Can some explain to me why veganism is bad?

>why is mental illness bad?

>>42101151
It's unnatural and unsustainable.

File: d7f952f1943a4d72720a870bfa0f8572.png (769KB, 1900x1005px) Image search: [Google]

769KB, 1900x1005px

stop making threads faggot

>>42101190
That is not me. seriously

>>42101151
1) Delete your frog folder, they're unaesthetic and haram
2) It isn't bad at all, just take 5 minutes of your day for the first month and log everything on cronometer to make sure you are getting all the fat soluble vitamins, Ω3s and minerals. If you eat nuts, flaxseeds, lentils, chickpeas, tofu and oats it shouldn't be hard at all
>>42101168
>Being compassionate is mental illness
>Not funding the needless, systematic massacre of billions of sentient beings is mental illness
Please do not reproduce
>>42101185
>unnatural
vaccines and cars are """unnatural""", PCs and smartphones too.
Factory farms are also unnatural.
Meanwhile, hurricanes and cobra venom are natural.
>but I eat free range grass fed cows only
No, you don't. 99% of all chickens, 95% pigs and ~80% cows are raised and killed in factory farms. Also, even if you do eat only grass fed, it still had to die.
>unsustainable
Completely wrong. Veganism uses by definition less resources, produces less GHG and takes less part in deforestation
>>42101190
Filters > add > vegan* > tick "hide" box > save
newfag

>>42101433
just imagine being this much of a cuckhold

>>42101433
What's wrong with eating something that died? That's literally how all of life works. You can't exist without consuming something that died.

>>42101455
>What's wrong with eating something that died?
Would you eat a dead human?
Why (not)?
>That's literally how all of life works.
Due to custom. Humans have evolved beyond necessity.
>You can't exist without consuming something that died.
Yes you can. Source: literally every vegan alive.
>>42101443
Amazing argument, completely refutes literally every single point I made with thorough explanations, tangible evidence and strict logic. By the way that was sarcasm and you should kys.

>>42101455
Are you a freegan?

>>42101486
We decide not to consume something because we decide it is outside of what we are. That's why we don't eat rocks, algae, or long-dead rotting meat. They're too far away from what we are physically able to consume. Yet we also define the things too close to us to eat under this. These things can be consumed, yet we still feel it's evil to do so.

Why?

Because I'm a human, and I don't want to get eaten.

>Humans have evolved beyond necessity.

No we haven't. You, a first-worlder with easy access to clean water and medical care have decided you won't eat any more meat because it makes you feel more at one with everything as a whole. You see human qualities in the animals we consume.

But you are projecting. Animals are nowhere near as advanced as human. This is a simple fact.

By refusing to eat them you're just moving the goalpost. Your logic follows:

1. It's wrong to end life
2. It's wrong to kill people
3. It's wrong to kill anything that can think
4. It's wrong to kill animals

and the next logical step is

5. It's wrong to kill plants

...and yet you'll never take that step five. But to not take this step is to claim plants are not alive. This is simply not true.

>>42101525
I don't know what that is so maybe maybe not

>>42101549

not that vegan guy, but it's fucking retarded what you're saying.

Ofc one wouldn't eat plants if he doesn't have to. Eating plants is a necessity eating animals isn't

Besides that the whole point is that animals experience more suffering and have a higher ethical dignity than plants for example because mostly having the same pain receptors as we humans do.
Also your third point exludes the fifth one in your argument aswell... nobody says plants aren't more alive than rocks. this still doesn't change the fact animals feel more pain during their time in a cage/whatever you amerifags use to keep them with as much space as possible or in the slaughterhouse

>>42101590
>Ofc one wouldn't eat plants if he doesn't have to.

My point is there's no reason to do so. It's an unnecessary complication. Things have to die in order for things to live. If everything lived forever, nothing would be truly alive. That makes it ok to consume things, and in turn, kill them. Because when something refuses to die it becomes a caner.

I'm willing to admit that the factory process we have for producing meat is still very brutal an inefficient. But the way forward is more of a stumble than a march.

My ultimate point is, to consume animals is not ethically wrong. While they do suffer, their suffering does not reach the depths humanity is capable, and it is therefore simply idiotic to treat it as such. Humans are objectively superior to all other animals.

>>42101549
>We decide not to consume something because we decide it is outside of what we are.
>That's why we don't eat rocks, algae, or long-dead rotting meat. They're too far away from what we are physically able to consume.
>Yet we also define the things too close to us to eat under this. These things can be consumed, yet we still feel it's evil to do so.
100% agree here.
Do you agree that animals are sentient and can experience subjective reality, just like us?
>Because I'm a human, and I don't want to get eaten.
Please explain how buying beans instead of chicken will make you get eaten, I don't follow.
>>Humans have evolved beyond necessity.
>No we haven't.
Yes, we have. Name one nutrient that we *need* to get from meat.
>B12
>iron
>calcium
>certain EAAs
>Ω3s
All of those can be easily found on a vegan diet without even supplementing, 1 google search away
>You, a first-worlder with easy access to clean water and medical care have decided you won't eat any more meat because it makes you feel more at one with everything as a whole.
Of course, I obviously don't scoff at poor nigger countries who eat whatever they find available. But we first-worlders don't need that. The grocery store is what I mean by "we have evolved beyond the food chain"
>You see human qualities in the animals we consume.
Only the bare minimum which is the capacity to experience subjective reality, which grants them the bare minimum right to life.
>But you are projecting.
Am I? Are animals not sentient? Before you say "no", I didn't say "sapient", I said "sentient". Big difference.
>Animals are nowhere near as advanced as human. This is a simple fact.
Yes, and? I didn't say we should make animals first class citizens like us.
>By refusing to eat them you're just moving the goalpost.
That does not mean that the goalpost should not be moved, its position isn't axiomatically correct.

I just eat vegan mostly cause it makes me feel better and is way easier to long term meal prep. My grocery bill is actually pretty light since most of my meals are based on dense cheap foundations like brown rice, beans, oats, whatever.

If I'm being honest I think most of my health benefits came from cutting out dairy vs meat. I'll still eat whatever socially, not gonna be a fuckhead who won't take a slice of pizza when we're all out. But as far as what I prep at home all vegan with eggs every once in a while.

So I guess I'm a fake vegan but whatever. Just do a little research, establish what sort of values are important to you with health, and do whatever works for you. I'd eat a lot more meat if I could kill it and prep it myself.

>>42101642
You're spending a lot of time missing the point I'm making so I'll spell it all out to you in a couple sentence.

Humans are objectively superior to all other animals.

Therefore, it is not wrong to consume the lesser beings.

>>42101549
>>42101642
2/2
>1. It's wrong to end life
>2. It's wrong to kill people
>3. It's wrong to kill anything that can think
is sentient* but anyway
>4. It's wrong to kill animals
Yes, roughly. But I won't argue over little details. Is there a flaw in steps 1-4? No.
>5. It's wrong to kill plants
No, it's not. Where did you get that?
>...and yet you'll never take that step five. But to not take this step is to claim plants are not alive.
They are not "brain alive".
>This is simply not true.
Stop trying to sound smart, it's a 12 year old's trait.

Plants are not sentient. Hell, even using the verb "be" is too much. What is a being? Is a plant a being? What is a plant? What is a bean? Is it the entire beanstalk? The seed pod? A single bean?

Plants can't be exploited, suffer or die in the medical definition of the term (brain death). Plants can't even "be".
>>42101621
>My point is there's no reason to do so.
Yes there is, it's wrong to make someone else suffer
>It's an unnecessary complication.
It's not complicated, just don't buy corpses again and buy something else instead
>Things have to die in order for things to live. If everything lived forever, nothing would be truly alive.
As above, stop trying to sound smart
>That makes it ok to consume things, and in turn, kill them.
By that "logic", humans are ok to kill too. But humans aren't ok to kill, so your "logic" is flawed
>Because when something refuses to die it becomes a caner.
What
>I'm willing to admit that the factory process we have for producing meat is still very brutal an inefficient.
So don't fund it
>My ultimate point is, to consume animals is not ethically wrong.
Yes it is
>While they do suffer, their suffering does not reach the depths humanity is capable, and it is therefore simply idiotic to treat it as such.
They shouldn't be killed if they have *any* capacity to suffer
>Humans are objectively superior to all other animals.
Not an argument that makes it ok to kill them

>>42101666
>Humans are objectively superior to all other animals.Therefore, it is not wrong to consume the lesser beings.
Wasted trips on a shitpost. You wouldn't eat golden retriever ribs, and don't pretend you would.

>>42101688
You're still avoiding my central point. And stop with that overuse of greentext, It's just annoying to look at. It allows you to attack the little details of what I'm talking about without actually understanding the central point.

Animals are less than us. Animals are not us. We are animals, but they are not us. They are sentient, like us, but not to the point we are.

What I'm talking about here is humanist superiority. That's the problem I have with veganism, it proposes that humanity is not superior than all other animal life.

But it is. You cannot refute this. If you refute this, prove animals are capable of the same suffering we are, I will accept defeat.

>>42101697
Because wolves have evolved to become closer to humanity. That's what domestication is. Domesticated house pets are superior to cattle.

>>42101713
It doesn't propose that humans are NOT superior, it proposes that that superior beings don't torture and slaughter other sentient beings just because they're "worse"

>>42101721
>torture and slaughter
These are just negative words for "kill." You believe that killing, in any form, is automatically evil. It is not. It's a manifestation of your fear of death, and you've projected that feeling onto animals that cannot actually feel it.

>>42101688

of all the shit posters in this thread you're the one who is the most desperate to sound smart desu

>>42101736
Torture and slaughter are indicative of the methods used to keep and kill. I am not afraid of death, I do not believe hunting is wrong, I just simply think eating factory farmed meat isn't right and the meat is probably really shitty quality and pumped full of god knows what. That's it.

>>42101151
makes you live longer apparently. I want to die huge as a brick shithouse with a chronically stressed CNS and organs before 50 Tbh Tbh

>>42101759
And yet veganism proposes that rather than improving the processes, making it much more efficient and maybe even pleasant for the animal, we should simply cut our losses and run. That's fucking stupid. To improve is better than to exclude, especially in something as massive and profitable as the meat industry.

Stop trying to play God and shut everything down when you're a tiny little man who can only make tiny waves in a massive ocean.

>>42101785
I mean I can't speak for "veganism" i just eat what I eat for those reasons and vote for people who won't give massive federal aid to farms with shitty conditions pumping out shitty sources of food for the masses. Sure you need it on some level but I have the means not to do it so I don't. What more can I do? I'm not fucking playing god lol I also don't give a shit what you eat I'm just justifying my position because you obviously have a pretty weird view of why people would change their diets. Suit yourself bud

>>42101713
>You're still avoiding my central point.
Last two lines in >>42101688, also >>42101697
>And stop with that overuse of greentext, It's just annoying to look at.
Sorry, I have to show how airtight the veganm moral argument is
>It allows you to attack the little details of what I'm talking about without actually understanding the central point.
Understood and addressed it, see above
>Animals are less than us. Animals are not us. We are animals, but they are not us. They are sentient, like us, but not to the point we are.
Agree
>What I'm talking about here is humanist superiority. That's the problem I have with veganism, it proposes that humanity is not superior than all other animal life.
No it doesn't. Of course we are superior, that's not the point. Definition: "Veganism is a way of living which seeks to exclude, as far as is possible and practicable, all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose."
>prove animals are capable of the same suffering we are, I will accept defeat.
Why should the goalpost be there? Answer the following hypothetical LARP scenario instead

_____________________________________
Imagine an advanced alien race invades us. We are objectively lesser in every aspect of our existence, but they aknowledge we are sentient, just less than them.
They select you out of 7.5B people to represent us and ask you the following q: "Humans are inferior to us. Should we eat you?"
Do you answer "no" despite being irrefutably inferior? Why?

>>42101807
You're obviously stressed enough about it to participate in all these threads about it on /fit/. If you don't really give a shit, why take the time?

It's because you do want things to change. But you realize, on some level, that you're just a drip of piss in a massive sewer. So stop trying to change the meat industry as a whole through little things like individual effort, voting, and shitposting on 4chan.

I'm not saying you're wrong. You're right. Now fucking go out and do something about it. You've taken the first steps, now it's time to find the next one.

>>42101433

>veganism uses by definition less resources
>by definition

Shoo shoo vegan.

>>42101151
It isn't.

Almost all arguments against veganism are logical fallacies like "it's unnatural" or "eating meat is tradition".

>>42101841
I can't even read that disgusting greentext so I'm going to ignore it and focus on what you put under the line.

I would answer no. How could I do anything else? I'm not auguring that human life isn't as futile as the rest, I'm arguing that we're just the best we know about right now.

But the world is a big place. And if something better came along and asked me if I wanted to die, I'd say no, and hope that their ultimate decision doesn't involve me dying.

Your metaphor is inherently flawed, though. You think that something superior would give me a choice in the matter, but something superior would be cognitive on a level i'm not even capable of imagining. It would never even bother to take the time to ask me.

That's like you walking up to a cow and trying to ask it that.

>now reply to me without this ugly fucking greentext. I'm going to ignore any fucking greentext you fucking post.

>>42101856
Why does stress have to be a factor? I'm not doing anything right now and popped in here to clarify some things from my perspective. Take that as you will. There are definitely nutty vegans out there my point is some people do it for their own reasons and there's really nothing wrong with that if it works.

>>42101887
Same can be said against all arguments against eating meat

"It hurts the animal" or "It's evil"

>>42101897
Why are you pretending that green text is hard to read? I wonder.

>>42101901
So then we agree it's all subjective ethically and that's...that's kinda it.

>>42101901
Then please debunk
>eating animal products is unhealthy
>the production of animal products is bad for the environment

>>42101716
Cattle are domesticated animals too, what are you talking about
>>42101736
>You believe that killing, in any form, is automatically evil.
No I don't. Self defense is always ok to example.
>you've projected that feeling onto animals that cannot actually feel it.
Lol, says who? Of course they can.
>>42101785
>And yet veganism proposes that rather than improving the processes, making it much more efficient and maybe even pleasant for the animal, we should simply cut our losses and run.
Yes, why not?
>That's fucking stupid. To improve is better than to exclude
Explain why
>especially in something as massive and profitable as the meat industry.
The tobacco industry is profitable too, that doesn't mean you should smoke. Same with the alcohol, soda and other industries.
>Stop trying to play God
Pot kettle etc. Stop playing god and deciding whose life is worthless, who lives and who dies.
>you're a tiny little man who can only make tiny waves in a massive ocean.
By that logic we shouldn't vote either

>>42101549

Agreed completely. Vegans continually move the debate goalpost so they'll never have to acknowledge that they consume "life" just as much as any other meat eater. Just because they don't scream, doesn't mean they aren't alive.

It doesn't matter anyways because most vegans don't have children to pass on their idiotic ideology too. They are typically lower in testosterone, more like a woman actually.

File: Ecological_Pyramid.svg.png (183KB, 1280x920px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 1280x920px

>>42101858
>I never went to biology class in high school

>>42101898
Stress is any expenditure of energy taken in pursuit of a goal. As you try to pursue a goal more and more, failing to do so each and every time, you accumulate more and more stress. The human mind is able to subconsciously decide what the best route to achieving your goal, the one that will use the least amount of stress.

But the process isn't perfect. Sometimes in trying to use the least amount of stress we begin to see things are too big to handle, and so remain stagnant in whatever we've gotten comfortable doing, feeling subconscious misery but unable to act on it.

That's where your conscious mind kicks in. You have to make an effort to find the next step, the next point which will help you to achieve your goal. Rather than focus on the big, focus on the small. The detailed. This is what """""self-help"""""" gurus mean when they say to create a step by step.

What I'm saying is, you can change the meat industry if you want. You don't have to fester on here having one-sided arguments with us morons. You've already taken the first steps. Now find the next.

>>42101549
fucking fascist shit, it's wrong to eat. Full stop.

>>42101928
This is discounting all the reasons someone might not want to eat meat and dairy other then "vegans are animal loving liberal pussies". Grow up haha

File: lolniggers.jpg (215KB, 472x1636px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 472x1636px

>>42101929
so technically speaking, by eating meat we can deprive the niggers from resources? NEAT.

>>42101897
>I can't even read that disgusting greentext so I'm going to ignore it and focus on what you put under the line.
The greentext is non-veganism being defeated, bury your head in the sand at your discretion
>Your metaphor is inherently flawed, though. You think that something superior would give me a choice in the matter, but something superior would be cognitive on a level i'm not even capable of imagining. It would never even bother to take the time to ask me
Assume it did. You said you answer no, despite your inferiority. That is logically inconsistent. Either your inferiority isn't reason enough to die or you surrender your life or change argument.

>>42101931
You're making a lot of assumptions about my mental state. I'm relaxing with this thread open in one tab, responding to you whenever you say something silly.

I already told you I vote with my wallet and my ballot, there's not a lot more I can do. So I don't worry about these things.

I don't think you're a moron but you sure think I am for some reason.

>>42101914
It's not hard to read when you know how to use it. You're supposed to use it sparingly. Like This:

>Quote from previous reply detailing central point

Refutation of that central point.

you're doing this:

>small detail from the previous post
one or two word reply that fails to penetrate the central point

So either start using it right or stop fucking using it.

>>42101914
He just came from leddit obviously

>>42101940
When the land in South America and Africa becomes unlivable, all those people will move up north to Europe and North America, this means that there will be more spics, niggers and sandniggers in your country. So by going vegan you're helping your white country to stay white.

>>42101944
Oh so you're not pretending. It actually bothers you that he's putting your stupidity on full display. That's all I wanted to know.

>>42101950
what is the landmass decline rate vs their birth rate then I wonder.

File: Grahams_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement1.png (126KB, 786x589px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 786x589px

>>42101917
Why debunk that? It's correct.

Debunk this
>the meat industry is not an inherent evil
>though it's inefficient now, it can be fixed, so that meat is produced in a much better way

>>42101922
>Cattle are domesticated animals too

Not on the level dogs and cats are. Cattle only provides us with things we can eat. Domesticated pets provide us with more advanced benefits, such as entertainment. They're closer to being human than cattle is.

I'm not even going to bother trying to make sense of what you're spouting past that because of >>42101944

Learn to fucking talk you moron

>>42101944
You are painfully obviously a newfag and a redditor.
I am greentexting like this to show you that the vegan moral argument is airtight.
Also I did address your central point multiple times
Quit bickering and answer my central point now.

>>42101966
Now you've gone down to name-calling, how sad. See >>42101972

>>42101486
>Would you eat a dead human?
Yeah probably. I tend to look at exotic animals and wonder what their cooked flesh would taste like. The human would have to be female though and probably a cut of the leg or ass.

File: vegansidekick.jpg (68KB, 601x597px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 601x597px

>>42101972
>Not on the level dogs and cats are. Cattle only provides us with things we can eat. Domesticated pets provide us with more advanced benefits, such as entertainment. They're closer to being human than cattle is.
>I'm not even going to bother trying to make sense of what you're spouting past that because of >>42101944
>Learn to fucking talk you moron
Learn to read, this is how functioning logically consistent adults talk

>>42101972
>Why debunk that? It's correct.
Then why are all arguments against eating meat fallacious?

>>42101590
>Ofc one wouldn't eat plants if he doesn't have to. Eating plants is a necessity eating animals isn't
Eating animals is a necessity but eating plants isn't.

>>42101972
>Not on the level dogs and cats are.
Why is it okay for me to kill and eat a cow but not a dog and cat?
>Domesticated pets provide us with more advanced benefits, such as entertainment.
Slaves provide us with more advanced benefits such as entertainment. They're closer to being human than animals are.

>>42101987
Your dumb comic are always such retarded huge strawmen, its like a child trying to describe how the manufacturing of CPU's happens. You just have no clue in it all and throw up ridiculous problems where there exist none.

Also that image is from the reddit vegetarianism subreddit, so go back there pls.

>>42101989
Because eating meat is not inherently bad. It's the meat industry and it's practices that are bad.

>>42101987
>>42101975
>i understand it so he must be a moron because he can't understand it

Yeah, keep telling yourself that kid. Maybe if you actually tried improving your communication skills people might learn to """read""" this great genius you're spouting.

As for your comic it's a good thing you posted it because whoever drew it is a lot better at detailing your points than you are.

However it implies these distinctions on what an animal can be used for were come about arbitrarily. They were not. They are based on the uses animals have for us. And yes, some animals are only useful as food.

>>42102000
Because cats and dogs are better than cows and chickens

>Slaves provide us with more advanced benefits such as entertainment.
>Slaves

See, this is where you're wrong. You see the animals as slaves, but they're not slaves. Slaves are people who have been forced down into a life of servitude. Who, without it, would otherwise thrive and become just as great as their master.

You take a cow out a meat factory, It'll stand around and keep eating grass. Cattle doesn't know any process more complicated than consume and be consumed. You cannot refute this.

>>42102013
That particular comic is not a strawman at all, it's an exact depiction of your argument to show you how silly you are
>It's from le reddit
It literally says where it's from are you blind?
>>42102023
Stop beating around the bush and answer my main point from
>>42101941 and >>42101841

>>42102069
>Stop beating around the bush and answer my main point from

If you can say it in one sentence I will.

But only one sentence. Keep it simple, stupid.

just eat small amounts of meat and animal products of the higest quality of animals living a more or less free life until they are killed late in their life, fast and without pain.
I personally know the butcher i buy meat from. His cows live in the mountains nearby and have acres of freedom. The meat is expensive as fuck, but I just eat smal amounts of it

>>42102102
Pretty much this. You can argue why the meat industry is wrong, but not how this is wrong

>>42102078
Why would you argue against a hypothetical superior race who hypothetically gives you a chance to defend us that we shouldn't be eaten, given that both we and them aknowledge humans are sentient but inferior.

>>42102046
>Because cats and dogs are better than cows and chickens
Says who? Animals are animals and I should be allowed to eat any animal I want.
> You see the animals as slaves, but they're not slaves.
They are though, you're keeping them as slaves for your entertainment.
> Who, without it, would otherwise thrive and become just as great as their master.
I don't believe fucking niggers can thrive and become just as great as white people.

>>42102120
Horribly written sentence but it's a start I guess. Very much a run-on. You wrote "hypothetical" twice for no reason.

A superior organism would not give us the choice to defend ourselves, because it would be incapable of communicating with us.

Like I said, it'd be like trying to talk to a cow.

>>42102156
Stop weaseling out of the argument, assume they want to hear your thoughts and let you speak.
How do you explain that you eat the inferior cow but your inferior race should not be eaten

>>42102155
>I should be allowed to eat any animal I want

Who's stopping you? It's a free world. Go right ahead.

>you're keeping them as slaves for your entertainment.

Slavery also implies there's nothing being given back. No payment. But animals, unlike people, can't use money. So we pay them in food and shelter.

>I don't believe fucking niggers can thrive and become just as great as white people.

Wow, a racist and a faggot vegan? I'm impressed. That's some nice independent thinking right there

>>42102155
Cattle doesn't know they're slaves, they're too stupid for that
Also: eat any animal you want, I have personally tasted every pet out there and actually loved it, cat was tough though

>>42102180
Because the cow can't do shit, and we can.

>>42101666
So if a superior alien species was discovered you would gladly give it your life to consume?

>>42102195
>Because the cow can't do shit, and we can.
You can't do shit compared to that hypothetical race, that's the concept of being inferior, you are as inferior to them as the cow is to you.
I'll repeat it as many times as you weasel out of it.
How do you explain that you eat the inferior cow but your inferior race should not be eaten.

>>42102180
I'm not weaseling out of the argument, I'm showing you that your argument is foolish.

What you're talking about is death. We fear death more than anything else in existence, because we see to die as to stop existing.

But in death, we are consumed by the earth and become a part of it. Remember Lion king? This is the circle of life. We're a part of it.

How would I even begin to explain to death that I shouldn't die because I don't want to?

>>42102217
Ignore him. He doesn't know what he's talking about.

This superior alien species would either
A - Be capable of communicating with us as equals and therefore not be superior to us

or

B - Be incapable of communicating with us and therefore consume us regardless of our consent

That's the reason it's OK to eat cows. A cow can't reason with you for it's life.

>>42102225
The argument is hypothetical, of course it's going to sound a little bit foolish. That's not the point.
>But in death, we are consumed by the earth and become a part of it. Remember Lion king? This is the circle of life. We're a part of it.
So you would not object to being eaten? You'd gladly offer your brother and sister to them to be turned to poop?

>>42102244
fuck meant to reply to >>42102217

>>42102219
I'm not him you fucking retard your vitamin deficiencies are starting to get to you
If the race is in another dimension alltogether, they should fucking eat us we got good protein going on

>>42102247
Of course I'd object to it. I don't want to die. That's why I eat food every day: to keep from fucking dying.

But in the end I'd have to accept that what's going to happen is utterly out of my control. Or I die sad. Either way I'm going to die.

This isn't a hypothetical you're talking about. We are all going to die. It's not some abstract concept. Death is the end.

>>42101486
Bumping my support for you. Despite being a meat eater. Vegans get shit on but do the most for society.

>>42102244
>Ignore him. He doesn't know what he's talking about.
Neither do you
>This superior alien species would either
>A - Be capable of communicating with us as equals and therefore not be superior to us
If they are capable of intergalactic travel and understanding English despite hearing it for the very first time they are very much superior to us.
>or B - Be incapable of communicating with us and therefore consume us regardless of our consent
Moving the goalposts and avoiding the argument. Try to keep up.
>That's the reason it's OK to eat cows. A cow can't reason with you for it's life.
A retard or a brain dead human in a coma can't either but you wouldn't eat them

I'll repeat it as many times as you weasel out of it.
How do you explain that you eat the inferior cow but your inferior race should not be eaten.

>>42102275
see>>42102268

>>42102268
WEASELING
>I don't want to die.
Neither does the cow
>That's why I eat food every day: to keep from fucking dying.
You need *food* to live and thrive, not *meat*
>But in the end I'd have to accept that what's going to happen is utterly out of my control.
Assume for the sake of the HYPOPTHETICAL question that the alien race will allow you to live as log as you are logically consistent with them
>This isn't a hypothetical you're talking about. We are all going to die.
Humans are going to die, but you don't use that argument to eat humans

>>42102275
What you don't seem to understand is what you're talking about isn't hypothetical. That "higher begin" isn't just some abstract concept. It's the earth. It's reality. It's everything.

When we die, it consumes us. Like us consuming a cow.

I ask- How do i even fucking begin to argue with that?

>>42102304
Humans are going to die, but you don't use that argument to eat humans

>>42101151
It's inefficient. You need full protein from meat, eggs or diary to properly develop muscle. If you were to only eat vegan shit like beans you would lack leucine.
https://www.nutritionexpress.com/article+index/protein/showarticle.aspx?id=807

>>42102309
What I have against veganism is it implies a great deal of subconscious fear of death.

Death is the very worst thing people can imagine. It's the end. There's nothing past it.

You project this utterly horrible existential dread on to animals, who can't feel it as profoundly as we can, and your subconscious tells you "maybe if I keep them alive, it'll help keep me alive."

But that is impossible.

Realize you are going to die. Realize you ARE going to be consumed. Realize that this hypothetical you created is just a way to avoid thinking about that deep existential dread you and all the rest of us feel at every moment we are alive.

Realize that you have no control. Then we're done here.

One look at the vegan posters in this thread will tell you they're a bunch of insufferable cunts who love nothing more than to prattle on about their diet. Veganism isn't bad; it just so happens to attract uppity wankers.

>>42102316
>If you were to only eat vegan shit like beans you would lack leucine.
Completely wrong.
Your source says you need 2.5 g leucine per day. I logged in to cronometer. The following foods contain 2.5 g leucine each
>280 kcal tofu
>330 kcal tempeh
>450 kcal kidney beans
>500 kcal lentils
>700 kcal chickpeas
I can go on, but wa all get the picture that you're lying through your teeth. Go on, whine about how the watercress meme now.

>>42102365
basically this. RTight now i'm looking into cheap protein and it basically revolves around non-meat stuff (poorfag), but when ppl ask me if im vegan or vegetarian i auto-answer "fuck no" even if i basically dont eat meat...

>>42102339
>animals, who can't feel it as profoundly as we can,
I'll repeat it as many times as you weasel out of it.
How do you explain that you eat the inferior cow but your inferior race should not be eaten.
>Realize you ARE going to be consumed
Humans are going to die, but you don't use that argument to eat humans

>>42101642
>>42101688
>>42102275
>>42102302
my only argument for not being vegan is
people bred animals to be consumed, they are born, they grow and they die to feed us, they don't feel sad because they are in a tiny cage, a cow doesn't understand the concept of being trapped, in nature, cows are only alive to eat, breed and feed predators, the exact same thing happens in a cow farm

>>42102394
>Humans are going to die, but you don't use that argument to eat humans
because you can walk 500m, go to a store and buy a sirloin that will taste better and will be more tender than human meat.
but guess what people that crashed planes on mountains and are in the midle of the ocean after a ship accident ate when their friends died and they had no food? they eat humans, as anyone would to survive as a last resort

>>42101950
If they could afford to do so, they would have already moved out of those shithole countries. Increased famine from resource depletion would lead to domestic warfare well before a mass exodus. And since the medical care is already pretty tenuous in most of those areas, the likelihood of widespread illness increases as nutrition takes a hit which could also negatively impact acceptance of refugees from those lands.

>>42102394
Pretty much this >>42102448.

The desert island thing is pretty much just another version of that "superior being" hypothetical you were talking about before. A group of people, who are by default stronger than an individual, rationalize that they should consume the individual for the good of the whole.

The reason eating humans is seen as so disgusting is, imagine being on the losing side of it. Imagine people you're close to coming to the conclusion that they'll end you so they can go on. It's horrible to think about.

A cow isn't capable of thinking that.

>>42101716
I'll bite. Pigs are much smarter than dogs or cats. If we are to accept that the defining characteristic of humanity is intelligence, then by your logic it is more wrong to consume pigs than to consume dogs or cats since they are closer to humanity by their intelligence.

>>42102394
>How do you explain that you eat the inferior cow but your inferior race should not be eaten.
Because humans don't get kuru from cows

>>42102481
It's worth noting that a lot of religious see consuming pig meat as wrong.

Let me make it clear that I'm not talking about objective morality here. That doesn't exist. I'm just talking about popular consensus. There's a reason people have come to the popular consensus that eating dogs and cats is wrong but pigs and cows are fine. This is based very heavily on our culture. In western american canon, dogs and cats and other household pets are seen as superior. But in counties like Japan and Asia, dogs are boiled alive and sold on sticks.

In the end, anything not human is less than human. To treat it like it can think deeper than what it can is plain stupid. That's why peta propaganda works so well; it makes you feel like those animals wandering around can feel exactly what you feel. They cannot.

>>42101151
Ive been vegan for 2 years, and life has gotten alot better. Im in better health and shape than ever before.

>>42102521
How do you know it's the veganism

File: 1492532953565.png (58KB, 266x216px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 266x216px

>>42101151
It's not bad. It's just not better than normal. You can do as you please, anon.

>>42102382
You didn't read the link then. It says the average person (85kg) needs 2,5 g leucine per meal, averaged to 8 g per day.

>>42102481
Dogs and cats have the added benefit of utility which most pigs lack. Cats as pest control, dogs as home security and hunting assistants. We have kept these psychological traits in these animals in the domestication process, while the pigs have been bred to be far more docile to aid in their raising so they lack these kinds of utilities without far more extensive training

>>42102534
I read it. How does that invalidate what I said here >>42102382?
>>42102409
Would you like id a superior species did that to us? Why (not)?
>>42102448
Are you in a ship accident right now, or do you have other options?
>>42102480
The desert island thing is pretty much just another version of that "superior being" hypothetical you were talking about before.
No, it's a false analogy. In the desert land scenario you don't have a choice, in the grocery store you have. In the superior species invasion scenario the analogy isn't false: They want to eat the inferior you just like you eat the inferior cow.
>imagine being on the losing side of it.
My point exactly. Imagine being in the cow's shoes
>A cow isn't capable of thinking that.
Fucking lol, says who?

>>42102534
Oh fuck me, I see it now. I said "per day". That was an obvious typo, my point still stands strong. Eat 500 kcal lentils to get your leucine and other EAAs and nutrients. 500 kcal is way less than what an 85 kg male should be eating in a sitting.

>>42102577
>A cow isn't capable of thinking that.
>Fucking lol, says who?
What objective analysis says they can?

>>42101433
>people actually put this much effort to defend their mental illness

>>42102641
The fact that they try to protect their young and try to run away when they see their sisters' blood on the floor and know they're next, you dense motherfucker
How is this even up for debate

>>42102651
Amazing argument, now crawl back to >>>/b/

>>42102577
>Would you like id a superior species did that to us? Why (not)?
no i would not, but i can think "fuck, i'm trapped here until alien decides to kill me and eat me"
a cow just is there, hanging out eating its ration and grass.
>Are you in a ship accident right now, or do you have other options?
as i said on my post i do have other options and thats why i don't eat humans.
>imagine being on the losing side of it.
>My point exactly. Imagine being in the cow's shoes
really? you can't be on a cows shoes because they don't wear shoes.
jokes aside, you can't just lay arround a field while naked and chewing the same piece of grass for 2 hours straight like a cow do
>A cow isn't capable of thinking that.
Fucking lol, says who?
anyone that knows a little about animal cognition knows that a cow doesn't think and doesn't know the concept of fear and happiness and sadness, those are all concepts created by men to describe how we feel, to cows its just instincts, if something hurts they don't get close, if something feeds them they stick arround, its simple as that

>>42102654
>evolutionary defensive instinct
>must mean cows can have an existential crisis
And the mental gymnastics judges give it an average score of 6.8

>>42102695
I'm bored by you, but my work here is done. Anyone who was on the fence saw how brittle the non-vegan "arguments" are and what mental gymnastics you do to avoid confronting the reality of your choices, or how hard you've been WEASELING out of replying to a simple question which I dumbed down to a single sentence.
Now say something about how I am a hypocrite or I only do it to feel morally superior, or another non-argument. Or maybe twist the situation to make it sound as if somehow I'm the one avoiding to reply. I'm leaving, see you tomorrow on the same thread, you will suffer the same defeat if you use the same non-arguments.

Eat as much bacon and steak as you can. It's going to be illegal soon. I give it 30-50 years tops.
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=vegan

>>42102654
>The fact that they try to protect their young and try to run away when they see their sisters' blood on the floor and know they're next, you dense motherfucker
>How is this even up for debate
thats called instinct, just like a carnivorous plant closes when something touches its "mouth"
every animal in the world protect their young until certain age, thats literally making sure your race survives, thats why most preys walk in groups
you dense motherfucker

>>42102726
How is that different from what you'd do in their situation? Your reaction is based on evolutionary instinct too.

>>42102756
>thats called instinct, just like a carnivorous plant closes when something touches its "mouth"
Wrong. A spring trap closes it's "mouth" too, that doesn't make it intelligent or sentient.
>every animal in the world protect their young until certain age, thats literally making sure your race survives, thats why most preys walk in groups
Read >>42102761

>>42101486
>Yes you can. Source: literally every vegan alive
What are plants, guy?

>>42102784
After googling "medical definition of death":
>"An individual who has sustained either (1) irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions, or (2) irreversible cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem is dead. A determination of death must be made in accordance with accepted medical standards."
Plants don't even have a brain to die, it's like dividing by 0

>>42102747
>what mental gymnastics you do to avoid confronting the reality of your choices
i'm definitely now avoiding my choices, there is a pound of filet mignon waiting for me at my place when i leave work, i trully respect vegans for their decisions, but they can't just simply talk nonsense and expect people to just be okay with that.
i don't give a shit about your eating habits or your morality or anything, i answered all your questions, and you kept asking dumb question such as if i would like to get eaten... i would not like to get eat by a superior being (although they would probably eat cows too because humans have guns and can fight back)
Meat probably will never be ilegal, just like smoking and drinking alcohol, its proved to be harmful and its bad for the enviroment (smoking) may be crontroled on the future but definitely not ilegal (just like cocaine is ilegal and people still snort and od everyday)

>>42102761
Your description is for immediately in the slaughterhouse for a cow. The desert island scenario happens over a longer period of time and has ramifications due to the increased rationalization abilities of the consumer and that which is about to be consumed. A cow has no perspective of its situation until moments before it is slaughtered. The same ability that allows you to jump through these mental hoops is the same ability that allows you to rationalize your existence, which cows cannot do. That And the immediacy of the awareness makes it an instinct for the cows

>>42102817
The cow doesn't want to die
You don't want to die
No mental gymnastics at all

>but the cow doesn't know any better
Neither do retards or braindead humans in a coma.
Admit defeat, I just PROVED to you that intelligence is not the moral baseline for what is OK to eat, but sentience is.

Try this argument:
Livestock need a place to live and get fat for slaughter, thus tons of acres of land are dedicated to housing them.
All of those animals require feed, and that has to grow somewhere - So not only do we waste alot of space for housing, but also for growing food. Keep in mind that cows and such eat way more than you, unless you have some bad lifestyle..

What does livestock do? fart. Meat industry is one of the main causes of global warming, look it up.

So, unless you live in a 3rd world country without any access to normal groceries and medical care, eating meat might not be the most natural choice, unless all you care about is how you are being percieved by yourself and others. theres more to life. and therse plenty of awesome vegan food out there.

Now, take all that land for growing animals and growing food animals, and replace it by forests, agriculture and such.

Thanks for reading,

>>42102847
Growing food for animals*

>>42102776
idk what a spring trap is (google showed me a cartoon), but if its something like a bear trap its made to close.
>Read >>42102761
>humans also have evolutionaty instincts too
wooooow what a surprise, also we get atached to things and people, thats why we take so much care of everything arround us, cows don't, also wait untill the cows son grow up and he will fuck his own mother, just like you would right?

>>42102847
>cow farts will end the world
Truly global warmingfags are the most retarded of conspiracy theorists

>>42102802
That's clinical death which belongs to humans.
Plants like all living organisms respire, thus they can die.

>>42102858
>bear trap
So you agree with my point.
>cows are not intelligent
See >>42102840

>>42102865
No brain, no CNS, no sentience

>>42101486
>Would you eat a dead human?
If I absolutely had to I would, I'm sure you would too in a moment of necessity. But that's a stupid argument, cannibalism isn't natural, it's very uncommon on the wild.

>>42102840
>>but the cow doesn't know any better
>Neither do retards or braindead humans in a coma.
>Admit defeat, I just PROVED to you that intelligence is not the moral baseline for what is OK to eat, but sentience is.
shitty example again, yeah braindead people doesn't think and retarded probably think as much as a cow, but they are still human and i can still walk to the store nextdoor and buy animal meat. and we go back to the last resort thing

>>42102861

Have fun reading published papers, also, thats one point you dont agree with, what about the rest?

>>42102901

Sentience =! Living

>>42102917
>>42102911
YOU ARE NOT IN A LAST RESORT SITUATION
YOU HAVE THE CHOICE TO BE COMPASIONATE
STOP WEASELING

>>42102847
>lets stop eating cows because cow farts causes global warming
>still drives a gasolin fulled car
>still uses energy generated by burning stuff (most of the US energy source is gas, coal and oil)
yeah, try again

>>42102946
Yeah, right back at you
It's not wrong something that is alive as long as it's not sentient.
Something non sentient is not smart or dumb, it's barely alive. It barely even qualifies to deserve the verb "be"
Is that hard to understand?

File: j1AYu1J[1].jpg (344KB, 2048x2048px) Image search: [Google]

344KB, 2048x2048px

>>42102960
Pic related your argument

>>42102840
Nothing wants to die by instinct. The point is rationalization of one's existence which cows are incapable of doing. And as for your argument about the mentally impaired, humans get far more sick eating human meat than they do cow meat. In developed countries, the biggest risk to your body from eating cow meat is a minor bacterial infection. Eating humans causes neurodegenerative issues in other humans

>>42102889
>>bear trap
>So you agree with my point
what? i'm telling you that if what you told me is somewhat similar to a bear trap, it is made to close when its touched.
you just proved that you can't think straight
>>42102952
and i chose to eat meat, what the fuck, respect my choice just as i respect yours lol

>>42102999
If there was a pill that prevented this disease, would eating mentally disabled or brain dead humans be ok?
Stop the mental gymnastics, eating fellow sentient beings is not ok.

>>42102971

I agree with your point about non sentience, just you can't really say something is "barely alive" based on something as arbitrary as sentience.

Plants are alive like all life on this planet.If you are consuming them you are consuming a dead organism.

Now if the topic of discussion was if they feel pain/emotion prior to death that'd yield more fruitful discussion.

>>42103002
>telling you that if what you told me is somewhat similar to a bear trap, it is made to close when its touched.
You implied that carnivorous plants are closer to cows than cows are to us, I explained that carnivorous plants are literally organic bear traps and that doesn't make them at all sentient as they have Z E R O capacity to experience subjective reality, unlike cows, which do
>and i chose to eat meat, what the fuck, respect my choice just as i respect yours lol
>respect my choice to fund the systematic and UNNECESSARY mass slaughter of fellow innocent sentient beings just like I respect your choice to not cause unnecessary harm to anyone, lol
Fair trade, lol

>>42103014
>proposes hypothetical to justify something extremely dangerous for the sake of arguing
>loll ur r teh metnal gymnast
A pill doesn't magically make all bad shit go away, faggot. There's always a risk the pill is ineffective or less effective than planned for, and when the risk is as big as having your fucking nervous system shutting down nobody would eat that human meat for that practical purpose.

>>42103082
>I avoid answering the question about human meat being ok to eat if it comes from a lesser human and does not make me sick because facing the immorality of my choices makes me uncomfortable
fag

>>42102987
You're talking about global warming, I drive a hybrid and have solar panels on my company, it supplies for my house too though, I truly care about environment, unlike you that uses it as an excuse to your cool vegan cult"

File: angry vegan.jpg (47KB, 634x356px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 634x356px

>>42102847
This is the only plausible vegan argument in this thread.
Not eating animals just because you feel bad they die it's stupid. Animals eat animals, tough shit, it's always been this way and humans are omnivorous animals we need meat for a proper diet. Eating meat is natural, animals die, it's the cycle of life.
I can respect vegans that don't eat meat because of the impacts of the meat industry in the environment and to avoid the suffering of enclosed animals (have considered becoming vegan for those reasons myself), but I don't see anything wrong about killing animals that lived a free plentiful life (as it happens in hunting and free range cattle for example) the whole "you don't have to kill the poor animals, have compassion" argument just doesn't compel me, death is natural.
>>42102952
Calm down bro,why are the vegans on /fit/ always so angry. Maybe I didn't understand your argument, but I don't see why you brought cannibalism in the discussion, you don't have to worry,meat eaters don't want to eat you.

>>42103096
>my hypothetical situations based on the loosest grasp of reality clearly makes my point valid
It's not avoiding the question because the it's not even a reasonable equivalency, Why would anyone opt to take a pill so that they simply won't die from slow, painful nervous system failure due to their diet when they could eat something that is of better food quality and has none of the same risk in a country that isn't a shit hole? Just because you can pull shit from your ass and serve it to me doesn't mean I have to eat it

>>42101433
agree w you 100% ill be starting my vegetarian journey soon, then maybe on to vegan.

>>42103147
My argument is very simple
You wouldn't eat a human (in a normal, everyday situation in the western society)
There is nothing in humans that animals lack, that if a human lacked would justify killing them for food
(example: animals lack intelligence so they are ok to eat, refutation: unintelligent or braindead humans are not ok to eat)
Ergo, eating animals is not ok.

Not saying animals are our equals
Not saying I wouldn't eat one if I literally had no choice
>>42103043
The topic of discussion is that animal sentience (capacity to experience subjective reality) makes them not ok to eat.

Show me a good body that is vegan and not an obvious roider.

>>42103193
Good luck! Visit a vegan general or our discord server for any questions! Don't be shy!
>>42103169
>It's not avoiding the question because the it's not even a reasonable equivalency, Why would anyone opt to take a pill so that they simply won't die from slow, painful nervous system failure due to their diet when they could eat something that is of better food quality and has none of the same risk in a country that isn't a shit hole? Just because you can pull shit from your ass and serve it to me doesn't mean I have to eat it
oh my god I don't believe you don't see the irony
literally every word applies to eating a cow

>>42103147
>Not eating animals just because you feel bad they die it's stupid. Animals eat animals, tough shit, it's always been this way and humans are omnivorous animals we need meat for a proper diet. Eating meat is natural, animals die, it's the cycle of life.
muh feels > yuh feels

>>42103212
Brian Turner
MuscleNMind
Vegan Physique
Jon Venus
Leo Venus
Vegan hustle tv

File: 1f2cef5d31ad63001a36536d465f7040--jared-leto-shirtless-thirty-seconds.jpg (11KB, 305x305px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 305x305px

>>42103212
peak ottermode

>>42101486

You realise plants live. So do fungi (yeast, mushrooms).
Not eating meat because it's more damaging to the environment is an actual argument I can get behind. It's backed up by facts and logic.

However, claiming eating animals is bad, just because they are animals is some retarded backward logic I can never understand. To take it a step further and claim we cannot use any animal products because using animal products is somehow damaging to them is fucking inane. Being kind to animals is important in my eyes, but putting an animal live over a certain quality of life is pretty fucking pathetic. Even more so when you say things like you can't use wool or cheese since it's produced by animals.

People like that would die within a few days when left in the wild.

>>42103229
>literally every word applies to eating a cow
No it doesn't, you fucking faggot. Eating red meat doesn't cause fucking nervous system breakdown in any way shape or form. It has been loosely associated with some heart problems, with links that are growing more contentious every day
>but m-muh who study
Referred to processed red meat products, not all red meats. I hope you choke to death on your boyfriend's cum

>>42101642

>Yes, we have. Name one nutrient that we *need* to get from meat.

The point was that most humans on Earth don't have a choice in the type of food they eat. It's eat what you can get and survive or die. You really think those people have an option to go vegan?

>>42101151
Nothing wrong with it, but Vegans are annoying. And making gains as a vegan is a myth.

>>42102654

I'm glad you know more than the thousands of scientists who study this subject.
So good to see that a random anon on a fitness and health board on 4chan has ended this discussion for all time.

What a time to be alive

>>42103269
>Why would anyone opt to take a pill or insulin injection so that they simply won't die from ischemic heart disease, stroke, diabetes etc due to their diet when they could eat something that is of better food quality and has none of the same risk in a country that isn't a shit hole?
>denying the WHO study
oh fuck got me to reply. 10/10 effort

>>42103252

>wearing body makeup

>>42103251

I said a good body that isn't an obvious roider.

>>42103197
>There is nothing in humans that animals lack, that if a human lacked would justify killing them for food
But that's wrong.
Over 99% of animals have no awareness of self, which humans do. They do not realise they are 'there' or alive. Also, comparing eating a brain damaged human to a fully functional cow is a goalpost mover if I ever saw one.

>>42101486

You do know that plants are alive right? So are mushrooms and shit. They're all alive. Unless you're eating rocks and shit, everything you eat was alive at some point.

Are all vegans this retarded?

>>42103297
>You really think those people have an option to go vegan?
I'm not talking to them, I'm talking to you. You do have a choice
>>42103319
Post source that proves cows are not sentient, please. I really miss steak, it's the only animal product there is no substitute for and I'm very open to persuation.
But here's the catch, to persuade me you have to use credible sources and consistent logic
Post source and I will post pic with timestamp of me eating meat.

>>42103350

And I choose not to, because I don't find your arguments convincing.

>>42103342
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRJ6TnCfBAk
you're more of an animal than the cow

>>42103346
No brain, no CNS, no sentience, no sense of self or any ability at the lowest capacity to experience subjective reality
Can't say the same for cows
>>42103333
Wasted digits desu
>Brian Turner roids
>MuscleNMind roids
kek the salt

>>42103346
>i'll bite the bait
you realize plants are not sentient right?

>>42102186
>Who's stopping you? It's a free world. Go right ahead.
Irrational people who write the law.
>Slavery also implies there's nothing being given back.
You don't pay your slaves, you just give them food and shelter.

>>42103323
You would have a point if literally nobody could eat meats without getting any of those illnesses and that all vegans are magically immune to them. Neither of which is the case thanks to other lifestyle choices like smoking, drinking, and inactivity. And even then, those conditions are drastically improved with lifestyle changes, while neurological degeneration is not. Try actually learning something about basic medical practices before putting up more false equivalencies.

>>42103361
>I don't find the argument that there is no nutritional benefit to eating meat convincing, because using cronometer is hard
>I don't find the argument that "You wouldn't eat a human (in a normal, everyday situation in the western society) There is nothing in humans that animals lack, that if a human lacked would justify killing them for food (example: animals lack intelligence so they are ok to eat, refutation: unintelligent or braindead humans are not ok to eat) Ergo, eating animals is not ok." convincing

Eat as much bacon and steak as you can. It's going to be illegal soon. I give it 30-50 years tops.
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=vegan
>>42103342
Have you ever had a pet?

>>42103361
>implying you can be persuaded with the logical argument
some people are hopeless, it's called natural selection anyway

>>42103350

Sentience is not the same as self-awareness. There are plenty of studies on that and I'm not going to spoonfeed you. Not on my uni's network right now so I have restricted access to journals and I don't feel like going through the effort just to prove some opinionated retard wrong.

But in your reasoning, is it OK to eat fish and insects? Or are they also considered sentient? In that case, is it okay to eat yeast or mushrooms? Is it okay to eat fetuses (not sentient either).

Your definitions of what you can and cannot eat/use/wear are wonky to start with, which is why many people think veganism is retarded.

>>42103403

Yes and if I put a mirror in front of said pet, they will not recognize themselves, because they have no awareness of self. It's not rocket science anon.

I can form an emotional bond with something and not want it die/gone. Doesn't mean it restricts me from eating/destroying other things from the same category.

>>42103407
why are you baiting so hard?

>>42103395
You wouldn't see my point if it fucked you in the eyesocket with a cactus
The moral implications of whether something is ok to eat or not are not dictated by its health implications
The health detriments of animal product consumption are the tertiary argument to go vegan, not even secondary.

>>42103421

Why are you?

>>42103384
>>42103367
Read the actual comment I was replying to.

Is sentience the new baseline for life now? Are bacteria suddenly not alive?

Unless you guys are trolling, I seriously worry for your mental health.

>>42103417
>convince himself he's a human that's smarter than animals giving him privilege to eat 'em
>couldn't even do google search before posting
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mza1EQ6aLdg

>>42103421

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentience
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-awareness

Two different things bucko. Almost no animals have self-awareness, except for a few exceptions like humans.

>>42103451

>a YT video trumps scientific research

OK

>>42103436
>Is sentience the new baseline for life now? Are bacteria suddenly not alive?
you're the one who's being retarded thinking vegan has anything to do with life
vegan only cares about animals,not other life forms
inb4, human are animals retard!

>>42103430
>and the goal post shifts again
Your moral argument means absolutely nothing if there is a health issue that renders it's practicality to 0. Again, you put forth a hypothetical extreme to negate it, but it was a false equivalency because it ignored an outside practical value (or lack thereof). If your moral argument cannot serve a reasonable function, then it has no value in your justification

>>42103467
>implying he has scientific research to back him
>doesn't know pig has been proven scientifically to have the same intelligence as 3 years old human

>>42103436
>Is sentience the new baseline for life now?
No, but it should be the moral baseline for determining whose life matters enough to not warrant systematic mass slaughter.
>Are bacteria suddenly not alive?
Yes they are, however they are ok to eat. No brain, no CNS.
>>42103407
>There are totally studies that say cows are not sentient, but I can't post them right now because I left my excuse in the oven

>>42101486
Cannibalism is bad because it fucks with your brain, giving you the neurological disease called Kuru, the human form of mad cow disease. All animals suffer neurological decay from eating their own kind, this is why cannibalism is very rare in the wild, and one of the reasons why it's shunned in human society.

In addition unless you're eating raw elements, you're still eating living things, plants are alive, should we stop eating plants because we have to kill them? I agree that the conditions that the majority of farm animals are kept is abhorrent, but it's the way of the world to eat, humans are omnivores, we eat both meat and plants.

>>42103482
>Your moral argument means absolutely nothing if there is a health issue that renders it's practicality to 0.
If you have a weird (hypothetical or not) medical condition that necessitates the consumption of meat, go right ahead. Do you? I guess not.
"Veganism is a way of living which seeks to exclude, AS FAR AS is possible and PRACTICABLE, all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose."
I seriously don't understand why you keep arguing about the moral implications of non veganism and expect to come out on top, it's like expecting to siege down a skyscraper with a fly swatter

>>42102847
It's a valid question, but not without its own counterpoints. First is that most cattle ground is deemed only agriculturally useful for cattle before the cows are placed there, which means that growing plants for human consumption on that land is next to difficult to impossible without significant chemical usage, a matter which is potentially dangerous to the local human populations. Deforestation does occur for that, which is shitty, but it's not as simple as "all this land for cows can absolutely be used to grow veggies".

The second is that there are more environmentally efficient meats to eat besides cows. In terms of carbon production, fish is pretty neutral, with poultry having a somewhat greater impact (it's something like fish sit at 1.05 efficiency with poultry at 1.2 relation vs cows which sit around like 5). I don't remember exact shit, but it was taught in one of my environmental biology courses a couple years ago. It's still impactful, but can me negated with other habits.

Third, most vegan diets are not optimal for proper nutrition on their own, and to get a larger population to adopt a more optimal diet en masse would require significant agricultural changes which carries similar risks as they would in cattle land designations. I will admit that typical diets in developed countries are far from optimal in and of themselves, but diets balanced with meats and veg/vegetable products provide a more nutritionally sound system with minimal to no need for supplementation

>>42103509
The moral implications of whether something is ok to eat or not are not dictated by its health implications.
Eating humans isn't frowned upon because it's unhealthy.

>>42103509
>you're still eating living things, plants are alive
duh!
now stop being retarded and think that vegan cares about life, vegans care about sentient being

>hate vegans and vegetarians
>only eat like 100-150 grams of lean meat a day anyway

Whatever

>>42102517
>Let me make it clear that I'm not talking about objective morality here. That doesn't exist. I'm just talking about popular consensus. There's a reason people have come to the popular consensus that eating dogs and cats is wrong but pigs and cows are fine. This is based very heavily on our culture. In western american canon, dogs and cats and other household pets are seen as superior. But in counties like Japan and Asia, dogs are boiled alive and sold on sticks.
Appeal to tradition fallacy - Slavery was legal at one point, was it morally justified because its was as seen as normal by general public at that time?
>>>42102480
>The desert island thing is pretty much just another version of that "superior being" hypothetical you were talking about before. A group of people, who are by default stronger than an individual, rationalize that they should consume the individual for the good of the whole
Might makes right fallacy. If im capable of killing you is it morally justified to murder and eat you?
>Not eating animals just because you feel bad they die it's stupid. Animals eat animals, tough shit, it's always been this way and humans are omnivorous animals we need meat for a proper diet. Eating meat is natural, animals die, it's the cycle of life.
Appeal to nature fallacy -. If something is "natural" it doesnt morally justify doing it.
>The point was that most humans on Earth don't have a choice in the type of food they eat. It's eat what you can get and survive or die. You really think those people have an option to go vegan?
So if they cant, so cant you, right?

For the love of god, if you meattards are going to make an argument., please take a look at this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies so you dont look like a retard next time. This thread is only full of fallacies and dishonesty. There are no real arguments that morally justify killing sentient beings and eating them.

>>42103523
>Do you?
I do actually. I have a genetic disorder which has a pancreatic deficiency component which requires a lower carbohydrate, high protein and high fat diet in order to maintain weight and prevent further pancreatic issues since I'm at higher risk for diabetes on it's own. As such, vegan diets which have a higher ratio of carbs to protein are improper for me (I've checked with a few doctors because I've asked about going vegetarian/vegan for personal experiments). It's actually not a hypothetical because some illnesses like that exist, albeit in uncommon cases.

>I seriously don't understand why you keep arguing about the moral implications of non veganism and expect to come out on top, it's like expecting to siege down a skyscraper with a fly swatter
You don't have a skyscraper. You have a stick hut built on sand. The moral implications you propose do not have the universal qualities you think they do. They're either cherry-picked examples or hypothetical extremes, neither of which are practically sound, despite your "definition"

>>42103537

How do you define sentience, and how do you know animals are sentient and plants aren't?

>>42103610
>I do actually.
Then it's ok to eat meat. You could give a diet high in tofu, nuts and seeds a try but there was no convincing you when I assumed you were healthy, there is definitely no convincing you now.
>You don't have a skyscraper. You have a stick hut built on sand. The moral implications you propose do not have the universal qualities you think they do. They're either cherry-picked examples or hypothetical extremes, neither of which are practically sound, despite your "definition"
The wrongest thing that has ever been wrongly said
Refute this (protip: don't even try, you can't)
>You wouldn't eat a human (in a normal, everyday situation in the western society) There is nothing in humans that animals lack, that if a human lacked would justify killing them for food (example: animals lack intelligence so they are ok to eat, refutation: unintelligent or braindead humans are not ok to eat) Ergo, eating animals is not ok
Literally irrefutable, you can't even scratch it. Try, but 100% you'll either dodge it or use a logical fallacy

>>42103613
there's an organ that only animals have that plants don't, that is known as the centre of sentience and consciousness
now you've been retarded so far, but hopefully you can use the organ and figure out what it is

>>42103613
Sentience is the capacity to feel, perceive, or experience subjectively.
Animals have brains and nerves
Plants have no brains and nerves
End

>>42103711

>plants can't feel like animals because they don't have brains
>sentience stems from the brain

https://www.pri.org/stories/2014-01-09/new-research-plant-intelligence-may-forever-change-how-you-think-about-plants

>>42103733
>literally every single vegans know about this
reaction to stimulus isn't sentience

>>42103733
Bear traps react to stimuli, that doesn't make them sentient

>>42103744

Then what is sentience?

>>42103764
>>42103731

>>42103774

From the article you quickly waved off.

>"Plants can do incredible things. They do seem to remember stresses and events, like that experiment. They do have the ability to respond to 15 to 20 environmental variables," Pollan says. "The issue is, is it right to call it learning? Is that the right word? Is it right to call it intelligence? Is it right, even, to call what they are conscious. Some of these plant neurobiologists believe that plants are conscious — not self-conscious, but conscious in the sense they know where they are in space ... and react appropriately to their position in space."

>>42103764
can't you google it yourself?
what's the point?

>>42103785
Replace "plants" with "smartphones" in your sentence and ask yourself if smartphones qualify as sentient

>>42103708
Easily refutable depending on one's moral background. Most of the world has a religious backing of their morality which tends to place humans at the top of the mortal-moral food chain on earth, so eating humans is wrong on that moral ground. Christianity, which makes up almost 1/3 of the planet's religious practices, places a high value on human life by claiming humans to be the favored of God's creations, to the point where they think that God literally told mankind not to kill each other.

That's one simple refutation. Morality is a varied and complex field, something you're clearly not privy to, nor equipped to handle.

>>42103802
Let's not drag the argument down to arguing about religion, I want to hear your personal refutation.

>>42103787

No, because the point of the argument is to determine what you vegans consider "sentient" and thus see as okay to kill and eat or not.

>>42103801

Smart phones can remember stresses? Hell, with that argument you can replace "plants" with "cows" and it would still make sense, or are you going to telling me cows are self-conscious? If so, prove it.

>>42103822
>Let's not drag the argument down to arguing about religion
Why not? Religion is the source of morality for the majority of the world. Why is that invalid?

>>42103708
Not him, but, Cannibalism is extremely bad for you.
Eating cows is not.

File: 1499197372989.png (66KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 1000x1000px

Hmm

If you think it's wrong to eat meat then don't do it

But don't be a vegan about it

My $0.03

File: 1450315306756.jpg (46KB, 720x554px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 720x554px

>>42101486
>Humans have evolved beyond necessity.
Yeah, no. Your coddled, suburban ass doesn't speak for the rest of humanity.

>>42103850

Because other dogmas conflict with the vegan dogma, much like all dogmas do with one another.

>>42103850
>religion is based on zero scientific evidence
>majority of people are stupid, they believe in religion
i agree with you
so you're saying you're one of them?

>>42103888
Morality is not a science, and science is not a morality. You can justify the eradication of all life on the planet, human and non, with science. Attempting to equate the two branches of philosophy is dangerous to both.

>>42103888
>Being this retarded
You're not even trying to engage in the argument

>>42103850
Religion should not be the moral baseline of the majority of the world, much like the majority shouldn't eat meat.
Why?
Many reasons
>Arbitrary
>Not universally agreed upon
>Set in stone while derived from 2k year old moral values in most cases (that's right, religious values were created from moral ones, not the other way around)
>Not believing in any religion doesn't make you a psychopath by default because as an evolved species we have enough brain capacity to tell right from wrong without a bearded guy in the sky or fat guy with 99 arms or faceless guy in the desert or a flying spaghetti monster telling us what to do
>Practicality trumps deontology, literally fuck deontology (practicality necessitates logic, deontology means "just because")
>Even if we do take religion into account, if we put Jesus and the devil in a room with a live lamp and a plate of veggie and bean stew and force them to share a meal, pretty sure most Christians would agree that Jesus would not kill the lamb to eat it if he doesn't need to
>>42103851
I've pasted this so many times altrady...
The moral implications of whether something is ok to eat or not are not dictated by its health implications.
Eating humans isn't frowned upon because it's unhealthy.

>>42103945
>argument is based on juju believes
>i stated that majority of people are stupid, by following majority you're being stupid yourself
>expect me to engage in stupidity
is this the case where retard can't even understand their own retardation?

>>42101697
>You wouldn't eat golden retriever ribs,

Asians do and China is BTFO'ing the west right now

Actually the Chinese don't give a fuck about any of your vegan bullshit and they and the pajeets are going to inherit the fucking word

Western Anglo cucks are fucking pathetic twinks

File: 1498959597761.png (587KB, 625x918px) Image search: [Google]

587KB, 625x918px

This thread is absolutely retarded. Veganism is good for you, but so is eating meat. From the most basic standpoint, food is just as collection of different nutrients that are all beneficial to the body in one way or another. If you can get the nutrients through only eating plants, essentially handicapping yourself from the joy and taste of certain foods, do it, who cares.
Saying that you are vegan b/c you care about animals is really dumb...vegans don't have enough people on their side (only about 1 million people in the US don't eat meat, which is ~0.5%) Basically, boycotting only works if you have a large group of people on your side. Sorry, but you really aren't hurting the 'animal killers' at all, and I'm killing your precious animals as I eat my pre-workout turkey sandwich.
A lot of vegans also say they 'feel better' after going vegan. Personally I put this on two factors: the user probably neglected diet and eating necessary nutrients previously, before going vegan, and the rest is on placebo. I eat (and juice) a lot of certified organic vegetables every day, while also enjoying milk, eggs, turkey, etc.

>>42104034
>Using chinks as an example to follow
*slow clap*
10/10 bait got me to reply
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6l01f1NDUwQ

>>42104050
Russians eat meat. ISIS consumes lambs and german pussy. Chinese will eat your dogs.

Only western faggots care about what a fucking chicken thinks.

You fucks are all doomed. All of you.

More expensive mostly. It's not sustainable unless you're living in a first world country.

There's nothing really wrong with it there's also nothing wrong with not being vegetarian it's mostly just ethical shit. I for one don't really have a problem killing and eating animals but I don't cares about other people who do just don't try to push it on me

>>42104050
>Saying that you are vegan b/c you care about animals is really dumb...vegans don't have enough people on their side (only about 1 million people in the US don't eat meat, which is ~0.5%)
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=vegan
SOON
>Basically, boycotting only works if you have a large group of people on your side. Sorry, but you really aren't hurting the 'animal killers' at all, and I'm killing your precious animals as I eat my pre-workout turkey sandwich.
>You shouldn't vote either guy, what's a single vote?

>>42104079
If you have moral hangups about a cow being killed and eaten how the fuck are you going to win the war against the East?

People who show sympathy for farm animals are the same people who raise suprise mulattos


Why the fuck is this even a debate? You don't even validate the Vegan cucks by engaging. Let them be soft and pass away like the passive milquetoast white guilt pussies they are

Sage this shit

>>42104103
gee anon i don't know, maybe only hurt people that hurt you and leave all these innocent cute animals that never harm not a single human being in the history of universe?

>>42104089
>shouldn't vote argument
this is a really shitty argument, especially when you consider that I have voted third party since the days of Ron Paul. The difference here is that once the libertarian party reaches 5% (a reachable goal) of the popular vote, they will be thrown into the debates and will actually be a viable option. Meanwhile, even if 20% of the US wasn't eating meat, the other 80% (which is still incredibly high demand) would be. Do what you do vegan man, just know that it isn't doing anything at all and you are just wasting your time and energy restricting yourself.

>>42103988
>Arbitrary
Almost all forms of morality are arbitrary and based on a series of observations. The validity of one stance over another is not dependent on arbitrary nature, but on ability to hold up to questioning/criticism.
>Not universally agreed upon
Neither are several forms of morality. Again, that's not grounds for immediate dismissal.
>Set in stone while derived from 2k year old moral values in most cases (that's right, religious values were created from moral ones, not the other way around)
Hardly. Compare modern Christianity to Christianity in the Roman Empire or Middle Ages Christianity and you will see stark changes in practices in response to moral environments.
>Not believing in any religion doesn't make you a psychopath by default because as an evolved species we have enough brain capacity to tell right from wrong without a bearded guy in the sky or fat guy with 99 arms or faceless guy in the desert or a flying spaghetti monster telling us what to do
Did anyone claim otherwise ITT? Don't reduce the argument to /r/atheism level responses if you expect to be taken seriously.
>Practicality trumps deontology, literally fuck deontology (practicality necessitates logic, deontology means "just because")
Maybe in a handful of cases, but plenty of modern religions (the most populous ones in the world, anyway) pay express heed to the nature of being a dutiful person.
>Even if we do take religion into account, if we put Jesus and the devil in a room with a live lamp and a plate of veggie and bean stew and force them to share a meal, pretty sure most Christians would agree that Jesus would not kill the lamb to eat it if he doesn't need to
Not really an argument, but Jesus can basically do whatever the fuck he wants because He is God's will bestowed upon humanity in their own form. He likely wouldn't due to Jesus representing the loving and healing aspects of God's will, but it's kind of a moot point considering God's will supersedes man's concepts

>>42104126
the poor cows are brave moo soldiers in the war against niggers, and for environmentalism, you know.

>>42101940
Each cow gave its life to kill like 10 niggers. Go on brave cows, kill more niggers pls.

File: cf0.jpg (26KB, 441x463px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 441x463px

>>42104103
trying to act though by killing innocent powerless animals
only potential serial killers do that

>>42101151
>>42101433
I agree on most points except deforestation. Lumber is our greatest natural resource, and should be farmed/used responsibly.

You can get all 9 BCAAs from Quinoa. You can also get all 9 BCAAs from Brown Rice and Peas. There is no reason to consume meat at all if your goal is a balanced healthy lifestyle.

Yes, you can bulk on vegetables.

>>42104050
Yeah, nutrients like bacterial toxins that trigger inflammation in the body.

>>42104126
>leave all these innocent cute animals that never harm not a single human being in the history of universe?

You mean like the innocent little puppy who would eat your corpse if it was starving? Kill yourself.

>>42104147
>trying to act morally superior by eating toast instead of bacon
>while wearing H&M v-necks made in Vietnamese child labor sweatshop death camps and giving 0 fucks about it

Try harder

>>42104155
yes, let's not use extreme situation though

>>42104152
>a-a-anon y-you can get toxins from eating meat!
interesting how long I've been eating meat vs. how many times I've had a bacterial toxin trigger inflammation in my body. :)

>>42104164
gee anon i don't know, are the slave labours imprisoned since birth against their will even though they're innocent to be later killed by chopping their head off then their carcass is mutilated?

>>42104139
>The validity of one stance over another is not dependent on arbitrary nature, but on ability to hold up to questioning/criticism.
Your post is mostly shit and trolling so I will only bother with this sentence
My argument is IMPERVIOUS to criticism, as long as you believe (arbitrarily and subjectively I'll admit) in human moral value and are logically consistent. Only veganism can follow.
You believe in human moral value =>
You believe humans are not ok to eat (in a normal, everyday situation in the western society)
There is no trait that humans have and animals lack, that if a human lacked would justify killing that human for meat (example: animals lack intelligence so they are ok to eat, refutation: unintelligent or braindead humans are not ok to eat)
=> Killing animals for meat is not ok
>before someone repeats that we shouldn't eat humans because prion's or kuru or whatever
Eating humans is not immoral because it's unhealthy
LITERALLY IMPERVIOUS

You know, I was a little bit on the fence between dietary cholesterol, and I was the guy who was aware of the implications from the veggy side that it may increase LDL. But thanks to other anons, thanks to going through all the other sources again. I have started to use animal fats again for cooking and I decided to eat more red meat. Thanks vegans!

Also removed the american heart assosiation thing from my giant pastebin thing. Probably is false too. Man this video is gret.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uc1XsO3mxX8

I was a bit low glycemix index type of guy but lol, I think I may go more carnivorous. And I shall also recommend so.

>>42104151
>I agree on most points except deforestation.
This is my fault, I was short on words. A lot of deforestation happens to create arable land for soy crops that becomes 90%+ cattle feed.

>>42101151

It's not sustainable for people living in northern europe.

>>42104205
>slave labours imprisoned since birth against their will even though they're innocent to be later killed by chopping their head off then their carcass is mutilated?

This is actually a fairy accurate description of what happens, so yes.

Better pat your wife's son's curly Afro one more time before you drink your bleach

>>42104238
Jon Venus has Norway vlogs

>>42104217
>cant argue against the counterpoints to his reasoning, calling them all shitposts while shitposting

>>42104275

Does he grow his own crops during the winter?

>>42104241
what's stopping the slave labors from leaving anon?
are you always lying and deluding to yourself in order to feel better about yourself?

>>42101151
Well its because our education system is not ready yet to teach proper nutrition. Most people get their information nowdays in a google research and the ones that don't, get it from their parents and relatives. Over time everything becomes reality and truth and its always hard for humans to seek for truth and not for confirmation. Its hard to accept that someone you love is wrong and that you might be wrong all along just like your beloved doctor. But it has always been like this with science. Scientists used to believe that there are more metals on the planet than hydrogen but cecilia h payne proved them wrong. But nowdays the actual science gets debunked by misrepresenting data.

The future is vegan für humanity. I simply can't deny it, I would be lying

>>42104300
No, he goes to the supermarket

>>42104309
>für
Fucking vegan nazis

File: IMG_0871.png (949KB, 1040x644px) Image search: [Google]

949KB, 1040x644px

>>42101151
It's not. Just the assholes who act smug about it give it just a shit wrap.
Pic related. The patron green goblin saint of broccoli autists

>>42104291
>Calling someone who tossed religion into the thread out of nowhere a shitposter instanty invalidates my post including the part where I IRREFUTABLY DECONSTRUCTED carnism
Bury that head deeper

>>42104383
Makes sense. Vegans, like the current generation of Germans, are complete cucks so yeah

>>42102046
Nice logical fallacy

>>42101433
How to justify eating meat

Step 1:

It tastes good

>>42102302
I have never heard proof a cow doesn't want to die. I'd imagine they don't give a shit whether they are or are not alive tomorrow. Not that I care anyway.

>>42104709
You wouldn't eat a human besause they taste good, so it's not a good argument to eat meat. See >>42104217
>>42104722
ebin

>>42104752
Humans have way more uses to society than being used as food. The only human you could make that argument is mentally retarded humans with similar intelligence to an animal, where yeah I agree, mentally retarded people have no use to society so weirdos who are into cannibalism, I guess retards would be perfect for them.

I don't give a shit about a moral argument though. It tastes good, and I don't need any more justification then that.

I could make a moral justification but I have no need because I don't care about morals in terms of eating meat kek.

In terms of farm animals, technically if they're treated humanely it's morally justified to kill and eat them, because a short life is better then no life, and we humans are the reason they exist. Sounds like a fair trade to me.

>>42104217
>My argument is IMPERVIOUS to criticism, as long as you believe in human moral value and are logically consistent.
people are still very shitty when moral values and logic are in the table, for example if someone steals your phone and you have a gun, you'll probably shot the guy over a phone or couple hundred dolars. People kill because of their religious beliefs and many other stupid shit that would go against regular moral values and logic.

>There is no trait that humans have and animals lack, that if a human lacked would justify killing that human for meat
the difference is that we bred animals to eat them, you don't see a retarded children farm for us to consume

>>42104949
>the difference is that we bred animals to eat them, you don't see a retarded children farm for us to consume
Exactly my point! We don't breed retards to eat, why breed animals to eat?

>>42104949
I hope you fucking die. You are EVIL. You MURDER innocent animals and enjoy them for dinner! FUCK YOU!

>>42105020
>>>/b/

File: 1496686211800.jpg (279KB, 1280x1280px) Image search: [Google]

279KB, 1280x1280px

>>42104822

>>42105010
You can't "breed" retards the same way you breed an animal because their kids likely won't end up retarded.

Your argument is invalid though, because instead of saying why it is morally wrong, you jump to retards as a shield. You have not said why it is morally wrong to eat humanely treated farm animals.

>>42105037
Not an argument. A short life is better than no life and you would be intellectually dishonest to say otherwise.

>>42101151
https://blog.bulletproof.com/carl-lewis-vegan/

>>42105010
because animals grow faster, are easier to mantain, taste better, will feed lots of families and more, they are rich in protein, eas to make, easy to digest, tastes good, and also is cheap0

>>42105020
kek, i'm 100% sure i'm do much more for other humans than you do, and i don't murder animals, i buy their flesh on a super market and i do enjoy them, and its really cool to see that you would want someone dead because of their diet

>>42105117
>because animals grow faster
plants grow even faster, animals require plants first to grow
>are easier to maintain
plants are way easier to maintain, they don't even need cages or whatever
>taste better
Subjective but I'll argue that a properly cooked seitan is not worse than the real thing just different. All your steak marinades and salad or meat condiments to enhance taste come from plants btw, all spices are vegan.
>will feed lots of families and more
Plants are way more efficient in converting energy input to energy output. By definition, Animals need to eat plants so it's inefficient to use them as a source of food, way more inefficient than plants.
>they are rich in protein
Legumes, seitan, tofu, tempeh easily cover your protein needs and all the essential amino acids as demonstrated here >>42102382 for example
>eas to make
Plants are just as easy
>easy to digest
Plants make pooping easier, that's a tie
>tastes good
You repeated that
>and also is cheap
plants are cheaper because animals require plants to grow and the only cases where meat and dairy is even remotely comparable is because of the cow kike lobbyist pushing for subsidies gimmedats from the government

>>42105044
Retards are sterile but that's beside the point. We could be eating aborted fetuses for example, they aren't even going to live unlike cows.
>Your argument is invalid though, because instead of saying why it is morally wrong, you jump to retards as a shield.
It's not a shield, it's a parallel to show how the "logic" of eating meat is baseless
You wouldn't eat a retard, so eating a cow because it's retarded is not an argument
>You have not said why it is morally wrong to eat humanely treated farm animals.
1) "humanely raised" is loaded language and an oxymoron. Here is a hot chick explaining better than I ever could (trigger warning: facebook-tier humor, but if you look past it she explains the oxymoron reasonably well)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VI4EjUJb6PQ
2) You wouldn't eat a humanely raised human, following this logical structure >>42104217 you shouldn't eat a humanely raised animal.

>>42105020
You feeling ok?

>>42101151(OP)
Because animals have feelings and vegans are extremists. Just be vegan chickens dont give a shit if you eat their eggs

>>42101486
>Would you eat a dead human?
there is not a single animal I would not eat assuming it wouldn't make me ill and was legal

>>42105037
>I love animals
Nope

>but killing them is totally legit
They aren't sentient human beings who can act as moral agents in a society of peers, so yes.

>Top of the food chain
Self evidently we are at the top, but that is irrelevant for the question whether killing animals for food is ethical or moral.

>I did them the favour of breeding them and killing them
Evolutionary is that a great thing for their species, if it is morally acceptable depends on your moral system (pro tip there are many)

>and plants have feelings anyway
Depends on your definition of feelings

>>42105318
>plants grow even faster, animals require plants first to grow
not all plants grow fast, and animals don't require plants
>plants are way easier to maintain, they don't even need cages or whatever
not at all, in most places you need to water it constantly but not too much and not too little, needs to get literal shit to make them grow, need to spray with medicine to kill the bugs and insects eating everything all the time
>Subjective but I'll argue that a properly cooked seitan is not worse than the real thing just different. All your steak marinades and salad or meat condiments to enhance taste come from plants btw, all spices are vegan.
seitan isn't bad, but doesn't come close to a steak, and also salt and pepper is all i need on my steak, maybe salt only, but yeah, condiments are god tier
>Plants are way more efficient in converting energy input to energy output. By definition, Animals need to eat plants so it's inefficient to use them as a source of food, way more inefficient than plants.
what? i'm saying that a cow can feed 200 people easily
>Legumes, seitan, tofu, tempeh easily cover your protein needs and all the essential amino acids as demonstrated here >>42102382 for example
besides seitan it isn't nearly as convinient as eating meat, and seitan is a pain in the ass to make everyday
>Plants are just as easy
yeah, but they don't taste as good and it takes much more plants to make me as full as with a good steak, and yeah, steak+veggies=perfect combo
>Plants make pooping easier, that's a tie
thats why i eat both
>>tastes good
>You repeated that
it taste that much better
its good that you took your time to respond all i said and maybe you'll see that meat eaters aren't half as bad as you think, most of my diet is chicken and fish, and if you don't agree that chicken and fish are almost brainless you are out of your mind, chicken literally run towards a moving car and kill themselves

real quick can vegans name one animal near the top of the food chain that CHOOSES to be vegan?

>>42105595
>not all plants grow fast
What
>and animals don't require plants
Animals photosynthesize now?
>not at all, in most places you need to water it constantly but not too much and not too little, needs to get literal shit to make them grow, need to spray with medicine to kill the bugs and insects eating everything all the time
Literally all of these apply to animals, and animals require plants, a kg of beef needs like 15 kg grains or soy so yeah, animals are way more resource intensive. Also, plants don't require stunning before killing, you can barely "kill" them
>seitan doesn't come close to a steak
It's literally one (1) food item you'll be missing that has no substitute and you'll discover so many more
>what? i'm saying that a cow can feed 200 people easily
The food that the cow ate through her life to feed 200 people could have fed 3000 people. Grass fed free range is an exception but they're like 5-10% cows worldwide tops
>besides seitan it isn't nearly as convinient as eating meat, and seitan is a pain in the ass to make everyday
It's literally the same level of difficulty as cooking meat, source: I've been cooking for myself since before I turned veg
>yeah, but they don't taste as good and it takes much more plants to make me as full as with a good steak
Curious, /fit/ usually argues that plants make them too full with too little calories. Can you decide which one it is?
>steak+veggies=perfect combo
Not for the cow
>chicken and fish are almost brainless
Agree.
Vegans argue that we should eat only non-sentient things, not unintelligent things. Mentally disabled children, braindead humans in a coma and aborted fetuses are not ok to eat morally, regardless of whether they're unhealthy or not, despite being unintelligent.
See >>42104217.
Chickens are dumb as shit, but they feel pain just like us.

>>42105742
The one that is intelligent enough to make rational choices and does not need meat to survive because it has access to a grocery store.

>>42103333
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R53_flfMacw

I will legit turn vegan if a vegan guy here posts a timestamped picture of body.

>>42105833
>>not all plants grow fast
>What
most fruits takes more than 1 year to grow
>Animals photosynthesize now?
most animals eat rations
>Literally all of these apply to animals, and animals require plants, a kg of beef needs like 15 kg grains or soy so yeah, animals are way more resource intensive. Also, plants don't require stunning before killing, you can barely "kill" them
i raise chicken and some lambs and i literally throw ration in a container, and water in another once a day and they are fat as fuck, also to kill them it takes less than 1 second
>It's literally one (1) food item you'll be missing that has no substitute and you'll discover so many more
meat isn't just steaks, and yeah, i already eat "vegan food" along with meat
>The food that the cow ate through her life to feed 200 people could have fed 3000 people. Grass fed free range is an exception but they're like 5-10% cows worldwide tops
before opening my company i used to give my cows ration so they would grow faster and fatter, now they are grass fed
>It's literally the same level of difficulty as cooking meat, source: I've been cooking for myself since before I turned veg
i cook steak literally touching the pan three times
>Curious, /fit/ usually argues that plants make them too full with too little calories. Can you decide which one it is?
on every meal i eat 200g of chicken or fish or steak, and 200g of veggies and its enough for me, when i tried eating vegetarian food i used to eat 500g of veggies+3 eggs to get the same protein
>>steak+veggies=perfect combo
>Not for the cow
thank god i'm not a cow then
>>chicken and fish are almost brainless
>Chickens are dumb as shit, but they feel pain just like us
decapitating a chicken is so fucking fast that i'm 100% sure they don't feel a thing

>>42106054
I won't respond to the first three >s because you don't understand the concept of large scale economy and I'm not your teacher
>meat isn't just steaks
Believe me, steak is literally the only thing that doesn't have an accurate substitute
>i already eat "vegan food" along with meat
Have you had cashew mozzarella, seitan ribs, tofu "chicken", beyond burger, cashew cheesecake, falafel, jackfruit pulled pork bbq sandwich etc? There are many food items you won't ever discover if you stay at the comfort of your burgers
>i cook steak literally touching the pan three times
I cook chili sin carne literally touching the pan one time to serve the food on a plate
>on every meal i eat 200g of chicken or fish or steak, and 200g of veggies and its enough for me, when i tried eating vegetarian food i used to eat 500g of veggies+3 eggs to get the same protein
Should have tried more calorie dense foods, like pb, falafel, seitan and tofu, I can give you infinite examples of you can just google vegan bodybuilding high protein meals
>thank god i'm not a cow then
What about the cow then
>decapitating a chicken is so fucking fast that i'm 100% sure they don't feel a thing
I could shoot a human in the head with a gun and they wouldn't feel a thing. Is murder justified if the victim didn't feel pain? It's not in the case of humans, so why is it in the case of chickens?

>>42102275
>A retard or a brain dead human in a coma can't either but you wouldn't eat them

I wouldn't because it would be a waste to eat them instead of harvesting them for organs which could save many people.
Cows aren't useful in this manner.

>>42107315
>wouldn't because it would be a waste to eat them instead of harvesting them for organs which could save many people.
Careful with the utilitarianism. Dilemmas that could arise for example:
Poor humans could serve as donors for rich humans
Doctors killing one perfectly healthy but unfortunately compatible guy to harvest organs and sell them or save 10 lives
etc
Also, the two aren't mutually exclusive. Say I ask for my organs to be donated post mortem. That doesn't make it ok for my meat to be eaten. It's immoral, unnecessary and weird to say the least
>Cows aren't useful in this manner.
Then just don't breed and kill them at all?

>>42103417
While I am not vegan, I would like to look at what you said about the mirror test.
There are certain animals that do recognize themselves in the mirror, among them being the crows and dolphins. Dolphins are an even more interesting case, since they are the most intelligent species after humans - they can learn (mothers teach their young), use tools (dolphins adjust to the conditions they live in, for example they were found to use marine sponges in order to protect their bellies from rocky bottom during feeding), are capable of understanding gain/loss and therefore there are cases of dolphin groups working together with local fishermen - dolphins drive the fish into their nets, and feed in the ensuing chaos, with fishermen often giving them part of the catch. All arise spontaneously, without training - meaning communication and coordination among dolphins.
Cases where they saved humans from being eaten alive by sharks are also known.
I don't give a shit about cows, but I'd never forgive killing a dolphin. Animals are not equal among themselves.

>>42107454
It wasn't meant to be an argument for utilitarianism. I'm well aware of the risks. I'm just saying, that if I had to choose, eat or harvest a retard, then of course I'd rather harvest him, since no matter how good would he taste, it's still less of a pleasure than helping capable people in need.
As for cows, sure I wouldn't mind if we killed them all and ceased husbandry. Myself, I'm pescetarian. I don't normally eat other meat mostly for health reasons and because small oily fish have everything I would want from meat, including a fuckton of omega-3 and low to no mercury contamination. Their nervous systems are also extremely simple, so at the very least, they certainly don't feel like chickens or cows in a farm. My favorite, that is sprats, are caught in the ocean, anyway. It's a win-win. The majority of my diet consists of whole-wheat products, buckwheat, oats, lentils, fish and the smallest amount of calories from diary (a glass of milk to make my oatmeal, yogurt and molded cheese) and eggs (6 per week).

File: broccolibrain.png (1MB, 898x790px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 898x790px

>tfw to intelligent to eat meat

>>42107818
kek
post discord link fag

File: 1495598282356.jpg (14KB, 238x192px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 238x192px

>>42107818
>tfw not eating meat actually degenerates your fucking neurons

>>42108968
>lying on the internet

Do vegans know that animals die when vegetables are harvested at commercial levels too?

>>42109002
Trusting a supplement over a natural source

Enjoy your retardation

As long as you're hitting your macros, you can eat whatever you want. Let it be chicken, red meats, fish, or a diet of soy beans, cabbage, sweet potatoes, etc. Hell you can even have varied meals. It doesn't fucking matter, this discussion is stupid.

>>42101151
>inb4 bait
Veganism (as a diet) is a nice diet provided you only eat soy once in a while and take vitamin b12 periodically.

>>42103863
this. if you eat eat rice and beans instead of a burger you're a fat atheist coddled suburbanite white devil.

>>42101642
>Yes, we have. Name one nutrient that we *need* to get from meat.
>Ω3s
>All of those can be easily found on a vegan diet without even supplementing, 1 google search away
Only if you have the enzymes to Convert ALA (Plant based) to DHA and EPA (Animal Based). Apparently Science, Studies and Google say many people lack these enzymes.

>>42102901
Studies have shown that plants operate like borg brains, decentralizing their "neural" system. Additionally, studies have also shown that plants can feel pain while many fish cannot.

>>42101940
wtf i love meat now

>>42109040
so what do you suggest we eat then?
do meat eaters know that they kill more plants than vegans?

Can I sip on blended barley for energy, vegan fags?

all vegans are virtue signalling

morality is relative, and doing it 'for the environment' is like not driving a car 'for the environment' - your efforts are fucking futile thanks to industrialisation

>>42101151
Not enough protein, also who cares about animals suffering, they're barely self-conscious

>>42101151
Veganism is a political movement that only cares for guilt triping you for eating cute animals, not a real diet.

If you want life and gains in hard mode, go vegan.

File: 1499390559530.jpg (59KB, 558x408px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 558x408px

>>42101621
>bacteria are the most abundant form of life on the planet
>some kinds can consume rocks
>many kinds can survive unprotected in deep-space conditions
>bacteria reproduce faster than humans
>bacteria adapt to their environment faster than humans
>bacteria were some of the first life forms we know of
http humans arent OBJECTIVELY superior

I've ever met a vegan who didn't look like they would get knocked over by a stiff breeze.