Zoo's good or bad?

Cobra said:
No, as already mentioned, that apparently is rape or some other sexual crime.
And completely abhorrent to the vegan way of life.
Click to expand...

But it was his own suggestion.
Still waiting though to hear how the vegans mean to pay for the feeding/housing/veterinary care of a few billion former farm animals.
 
viv1969 said:
Yeah but it's still this kind of statement....



.....that highlights your general ignorance and ultimate selfishness towards anyone who doesn't share your lifestyle choices; choices which are impossible to truly adhere to.
The two examples I used were the tip of the iceberg. Your home is filled with items containing animal derivatives, not to mention everywhere you choose to work or visit.

Oh and as far as ethics go....I'm assuming these ethics in question are yours, so again with the dictating.
Click to expand...

Wait wait, so it's selfish and a dictatorship for me to enforce my views on others, but not for the world to force it's view on animals? If wanting animals with a right to life not to die is more selfish than wanting to eat meat just because you like the taste (and I've heard no arguements against that so far as that is the only reason you eat it) then you need to redress your definition of selfishness.

Can't you see though that many many aspects of life are a dictatorship? I'm forced to contribute towards things I don't want to through my taxes as I'm sure you are. We're all forced to do things we don't want and we all have to accept a way of life forced upon us by others, so how is this any difference? If we all had our lives running exactly as we want, the world would be in chaos and there would be constant wars, so again why is me wanting others not to cause harm any different to the goverment forcing me to spend money on wars I and many others don't agree with?

My home may be full of animal derived ingredients, but again, tell me why doing the best I can is worse than you doing nothing at all? If you want to nitpick like that, as I said to whoever else it was, you're just the same. You don't agree with paedophilia I'm sure, yet I can say with confidence that you don't do everything within your power to stop it happening in the world. I mean if you're going to say about animal products in places I visit, I can say that by having children you're contributing to paedophilia by having children (if you do), both of which are completely ridiclulous statements!

@Cobra well you'd be under the wrong impression then because that was taken from the vegan society page. But the definition there and what you've said are in essence the same thing. Vegetarians only avoid meat, vegans try to avoid all animal products as the definition states.

On the point of sterilisation of farm animals to wipe them out. Of course this is a less than ideal scenario but as I've said before, the sterilisation of all existing farm animals is a lot more kind to animals than the death of trillions of future yet to be born farm animals. There is no perfect solution so the best alternative has to be used which is what I've suggested.

Yet again, what is the point in this now? What do you all want to prove? That I'm a bad vegan? That you're right and I'm wrong? I just don't understand why you keep replying when there's no end to this. I'm only replying to defend my position which keeps being attacked, but everybody else...?
 
viv1969 said:
But it was his own suggestion.
Still waiting though to hear how the vegans mean to pay for the feeding/housing/veterinary care of a few billion former farm animals.
Click to expand...

Hold on, so we can afford to pay for a few billion animals now, with them being bred and even more coming into the world, but we can't afford to care for them if we stop breeding them and they gradually die out meaning less and less animals to care for? How does that logic work?!
 
htid said:
Hold on, so we can afford to pay for a few billion animals now, with them being bred and even more coming into the world, but we can't afford to care for them if we stop breeding them and they gradually die out meaning less and less animals to care for? How does that logic work?!
Click to expand...

because the money that pays for them now comes from selling their meat or produce (and a lot of farms are barely making a profit as it is), so if a farm has no money coming in because you've forced everyone to become vegan will the farmer a) keep paying to keep the animals that now have no purpose , or b) have them put down

(and thats not counting all the wildlife that will suffer from the habitat changes brought about by lack of grazing and hay cutting, and the huge monocultures of soya )

Also if unborn animals have a right to life - how can you advocate sterilising the existing animals and allowing species to die out ?
 
Last edited:
Your position is still derisory, that's why people constantly question it.
What about farmers, farm workers, ALL of the trickle down positions in the industry. Are you going to pay their bills? Employ them? Feed them?
You are, as are all armchair idealists, incapable of seeing the global picture, or of suggesting a viable alternative.
 
@htid The description of dictatorship was yours, I merely quoted your words.
 
Ok it isn't a dictatorship then, therefore there's no problem.

Farm workers can find new jobs, ALL the positions in the industry can find new jobs. That's not my problem. I'm sure everybody working in the slaving industry said the same, so did everybody working in any industry that has died! Yet life goes on, we find a way. Why do you think this would be so different to anything else?

Are you really saying that if the global population put their mind to it, we couldn't find an alternative to meat eating? There are so many arguments produced here that anybody with a bit of time and effort can see are rubbish. I and many vegans have had these arguments countless times, we have answers for everything, but I can't be bothered to explain how every little thing will work if the world did change.

Again, we're not getting anywhere and it's a waste of time for everybody so let's just forgot it.
 
First thing to do is cut down on people - then less meat eaten - start with Chinese .............. they will eat anything ......... amongst other things . ......... we'll never miss the buggers

then we need to turn all the animals into vegetarians and there'lll be less of them .. and the world will end
 
Last edited:
htid said:
. I and many vegans have had these arguments countless times, we have answers for everything,
Click to expand...

no - you merely think you have the answer to everything, but because these answers are predicated on forcing everyone to agree with you and to make fundamental changes to their lives whether they want to or not, in a democracy they are worthless

those of us who aren't vegans and don't want to be have also had these arguments countless times, and know that your "answers" have fundamental flaws - like the fact that humans are biologically speaking omnivores and many don't want to be forced to eat a vegan diet

htid said:
Again, we're not getting anywhere and it's a waste of time for everybody so let's just forgot it.
Click to expand...

this sort of argument never goes anywhere - it can't because you have people with diametrically opposed views.
 
big soft moose said:
no - you merely think you have the answer to everything, but because these answers are predicated on forcing everyone to agree with you and to make fundamental changes to their lives whether they want to or not, in a democracy they are worthless

those of us who aren't vegans and don't want to be have also had these arguments countless times, and know that your "answers" have fundamental flaws - like the fact that humans are biologically speaking omnivores and many don't want to be forced to eat a vegan diet



this sort of argument never goes anywhere - it can't because you have people with diametrically opposed views.
Click to expand...

You're right it can't go anywhere. But the reason you don't want to be vegan is simply because you want to eat what you want. Your choice to enjoy a nice meal is more important than a life. This is why veganism is slowly progressing (and it is), because more and more people realise that choice isn't more important than life.

Also you don't have this argument half as much as we do. How many vegans do you talk to? Barely any I bet. Yet as soon as you mention you're vegan, everybody and his dog is an expert on everything from protein deficiency to human evolution.
 
Last edited:
htid said:
Ok it isn't a dictatorship then, therefore there's no problem.

Farm workers can find new jobs, ALL the positions in the industry can find new jobs. That's not my problem.
Click to expand...

And that's the bottom line isn't it.
The fact that such an infinitesimal part of the population are vegan (or as vegan as it suits them to be), would suggest it's hardly likely to ever have legs globally, thankfully.

Perhaps the vegans and the Scientologists could co-holiday. I'm sure there's some interesting conversations to be had.
 
viv1969 said:
And that's the bottom line isn't it.
The fact that such an infinitesimal part of the population are vegan (or as vegan as it suits them to be), would suggest it's hardly likely to ever have legs globally, thankfully.

Perhaps the vegans and the Scientologists could co-holiday. I'm sure there's some interesting conversations to be had.
Click to expand...

I'm just sorry that you and I will die before we get to see who is right. There is no denying that veganism is growing. As I've said, throughout history more and more rights are given. You can see within our lifetimes - I'm not sure how old you are but I'm only 32 and even as long as I've been alive, animals have gained more rights.

I'd still genuinely like to know why you think your wish to have a nice meal is more important than a life. Forgetting everything else about this argument, I'm just curious, is it literally because you feel you're right to eat what you wish is more important than a an animals right to life? Or do you have other reasons?
 
htid said:
You're right it can't go anywhere. But the reason you don't want to be vegan is simply because you want to eat what you want. Your choice to enjoy a nice meal is more important than a life. This is why veganism is slowly progressing (and it is), because more and more people realise that choice isn't more important than life.
.
Click to expand...

and your choice to be a vegan is more important than millions of lives, because you want to sterilize stock and allow them to die out... that's the most illogical part of your argument , everything that lives dies one day , what matters is the quality of life it has in the mean time

Which isn't an argument for not allowing it to be born

Personally i'd rather see stock be born, be well treated and have a good quality of life then die and be eaten , than eradicate them out of prejudice, and I make that choice in only buying meat and animal products from places with high welfare standards.
 
What?????!!!!! That's utterly ridiculous!

So you'd rather have been born, had a good life and be executed at 26 (cows are killed around age 4 which equates to 26 in human years) in a slaughter house, than have not been born? I really don't believe that. Plus that's in an ideal world, most animals do NOT have a good quality of life. Why the heck would they care if they were never born, they'd never know any difference.

That must be one of the most ridiculous arguments I've ever heard against being vegan.
 
htid said:
I'd still genuinely like to know why you think your wish to have a nice meal is more important than a life. Forgetting everything else about this argument, I'm just curious, is it literally because you feel you're right to eat what you wish is more important than a an animals right to life? Or do you have other reasons?
Click to expand...

rather than it being about my wish to have a nice meal, my wish is to eat the food I am biologically adapted to eat and not harm my health by not doing so, also its about freedom of choice - I have no problem with you choosing to be a vegan, only with you wanting to force me (and everyone else) to be one too.

What I can't get my head round is that in order to allegedly protect the animals right to life you want to not only create conditions in which they'd all be killed but also stop any more being born and eradicate the species... does that not seem just a teeny bit illogical ?
 
htid said:
So you'd rather have been born, had a good life and be executed at 26
Click to expand...

Absolutely, without question.

Oh, I'm not buying into your anthropomorphic logic BTW, just giving a direct answer to a question.
 
Sorry that's dairy cows which live to 4. Beef cows is 16 - 18 months which is about 15-18 years old.
 
big soft moose said:
rather than it being about my wish to have a nice meal, my wish is to eat the food I am biologically adapted to eat and not harm my health by not doing so, also its about freedom of choice - I have no problem with you choosing to be a vegan, only with you wanting to force me (and everyone else) to be one too.

What I can't get my head round is that in order to allegedly protect the animals right to life you want to not only create conditions in which they'd all be killed but also stop any more being born and eradicate the species... does that not seem just a teeny bit illogical ?
Click to expand...

Your health wouldn't suffer as I and many other vegans can attest to. So it's about your choice to eat what you want which is more important than a life.

Which conditions did I say I want to create where they'd all be killed? Stopping them reproducing to kill of the species does not seem illogical because apart from the sterilisation process, they'd have a happy free life and it would mean many trillions of future animals would be saved from living horrible lives which they would since we don't live in the ideal world you mention where they're all happy.
 
simon ess said:
Absolutely, without question.

Oh, I'm not buying into your anthropomorphic logic BTW, just giving a direct answer to a question.
Click to expand...

As I said it's 16-18 but I don't believe you. If you watch slaughter house videos and see how it actually happens, I don't believe you.
 
htid said:
What?????!!!!! That's utterly ridiculous!

So you'd rather have been born, had a good life and be executed at 26 (cows are killed around age 4 which equates to 26 in human years) in a slaughter house, than have not been born? I really don't believe that. Plus that's in an ideal world, most animals do NOT have a good quality of life. Why the heck would they care if they were never born, they'd never know any difference.

That must be one of the most ridiculous arguments I've ever heard against being vegan.
Click to expand...

I'd rather dies after living a good life than not be born ... - my point was that according to you they have a right to life ... its not about what they actually know, because a cow doesnt think in those terms anyway , but in your anthropomorphic approach they have a right to live.... so why does that not extend to the right to be born, or the right not to be sterilised etc

If you wanted to turn them all free to live a natural life as herd animals wandering the countryside I could see where you were coming from ( I'd think it was bonkers but at least it'd be consistent), but the argument "they have a right to live and therefore we must eradicate them from existence" makes no sense whatsoever

I agree with you that welfare standards arent where they should be, but imo thats a seperate argument and does not militate against eating meat per se
 
A right to live doesn't extend to things that are yet to exist. It's not that difficult to grasp.
 
htid said:
Your health wouldn't suffer as I and many other vegans can attest to. So it's about your choice to eat what you want which is more important than a life.

Which conditions did I say I want to create where they'd all be killed? Stopping them reproducing to kill of the species does not seem illogical because apart from the sterilisation process, they'd have a happy free life
Click to expand...

you said you wanted to force everyone to be vegan - in those conditions all the farm animals would be killed since no one would be able to afford to keep them, and we'd need all the low land pasture to grow soya etc, so no they wouldn't have a happy free life, they'd be immediately slaughtered

oh and yes my health would be impacted, just as yours is being , but that's your choice and I entirely support your right to choose it, just as I expect you to support my right to choose not to - as soon as you start talking about forcing people to be vegan you are removing that freedom of choice.

But in essence yes my right to choose to eat meat is more important to me than the "right" of an animal to live

The reasoning behind this is simple, I am an omnivore, not a herbivore, therefore I am evolved to eat meat as well as vegetables. Also the right to life is a fallacy , everything that lives is going to die one day.
 
Last edited:
htid said:
A right to live doesn't extend to things that are yet to exist. It's not that difficult to grasp.
Click to expand...

that's not what the anti abortion campaigners say
 
I've already covered the point about what to do with the farm animals, further back in the thread.

Give me proof that yours or my health is being impacted.

I'll respect your right to choose when you respect an animals right to live.
 
htid said:
I'd still genuinely like to know why you think your wish to have a nice meal is more important than a life. Forgetting everything else about this argument, I'm just curious, is it literally because you feel you're right to eat what you wish is more important than a an animals right to life? Or do you have other reasons?
Click to expand...

Animals have NO actual rights in law. None.
Legistalion exists to attempt to prevent the mistreatment of animals by humans, but that is a far cry from animals having rights themselves.
The law currently affords no direct rights to any animals, not even the right to life.
 
htid said:
I'll respect your right to choose when you respect an animals right to live.
Click to expand...

The animals don't have a right to live , nothing does you and me included - you might as well say that plants have a right to live , but then you'd be really knackered as your only ethically consistent choice would be to starve to death

Talking of which if you were starving to death and the only available food was an animal would you allow yourself to die before you killed it for food ?
 
Last edited:
htid said:
@Cobra well you'd be under the wrong impression then because that was taken from the vegan society page. But the definition there and what you've said are in essence the same thing. Vegetarians only avoid meat, vegans try to avoid all animal products as the definition states.
Click to expand...
Fair enough I'm just relating to how it was explained to me by a vegan some years ago, seems that moving the goal posts to suit the lifestyle is also part of the lifestyle.

I admire anyone that has ideals and sticks to them. But no so much those that pick and choose the "best bits"
I reminds me of the fanatical religions TBH.
 
viv1969 said:
Animals have NO actual rights in law. None.
Legistalion exists to attempt to prevent the mistreatment of animals by humans, but that is a far cry from animals having rights themselves.
The law currently affords no direct rights to any animals, not even the right to life.
Click to expand...

Who is talking about law? I've said already that so many things which we now classify as backwards (slavery, anti homosexuality, anti women's rights) were at one point all legal. The people campaigning against them were seen as extremists and wanted to force their views on everybody else. This is exactly the same, the only difference being the species. Obviously to people like you (and of course that's the majority), that's where the line is, the fact that they aren't human, but black people were seen as sub human in the past too.

@big soft moose Fair enough the right not to be killed for anything except survival then.
 
Cobra said:
Fair enough I'm just relating to how it was explained to me by a vegan some years ago, seems that moving the goal posts to suit the lifestyle is also part of the lifestyle.

I admire anyone that has ideals and sticks to them. But no so much those that pick and choose the "best bits"
I reminds me of the fanatical religions TBH.
Click to expand...

The goalposts have never changed, it IS about avoiding all animal products and it always has been.

Fanatical religion is based upon faith and something that I don't believe exists (a god). This on the other hand, is based on actual cruelty and death. They aren't the same at all.
 
Also another interesting point - what will happen to all the cats and dogs when you force everyone to become vegan ? Are you going to force them to eat soya protein despite it being totally alien to their biology ? or will they all simply starve ?

I know some extremists say that pets is a master slave relationship - but even if we except that premise (personally i don't) surely you liberate slaves , you don't kill them all
 
htid said:
@big soft moose Fair enough the right not to be killed for anything except survival then.
Click to expand...

So there's no problem since eating the diet we were evolved to is part of survival - I agree that animals shouldn't be killed purely for fun
 
big soft moose said:
Also another interesting point - what will happen to all the cats and dogs when you force everyone to become vegan ? Are you going to force them to eat soya protein despite it being totally alien to their biology ? or will they all simply starve ?

I know some extremists say that pets is a master slave relationship - but even if we except that premise (personally i don't) surely you liberate slaves , you don't kill them all
Click to expand...

(domestic) Cats and dogs have been bred by man - they are invasive species - the world is trying to rid itself of invasive species - animal, vegetable or mineral - all part of evolution - you introduce something into a country because you think it will benefit and then a few years later you want to get rid of all you have introduced

same with people
 
Last edited:
htid said:
This is exactly the same, the only difference being the species. Obviously to people like you (and of course that's the majority), that's where the line is, the fact that they aren't human, but black people were seen as sub human in the past too.
.
Click to expand...

Its not the same thing because black people by definition are people so seeing them as not human is wrong - a cow is patently not a person so that line of argument is specious
 
big soft moose said:
So there's no problem since eating the diet we were evolved to is part of survival - I agree that animals shouldn't be killed purely for fun
Click to expand...

You don't need it to survive therefore it's not part of survival. Obviously it's good that you agree animals aren't killed for fun, but they are killed for enjoyment...your enjoyment of a meal. Because as I said there is no life threatening reason for you to eat meat except that you want to.

On the issue of pets, I haven't considered that before, but it's a good point. I'd have to think about my position on that. But my sterilisation of all animals extends to them too, so it's just a problem while the ones that live now continue to live. We already neuter our pets for fear of getting unwanted puppies or kittens so it's no different. As Bill said, they are an invasive species and I'd especially like cats to die out due to the amount of birds they kill for fun rather than for survival. I know they can't control it as it's in their nature, but still it'd be better if they died out.
 
htid said:
The goalposts have never changed, it IS about avoiding all animal products and it always has been.
.
Click to expand...

But that road leads back to living in a cave and foraging nuts and berries (being careful not to take any that another species might want to eat). Everything in the world is about competition between species .. a lion doesn't worry about the rights of an antelope or whether it is its equal or not, a Fox doesn't worry about a rabbit and so forth ... the idealised 'every species is equal and they can all be freinds' view is a naive fiction
 
big soft moose said:
Its not the same thing because black people by definition are people so seeing them as not human is wrong - a cow is patently not a person so that line of argument is specious
Click to expand...

Only if you see a line between human animals and non human animals which I don't.
 
big soft moose said:
But that road leads back to living in a cave and foraging nuts and berries (being careful not to take any that another species might want to eat). Everything in the world is about competition between species .. a lion doesn't worry about the rights of an antelope or whether it is its equal or not, a Fox doesn't worry about a rabbit and so forth ... the idealised 'every species is equal and they can all be freinds' view is a naive fiction
Click to expand...

That's not what I believe. Lions will continue to kill antelope etc. as that's nature. But I'm sure you'll agree that we've risen above nature and evolution and we have the brain capacity to make an ethical choice. It comes down to where each person draws the line as to what is ethical or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top