Forums > Social Discussion > Vegetarianism.... Plants have feelings too
Login/Join to ParticipateSILVER Member
artisan
1,576 posts
Location: Berkshire, UK
artisan
1,576 posts
Location: Berkshire, UK
Posted:
I would just like to mention out of general irritation that some veggie friends give me. They always ask how can I have a clean conscience because I eat meat? Uusally giving me a long lasting lecture also about how much healthier it is. I have no rpoblem with the healthy part. But I would like to inform you that plants have feelings too. If you have come across kirlian photography (aura photography) you can see strands coming from them. Well we know plants are alive of course but what about other tests that have been undergone? Plants react to the atmosphere around them eg music, smells, people talking.
Albeit they are a different form of life I just wish some veggies would stop taking the moral highground because I like meat.
All I can say is I appreciate every morsel of food that passes through my lips and I wonder where it came from and how that piece of food lived.
Views people?
Heres some linkage to show I aint a complete raving loony
linky link
Oh and if there are any fruitarians about who can give me a kick up the bum then go ahead.... I respect that you try not to harm anything to get your grub.
I would just like to mention out of general irritation that some veggie friends give me. They always ask how can I have a clean conscience because I eat meat? Uusally giving me a long lasting lecture also about how much healthier it is. I have no rpoblem with the healthy part. But I would like to inform you that plants have feelings too. If you have come across kirlian photography (aura photography) you can see strands coming from them. Well we know plants are alive of course but what about other tests that have been undergone? Plants react to the atmosphere around them eg music, smells, people talking.
Albeit they are a different form of life I just wish some veggies would stop taking the moral highground because I like meat.
All I can say is I appreciate every morsel of food that passes through my lips and I wonder where it came from and how that piece of food lived.
Views people?
Heres some linkage to show I aint a complete raving loony
linky link
Oh and if there are any fruitarians about who can give me a kick up the bum then go ahead.... I respect that you try not to harm anything to get your grub.
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
Steak4lifer chiming in to say I'd give the tissue culture a try, and stick with it were it comparable to "real" meat.
Locally I can buy this big name brand of chicken ( well my wife buys it ) that comes in big boxes 5 kilos, and I assume it's cheap. Thing is it's the weirdest chicken I've ever come across. Not only will this stuff not brown, even on the bbq, but it's completely lacking in flavour and the texture is closer to tofu than chicken. I often joke that this stuff is grown in a lab, and now refuse to eat it in favour of better, more expensive bird.
Steak4lifer chiming in to say I'd give the tissue culture a try, and stick with it were it comparable to "real" meat.
Locally I can buy this big name brand of chicken ( well my wife buys it ) that comes in big boxes 5 kilos, and I assume it's cheap. Thing is it's the weirdest chicken I've ever come across. Not only will this stuff not brown, even on the bbq, but it's completely lacking in flavour and the texture is closer to tofu than chicken. I often joke that this stuff is grown in a lab, and now refuse to eat it in favour of better, more expensive bird.
SILVER Member
artisan
1,576 posts
Location: Berkshire, UK
artisan
1,576 posts
Location: Berkshire, UK
Posted:
I daresay I will buy a crossbow when I have the money, go for a lovely walk in the hills.... spot my prey bounding/flapping around happily where it wants to be and end it's life swiftly.... not prolonging it.
Abatoires are bad places because it's mass murder and whoever that cow/pig gives life to they don't know, if you've been near/in one you'll probably notice the very bad atmosphere around it. Better being able to look your prey in the eye complimenting your prey with skill/wit taken.
This I deem helluva lot more respectable.... and it's free range.
But that's just me
I daresay I will buy a crossbow when I have the money, go for a lovely walk in the hills.... spot my prey bounding/flapping around happily where it wants to be and end it's life swiftly.... not prolonging it.
Abatoires are bad places because it's mass murder and whoever that cow/pig gives life to they don't know, if you've been near/in one you'll probably notice the very bad atmosphere around it. Better being able to look your prey in the eye complimenting your prey with skill/wit taken.
This I deem helluva lot more respectable.... and it's free range.
But that's just me
SILVER Member
artisan
1,576 posts
Location: Berkshire, UK
artisan
1,576 posts
Location: Berkshire, UK
Posted:
oh and I ackwoledge that when I hug a tree I may think about a cousin I munched on earlier and thank them for still letting me hug them.
Yes I am nuts
oh and I ackwoledge that when I hug a tree I may think about a cousin I munched on earlier and thank them for still letting me hug them.
Yes I am nuts
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
:uumm: now fly4fun get's into the same corner as the steaks4life?
You're terrifying me...
:uumm: now fly4fun get's into the same corner as the steaks4life?
You're terrifying me... the best smiles are the ones you lead to 
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
Tom..only in relation to global warming.
The IPCC says we should all be afraid...very afraid. Well ok, it's our grandchildren that need to be afraid and we need to be afraid for them.
Maybe
All those scientists could be wrong
Tom..only in relation to global warming.
The IPCC says we should all be afraid...very afraid. Well ok, it's our grandchildren that need to be afraid and we need to be afraid for them.
Maybe
All those scientists could be wrong
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
"all there is to fear is fear itself"... (Amytiville Proverb)
We get all scared, distracted and scattered, whilst the dough is getting taken by the few...
"all there is to fear is fear itself"... (Amytiville Proverb)
We get all scared, distracted and scattered, whilst the dough is getting taken by the few...
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
Cheers- it was getting a bit lonely in this thread
I don't think we ever see many cohesive arguments from keen meat eaters, cos there aren't any
People eat meat either cos they like it or through established habit- not necessarily anything wrong with that, but it doesn't constitute reason/argument for eating meat.
Whereas many of those who don't eat meat, make that choice based on some form of argument/reason eg cos they don't want to contribute to harming animals or they think that meat eating has adverse effects on the environment.
And that's OK- it's just the nature of the issue that there can't be many arguments why people should eat meat (other than for that minority who have medical conditions that make it desirable).
It's just unfortunate when they see that as being such a bad thing that they then bring forward obviously false arguments, like the one this thread is based on (plants have rights, therefore lets eat animals instead......).
Written by: Pyrolific
I appreciated your proof re harm minimisation Dave - its a pity we havent seen a single cohesive argument from the Steaks4life crew
Cheers- it was getting a bit lonely in this thread
I don't think we ever see many cohesive arguments from keen meat eaters, cos there aren't any
People eat meat either cos they like it or through established habit- not necessarily anything wrong with that, but it doesn't constitute reason/argument for eating meat.
Whereas many of those who don't eat meat, make that choice based on some form of argument/reason eg cos they don't want to contribute to harming animals or they think that meat eating has adverse effects on the environment.
And that's OK- it's just the nature of the issue that there can't be many arguments why people should eat meat (other than for that minority who have medical conditions that make it desirable).
It's just unfortunate when they see that as being such a bad thing that they then bring forward obviously false arguments, like the one this thread is based on (plants have rights, therefore lets eat animals instead......).
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
i have a small obsession in bacon and steak wrapped with bacon
and i think plants have some form of feeling or consciousness
no excuses
i have a small obsession in bacon and steak wrapped with bacon
and i think plants have some form of feeling or consciousness
no excuses
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Even though it might come across the wrong end:
I just can't fully agree with you, OWD. IMHO the agricultural industry is doing mayor damage to the environment, the fruits and veggies are not as healthy as you may try to put it and indeed, just because you can neither hear nor sense it: plants have a life and emotions.
So how do you explain that plants should have lesser rights?
May I direct you to this woman who claims that it's possible for the human body to survive exclusively on sunlight.
You guess that's an option for you? It should be, because it's here and she proves it. So you should now cease all veggie-genocide and just stare up to the sun... errrrrm now I got it: how often does the sun shine in the UK??
Even though it might come across the wrong end:
I just can't fully agree with you, OWD. IMHO the agricultural industry is doing mayor damage to the environment, the fruits and veggies are not as healthy as you may try to put it and indeed, just because you can neither hear nor sense it: plants have a life and emotions.
So how do you explain that plants should have lesser rights?
May I direct you to this woman who claims that it's possible for the human body to survive exclusively on sunlight.
You guess that's an option for you? It should be, because it's here and she proves it. So you should now cease all veggie-genocide and just stare up to the sun... errrrrm now I got it: how often does the sun shine in the UK??
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
I addressed this one earlier-
Basically, whatever harm plant agriculture causes, is simply multiplied by ten if the alternative of eating animals is attempted.
Of the two options of eating meat and eating plants, the second is by far the least destructive, simply because meat production requires so much vegetation for the animal feed.
I don't.
Anyone who really believes that plants have rights should immediately cease to eat meat- as explained above, getting your energy and nutrition from meat involves far greater plant carnage than simply subsisting on plants alone.
She's talking bollox- no one can live without eating (as I'm sure you know ).
Written by: FireTom
Even though it might come across the wrong end:
I just can't fully agree with you, OWD. IMHO the agricultural industry is doing mayor damage to the environment....................
I addressed this one earlier-
Written by: onewheeldave
Fortunately, over the past few days, I've realised there is no need to engage with that particular issue, when, instead, it can be shown to be irrelevant (to the issue of the rights/wrongs of meat eating and vegetarianism).
Let me be somewhat bold and say that I'm not interested in proffering an opinion here- what I am aiming to do is put forward an irrefutable, drop-dead proof, that the existence of plant feelings in no way justifies the meat-industry.
Of course, i may make a mistake, in which case feel free to point it out.
1. For the case of argument, I grant the opposition the possibility that plants are conscious.
2. I'll use one premise/assumption- the fact that, when it comes to doing harm or inflicting suffering, that it is morally preferable, when faced with two options, all other things being equal, to choose the option that results in less harm/suffering.
In life, it is impossible to not inflict harm occasionally- even those who commit to not killing any life, will inevitable occasionally swallow a fly, or sit on something that results in an insect being crushed.
The important thing, morally speaking, is to minimise the harm. Given a choice between selling cakes for a living and selling landmines, it is preferable to sell cakes.
-----------
Getting to the point, take two choices-
A. eating a lot of animal produce/meat
B. eating very little animal produce/meat and instead eating more vegetation
If plants have feelings and can suffer pain/loss, than option B does indeed involve harm.
Option A also involves harm (to the animals).
Clearly though, option A also involves considerably more harm to plants.
This is because animals eat vegetation to live.
They walk, run, copulate, breed- a considerable amount of food is necessary to fuel all this.
As a result, the amount of energy/food value obtained from an animal by eating it, is considerably less than the amount of energy/food value of the crops that have gone into it throughout its life.
This portion is generally said to be around 10 to 1.
This means that, to sustain a human with option B (vegetarian or close to vegetarian) involves an amount of plant suffering which we will call X.
Option A, however (eating, lots of meat) involves an amount of plant suffering equal to X multiplied by 10.
Option B, therefore, as it involves considerably less suffering to both plant and animal, is clearly the morally preferable option.
Thus, even if we accept that plants are capable of suffering, vegetarianism is still the morally superior option.
From this I put forward the suggestion that the 'plants have feelings' justification of the meat-industry, is irrelevant to the issue and nothing more than a smoke-screen.
Basically, whatever harm plant agriculture causes, is simply multiplied by ten if the alternative of eating animals is attempted.
Of the two options of eating meat and eating plants, the second is by far the least destructive, simply because meat production requires so much vegetation for the animal feed.
Written by: FireTom
So how do you explain that plants should have lesser rights?
I don't.
Anyone who really believes that plants have rights should immediately cease to eat meat- as explained above, getting your energy and nutrition from meat involves far greater plant carnage than simply subsisting on plants alone.
Written by: FireTom
May I direct you to this woman who claims that it's possible for the human body to survive exclusively on sunlight.
She's talking bollox- no one can live without eating (as I'm sure you know
). "You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
SILVER Member
addict
449 posts
Location: Australia
addict
449 posts
Location: Australia
Posted:
There are two, seperate reasons why people don't like killing animals. Firstly, people might not want to end the life of another living being. They would be ethically disturbed by the idea. Secondly, killing an animal can be quite gross, with all the blood and guts. I have heard vegetarians say that meat eaters are too weak to kill animals themselves, but they assume that this is because meat eaters don't like to see animals die in front of them as that would make them feel morally responsible. I would say that it's most often because of the second reason - if killing an animal wasn't so full of blood and guts, people wouldn't have as much of a problem with doing it themselves.
Written by: Pyrolific
oh my goodness.
I think we'd have a lot less meat eating if the meat eaters had to kill their own meat and butcher it to get their meat. so many people love to defend their right to eat meat, but then when it comes to ending the life of an animal right in front of them wimp out - and usually feel ill during the butchering process. I wonder how many would be defending their right to eat factory meat if they had an awareness of the conditions their food is being grown in?
There are two, seperate reasons why people don't like killing animals. Firstly, people might not want to end the life of another living being. They would be ethically disturbed by the idea. Secondly, killing an animal can be quite gross, with all the blood and guts. I have heard vegetarians say that meat eaters are too weak to kill animals themselves, but they assume that this is because meat eaters don't like to see animals die in front of them as that would make them feel morally responsible. I would say that it's most often because of the second reason - if killing an animal wasn't so full of blood and guts, people wouldn't have as much of a problem with doing it themselves.
GOLD Member
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
I don’t follow OWD, if the existence of plant feelings in no way justifies the meat-industry, then what are you complaining about? You seem to base opposition to eating meat on the existence of animal feelings.
Perhaps OWD, you could read the The Secret Life of Plans.
If people were really concerned about animal then they wouldn’t eat any animal products. Then they would suffer from Vitamin B12 deficiency, proving once again that animal products are part of a healthy human diet.
Written by:
OWD said: Let me be somewhat bold and say that I'm not interested in proffering an opinion here- what I am aiming to do is put forward an irrefutable, drop-dead proof, that the existence of plant feelings in no way justifies the meat-industry.
I don’t follow OWD, if the existence of plant feelings in no way justifies the meat-industry, then what are you complaining about? You seem to base opposition to eating meat on the existence of animal feelings.
Perhaps OWD, you could read the The Secret Life of Plans.
If people were really concerned about animal then they wouldn’t eat any animal products. Then they would suffer from Vitamin B12 deficiency, proving once again that animal products are part of a healthy human diet.
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
BRONZE Member
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Posted:
I've butchered a pig and a couple of chickens... pigs are hard. we raised some iron age boar on a farm in the forest, big red bristley ones, butchered then spit roast them takes a HELL of a long time to spit roast a whole damn pig (about 14-20 hours)
Written by: Pyrolific
oh my goodness.
I think we'd have a lot less meat eating if the meat eaters had to kill their own meat and butcher it to get their meat. so many people love to defend their right to eat meat, but then when it comes to ending the life of an animal right in front of them wimp out - and usually feel ill during the butchering process.
I've butchered a pig and a couple of chickens... pigs are hard. we raised some iron age boar on a farm in the forest, big red bristley ones, butchered then spit roast them takes a HELL of a long time to spit roast a whole damn pig (about 14-20 hours)
A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
OWD: meaning that if these two parts would greatly change
- feeding the animals and
- killing them softly
eating meat would be okay? I mean the gasses could even be turned into energy.
Ever thought about the fact that your resentment to light-food is the same as vegetarianism appears to meatlovers?
And finally: you would have no problem in denying rights to plants and have them farmed any which way.... but animals are a different story, because you think so?
*wanders off, headshaken*
OWD: meaning that if these two parts would greatly change
- feeding the animals and
- killing them softly
eating meat would be okay? I mean the gasses could even be turned into energy.
Ever thought about the fact that your resentment to light-food is the same as vegetarianism appears to meatlovers?
And finally: you would have no problem in denying rights to plants and have them farmed any which way.... but animals are a different story, because you think so?
*wanders off, headshaken*
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
SILVER Member
artisan
1,576 posts
Location: Berkshire, UK
artisan
1,576 posts
Location: Berkshire, UK
Posted:
As well stablished meat eater when you say their are little arguements I daresay the protein count is important.... tofu tastes of tasteless goo unless of course you attack it with all manner of flavorings. Hey I aint dissin veggiecuisine.... heck my xmas dinner was a nut roast and I enjoyed it too. Also us humans are omnivores.... why do you think we have those pointy canine thingies?
As well stablished meat eater when you say their are little arguements I daresay the protein count is important.... tofu tastes of tasteless goo unless of course you attack it with all manner of flavorings. Hey I aint dissin veggiecuisine.... heck my xmas dinner was a nut roast and I enjoyed it too. Also us humans are omnivores.... why do you think we have those pointy canine thingies?
Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
Posted:
I think you've misinterprated. OWD's point was that plants having feelings would not make unneccesary harm to animal justifiable.
The fact that having some animal component to our diet may be conductive to our health does not justify unneccesary harm either.
Rather, it would mean that people should try an minimise their consumpsion of animal meat, restrict themselves to animal species less likely to experience pain in a meaningful way, and encourage more humane farming principals
Animal are different to plants.
Written by: StoneWritten by: ] OWD said: Let me be somewhat bold and say that I'm not interested in proffering an opinion here- what I am aiming to do is put forward an irrefutable, drop-dead proof, that the existence of plant feelings in no way justifies the meat-industry.[/quote
I don’t follow OWD, if the existence of plant feelings in no way justifies the meat-industry, then what are you complaining about? You seem to base opposition to eating meat on the existence of animal feelings.
Perhaps OWD, you could read the The Secret Life of Plans.
If people were really concerned about animal then they wouldn’t eat any animal products. Then they would suffer from Vitamin B12 deficiency, proving once again that animal products are part of a healthy human diet.
I think you've misinterprated. OWD's point was that plants having feelings would not make unneccesary harm to animal justifiable.
The fact that having some animal component to our diet may be conductive to our health does not justify unneccesary harm either.
Rather, it would mean that people should try an minimise their consumpsion of animal meat, restrict themselves to animal species less likely to experience pain in a meaningful way, and encourage more humane farming principals
Written by: Firetom
And finally: you would have no problem in denying rights to plants and have them farmed any which way.... but animals are a different story, because you think so?
Animal are different to plants.
According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...
SILVER Member
artisan
1,576 posts
Location: Berkshire, UK
artisan
1,576 posts
Location: Berkshire, UK
Posted:
Animals are different to plants of course. I imagine we can argue perceptions of life all day.... through to next millenium.
I believe the race to posess a plant is now on
But plants are still alive, as are fungi, as are we.... all in their own special way. They react to the environement around them, they reproduce. How do you know that they aren't debating what we're up to?
If you've read any of Terry Pratchett then you may recall when Rincewind has just bounced back onto the disc and wandering around somewhere on the rim he realises the trees are talking. He asks the tree 'what does it feel like to bea tree?', the tree replies 'I've been a tree all my life, I don't know how to beanything else, why? What does it feel like to be human?'
or something like that.
There are so many things we do know but have proof of... how do you know? I like to keep an open mind.
Animals are different to plants of course. I imagine we can argue perceptions of life all day.... through to next millenium.
I believe the race to posess a plant is now on
But plants are still alive, as are fungi, as are we.... all in their own special way. They react to the environement around them, they reproduce. How do you know that they aren't debating what we're up to?
If you've read any of Terry Pratchett then you may recall when Rincewind has just bounced back onto the disc and wandering around somewhere on the rim he realises the trees are talking. He asks the tree 'what does it feel like to bea tree?', the tree replies 'I've been a tree all my life, I don't know how to beanything else, why? What does it feel like to be human?'
or something like that.
There are so many things we do know but have proof of... how do you know? I like to keep an open mind.
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
There's no such thing as 'light-food'- humans cannot obtain nutrition or calorific energy from light or prajna and subsist on it so that food and water is unnecessary.
As I previously said, my argument does not deny rights to plants, on the contrary-
...it includes it as the first assumption of the argument.
and then goes on to show that eating meat violates far more plant rights than eating plants does...
The fact is that the animals we eat (cows, pigs, hens etc) consume a lot of plants to live on- by getting energy from animal meat we violate around 10x the plants rights than if we just eat plants.
(unless of course, animals can also live on 'light-food' )
Written by: FireTom
Ever thought about the fact that your resentment to light-food is the same as vegetarianism appears to meatlovers?
There's no such thing as 'light-food'- humans cannot obtain nutrition or calorific energy from light or prajna and subsist on it so that food and water is unnecessary.
Written by: FireTom
And finally: you would have no problem in denying rights to plants and have them farmed any which way.... but animals are a different story, because you think so?
*wanders off, headshaken*
As I previously said, my argument does not deny rights to plants, on the contrary-
Written by: OWD
1. For the case of argument, I grant the opposition the possibility that plants are conscious.
2. I'll use one premise/assumption- the fact that, when it comes to doing harm or inflicting suffering, that it is morally preferable, when faced with two options, all other things being equal, to choose the option that results in less harm/suffering.
...it includes it as the first assumption of the argument.
and then goes on to show that eating meat violates far more plant rights than eating plants does...
The fact is that the animals we eat (cows, pigs, hens etc) consume a lot of plants to live on- by getting energy from animal meat we violate around 10x the plants rights than if we just eat plants.
(unless of course, animals can also live on 'light-food'
) "You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
Posted:
We don't. But we also have absolutely no reason to suppose that they do, and good but not conclusive reasoning to support the idea that they can't.
Long story short, we just need to do what's best based on the best information at present. Short story long, anything by Dickens.
Written by: Little_Miss_Nebula
But plants are still alive, as are fungi, as are we.... all in their own special way. They react to the environement around them, they reproduce. How do you know that they aren't debating what we're up to?
We don't. But we also have absolutely no reason to suppose that they do, and good but not conclusive reasoning to support the idea that they can't.
Long story short, we just need to do what's best based on the best information at present. Short story long, anything by Dickens.
According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...
member
25 posts
25 posts
Posted:
Plants have no nerves, so they physically can't feel.
They also have no brains so they have no where to register emotions.
I appreciate they are living and can react to the atmosphere but not that they have fealings.
Plants have no nerves, so they physically can't feel.
They also have no brains so they have no where to register emotions.
I appreciate they are living and can react to the atmosphere but not that they have fealings.
SILVER Member
there's no charge for awesomeness... or attractiveness
3,764 posts
Location: limbo, Australia
there's no charge for awesomeness... or attractiveness
3,764 posts
Location: limbo, Australia
Posted:
the whole idea of whether or not plants have feelings is irrelevant to a discussion of what it is we should be eating. we've evolved over a period of a couple million years or so, to be omnivorous... our species is supposed to eat meat, fruit, vegetables and nuts.
grains, via the agricultural revolution, were only introduced into our diet a matter of 10,000 years ago, which in evolutionary terms is a mere pittance.
we're not doing ourselves any favours by the propagation of grains as a mainstay of the human diet, both in terms of our health and well being and in the health of the planet in general.
arguments put forward that the farming of animal meat is detrimental to the planet are ludicrous. we've been eating meat since our species could pick up a rock and crush the nearest animal. the farming of grains is a double-edged sword... yes, we, as a species have pushed ourselves into a corner where the only way we can afford to feed the exploding population is via grains. but we would never have got to that point (out of control population growth) without the farming of grain.
if, on the other hand, you wish to argue that modern farming practises (steroid-laden chicken, grain-fed beef, battery hens etc etc) are detrimental to both our health and the health of the planet, I'm with you 100%. I'll buy free-range eggs, "organic" meats (and yes, I'm aware you have to be very careful what they label as organic), grass-fed beef, whenever I can, not only because it's good for me, but good for all of us. but the same can be said for modern vegetable/grain farming practises.
that we should also do what we can to minimize trauma to whatever our chosen food source, ought to go without saying.
I'm rambing a little bit, (and I've gone a little off topic - plants have feelings, but then, so have most of the replies), because I'm tired and haven't had time to put together a cohesive argument. but I'll try to return with more later.
the whole idea of whether or not plants have feelings is irrelevant to a discussion of what it is we should be eating. we've evolved over a period of a couple million years or so, to be omnivorous... our species is supposed to eat meat, fruit, vegetables and nuts.
grains, via the agricultural revolution, were only introduced into our diet a matter of 10,000 years ago, which in evolutionary terms is a mere pittance.
we're not doing ourselves any favours by the propagation of grains as a mainstay of the human diet, both in terms of our health and well being and in the health of the planet in general.
arguments put forward that the farming of animal meat is detrimental to the planet are ludicrous. we've been eating meat since our species could pick up a rock and crush the nearest animal. the farming of grains is a double-edged sword... yes, we, as a species have pushed ourselves into a corner where the only way we can afford to feed the exploding population is via grains. but we would never have got to that point (out of control population growth) without the farming of grain.
if, on the other hand, you wish to argue that modern farming practises (steroid-laden chicken, grain-fed beef, battery hens etc etc) are detrimental to both our health and the health of the planet, I'm with you 100%. I'll buy free-range eggs, "organic" meats (and yes, I'm aware you have to be very careful what they label as organic), grass-fed beef, whenever I can, not only because it's good for me, but good for all of us. but the same can be said for modern vegetable/grain farming practises.
that we should also do what we can to minimize trauma to whatever our chosen food source, ought to go without saying.
I'm rambing a little bit, (and I've gone a little off topic - plants have feelings, but then, so have most of the replies), because I'm tired and haven't had time to put together a cohesive argument. but I'll try to return with more later.
--pogo (pat) [forever and always]
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
whether or not it is irrelevant to what we should be eating it is the title of this discussion
and you can't eat strawberries because you would cause environmental damage
https://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article2268097.ece
EDITED_BY: faithinfire (1171724837)
whether or not it is irrelevant to what we should be eating it is the title of this discussion
and you can't eat strawberries because you would cause environmental damage
https://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article2268097.ece
EDITED_BY: faithinfire (1171724837)
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Really OWD I thoroughly get your point (even though animals are getting fed their own kind, along with a lot of other (nonveggie) crapo).
As human beings we evolved to a point were we can incorporate a lot of stuff into our diet and survive (a reasonable time) - this is one aspect why we are superior, besides the fact that a lot of our evolution is due to the intake of animal protein.
Now we have come to a point where we are no longer dependant on a particular source of food and where we - as one of the most sophisticated predators on this planet - even get compassionate about our prey. And much of this is due to our very unique situation in the west.
IMO this is a very interesting point in our history.
Yet we cannot deny that this development only took place within a VERY brief period of time. Our minds (mostly) evolved a lot quicker than our bodies, instincts and habits may be able to follow up on it.
I'm pointing this out, because I think that this discussion is only affecting and is only appropriate to us here in the "developed" west. I guess none of you would go so far to tell the tribes they should cease hunting (if much of their survival is depending on it), due to ethical reasons.
We - as humans and the dominating species - are having a deep impact on this planet and it simply is our choice how deep this impact is going to be.
Any which way this planet will die one bright day in the far future, we cannot stop this as this is a natural law. The only thing we might be able to do is to shoot ourselves to another solar system and restart. So: this planet is going to die, no matter what, and if humans are not building an arch, then (most likely) nobody will.
So back to the initial topic (and I also do side you on the point, that animal farming is also inflicting on vegetable rights, and am not trying the sidealley that humans as such are infringing with ANY liveforms rights on this planet):
As long as vegetarians are trying to put a guilt pattern on meatlovers, nothing is going to change - IMHO.
It has to be a conscious decision each and every individual is happy with and is doing from one's own heart.
I'll not try to point out that the structure of society in which we are living today is very fragile. Almost 50% of the human population is living in cities already. If one of the mayor metropolitans (like Tokyo, NYC, L.A. etc.) is going to blow up, OR if some other event is going to put this civilization on the edge, the scenario can change rapidly.
How many of us urbanauts would be able to go back into nature and feed themselves?
However, I'm on the merge of going astray: IMHO a balanced diet is the key. US citizens do seem to hold the record of meat/ capita/ year as in 100kgs per head and year (that's an awful lot of meat)... A balanced diet (maybe 1 meat/ week) will greatly improve the status quo, but I do neither have the right nor do I hold the power to stop people from eating meat and I suspect that ppl would resent, if I would.
Therefore I can only live through example and eat as little meat as I can and as much as I "need" (as in "personal preference") and emphasise that the conditions under which animals (and veggies) are farmed is 99% a horrible nightmare.
It's not up to me to condemn anyone for their actions, because IMHO this will not lead anywhere but into conflict. I can raise awareness and that is as much as I can do.
Maybe I made myself a little clearer now, as you may have gotten the wrong impression, OWD.
Really OWD I thoroughly get your point (even though animals are getting fed their own kind, along with a lot of other (nonveggie) crapo).
As human beings we evolved to a point were we can incorporate a lot of stuff into our diet and survive (a reasonable time) - this is one aspect why we are superior, besides the fact that a lot of our evolution is due to the intake of animal protein.
Now we have come to a point where we are no longer dependant on a particular source of food and where we - as one of the most sophisticated predators on this planet - even get compassionate about our prey. And much of this is due to our very unique situation in the west.
IMO this is a very interesting point in our history.
Yet we cannot deny that this development only took place within a VERY brief period of time. Our minds (mostly) evolved a lot quicker than our bodies, instincts and habits may be able to follow up on it.
I'm pointing this out, because I think that this discussion is only affecting and is only appropriate to us here in the "developed" west. I guess none of you would go so far to tell the tribes they should cease hunting (if much of their survival is depending on it), due to ethical reasons.
We - as humans and the dominating species - are having a deep impact on this planet and it simply is our choice how deep this impact is going to be.
Any which way this planet will die one bright day in the far future, we cannot stop this as this is a natural law. The only thing we might be able to do is to shoot ourselves to another solar system and restart. So: this planet is going to die, no matter what, and if humans are not building an arch, then (most likely) nobody will.
So back to the initial topic (and I also do side you on the point, that animal farming is also inflicting on vegetable rights, and am not trying the sidealley that humans as such are infringing with ANY liveforms rights on this planet):
As long as vegetarians are trying to put a guilt pattern on meatlovers, nothing is going to change - IMHO.
It has to be a conscious decision each and every individual is happy with and is doing from one's own heart.
I'll not try to point out that the structure of society in which we are living today is very fragile. Almost 50% of the human population is living in cities already. If one of the mayor metropolitans (like Tokyo, NYC, L.A. etc.) is going to blow up, OR if some other event is going to put this civilization on the edge, the scenario can change rapidly.
How many of us urbanauts would be able to go back into nature and feed themselves?
However, I'm on the merge of going astray: IMHO a balanced diet is the key. US citizens do seem to hold the record of meat/ capita/ year as in 100kgs per head and year (that's an awful lot of meat)... A balanced diet (maybe 1 meat/ week) will greatly improve the status quo, but I do neither have the right nor do I hold the power to stop people from eating meat and I suspect that ppl would resent, if I would.
Therefore I can only live through example and eat as little meat as I can and as much as I "need" (as in "personal preference") and emphasise that the conditions under which animals (and veggies) are farmed is 99% a horrible nightmare.
It's not up to me to condemn anyone for their actions, because IMHO this will not lead anywhere but into conflict. I can raise awareness and that is as much as I can do.
Maybe I made myself a little clearer now, as you may have gotten the wrong impression, OWD.
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
FireTom- a balanced a well written post.
Thank you for acknowledging that you've read and understood the point I was making.
I hope you understand that I'm not trying to put a guilt pattern on meatlovers, I'm simply presenting a few facts and some lines of reasoning.
Do you think I've gotten the wrong impression?
What particular areas?
FireTom- a balanced a well written post.
Written by: FireTom
So back to the initial topic (and I also do side you on the point, that animal farming is also inflicting on vegetable rights.....
Thank you for acknowledging that you've read and understood the point I was making.
Written by: FireTom
As long as vegetarians are trying to put a guilt pattern on meatlovers, nothing is going to change - IMHO.
I hope you understand that I'm not trying to put a guilt pattern on meatlovers, I'm simply presenting a few facts and some lines of reasoning.
Written by: FireTom
Maybe I made myself a little clearer now, as you may have gotten the wrong impression, OWD.
Do you think I've gotten the wrong impression?
What particular areas?
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
SILVER Member
there's no charge for awesomeness... or attractiveness
3,764 posts
Location: limbo, Australia
there's no charge for awesomeness... or attractiveness
3,764 posts
Location: limbo, Australia
Posted:
very true... but my opinion on that topic... is that it is irrelevant... just because it's contrary, doesn't make it wrong... or in fact irrelevant to the discussion.
Written by: faithinfire
whether or not it is irrelevant to what we should be eating it is the title of this discussion
very true... but my opinion on that topic... is that it is irrelevant... just because it's contrary, doesn't make it wrong... or in fact irrelevant to the discussion.
--pogo (pat) [forever and always]
SILVER Member
there's no charge for awesomeness... or attractiveness
3,764 posts
Location: limbo, Australia
there's no charge for awesomeness... or attractiveness
3,764 posts
Location: limbo, Australia
Posted:
oh... and that's a bugga about the strawberries... cos I love strawberries... but I wonder... is it strawberries that are problem or the specific farming practises used to grow them?
they're (albeit indirectly via the local council) obtaining the water illegally and destroying the underlying water table in the process; that doesn't mean there isn't a better, more ecologically sound way to cultivate them.
oh... and that's a bugga about the strawberries... cos I love strawberries... but I wonder... is it strawberries that are problem or the specific farming practises used to grow them?
they're (albeit indirectly via the local council) obtaining the water illegally and destroying the underlying water table in the process; that doesn't mean there isn't a better, more ecologically sound way to cultivate them.
--pogo (pat) [forever and always]
GOLD Member
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
I agree Fire Tom: As long as vegetarians are trying to put a guilt pattern on meatlovers, nothing is going to change. Well said
That’s the only reason I weighed into this debate. I read a few pages and came away feeling like a second class citizen because I like to eat meat. So I responded with few facetious comments.
Personally, I think eating fish caught in the wild is a much bigger problem than farming animals because fish stocks are being depleted at rapid rate.
There is also a big difference between ripping down the Amazon to grow hamburgers for upsize Americans and grazing beef cattle on the flood plains of the Darling to produce organic beef in a sustainable system that works with nature. Unfortunately, most of Australia’s rivers are being depleted by greedy irrigators to growing inefficient crops like rice, soy and mung beans.
nuff for now
I agree Fire Tom: As long as vegetarians are trying to put a guilt pattern on meatlovers, nothing is going to change. Well said
That’s the only reason I weighed into this debate. I read a few pages and came away feeling like a second class citizen because I like to eat meat. So I responded with few facetious comments.
Personally, I think eating fish caught in the wild is a much bigger problem than farming animals because fish stocks are being depleted at rapid rate.
There is also a big difference between ripping down the Amazon to grow hamburgers for upsize Americans and grazing beef cattle on the flood plains of the Darling to produce organic beef in a sustainable system that works with nature. Unfortunately, most of Australia’s rivers are being depleted by greedy irrigators to growing inefficient crops like rice, soy and mung beans.
nuff for now
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
Posted:
Feeling victimised doesn't change whether or not your lifestyle causes unneccasery harm or not.
Written by: Stone
I agree Fire Tom: As long as vegetarians are trying to put a guilt pattern on meatlovers, nothing is going to change. Well said
Feeling victimised doesn't change whether or not your lifestyle causes unneccasery harm or not.
According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Good point, Jeff.
Yet our entire lifestyle causes (unnecessary) harm.
All across the threads: our exotic fruit, our leather or plastic shoes, if we look at our jewelry, or spin with fire (burning fossil fuels for sheer pleasure) our desktop PC's - even the very screen you're receiving this post from... a satellite had to be shot in to space for this (in another scenario we had to put cables on the bottom of the ocean)etc etc...
ach, preachertell shut the ***** up!
But where do we start? And why are we trying to put others down? (lower than ourselves that is)
Vegetarianism will NOT turn us into saints and not flying won't either - not even the two combined, I'm afraid... (besides: Hitler was vegetarian) but it seems to be quite en vogue to crack down on meat lovers and frequent flyers, freedom fighters, US citizens and SUV drivers.... whereas the latter.... (an average of 100 kgs of meat per capita and year.. US guys, c'mon... 
*I said shut the f*** up! * Excuse me please )
@ OWN: just my paranoia maybe
Good point, Jeff.
Yet our entire lifestyle causes (unnecessary) harm.
All across the threads: our exotic fruit, our leather or plastic shoes, if we look at our jewelry, or spin with fire (burning fossil fuels for sheer pleasure) our desktop PC's - even the very screen you're receiving this post from... a satellite had to be shot in to space for this (in another scenario we had to put cables on the bottom of the ocean)etc etc...
ach, preachertell shut the ***** up!But where do we start? And why are we trying to put others down? (lower than ourselves that is)
Vegetarianism will NOT turn us into saints and not flying won't either - not even the two combined, I'm afraid... (besides: Hitler was vegetarian) but it seems to be quite en vogue to crack down on meat lovers and frequent flyers, freedom fighters, US citizens and SUV drivers.... whereas the latter....
(an average of 100 kgs of meat per capita and year.. US guys, c'mon... *I said shut the f*** up! * Excuse me please )@ OWN: just my paranoia maybe
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
the article was linked i thought
but the strawberry thing was i gathered from the article that many of brit and europes strawberries were grown in spain and that people were illegally getting water, lowering the water table and causing environmental damage
the article was linked i thought
but the strawberry thing was i gathered from the article that many of brit and europes strawberries were grown in spain and that people were illegally getting water, lowering the water table and causing environmental damage
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com