Animal abuse

kimb

Anbu Operative 🎭
Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2012
Messages
4,499
Reaction score
554
Doubt that other wise so many vegetarians wouldn't lack so much b12 and protein. Especially considering that two parents were charged for neglect because their child died from the lack of meat. Eat other humans? Animals eat other kinds of animals, we are animals. @immoral. Lmfao, believes cycle of life and fundamental need to grow society is immoral. Wow

B12 deficiency is capable to appear in vegetarians and vegans as it is in flesh eaters, and protein deficiency is a side of effect of malnurishment e.i. not consuming enough protein. Protein is found in most foods, including vegetables and fruits, you'd essentially need to be starving to achieve protein defiency on a vegetarian or vegan diet. Lack of meat consumption is not the common denominate in those ailments Also, your anecdotal evidence isn't supported by scientific evidence, and further more there is contradicting evidence proving that both a vegetarian and vegan diet is suitable for infants from childbirth onward.


And it's true other animals eat animals, but unlike animals, humans have moral agency. Animals lack moral agency and are incapable of making moral decisions making your comparison false. And I don't see how societal growth applies to you, unless you live in boarderline third world country, development of society does not apply to you. I'm assuming you live in a 1st world country seeing as how you have Internet connection, and have access device to connect to it.
 
Last edited:

LoZelda101

Banned
Elite
Joined
Dec 2, 2015
Messages
5,473
Reaction score
408
B12 deficiency is capable to appear in vegetarians and vegans as it is in flesh eaters, and protein deficiency is a side of effect of malnurishment e.i. not consuming enough protein. Protein is found in most foods, including vegetables and fruits, you'd essentially need to be starving to achieve protein defiency on a vegetarian or vegan diet. Lack of meat consumption is not the common denominate in those ailments Also, your anecdotal evidence isn't supported by scientific evidence, and further more there is contradicting evidence proving that both a vegetarian and vegan diet is suitable for infants from childbirth onward.


And it's true other animals eat animals, but unlike animals, humans have moral agency. Animals lack moral agency and are incapable of making moral decisions making your comparison false. And I don't see how societal growth applies to you, unless you live in boarderline third world country, development of society does not apply to you. I'm assuming you live in a 1st world country seeing as how you have Internet connection, and have access device to connect to it.

I never said it couldn't be found, i said the deficiency is high in vegetarians. If you want to cling to that life style go ahead but don't bring children into this. It's fact they do not fully get all the nutrition needed to fully develop without meat and even if they do the body won't absorb it as well by plants alone. This is not small example, this is an growing epidemic.




Lol no. studies show that animals do infact have morality. Even before the studies that stone age logic was not absolute. As society grow, so do the amounts of food is needed, the more food is needed, the more people it needs to employ to bring those products. That's how civilization expands. 1st world? That's your excuse? Lol get out. The only difference between 1st vs 3rd is conveniency.
 
Last edited:

kimb

Anbu Operative 🎭
Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2012
Messages
4,499
Reaction score
554
I never said it couldn't be found, i said the deficiency is high in vegetarians. If you want to cling to that life style go ahead but don't bring children into this. It's fact they do not fully get all the nutrition needed to fully develop without meat and even if they do the body won't absorb it as well by plants alone. This is not small example, this is an growing epidemic.


If you're going to provide sources for you claims on health related topics, use credible, peer reviewed research journals and articles, not articles written by part time bloggers who have little knowledge on the matter. And no, it's not a "fact" that that they need meat to fully develop, that is entirely false. The article I provided in my previous comment which was written by the National Institute of Health contradicts your claim stating, "Well-planned vegetarian and vegan diets with appropriate attention to specific nutrient components can provide a healthy alternative lifestyle at all stages of fetal, infant, child and adolescent growth (7,8,22). Appropriate education of the family and follow-up over time are essential. There are many useful tools and excellent guides to assist families and professionals".


Lol no. studies show that animals do infact have morality. Even before the studies that stone age logic was not absolute. As society grow, so do the amounts of food is needed, the more food is needed, the more people it needs to employ to bring those products. That's how civilization expands.
Provide evidence for the following;
1. animals have morality
2. animals have moral obligations
3. animals are capable of being held accountable for their moral actions

We as a species and as a society have advanced to were we don't need to commit immoral acts to forward civilization, and furthermore, the furtherment of civilization would not and does not justify needlessly killing animals. "As society grows, so does the amount of labor required, the more labor is needed, the more people are put in to slavery. That's how civilization expands" The ends don't justify the means. Anyway, the point is moot, if you're currently reponding to me from a 1st world country, your point is irrelevant and does not apply to you.

1st world? That's your excuse? Lol get out. The only difference between 1st vs 3rd is conveniency.
Please tell me you're joking. Please. :hmm:
 

SamAdams

Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2017
Messages
312
Reaction score
30
I see this quite disturbing, people abuse and slaughter the animals for some meaningless rituals, in my country, for example are slaughtered million of lambs in this period to celebrate the zombie Jesus rise.. and are children who watch this and they think is normal
You must be registered for see images

One thing is when you sacrifice a animal for necessity in accordance with rules and standards but another one is when you make a barbaric sacrifice meaningless..
You do not think that kind of things is irrelevant in this century?


As long as the animal is consumed, I have no problems with a cultural or religious ceremony surrounding it. In most casing there is a high level of respect for the animal and an appreciation for its sacrifice. I do however take issue if the kill is done in an inhumane way.
 

SamAdams

Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2017
Messages
312
Reaction score
30
You can't call out people who needlessly kill animals for religious sacrifice if you don't call out people who needlessly kill animals for taste pleasure. It's like a cannibal calling a serial killer immoral.

Cannibal?? really?? more like being an omnivore...
 

kimb

Anbu Operative 🎭
Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2012
Messages
4,499
Reaction score
554
Cannibal?? really?? more like being an omnivore...
The analogy is that both acts are immoral acts, but to commit one and call out the other is hypocritical. I shouldn't have used an analogy relating to consumption admittedly.
 

SamAdams

Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2017
Messages
312
Reaction score
30
The analogy is that both acts are immoral acts, but to commit one and call out the other is hypocritical. I shouldn't have used an analogy relating to consumption admittedly.

Cannibalism I would agree would be immoral barring an extreme circumstance. Consuming the flesh of another species however when our digestive is built for it would not be. Some nutrients our bodies require are hard to find in small quantities of plants were they may be abundant in animals.
Creatine is one example of a nutrient our body produces that we find available in animals that i'm not even sure we can find in plants let alone enough to benefit our body. Fat is another crucial nutrient where animals are the most efficient source.

Also your comment earlier where you used "our being civilized" as a proper reason for us to bypass the killing of animals for nourishment is invalid. We are in no way civilized... We are as barbaric as we've ever been. We are just more advanced in being barbaric.
What you see as Civilized is an illusion. Its nothing more than a certain level of control over the masses while the few elite daily exercise their barbarism in all its forms with very little consequence to themselves.

In addition, I'll use my area of the world as an example, species populations need to remain in balance in order to be healthy. White tale deer in my area do not have the necessary predator population to achieve this. Allowing hunting seasons for deer give families food that allows them to save money on their grocery bills, they get a much healthier meal than all this processed and gmo crap and the deer as a species are healthier and better off for it. That's the reason there is a such thing as predator and prey... To maintain a balanced and healthy ecosystem.
 

kimb

Anbu Operative 🎭
Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2012
Messages
4,499
Reaction score
554
Cannibalism I would agree would be immoral barring an extreme circumstance. Consuming the flesh of another species however when our digestive is built for it would not be.
Our digestive 'tract' (assuming) is also capable of digesting human flesh, but being able to digest human flesh wouldnt justify consuming human flesh, so I fail to see how the ability to digest animal flesh justifies needlessly killing animals. To add to that, our physiologically does not allow us to simply digest meat; more often than not you have to cook meat before it can be digested and most of the nutrients in the meat have been broken down and losed in the cooking process. On the other hand, we're capable of pulling fruits out of trees and vegetables out of the ground and consume them raw. There are other physiological traits that make us more less omnivorous than most omnivores, but those can be brought up in a later discussion.

Some nutrients our bodies require are hard to find in small quantities of plants were they may be abundant in animals.
It might be hard to find anything if you're looking for it in "small quantities". "It's hard to find potassium in small amounts of banana, it's hard to stay hydrated with small quantities of water, it's hard to stay well-nurished with small quantities of food". Hopefully I've driven the point home.

You're capable of easily obtaining all required nutrients in a plant based through "normal quantities" of fruits vegetables, grains, and various other things. It you may find hard to find such nutrients outside of meat if you've never made an effort to do so.

Creatine is one example of a nutrient our body produces that we find available in animals that i'm not even sure we can find in plants let alone enough to benefit our body. Fat is another crucial nutrient where animals are the most efficient source.
Unless your body building, you don't need to consume extra amounts of creatine to maintain your health. You're capable of being healthy and maintaining an average muscle mass with the amount creatine produced by your body. But, if you are into weight lifting (comme moi), you can easily get extra creatine from protein powders. I personally use VegaOne which I definitely recommend, but stay away from chocolate flavor. Tastes like shit.

Also your comment earlier where you used "our being civilized" as a proper reason for us to bypass the killing of animals for nourishment is invalid. We are in no way civilized... We are as barbaric as we've ever been. We are just more advanced in being barbaric.

What you see as Civilized is an illusion. Its nothing more than a certain level of control over the masses while the few elite daily exercise their barbarism in all its forms with very little consequence to themselves.

You seem to want to delve into abstract concepts on "THE TRUTH" behind civilization. Admittedly there is some truth in what you say, and I can agree on some aspects of your perspective, it's nothing more than a perspective.

The basic, undeniable truth and reality of civilization is that over the progression of humanity, we've come to establish systems of government, moral frameworks, the sciences, philosophy, virtues, principles, society, language, music, art, cultures and various other modes and tools we've used to gain a better understanding of ourselves and the universe around us and used that knowledge to better our quality of life and advance of the human race. And,* though primative qualities of humanity that predate civilization such as murder and rape still exist and have even been advanced through things like technology, it's a far cry from claiming we as a human species is as barbaric as we ever were. I'd imagine some philosophers would agree with you though, ironically enough.

In addition, I'll use my area of the world as an example, species populations need to remain in balance in order to be healthy. White tale deer in my area do not have the necessary predator population to achieve this. Allowing hunting seasons for deer give families food that allows them to save money on their grocery bills, they get a much healthier meal than all this processed and gmo crap and the deer as a species are healthier and better off for it. That's the reason there is a such thing as predator and prey... To maintain a balanced and healthy ecosystem.

I'd imagine overpopulation was the cause of bringing a new species into the ecosystem or some sort of human interference that led to an unbalanced ecosystem...Though I think hunters are better than the flesheater since they actually go out and obtain their meat instead of paying someone else to kill animals for them, it's still immoral to cause the unjustified death of animals. I'm don't know how bad the unbalanced the ecosystem you live in is, but as all nature does it will regulate itself and would eventually achieve equalibrium without human interference. If this means the death of animals through natural means, so be it. The inevitable death of an animal would not justify would not justify the murder of an animal.

And the fact that hunters benefit from the needless death of animals doesn't justify the death of animals. Even in poverty, a plant based diet remains as an easy, cheap alternative than an omnivorous diet. A more ethical one too.
 

SamAdams

Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2017
Messages
312
Reaction score
30
Our digestive 'tract' (assuming) is also capable of digesting human flesh, but being able to digest human flesh wouldnt justify consuming human flesh, so I fail to see how the ability to digest animal flesh justifies needlessly killing animals. To add to that, our physiologically does not allow us to simply digest meat; more often than not you have to cook meat before it can be digested and most of the nutrients in the meat have been broken down and losed in the cooking process. On the other hand, we're capable of pulling fruits out of trees and vegetables out of the ground and consume them raw. There are other physiological traits that make us more less omnivorous than most omnivores, but those can be brought up in a later discussion.


It might be hard to find anything if you're looking for it in "small quantities". "It's hard to find potassium in small amounts of banana, it's hard to stay hydrated with small quantities of water, it's hard to stay well-nurished with small quantities of food". Hopefully I've driven the point home.

You're capable of easily obtaining all required nutrients in a plant based through "normal quantities" of fruits vegetables, grains, and various other things. It you may find hard to find such nutrients outside of meat if you've never made an effort to do so.


Unless your body building, you don't need to consume extra amounts of creatine to maintain your health. You're capable of being healthy and maintaining an average muscle mass with the amount creatine produced by your body. But, if you are into weight lifting (comme moi), you can easily get extra creatine from protein powders. I personally use VegaOne which I definitely recommend, but stay away from chocolate flavor. Tastes like shit.



You seem to want to delve into abstract concepts on "THE TRUTH" behind civilization. Admittedly there is some truth in what you say, and I can agree on some aspects of your perspective, it's nothing more than a perspective.

The basic, undeniable truth and reality of civilization is that over the progression of humanity, we've come to establish systems of government, moral frameworks, the sciences, philosophy, virtues, principles, society, language, music, art, cultures and various other modes and tools we've used to gain a better understanding of ourselves and the universe around us and used that knowledge to better our quality of life and advance of the human race. And,* though primative qualities of humanity that predate civilization such as murder and rape still exist and have even been advanced through things like technology, it's a far cry from claiming we as a human species is as barbaric as we ever were. I'd imagine some philosophers would agree with you though, ironically enough.



I'd imagine overpopulation was the cause of bringing a new species into the ecosystem or some sort of human interference that led to an unbalanced ecosystem...Though I think hunters are better than the flesheater since they actually go out and obtain their meat instead of paying someone else to kill animals for them, it's still immoral to cause the unjustified death of animals. I'm don't know how bad the unbalanced the ecosystem you live in is, but as all nature does it will regulate itself and would eventually achieve equalibrium without human interference. If this means the death of animals through natural means, so be it. The inevitable death of an animal would not justify would not justify the murder of an animal.

And the fact that hunters benefit from the needless death of animals doesn't justify the death of animals. Even in poverty, a plant based diet remains as an easy, cheap alternative than an omnivorous diet. A more ethical one too.

1. Just because we currently do not have the ability to consume raw meat without a high risk to our health doesn't mean that has always been the case. We have had the knowledge of fire for a long period of time now and undoubtedly we have lost many of those immune protections due to not using them for many generations.
2. As for quantities and variety's of consumable plants, nuts and fruits, there has been, is now and will always be areas of the world that is limited in its options for many different reasons. Either way as I said earlier, we are omnivores and better still we are predators.

3. Who wants to be average? I don't and it goes against our nature. Well maybe beta males are ok with it but i'm no beta. Its a fact that meat eaters develop more powerful physiques. Again its part of our makeup for our bodies to benefit from meat.
Its natural and therefore moral to eat meat. As for cannibalism, take a pride of lions, they don't typically eat their own simply to feed themselves. A male lion is known to do it to cubs when taking over a pride or a female when theres a still birth but otherwise its very rare so if the animal kingdom lacking our level of awareness doesn't generally do it for nourishment reasons but will eat other species without hesitation than I believe that proves my point that cannibalism and eating other species are not one and the same.

4. Most current civilizations live in a very fragile and non realistic reality. We are one good solar flare away from being set back 200 hundred years. It could literally happen tomorrow. If it did, those who can grow a garden would to wait on the crop but could hunt instantly and fishing takes a lot less knowledge than growing a garden. It is irresponsible in my opinion to get to far away from our natural way of living when our current standards are built on such weak foundations.

If your a person who keeps a garden and is set up in a way that you could maintain your current preferences than good on you but most will not have that luxury and some even today still don't.

For those reasons I see no need to abandon food sources I naturally evolved to consume. Morality for me only has to do with dignity in which I end the life of the animal that gives its life to bless mine.


.
 
Last edited:

kimb

Anbu Operative 🎭
Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2012
Messages
4,499
Reaction score
554
1. Just because we currently do not have the ability to consume raw meat without a high risk to our health doesn't mean that has always been the case. We have had the knowledge of fire for a long period of time now and undoubtedly we have lost many of those immune protections due to not using them for many generations.

True, and by many generations you mean over 500,000 years ago. Meat was a resource that aided in human evolution by having enough caloric density to spark brain growth. Notably, had the neanderthals not switched over to cooking meat they would have likely gone exist. Once we reached a sort of climax in brain expansion in our evolutionary timeline, our consumption of meat continually decreased to less carnivorous levels as our physiology regressed back to that of early frugivores that predated neanderthals. Modern humans have more in common with the apes neanderthals we evolved from in the sense that we're frugivores.

2. As for quantities and variety's of consumable plants, nuts and fruits, there has been, is now and will always be areas of the world that is limited in its options for many different reasons. Either way as I said earlier, we are omnivores and better still we are predators.
I'd call a small amount of flesh eaters predators. Most of them walk into grocery markets, push around delicate carts , and buy small, packages of finely sliced meat that they pay for with money. Our modernization has also made plants, fruits, and nuts just as easily accessible to areas that do not have the climate to grow most crops. The only areas of the world that have an excuse are borderline 3rd world and 3rd world countries that do not have the economic infrastructure to sustain the basic means of living for most of it's people or the ability to import goods. Assuming that you're living in the first world country based off the fact you have internet and an access to a device that can connect to the internet, you don't fall under that branch.

You must be registered for see images
You people have been meme'd to death. There hasn't a response (or in this case a lack of a response) that I've never seen.

You must be registered for see images
 

SamAdams

Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2017
Messages
312
Reaction score
30
True, and by many generations you mean over 500,000 years ago. Meat was a resource that aided in human evolution by having enough caloric density to spark brain growth. Notably, had the neanderthals not switched over to cooking meat they would have likely gone exist. Once we reached a sort of climax in brain expansion in our evolutionary timeline, our consumption of meat continually decreased to less carnivorous levels as our physiology regressed back to that of early frugivores that predated neanderthals. Modern humans have more in common with the apes neanderthals we evolved from in the sense that we're frugivores.


I'd call a small amount of flesh eaters predators. Most of them walk into grocery markets, push around delicate carts , and buy small, packages of finely sliced meat that they pay for with money. Our modernization has also made plants, fruits, and nuts just as easily accessible to areas that do not have the climate to grow most crops. The only areas of the world that have an excuse are borderline 3rd world and 3rd world countries that do not have the economic infrastructure to sustain the basic means of living for most of it's people or the ability to import goods. Assuming that you're living in the first world country based off the fact you have internet and an access to a device that can connect to the internet, you don't fall under that branch.


You people have been meme'd to death. There hasn't a response (or in this case a lack of a response) that I've never seen.

You must be registered for see images

You didn't respond to comments referring to the fragile system that provides us 1st worlders the benefit to choose. As we both noted the 3rd world exception due to dependable and affordable alternatives we both can agree that there has always been a percentage of the population with that circumstance, which would make your argument of it being immoral only apply to 1st worlders who have the benefit of dietary choice and therefore its a relative argument not a moral one in my opinion.
 

kimb

Anbu Operative 🎭
Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2012
Messages
4,499
Reaction score
554
You didn't respond to comments referring to the fragile system that provides us 1st worlders the benefit to choose. As we both noted the 3rd world exception due to dependable and affordable alternatives we both can agree that there has always been a percentage of the population with that circumstance, which would make your argument of it being immoral only apply to 1st worlders who have the benefit of dietary choice and therefore its a relative argument not a moral one in my opinion.
It's still a moral argument, just relative to the situation at hand. Cannibalism is an abhorrent immoral act, but it can be seen justified in certain situations like being stranded on an island, or being trapped under a collapsed building with nothing to eat but dead corpses. I'd have no problem consuming animal flesh if it meant my survival, I'd even have no problem killing someone if it meant my survival. The immorality of animal consumption stems from the lack of necessity to kill animals for our survival. If we kill an animal, it should not be with proper justification; pest that impose disease and threaten crops, rabid dogs or wild animals that threaten your livelihood or others, pet suffering to death, etc. When we slaughter animals for nothing more profit, tradition, and taste pleasure it becomes immoral, essentially murder. And the fact that we slaughter animals in the billions makes things like the meat industry a holocaust.

Btw, I feel the same way. I definitely enjoyed the debate and appreciated the fact you spent your time laying out actual arguments and evidence, which is rare whenever I get on the topic of animal slaughter.

Us disagreeing doesn't mean we can't coexist. :win:
 

SamAdams

Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2017
Messages
312
Reaction score
30
It's still a moral argument, just relative to the situation at hand. Cannibalism is an abhorrent immoral act, but it can be seen justified in certain situations like being stranded on an island, or being trapped under a collapsed building with nothing to eat but dead corpses. I'd have no problem consuming animal flesh if it meant my survival, I'd even have no problem killing someone if it meant my survival. The immorality of animal consumption stems from the lack of necessity to kill animals for our survival. If we kill an animal, it should not be with proper justification; pest that impose disease and threaten crops, rabid dogs or wild animals that threaten your livelihood or others, pet suffering to death, etc. When we slaughter animals for nothing more profit, tradition, and taste pleasure it becomes immoral, essentially murder. And the fact that we slaughter animals in the billions makes things like the meat industry a holocaust.

Btw, I feel the same way. I definitely enjoyed the debate and appreciated the fact you spent your time laying out actual arguments and evidence, which is rare whenever I get on the topic of animal slaughter.

Us disagreeing doesn't mean we can't coexist. :win:

I think we aren't as far apart in our thinking as it first seemed. I am very much against the mass production of livestock for food supplies. Feral hogs are a nuisance problem in my area and I do hunt them to help local farmers protect their crop. I can't eat them all but I do eat my share were as I won't buy or eat other pork due to the insane way that they are raised and local small pork farmers don't exist in my area.

Anyway, enjoyed the conversation as well. Take care
 
Top