Meet Your Meat

[stagnant filth]

Meet Your Meat

im not looking for people to argue with me about how wrong i am for caring about animals .... im just trying to give some interested people insight into what goes on before a hamburger is a hamburger.

Well, I respect your opinion, but I don't agree that this is something to make one stop consuming meat. The point of domesticated animals is to be eaten; thus, the way in which we make them edible isn't really a big deal to me (they're going on people's plates one way or another).

Glad you have concern for these animals though; it’s an attribute that must surely guide your feelings on cruelty in other areas too.

[Man Against Time]

I didnt click the link but am not unfamiliar with the topic.

People who think it is appropriate to grow an animal in a dark box in a factory should just very simply all be murdered. That would solve more problems than you could imagine.

[stagnant filth]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (dotComa,)
Well, I respect your opinion, but I don't agree that this is something to make one stop consuming meat. The point of domesticated animals is to be eaten; thus, the way in which we make them edible isn't really a big deal to me (they're going on people's plates one way or another).<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

then you would have no problems with a homeless man wandering in your backyard, killing and eating one of your pets? i mean the point of a domesticated animal is to eat it right?

Actually I meant domesticated like on a farm for the purpose of consumption, but since you gave such a bad example (you included a man who needs to eat), I'd say yes to your question. I would not have a problem with a homeless man eating my pet if it gave him life. I suppose you’d want me to tell him to save his bottles for a soy milk.

and man against time, you'd have to kill nearly all of us if that's your theory.

[Impenitent]

can't you hear the vegetables and fruits scream in pain as they are mercilessily SLAUGHTERED so other life may continue? life is death... to live one must kill... to say otherwise is a stupidity

[stagnant filth]

when did i say i wanted to wipe out people that eat meat? cause i dont remember that at all. maybe you should re-read the very first post ...."im not looking for people to argue with me about how wrong i am for caring about animals"

and as a fact you might enjoy .. that homeless starving man wouldnt be starving if cattle farmers didnt raise so many cattle. Of the world's grain harvest 40 percent is used to feed livestock, not people. a cow grazing on one acre of land produces enough meat to sustain a person two and a half months; soybeans grown on that same acre would nourish a person for seven years.

You didn't say that, "Man Against Time" did, that's why I referred to him.

Also, don't be so naive. We could feed the entire planet if we wanted to-using cows, grain, whatever-but that's not profitable (so it’s not feasible). Haven't you read the Grapes of Wrath? They buried the crops to prevent poor people from eating them for free.

Also, I agree with Imp. He said it pretty bluntly, but it's true. One way or another you got to kill another organism to survive.

[stagnant filth]

plants dont have a central nervous system, dont have sensory nerves. if you show me a reliable study that proves that soybeans can feel love, fear, and pain ..... then i will accept that (as of now) lame argument.

"to say otherwise is a stupidity " or compassion.


and dotcomma .... so do you then think that everything that produces a profit is right? theft produces a profit .... as does organized crime and murder. are those all justified because they do (in their own way) keep the economy afloat? i highly doubt that an all vegetarian nation would perish due to economical peril.

Let's look at this objectively. A nervous system, and emotions are your reasons for not killing an animal for the purpose of survival. My question is who cares about a system that's only purpose is to warn an organism that it's going to have problems if it doesn't move? It's only for the purpose of survival that we have a nervous system, or even emotions. We only love to create; we only feel pain to avoid death. You're being too dramatic, and not thinking about this objectively. Animals know this more than we do; they kill for survival every day.

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
and dotcomma .... so do you then think that everything that produces a profit is right?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

Where did I say that? I said that it's only feasible if it produces profit. In other words, this world won't do something unless it produces profit. Example: If there was no business, roads would not be built. I'm just being realistic.

[stagnant filth]

so you eat meat for survival? come on now ... if you are able to post on this forum ... you have a computer and an internet connection, which means you mostly likely have a roof over your head and money in the bank. you are by no means eating meat to survive. you dont live in the jungle.

and your arguments make no sense .... so if the nervous system means nothing and niether do emotions ..... then why would killing a human being be wrong? if i choose to be a cannibal and eat your family would you support my decision?

Well we don't eat each other much like animals of the same species tend to avoid eating each other-we're a pack. If we all started eating each other we wouldn't survive (it'd be acceptable), so that's another poor argument.

Also, I didn't say I was poor, but people are and can't make choices like you and I can.

[stagnant filth]

so meat is less expensive than grain?

It's easier to make something edible, while still feeling like a human being when you're poor. Tell a poor family to eat grain for the rest of their lives; their emotions will be so stable

Look, you're obviously completely bound to your opinion, and you're not trying to understand what I'm saying (it seems), so just forget about it. The point of this place is to be objective, and try to understand other people bias. You might understand something new if you try.

[stagnant filth]

i understand what you are saying but im not going to agree with you that to live i must kill

Well you define "kill" differently then I (and the dictionary) do I guess. That's fine, and like I said, I hope your ideal in this matter leaks into other areas of your life. Just don't be too idealistic as to make people ignore you.

[stagnant filth]

(straight from the dictionary)
kill -
To put to death.
To deprive of life.


what is kill to you?

Same thing , but how is eating a plant different (this is why I said your definition must be different)? Are you not depriving it of life?

[stagnant filth]

how can you say my argument is weak if that is yours? sure i guess im depriving a plant of its life .... but the plant doesnt bleed, scream, or feel fear before its deprived. a plant is a plant .... humans are animals and so are cows, chickens, etc. if i was a maple tree id probobly say "screw eating plants .... i know how they feel" but im not. im a human being ... an animal with emotions just like the animals you eat. i can more closely identify the horrible things that they must feel or go through .... and thats why i feel compassion.


not to mention that i find the act of eating rotting flesh and muscle completeley disgusting.

Don't be rude, that's not my argument. My argument is that you can't classify things like you have-it doesn't make sense. You said something like <"humans are animals so I understand their pain">. What is an animal? It's an organism, and to be an organism you must also be alive right? How can you separate plants from animals? What makes them different? Your argument is that they don't cry-so because they're inferior or primitive it's ok to deprive them of life? You can't make your classifications if you oppose how we classify cows compared to humans. It's the same argument. I hope you understand your error.