The KGB Oracle Forums General Public Discussion (PUBLIC) The Pub Best Speech You Will Ever Hear

I dont understanding what are you saying, where/when hes causing pain to humans? If I understand in the beggining of his activism he caused financial damage to producers, other than this nothing was caused or is caused by him, in fact to not consume animal products is better economically is healther to your familiy, because is less resource intensive to produce grains, that the same amount of meat.


Yes, I consider causing financial damage to producers evil. I dont think their kids should starve or go poor because this guy wants to get his self-rightious jollies off.



One thing because humans have been eating animals for thousand of years. The fact that we have been doing something for a long times does not make it morally right, Humans have been racist and sexist for centuries and we now recognize that racism and sexism are morally wrong.

You are technically correct, but neither yourself nor CrazyGuy have MADE A CASE for why it IS immoral. You are just making some assumption that it is.



His argument is only to try to illustrate that we are not naturally eat meaters, like monkey ancestors that were mostly vegetarians. We do not have the natural tools, like mandibules and claws and etcs.. so to sum up is not our natural “nature” to eat milk after been baby e do not need cow milk to survive or to be health. We are brain washed since child to behave according to the majority.
Our faculty of reason,intellect, and our opposable thumbs ARE our natural tools. This guy has utterly failed in his analysis of our natural tools, thats my point. Not having the same digestive tract as a coyote does NOT mean we dont eat meat.



I do not see a logic, it's a moral question, I do not see damage on people eating meat when they have no other option for their survival, we have the choice and the knowlodge to feed healthier and again cheaper, but we for convenience, taste, tradition and etc.. we choose to eat from animals, to cause pain and suffering, do say me that the cow , day by day milk is sucked from their tits is a pleasure to them, we are causing animal pain for our pleasure, and just ignoring this fact.
Morality springs from logic, and his attempt to separate logic and reason from morality is why I find him so utterly repulsive and evil. You ought to read Descartes before you buy this guys crap. And Kant and Hume and etc http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/descartes-epistemology/

Trying to separate morality from reason never goes anywhere good. This guy is arguing that morality is based on emotion. Emotion is not a basis for morality, and trying to use it as such is in fact something a base animal would do. Its a dark side of human nature, not the enlightened side.



You are again failling to the arguments, usually you will not hear that a guy had a heart attack or other desease from being a vegetarian, like he said others factors include like alchool,stress, drugs. But you see a lot of health problems caused by meat and fat->dairy diet. Why he's an extremist I don't get it. Hes teaching people another reasonable view of our habits towards the use of animals.

Usually? You and he are confusing proper production of meat, with the state of our current industry. Some aspects of our current meat industry are inarguably imperfect and less than optimally healthy. However, that says nothing about the concept of eating meat in of itself. Some facts for you:
On my moms side of the family, which comes from a rural area which in fact has raised its own meat for hundreds of years- the average lifespan ( yes average) is about 95 years. My grandparents generation of people in the area and extended family live/lived to be between 87 and 102 years old. And they eat/ate home raised milk products and pork and beef EVERY SINGLE DAY.

They also didnt eat it as a luxury. This guys arguments about the inherent health benefits and economics of meat as blanket statements are utter bullshit, and completely unfounded assertions. I can guarantee that from personal experience.



You are been irrational for those arguments, your health will be not decreased, your human enviroment will be be not depleted, in fact it will be inverse.

I have not been irrational in the slightest, rather the PETA side has yet to concoct one single sound argument. Yet the PETA people will harm other humans and be general nuisances despite not having any sound arguments. The core of PETA belief is based on emotion.



We can feed people well and healther, without resort to billions of animal killing every year
Irrational is what are we doing to the planet, we are consuming too much milk and meat for detrimental of our health and planet resources, the amount of deforastion that is taking place in Brazil to plant soy to feed cattle is imense.

See, this is a different issue. Perhaps what is happening in Brazil is coloring your perception. Maybe what is happening in Brazil is not good. I dont know, I dont live in Brazil or follow it too closely. Perhaps the people who are growing meat in Brazil are in fact locally detrimental. If so, by all means oppose them and what they are doing. But do it on the basis of the harm they are actually doing.... no need to use emotion as faux basis for logic. You will get a lot further with that.





It's not a assumption, is fact that to produce 1kg of meat is more resource intensive that produce 1kg of vegetables(Around 15 times more intensive). And countries like Brazil are deforesting all forest to produce more grains to feed for cattle. While you can believe that this not affect you in USA it does, we are in the same planet, if we take out amazon forest to plant soy to feed cattle it will have a global impact. While you cannot think like that meat is a luxury, again, if the east countries(india,china and etcs) begin to eat like eurpeans and americans we will need 3 another planet earths.

Like I said, lets keep the global warning crap to a different thread. But on the meat topic, it is not inherently necessary to raise grain to eat meat. In fact some farmers naturally graze animals. You are talking about the individual techniques for raising meat, which is DIFFERENT than poor ranching tactics being INHERENT in eating of meat.

This is yet another example of why people who discard logic and argue on the basis of emotion are so frustrating.

Anyone with a simple grounding in logic inherently understands that just because one method or type of cattle ranching may arguably be overall detrimental, DOES NOT IN ANY WAY create a case that ALL MEAT detrimental.

People raised and lived off of animals for thousands of years because when done properly, they in fact add quite a bit of economic efficiency. Pigs for example are one of the best examples of natural recycling.





Again, not eating meat is less expensive and more healthier, you still blinded by what you want to see. Honestly I always had eat meat and dairy products/eggs, I always had a common sense that I knew about vegetables products and fruits being healther than meat/milk, After I grow up, I always had the moral awareness that delicious beef steak was with the pain of an animal that was slaved to that I had that delicous pleasure of taste. After many years of just ignoring the true, and inventing excuses like you are inventing, I realize that was not morally right what I was doing.
It's more health and economical advantagous to me do not eat meat and dairy products, I will be saving money in the future, and morally, I do not help to kill animals for my sake of taste. Because there are plenty of alternatives to meat/milk/eggs products.