The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
Science Fiction Time: Conditioning of Humans and such
So Vegetarians have this thing for meat eaters saying that they harm the animals, which I am not sure of, but aren't they doing the same thing to plants? I mean they kill plants just so they can call themselves Vegens. Do they know how farming is done and what happens to those poor plants who just want to grow? Aren't they hypocrits for calling the meat eaters cruel and then turning around and killing plants?
So Vegetarians have this thing for meat eaters saying that they harm the animals, which I am not sure of, but aren't they doing the same thing to plants? I mean they kill plants just so they can call themselves Vegens. Do they know how farming is done and what happens to those poor plants who just want to grow? Aren't they hypocrits for calling the meat eaters cruel and then turning around and killing plants?
It's spelled "vegan" and we've already seen your G&T post, and not all vegetarians or vegans choose that path because of moral opposition to killing animals for food. Some are religious (hindu especially), some are practical (dietary/health reasons), and some are inclined to forsake the deliciousness of meat because, I dunno, they hate themselves or something.
oh god don't tell me he cross-posted this in G&T too
Jedi Renegade on
0
RankenphilePassersby were amazedby the unusually large amounts of blood.Registered User, ModeratorMod Emeritus
edited May 2007
Seriously. It's like this.
Animals have central nervous systems. They can feel pain. They are sentient beings. Whether or not they are fully sapient is up for debate. But they sure as shit ain't plants.
Katchem you should probably just stick to making anime threads
Let him start to think about something other than anime. Yeah, he's not going to say something brilliant in the first five minutes, but at least he's making some progress into the real world by talking about something other than his faggy obsession.
Animals have central nervous systems. They can feel pain. They are sentient beings. Whether or not they are fully sapient is up for debate. But they sure as shit ain't plants.
k, you see this?
This is the end of the discussion. This answers your question. End of thread.
On the other hand, asking fucking retarded questions about subjects that are both polarizing and ridiculously uninteresting isn't exactly top quality either.
Animals have central nervous systems. They can feel pain. They are sentient beings. Whether or not they are fully sapient is up for debate. But they sure as shit ain't plants.
OK, so that's all fine and dandy. But then why are you drawing the line exactly there? What if we can kill an animal so fast that it never feels pain, like by piercing its brain with, like, bullets or metal spikes at such high speed that it's over in less than a tenth of a second? That takes away the "pain" argument because the death is now far less painful than whatever death it would get in the wild. Having a CNS is great, but why not require it to show signs of social behavior, or higher intelligence? Why is just having a CNS the line? Why isn't the line higher? Why isn't it lower? Where do we get the right to decide what constitutes a thing which is OK to kill for food and what constitutes a thing that isn't? Aren't these lines just being drawn to include humans and other things that we see as similar to ourselves? Isn't that pretty arbitrary?
The whole thing seems like it's more based in emotion than rationality.
Of course plants are alive, they're fucking respire. What Rank is saying is that because they possess no nervous system, they do not feel pain or respond to external stimuli in anything more than an automatic, sub-instinctual way, meaning that all you do when you chop one up is cause it to cease respiring. For many who are vegetarians for non-religious reasons, the main reason for their choice is that eating meat involves causing a living thing pain. Though plants are alive, they do not feel, and hence eating them does not cause pain.
There is your answer once again. Commence dickgirl shenanigans.
EDIT: Also, even though it's probably a bad idea to do so, I agree with Defender. It's a rather arbitrary line drawn from a purely emotional reaction. So long as an animal isn't suffering completely unnecessarily (like, just for the hell of it or just because it's cheaper), I'm not going to say "oh shit it will feel pain salads for me from now on".
OK, so that's all fine and dandy. But then why are you drawing the line exactly there? What if we can kill an animal so fast that it never feels pain, like by piercing its brain with, like, bullets or metal spikes at such high speed that it's over in less than a tenth of a second? That takes away the "pain" argument because the death is now far less painful than whatever death it would get in the wild. Having a CNS is great, but why not require it to show signs of social behavior, or higher intelligence? Why is just having a CNS the line? Why isn't the line higher? Why isn't it lower? Where do we get the right to decide what constitutes a thing which is OK to kill for food and what constitutes a thing that isn't? Aren't these lines just being drawn to include humans and other things that we see as similar to ourselves? Isn't that pretty arbitrary?
The whole thing seems like it's more based in emotion than rationality.
Posts
You're being a fucking idiot.
also what Rank said
fuck you.
I honestly want to know about this. Do they consider plants dead or something that they can justify it?
we kill more plants than the damn vegetarians
It's spelled "vegan" and we've already seen your G&T post, and not all vegetarians or vegans choose that path because of moral opposition to killing animals for food. Some are religious (hindu especially), some are practical (dietary/health reasons), and some are inclined to forsake the deliciousness of meat because, I dunno, they hate themselves or something.
Also, "hypocrite" is the correct spelling.
oh god don't tell me he cross-posted this in G&T too
Animals have central nervous systems. They can feel pain. They are sentient beings. Whether or not they are fully sapient is up for debate. But they sure as shit ain't plants.
Close your eyes and smile like a donut, I'll show you.
Let him start to think about something other than anime. Yeah, he's not going to say something brilliant in the first five minutes, but at least he's making some progress into the real world by talking about something other than his faggy obsession.
I have a feeling the animal is going to be harmed in this case, as well.
JordynNolz.com <- All my blogs (Shepard, Wasted, J'onn, DCAU) are here now!
k, you see this?
This is the end of the discussion. This answers your question. End of thread.
As you were, gentlemen.
On the other hand, asking fucking retarded questions about subjects that are both polarizing and ridiculously uninteresting isn't exactly top quality either.
This isn't about Meat vs Veg its just me wanting to know about it.
okay
you're being fucking stupid
it isn't about them being alive
it is about them being sentient
that's it
that's all there is to it
now move on
Not much.
Gonna go pick up my paycheck and then run to the bank and the Target, I think. It's Taco Tuesday! So that's cool.
I should probably eat some lunch sometime since I didn't have any breakfast.
JordynNolz.com <- All my blogs (Shepard, Wasted, J'onn, DCAU) are here now!
dubbed anime is the way god intended, and also delicious?
I've eaten burritos for the last like 3 days... I'm totally done with mexican food.
OK, so that's all fine and dandy. But then why are you drawing the line exactly there? What if we can kill an animal so fast that it never feels pain, like by piercing its brain with, like, bullets or metal spikes at such high speed that it's over in less than a tenth of a second? That takes away the "pain" argument because the death is now far less painful than whatever death it would get in the wild. Having a CNS is great, but why not require it to show signs of social behavior, or higher intelligence? Why is just having a CNS the line? Why isn't the line higher? Why isn't it lower? Where do we get the right to decide what constitutes a thing which is OK to kill for food and what constitutes a thing that isn't? Aren't these lines just being drawn to include humans and other things that we see as similar to ourselves? Isn't that pretty arbitrary?
The whole thing seems like it's more based in emotion than rationality.
So if say scientists develop a person who doesn't feel or show emotions can he/she be not sentient?
Don't question it! I just need to placate him!
do you not have a back button or something? it seems this is causing you actual physical pain
or were you unaware that dumb people exist?
seriously, he's just a dumb, harmless little guy
it'll probably get locked
Shut up Jermaine.
"oh just ignore everything that bugs you." God, fuck off.
JordynNolz.com <- All my blogs (Shepard, Wasted, J'onn, DCAU) are here now!
There is your answer once again. Commence dickgirl shenanigans.
EDIT: Also, even though it's probably a bad idea to do so, I agree with Defender. It's a rather arbitrary line drawn from a purely emotional reaction. So long as an animal isn't suffering completely unnecessarily (like, just for the hell of it or just because it's cheaper), I'm not going to say "oh shit it will feel pain salads for me from now on".