Ah, here we go
vegetarian:
A bad hunter. Someone who survives by consuming not food, but the stuff that food eats.
vegeterianism is not a right or wrong issue. it is just a person’s arbitrary perception on what is alive. i used to be angry at carnivores until i grew up and realized that nobody eats what they consider to be alive. whether it is a snail or a human fetus. what one considers to be alive is arbitrary and personal.
i eat fish but not cows, i cannot logicaly justify that, like you eat cows but not baby humans, or even baby cows. this perplexes me.
high and mighty vegeterians have the same passionate agenda as pro-lifers
[quote]skiredbull wrote:
naw i am a vegetarian cause i cant digest meat well so it isnt cause i am a pussy i stil take hell of sumplements i am just wondering if there is anything special to take[/quote]
An English class might help you out.
[quote]Dirty Gerdy wrote:
bushidobadboy wrote:
redgladiator wrote:
For every new vegetarian post I will eat another stake.
Dude, you’re not supposed to eat the toothpicks.
BBB
hahahahahahahaha lol!
I’ll take it a step further…for every new vegetarian post I’ll kill another cow!
DG[/quote]
thats funny you say this.
I just got my winter order from the local ranch.which included
11 top round steaks
8 sirloins
12 t-bones
2 strip steaks
12 sirloin tip cube steaks
12 ribeyes
4-7 bone roasts
2 chuck roasts at little under 4 pounds each
4 shoulder roasts at about 5 pounds each
12 ribs
whole brisket
8 soup bones
3 packs oxtails
about 9 pounds of double grind burger
this is running right off my packing list
this is half of a cow that just a week ago was lounging in the sun eating grass being a cow.
and whats worse I am washing down his hide with milk from one of his sisters.
MMMMMMM dead critters are good
[quote]MaddyD wrote:
…and whats worse I am washing down his hide with milk from one of his sisters.
[/quote]
I do like your sense of humor.
[quote]sluicy wrote:
MaddyD wrote:
…and whats worse I am washing down his hide with milk from one of his sisters.
I do like your sense of humor. [/quote]
you would like this video then.
part 2
part 3
part 4
part 5
and part 6
I love this video I really do
[quote]eremesu wrote:
vegeterianism is not a right or wrong issue. it is just a person’s arbitrary perception on what is alive. i used to be angry at carnivores until i grew up and realized that nobody eats what they consider to be alive. whether it is a snail or a human fetus. what one considers to be alive is arbitrary and personal.
[/quote]
This sounds like it’s spoken from a platform of severe naivety. Most carnivores, myself included, eat meat not because we don’t recognize a cow as being “alive”, but rather because we don’t care. We are at the top of the food chain, we are sentient and sapient, and beef tastes fantastic. That’s all it takes.
You soft-hearted vegetarians assume everyone is as soft-hearted and caring as you. We’re not.
i forgive the mistake in logic youve just made. i am talking about the same thing. what one considers alive blah blah. i know a fish is “alive” but i dont care, i eat it(which is your point). you know a baby is “alive”, yet as far as i know youve not eaten one, and i hear toddlers taste great too. so if you dont care as you claim…
knowing the difference between technicaly alive and actualy caring is what is the arbitrary part
[quote]chimera182 wrote:
Ah, here we go
vegetarian:
A bad hunter. Someone who survives by consuming not food, but the stuff that food eats.
[/quote]
from this logic, can we conclude that vegetarians are food?
[quote]zephead4747 wrote:
chimera182 wrote:
Ah, here we go
vegetarian:
A bad hunter. Someone who survives by consuming not food, but the stuff that food eats.
from this logic, can we conclude that vegetarians are food?[/quote]
last resort due to legal reasons, but yes vegans are indeed food.
[quote]MaddyD wrote:
zephead4747 wrote:
chimera182 wrote:
Ah, here we go
vegetarian:
A bad hunter. Someone who survives by consuming not food, but the stuff that food eats.
from this logic, can we conclude that vegetarians are food?
last resort due to legal reasons, but yes vegans are indeed food.
[/quote]
Though generally there’s not alot of meat on them, so you may have to eat more than one to be completely sated.
[quote]zephead4747 wrote:
chimera182 wrote:
Ah, here we go
vegetarian:
A bad hunter. Someone who survives by consuming not food, but the stuff that food eats.
from this logic, can we conclude that vegetarians are food?[/quote]
Haha, yes I think we can. Whether or not vegetarians will agree is another option.
How many more pages till you realize the OP is gone?
[quote]haploid wrote:
eremesu wrote:
vegeterianism is not a right or wrong issue. it is just a person’s arbitrary perception on what is alive. i used to be angry at carnivores until i grew up and realized that nobody eats what they consider to be alive. whether it is a snail or a human fetus. what one considers to be alive is arbitrary and personal.
This sounds like it’s spoken from a platform of severe naivety. Most carnivores, myself included, eat meat not because we don’t recognize a cow as being “alive”, but rather because we don’t care. We are at the top of the food chain, we are sentient and sapient, and beef tastes fantastic. That’s all it takes.
You soft-hearted vegetarians assume everyone is as soft-hearted and caring as you. We’re not. [/quote]
Additionally, let’s stop and think about it, which I think vegetarians do not.
If people did not eat meat, then what would the result be for various kinds of animals such as cows?
Does anyone REALLY think that for example the United States would continue to support the lives of 100 million head of cattle if no one was going to pay to eat them?
Would there be, as there presently are, 100 million cattle living in the US if no one was going to eat them?
No there would not. Exactly how many cows would be alive in the US if everyone were vegetarian I cannot say, but obviously there are at the least tens of millions more cattle alive today in the US because of meat-eaters than if there were none. Possibly a full hundred million, as I can’t visualize vast numbers of cows living in the wild in America fending for themselves.
Would vegetarians really rather that these 100 million lives did not exist? (Actually I wouldn’t be surprised if many of them WOULD prefer that.)
It’s one thing to want the animals to have better lives. The state of poultry farming, for example, is largely terrible. That is a concern that if a vegetarian has, I can sympathize with.
But wanting no one to eat the animals actually means not wanting the vast majority of the members of these species to be alive at all.
So much for supposedly valuing life.
[quote]FightingScott wrote:
How many more pages till you realize the OP is gone?
[/quote]
Do you think maybe he was unhappy with the responses he received?
[quote]ctschneider wrote:
MaddyD wrote:
zephead4747 wrote:
chimera182 wrote:
Ah, here we go
vegetarian:
A bad hunter. Someone who survives by consuming not food, but the stuff that food eats.
from this logic, can we conclude that vegetarians are food?
last resort due to legal reasons, but yes vegans are indeed food.
Though generally there’s not alot of meat on them, so you may have to eat more than one to be completely sated.[/quote]
the boney parts make a wonderful soup base though.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
haploid wrote:
eremesu wrote:
vegeterianism is not a right or wrong issue. it is just a person’s arbitrary perception on what is alive. i used to be angry at carnivores until i grew up and realized that nobody eats what they consider to be alive. whether it is a snail or a human fetus. what one considers to be alive is arbitrary and personal.
This sounds like it’s spoken from a platform of severe naivety. Most carnivores, myself included, eat meat not because we don’t recognize a cow as being “alive”, but rather because we don’t care. We are at the top of the food chain, we are sentient and sapient, and beef tastes fantastic. That’s all it takes.
You soft-hearted vegetarians assume everyone is as soft-hearted and caring as you. We’re not.
Additionally, let’s stop and think about it, which I think vegetarians do not.
If people did not eat meat, then what would the result be for various kinds of animals such as cows?
Does anyone REALLY think that for example the United States would continue to support the lives of 100 million head of cattle if no one was going to pay to eat them?
Would there be, as there presently are, 100 million cattle living in the US if no one was going to eat them?
No there would not. Exactly how many cows would be alive in the US if everyone were vegetarian I cannot say, but obviously there are at the least tens of millions more cattle alive today in the US because of meat-eaters than if there were none. Possibly a full hundred million, as I can’t visualize vast numbers of cows living in the wild in America fending for themselves.
Would vegetarians really rather that these 100 million lives did not exist? (Actually I wouldn’t be surprised if many of them WOULD prefer that.)
It’s one thing to want the animals to have better lives. The state of poultry farming, for example, is largely terrible. That is a concern that if a vegetarian has, I can sympathize with.
But wanting no one to eat the animals actually means not wanting the vast majority of the members of these species to be alive at all.
So much for supposedly valuing life.
[/quote]
yeah that is a little interesting, not twilight zone worthy though. since we are on the topic of what if. what if somebody killed hitler? i know jews arent that bad, but would you really want all of those jews around? especialy with all the damn people already shuffling about.
i think if somehow america outlawed carnivorism it would not be overnight, and americans would start buying up all the cows they could.
also arguing that vegeterians should be thankful for carnivores for creating more animal life is like telling black people that they should be thankful for slavery
A problem with reasoning by analogy is that the analogies can, in some cases, make zero sense and have zero applicability.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
A problem with reasoning by analogy is that the analogies can, in some cases, make zero sense and have zero applicability.[/quote]
Don’t blame the analogies(they’re innocent), blame poorly thought out arguments.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
A problem with reasoning by analogy is that the analogies can, in some cases, make zero sense and have zero applicability.[/quote]
I was thinking the same thing.
You cant argue using a logic fallacy, it sounds nice but doesn’t actually add up.
We call this “politician logic”
It doesn’t make sense, but it sounds good.