End of the line for anglers

SpearHead : sorry, the meaning of the word "phasers" neither appears in my mind nor in my 2000 pages thick "Robert & Collins Senior" english<>french dictionnary, so I might have misunderstood your post.

But if I read you right, you invite us to merely ignore whatever Connor may say, on the basis that his position is opposed to what most of us think in here. Anyway, that is an attitude that I have often seen on the political forum, where guys (amongst whom some are actually really weird, if not insane, but not all of them) are simply not listened to because their thinking was not cast in the same mould than the majority's. As sole answer, they get some :mad: and some :barf: , if not a :yawn: or a :rolleyes: . Why make a forum where everyone thinks the same way and believes to know the same things ?

I believe that fishing and hunting are human instincts which you cannot force to silence after you let them talk once, and thus I cannot imagine one second that I will turn myself towards vegetarism or vegetalism, but I must admit that those guys say things which are mostly unattackable; they are simply rationnal.

I am curious to know what Connor still has to say to us, and if we will be able to find smart answers to contradict him, or not.:)
 
Connor:
"If you want to be the 'smartest lifeform' on this planet, you have to prove that by the way you act - and killing other beings for no good reason just proves you are an animal like all the others."

animals do kill for a reason, it's us human beings that kill for no reason.
apart from that, i actually agree that fishing and hunting should not be allowed unless you consume what you hunt. i completely disagree with the kind of hunting sport fisherman/hunters practice.
on the other hand, if you actually eat what you hunt, and at least use it, it's ok for me.

regards, cheez
 
richardallen :
apart from that, i actually agree that fishing and hunting should not be allowed unless you consume what you hunt.
Click to expand...

Yes, right and necessary additional precision. Otherwise hunting is nothing else than primary barbarousness.

And about Connor : using the argument of "being better than an animal" will lead you to a slippy slope. The very best text about vegetarism/lism I've ever read (was an on-line document) only attacked the issue on two sides : the very rationnal, scientific side, in terms of nutrition, and on the other hand side, the aspect of basic emotions and empathy we can feel towards animals. Unfortunately I have not found it again yet; still looking for it. I think it is a very bad idea to try to convince anyone using almost philosophical arguments, like you seem likely to do.
 
Connor :

There is no intelligent reason that would morally justify killing and eating sensing beings just to feed ourselves.
Click to expand...

Prey animals will typically overpopulate without predation and can then die off in huge numbers due to starvation. There is a balance that can be reached with wild game which is hunted to keep the population healthy and the hunters fed. Yes there are those that waste, and care little about the animals, but not all are like this, there are those that take great care to reduce pain and stress and maximize utilization of the killed animal.

Similar for farming. Livestock will actually enhance the vegetation grown. The manure from the grazing animals is used to return minerals and vitamins to the land which was depleted by the crops, and this effectively moves the nutrients around from places where planting isn't always functional to areas where it is and by doing so can increase the ability to grow crops. The wasted produce (peels and such) are again fed to various animals which process the food into manure much faster than composting - which is also done on optimal organic farming.

As for the benefits of being a pure vegan, animal meats, especially organ meats contain the highest sources of many vitamins and minerals fills a staple requirement of essential fats. Yes there are many very beneficial fruits and vegetables - however consider we don't have the teeth nor the digestive system (consider your stomach and bowel length compare to a cow) for optimal digestion.

Most of the popular PC claims against animals meats especially red meats, fats and oils are without proof and fly in the face of healty native diets are commonly very high in such animal meats, especially organ meats like liver and heart, and will slectively eat those animals with a high fat and oil content.

Ref :

http://www.westonaprice.org/splash_2.htm

http://www.beyondveg.com/

http://www.panix.com/~paleodiet/

-Cliff
 
@poussin

SpearHead was referring to Star Trek beam weapons called "phasers", but you got his meaning perfectly right. I was perfectly unimpressed by his 'arguments' either. :)

@richardallen

I agree with you, but I would even go one step further. Mankind has (unfortunately) been killing animals for food for so long that it will not be an easy task to show people it's morally wrong to kill for food, even though there is an easy and better alternative. Hunting animals and killing them *for fun*/as a 'sport' is just plain sick.

I would wish that *all* people who want to eat meat had to personally kill their desired food, I bet that would make a lot of them vegetarians quite quickly. I'm pretty sure that most of the people in industrialized countries just eat meat because it's so conveniently packaged in the freezers of your local supermarket and you don't even have to think about where the stuff actually comes from.

@ poussin

But vegetarism *is* a philosophical matter, quite similar to abortion and euthanasia, actually. It's all about the value of life and death.

The best text I ever read about this matters is "Pratical Ethics" by Peter Singer. You might want to have a look at that one, it's really well-written and the critics will have a very hard stand to disprove his arguments.

Regarding your argument about "the aspect of basic emotions and empathy we can feel towards animals": Just imagine some aliens from Sirius or elsewhere would land on earth. Let them have far better technology/weapons and an IQ of 300+. Let them be carnivores. Those aliens could hunt, kill and eat us with the same justification we use to kill "our" animals. I don't think emotions or empathy towards animals are necessary to prove that it is wrong to kill sensing beings if you have an alternative. I think it's just plain logic not to hurt what *can* be hurt for the same reason you don't run around and hurt/kill other humans.

I would personally kill and eat an animal, if I had to starve otherwise, because I have the right to live, too - just like a lion or other predator. I just think it's wrong to do so if you *have* a choice.

@Cliff Stamp

You are correct about the prey/predator balance "circle-of-life"-thing but one should mention it's again the humans who broke this balance. It's also true that animals help in cultivation of land, but it's still not necessary to kill and eat them. And don't forget that the methane cows produce has a major impact on the greenhouse-effect. :)

What many people don't seem to realize is that cattle like cows, sheep, pigs etc. are very high in the food chain, too. These animals need a lot of vegetables in their life until they become 'mature'. If you would use the fields cultivated for food for *animals* to produce food for humans, far more people could be fed.

Since we are omnivores it's true that meat is an important, but not absolutely necessary part of our nutrition. You can get the vitamines/proteins you are missing if you are a vegetarian from other sources, but you have to actively think about it.

Besides, eating meat from a medical point of view would mean to eat a 200gr filet steak 1-2 times a week, *not more*. People are definitely eating way too much meat today.

-Connor
 
Originally posted by Connor
. . . it will not be an easy task to show people it's morally wrong to kill for food . . .

-Connor
Click to expand...

I think you underestimate the difficulty - It is probably impossible.

My faith and moral/ethical code places no such judgement on killing animals for food. Please respect that, for me and those like me, such things are NOT morally wrong.

Scott
 
One of the more admirable traits of the so-called top of the food chain is that it has the capacity to agree to disagree.
-carl
 
Originally posted by Connor
@poussin

SpearHead was referring to Star Trek beam weapons called "phasers", but you got his meaning perfectly right. I was perfectly unimpressed by his 'arguments' either. :)
Click to expand...

Connor, I haven't argued anything yet. The fact that you are unable to use that word correctly or to recognize an "argument" or "debate" when you read or hear one tells me plenty.

As for ignoring you... as long as you refuse to acknowledge that the human body is designed to accommodate an omnivorous diet (ex. the teeth, digestive tract, etc.) I will continue to file your comments as so much new age poppycock and treat them appropriately. I have yet to figure out exactly how you equate an "industrialized" existance with a change in what the human body needs in terms of sustenance. How exactly does that work?

I might agree that meat injected with hormones and other chemicals is not the best dietary choice one could make but your idea that one is permitted meat by virtue of where one resides is a lto of laughable nonsense.
 
Now, as for those who differ with me as a matter of personal dietary preference alone... Wonderful. Enjoy your sprouts.

I start to get irritated is when someone with a differing preference wants to moralize about what's a socially acceptable diet and condemn those whose dietary "morals" don't conform to his/her view of the world.

MMmmmmm.... meat.
 
Didn't we already know that fish feel pain? What else keeps them from allowing themselves to be dashed against the rocks? If death didn't hurt, it would not be resisted.

We are predators. The best ones. Anybody that tries to tell you otherwise is full of too much cellulose.

If we are to avoid causing pain to sentient creatures, what about childbirth? Eating is just as important. Pain and death are a natural part of the natural world of which we are a natural part.

If God hadn't meant for us to eat animals, He wouldn't have made them out of meat.
 
Great. I hope that my post didn't start all of this nonsense. The bear remark was in jest, and yes, Drifter62791, I would love to have one, but the scope would have to have "refractive error correction" built in for me! :D ;)

As for all the self righteous moralizing, pipe down. Quit trying to act better than anyone else based on your "cockamamie" ideas (see if that one's in your dictionary also)! :p

I've hunted and butchered many animals,in the wild, and on the farm since I was 12. Doesn't bother me a bit. That's what many of them were put on this earth for.
 
those people have too much time on their hands. why don't they spend two years studying something that really matters?
 
swede79 : yeah, my dictionnary knows cockamamie :cool: Is that all you've got ? :p
Of course, eating only vegetables is cockamamie. But you must have realized for a long time that most people in the civilisation do not really remain sticking to the ancestral behavior of our species : when they need food, they choose what they want to eat, then they put a plastic card in a machine, type in a few digits and earn the right to eat what they want. If a male human feels an overwhelming need for a particular female human, then he takes a mobile phone and dates. And if a civilised human being needs some sleep, then he takes the subway to return home and sleeps on a mattress made of plastic fibers.
And things will keep on becoming more and more strange. Deciding to stop eating meat is odd, but not more than making a baby in a test tube.

However, has anyone seen Connor ?
 
Oh, and swede, I forgot : nowadays you cannot figure out what people can make a living of. Some guys spend their days working on topics which are so weird that they would make non-linear algebra and calculus on several variables look like animals' occupations.
And after a day like that, they earn the right to use their plastic card to retrieve food.
 
Why don't we just eat plastic, saturated with man made vitamins and minerals? After all, if we eat fruit and vegetables aren't we actually taking food from the mouths of animals? Studies show that starvation is painful for animals, you know. In fact, why don't we all fly off into space and let the animals have the planet back?

Come on. We are all alive today because someone killed and ate animals. That is just the way it is.

Yes, it is possible to survive without eating and using animal products, but just because we CAN do something, does not mean we should. I got that from Jeff Goldblum's character in Jurassic Park, and he was some kind of fancy scientist!!!(yah, I know, mathmatician with a black belt in chaos). My kids also have a black belt in chaos, but I digress.

Wasn't Jesus a fisherman?

BTW, you vegetarian guys better not have any leather boots, jackets, sheaths, or brand name patches on your jeans!!!!

HAH, you wanna rant?? Bring it!!!
 
Jim-
You are just scratching the surface ...and barely at that. What about drugs? Best not use many of them either- many are first tested on critters before they got it right enough so that we could take them.

...indian word for bad hunter: vegan

On the other hand, I will not eat Veal- just don't like what it takes to produce veal.
-carl
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top