Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Rose]

Pig tend to disagree with my bowels.

Cows tend to disagree with mine.

Live ones, that is.

They like impaling me through the gut.

[PanH]

Kangaroo is fucking beautiful. Lamb is awesome, and Swordfish is a joy. Then pig. Though Snake, Hippo and Crocodile also score very highly.

Yes, I am an extreme carnivore.

That's more hype than anything. Some meats considered as the best are classical, as the Kobe beef. Wild/hunting meats are more strong, and have sometimes a more "gamy" (I'm not sure of this word in english) taste.
If you tap more into fish, there's red tuna, some salmons, oyster, etc.

I've been a bit educated on the matter by my uncle, who is part of the "Meat club" (yes, that truely exists), which is kind of disturbing.

[DrPoo]

I like all sorts of meat(except dog) but i prefer wild duck or kebab.

Also i have nothing against vegans at all, if it wasent for the fact that most vegan food tastes terrible and that i would have to monitor everything that goes inside my mouth. My life is too short for that. And i feel compelled to defend people i like, who are in a situation where they are weak. I felt that as an attack against her but i guess im just a horrible reader.

Sorry for the drama, back to sad stuff.

Im sad today because of a friend of mines mental condition.

[Helgoland]

I like pigs on a non-food level - kight have something to do with the fact that my family comes from a big pig-producing area. As Churchill put it: "I like pigs. Dogs look up to us, cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals."

Someday I'll buy a pet pig and keep it like other people keep dogs.

Doc Poo, what kind of condition?

[PanH]

Someday I'll buy a pet pig and keep it like other people keep dogs.

The interesting question is : Will you eat him/her ?

[Nadaka]

OK, I have to ask this now: what is it with these forums? There appears to be an abnormally large number of people who have been abused, are part of the LGBT community, or something else like that.

Is it just that they feel more comfortable talking about it here compared to other forums?

It probably is that people feel more comfortable around here. We have had several major forum members being very open and accepting, notably Vector among others, and that makes a difference. This is one of the first places I shared my childhood horror stories, it just isn't something I normally share.

LGBT?  You're accepted.  Abused?  We welcome you with open arms.  Depressed and suicidal?  Here's a shoulder to lean on. 

Vegan?  ...

This has nothing to do with you being a vegan, we have plenty of other vegans here. It has everything to do with what you say, and how you say it.

How can you possibly confuse the two. it is damn insulting to denigrate a human being and trivialize someones suffering by comparing to an animal.

Where is there confusion?  They are separate things, and I am expressing that I find both to be horrific.  I can't possibly fathom how I am trivializing anyone's suffering. 

And that would be the problem, you don't see how your are trivializing someone.

Im sorry for the harsh and violent outburst. But im a human being. I have feelings, MoM has too and i was trying to protect her feelings.

I never intended to offer any slight toward MoM, so I don't see why you'd need to protect her feelings. 

Because she is a person and a member of this community.

So stupid people suffer less? That's interesting.

This. 

i can empathise with the cruel treatment of chickens just fine. but they are many many orders of magnitude  less than human.

So, hypothetically, if there was some manner of life out there that was significantly evolved and advanced as compared to humans, it would be acceptable for them to treat us the same way we treat animals?

No. And animals don't necessarily suffer less either, but they are less important.

I'm sure the animals feel they are less important than humans too.  Again, would you still feel the same if humans were no longer the most advanced living beings around? 

Humans are still sophonts, there being a smarter sophont or not doesn't change that at all. A chicken will never write a novel. A chicken will never teach its children right from wrong. A chicken lacks the capacity for higher thought and the ability to form a culture or society greater than itself. I am not saying that simply being smarter makes you more important. I am saying there is a line that can and must be drawn between the majesty of the human mind and our collective noosphere and the mere existence of animals.

There is no way to equate the two without disregarding the distinction.

[kaijyuu]

Your dogma is showing, Nadaka.

I don't want to really go into a "what defines someone as a person" debate, but I will point out that it's incredibly hard to agree on that. Your opinion on what gives living things value is mental capacity in the manner of your examples, but that's not what others might think, and if you think your definition universally correct then you're a fool.

You're unwilling to compare without bringing human beings down. You cannot seem to grasp that it might, in fact, bring other things up instead.



Personally I feel that pain is pain, suffering is suffering, emotion is emotion. It doesn't matter what species is feeling it. However, I will not shove my opinion down your throat. You're welcome to believe what you like in this regard, so long as you're logically consistent. That is what separates me from PETA.

[Helgoland]

Your dogma is showing, Nadaka.

Quick, tug it back in!

You're unwilling to compare without bringing human beings down. You cannot seem to grasp that it might, in fact, bring other things up instead.

Yours is showing too - what you call dogma is nothing but an axiom of that specific person's philosophy.
Debates usually reach a stalemate when these dogmas/axioms have been worked out, because - them being axioms - there is no possibility of compromise.

Quick, get a derail in here!

[PanH]

Humans are still sophonts, there being a smarter sophont or not doesn't change that at all. A chicken will never write a novel. A chicken will never teach its children right from wrong. A chicken lacks the capacity for higher thought and the ability to form a culture or society greater than itself. I am not saying that simply being smarter makes you more important. I am saying there is a line that can and must be drawn between the majesty of the human mind and our collective noosphere and the animals.

There is no way to equate the two without disregarding the distinction.

I'm sorry but sophonts is only : "a being with a base reasoning capacity roughly equivalent to or greater than that of a human being".
There's 2 cases :
The "capacity" is the lower one of human beings, and then, animals are sophonts too.
The capacity is the one of average humans, and then people with e.g. Down's syndrome wouldn't be sophonts. That reminds me something. And I don't know if you realize how shocking this is. Way more than considering that animals' suffering should be shunned too.

[kaijyuu]

Hrm, not sure if you're trying to disagree with me Helgoland, but I feel you supported what I was trying to say, so...

I guess I'll say agreed~

[Nadaka]

Yup. If there is anything that I can say that I truly revere, it is the human mind and our capacity for culture and science. And it is something that animals (with the possible exception of cetaceans and marginal case of apes) do not have. What is it that animals have that even comes close to rivaling the near limitless potential of humanity?

[Shakerag]

Humans are still sophonts, there being a smarter sophont or not doesn't change that at all. A chicken will never write a novel. A chicken will never teach its children right from wrong. A chicken lacks the capacity for higher thought and the ability to form a culture or society greater than itself. I am not saying that simply being smarter makes you more important. I am saying there is a line that can and must be drawn between the majesty of the human mind and our collective noosphere and the animals.

There is no way to equate the two without disregarding the distinction.

And I am saying that I disagree that a line can and must be drawn.  If you feel that it's acceptable to draw a line between humanity and animals, then you would also have to accept that some other possible life in the universe could do the same to us.  If that's okay with you, then at least you're logically consistent and we can agree to disagree.  Otherwise, your argument smacks of human-centric hubris which doesn't sit right with me. 

[Criptfeind]

First off, how can can you not think a human being human centric is wrong? That's just. Is. It's not hubris.

Secondly yeah. If there is a alien lifeform that thinks on some whole other level then us and is upset by things that we don't care about, I am sure I will care more about those things impacting the alien then I do about them impacting us.

Also this thread is moving pretty fast, let me try to answer what you said to me as well as what you said to some other random person, one sec...

[Frumple]

Yeah... as to the general discussion, I'm a little sympathetic towards beef. They're just kinda' harmless, really. On the other hand, they'd also probably be pretty much extinct if we didn't regularly eat them, so... yeah. Demand doesn't stay up, species'll slowly (or not so slowly) disappear, so, welp. Conservation efforts! Sorta'. In a fairly twisted way.

Chicken and pigs get no sympathy. They'd happily eat me, I return the favor. Privilege of the super-predator to stay on the consumer end of the equation. Most of the meat I eat falls into one of those two categories -- either only kept as a substantial population due to them being a meat critter, or them happy to consume my flesh. Not saying the general treatment of 'ems moral, but... eh. Society does worse things as a matter of course, so unless it's up to me, personally, to torture critters to make the flesh more delicious, I don't worry about it.

[Criptfeind]

Although true that is true, saying that you should not be sad about one because you are not sad about another is insufferably insulting and false. Especially when the first one is many many times worse.

I didn't say that.  You're twisting what I said into some kind of "denying the antecedent"-ish thing.  Assuming you're referring to me, of course.

You're right, you didn't say that, you said that you don't understand how people can be, which is even worse as it makes you look like some sorta alien instead of just a incredibly callus person.