fed with its own kin. That added to the impact industrial fishing has in the environment

As long as we don't have a clear idea of what life, consciousness and self-awareness are how how they relate to fish, shellfish and bees, there's a moral argument against eating those things. It's that simple.

I've met vegans who stubbornly claimed humans are actually herbivores and that meat doesn't get digested, but only rots for days in our colon, poisoning us. It's futile to look for deeper logic among people that will believe anything that makes their life choice superior to others.

This kind of people would never talk like that in real life, especially since it's probable they don't have close family members or friends to speak so candid.
Even though could've research before talking and was probably speaking out of his ass, the response was really disproportionate for the conversation.
Just an angry guy venting online.

Overfishing can fuck up ocean ecosystems, which is probably a bad thing considering how much we already do that with dumping oil and plastics

Honey can actually be good for the environment, beekeepers help maintain population levels of those dumb little pests to keep them pollinating

Just do your homework to make sure the food you buy is sustainably cultivated and you'll be more helpful than 99% of people

plants are living things too you faggot

ALA's aren't as bioavailable as omega 3's as DHA from say fish but nowhere near as low as youre making it out to be, and ratios of omega 6 to omega 3 is crucial regardless for proper conversion

bro vegans talk about moral arguments but use phones and clothing made from child labor and underwaged personel

its just a fancy trend because people are trending to value cute animals lives more than humans

Nope only raised the creatures my whole life but tell me more about your vast experience from suburbia and your YouTube video credentials

Holy shit this. Dubs too

Accurate. Semiconductor fabrication that makes their new iPhone every year does insane amounts of damage to the environment and kills people (especially if they work in an Apple factory). My meat-eating ass is doing miles more to help the environment than they are.

You must be 18 years old to post.

I eat honey myself but I've heard two common arguments it. The first is that it's theft, which I think is a bit silly. The second is that a lot of bees die every winter due to how much honey is extracted in industrial production. Normally the bees use their honey to survive but extractors leave very little for them. Sometimes they take almost all of it and replace it with HFCS, which I personally find sad.

No they don't unnecessarily allow hives to collapse simply to extract all the honey they can. It makes no economic sense they have too much invested in their hives. Besides the real money comes from pollinating commercial crops not honey. Seriously you people know nothing about how agriculture works, it's sad.

Eating vegan diet is not enough, we all should stop using cleaning products, both the material source and the waste are bad for the environment especially animal life.
We don't need to be clean to live, dirtiness is natural after all

>dirtiness is natural after all
so are cancer, infections, dying in infancy, famines, getting hit by lightning, getting killed by a wild animal, falling and hitting your head causing brain damage, and birth defects

Your mistake is viewing it as a rational or logical thing- for vegans, this is a knowing, much like you know killing another human being is wrong because you feel it in your bones. Vegans have a higher level of empathy for life than your average person. I am a pescatarian, and I know fish feel pain, yet I need protein and Omega-3's, so I eat some. Your argument is a lot like a sociopath saying "I just don't see what's so wrong about killing people". For vegans, animals are people (or at least they're beings of sufficient status to be protected and loved rather than subjected to cruelty). Where did you get the idea that fish can't feel pain? Go stab one and watch what it does- they absolutely do feel pain.

This, this this. So much this. I used to be a vegan, and at the end of a year I was so drained and tired and STUPID and slow I could barely function. I did dozens of blood tests and the only thing wrong was low cholesterol. I realized I was deprived of animal fats and omega 3s and within of reintroducing them I began feeling better. it's a sad reality, I don't like it but you can't argue with science.