Offended by bumper sticker...

I saw a bumper sticker saying "meat eaters suck". I'm not much of a vegan, but joined this forum for some of the recipes. I respect all of your beliefs, and even support some of them, but this is NOT a good way to support your cause.

My speech-and-debate teacher mentioned that the worst thing you can do is directly attack your opponent. Instead, you should try to support your own cause and demonstrate how much better it is than your opponent's, while possibly refuting their arguments in a professional manner. My teacher mentioned that when he judged for speech and debate, anyone who directly insulted an opponent was given the lowest possible score.

All I'm saying is that belittle-ing the meat eaters isn't going to put them on better terms with vegans. You guys have good standards, but I just want to let you know that things like this are not the key to becoming better-respected. They won't respect you unless you respect them.

Hi,

I totally agree that one usually gets nowhere by attacking others.

But please read this:

Situation # 1:
Should we always claim that we always respect everything everybody does? If you take a walk with your dog, and someone shoots and kills it instantly with a gun while you're watching it - would you tell the killer that you respect he was doing? Most people wouldn't; they would get very upset.

This leads to situation #2:
What if there's a group of people who empathize with all animals, and not only "their own" animals... either emotionally, 'philosophically' (in lack of a better word), or both? What if they also empathize with cats, sheep etc. which are killed even when they don't actually witness the actual killing of the poor animal?

Combine this with an imaginary situation #3: What if there are meat eaters who don't reflect much over what they're doing and eating? Maybe they never decided to eat meat - but just continue living on the diet they were raised on (raised with? pardon my English...)? Maybe they'll never wake up to the fact that the animals they eat not only have been killed in a more brutal way than the dog in scenario above unless someone provokes them a little...

Some of them *may* reconsider what they're doing if they know that others are so upset by meat eating that they put that bumper on their car. If someone do, the end result of that bumper sticker could be that fewer animals will have to spend most of their lives in some sort of cage, only to be killed in a much more brutal way than that dog in the example above.

So... what 'sucks' the most? Instantly killing a dog - an animal which hopefully have have been treated well - or supporting the killing hundreds of animals - animals which usually never were respected as much as many humans after all treat 'their' dogs and cats? For most people walking their dog, the answer is subjectively killing the dog, as in scenario # 1. But realistically, meat eating causes a lot more suffering - for a lot more sentient beings, and is therefore - objectively, not subjectively - something to be a lot more upset about.

I would neither tell someone who killed a dog on the street or someone who causes the suffering and death for loads of animals that I respect these actions. I do understand that we're all a result of our past, so I somehow respect that they do what they do for a reason. But there's usually no excuse to not change our lifestyle to the better, especially if it involves less suffering for ourselves or others.

That bumper sticker would, BTW, be better off in my book if it said "Meat eating sucks' instead of "Meat eaters suck". Personally - I still wouldn't use one, but I do respect that there are many people out there who are upset about meat eating and all it implies, and I respect their right to express it on a bumper sticker. Do you, false23?

So...
Someone made a bumper sticker, another person puts it on his car, a third person (you) write about it on internet, and a fourth person (me) respond to your post. The thread will be read by hundreds of people. What if only one single person reading this thread decides that she agrees that eating meat causes more harm and death than shooting a random 'pet' on the street, and therefore stops eating meat? If this happens, we could more or less say that that bumper sticker saved the lives of many animals.

I hope these ramblings somehow explain the other perspective; a different view on what essentially is a "I kill lots of animals through my diet, but don't let that upset you - show me that you respect what I do instead" approach.

"meat eaters suck" stuck on the back of a car is not funny.

"meat eaters suck" written on a cows arse would be funny.

Anyways now that the idea of the 'rump-er' sticker has been born we will just have to sit back and see if it catches on .. lol

Hi false23 and welcome to the forum.

In the years that this forum has been in existence, the matter of having respect for others, especially omnis has been discussed many, many times. Perhaps you are able to find threads where you can read members' views on this to see what members think? Always nice though to receive a fresh contribution to the debate and thank you for your concern. And carry on enjoying the recipes!:thumbsup:

Good wishes

Leedsveg

Quote:

---

false23

I saw a bumper sticker saying "meat eaters suck". I'm not much of a vegan, but joined this forum for some of the recipes. I respect all of your beliefs, and even support some of them, but this is NOT a good way to support your cause.

---

It wasn't my car, are you sure it was one of "ours"?

I appreciate the kind welcome to the forum from all of you. You have some very valid arguments, and I appreciate that we can debate professionally without exchanging insults. You're right, "meat eating sucks" would be much better than "meat eaters suck". I thought much less of that person because of their bumper sticker, and felt like a non-stereotype bumper sticker would be positive towards you guys instead of negative. You may or may not agree with me on this, but hopefully this at least gives you the opportunity to see things from a non-vegan view. I honestly felt like that bumper sticker was more harm than good to you guys, but maybe overall it had a different effect on the general public.

Anyway, I'll include my views on the matter, so you at least know how I stand and will be free to argue with or agree me on with whatever. Hopefully, I won't upset any of you.

I won't touch veal since I am against what goes on and feel it is extremely cruel. I feel that animals should be allowed to live most of their lives, and in good conditions. I my grandparents raised cattle, and the cattle had it good: free to roam the pastures and would never be eaten until they were in their late years anyway. Maybe I'm not educated, but I think most cattle in general are that well off, so it doesn't bother me to eat beef, and feel the same way about lamb for those reasons.

I'm also against pork (and I'm not Jewist, lol, nothing against whoever is, but that's not why) because, although pigs are one of the dirtiest animals, they are actually smarter than dogs and horses (only a select few animals are smarter than pigs). I'm against eating animals of that intelligence level. I'll eat chicken, but beef when given the choice. I've heard that chickens have sometimes been raised in horrible conditions, but, to my knowledge, that was just one company that got shut down. As far as I know, in general chickens are treated well.

I feel least guilty about eating seafood. I'm not at all against eating non-mammals, though anything beside seafood just doesn't appeal to me. I have fished and don't feel guilty about doing it, although my lack of interest has kept me from it for quite some time. I don't hunt because I wouldn't feel right shooting an animal, but think it's ok for those who can't otherwise afford much for food. My question to you vegans is, are you guys against eating fish? Are you guys split on the matter, or altogether for / against it? I certainly feel there's a fine line between eating mammals compared to fish and would suspect you guys would feel the same way.

Anyway, those are my views. I'm not extremely educated on the matter, so some of my assumptions could be wrong. So feel free to argue. I think it's nice to see views of the other side, even if I don't agree with all of them, and hope you guys feel the same way.

You were right when you mentioned that it's hard to show respect for someone you are completely against (the dog analysis). I remember doing a research paper for one of my classes in which I was arguing against the use of puppy mills. I recall encountering some of the pictures and descriptions on the truly horrific conditions that went on at puppy mills, and was shocked and disgusted. Needless to say, I would have a hard time showing respect for the cruel, heartless, scum of the Earth who runs puppy mills, or supported them, aware of what they were like. I'm sure whoever is educated about puppy mills would agree, and knows that no one would support them if everyone knew what went on. I'm sure you guys won't buy dogs from pet stores (pet stores are the only thing keeping them going) because of this fact, and also because buying one from pet store is one less dog that gets adopted from the shelter, which might get put to sleep.

Sorry about going off on a tangent with puppy mills, but that is one argument I feel strongly about. There could be some similarities behind your arguments.

By the way, I wasn't implying that it was any of the form members that had that bumper sticker lol.

Quote:

---

false23

... my grandparents raised cattle, and the cattle had it good: free to roam the pastures and would never be eaten until they were in their late years anyway. Maybe I'm not educated, but I think most cattle in general are that well off ...

---

Farming has changed a lot since our grandparents day matey ..

Quote:

---

Factory farms, also known as CAFOs (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations) or IFAP (Industrial Farm Animal Production) facilities,1 can house up to 125,000 animals2 under one roof and are designed to produce the highest possible output at the lowest possible cost to the operator. These farms and their associated industrial slaughterhouses produce “cheap” meat, eggs, and dairy by externalizing their costs. The costs to the public from the ecological damage and health problems created by factory farms are not considered any more than the law requires, and companies have often found it less expensive to pay fines than to alter their methods. For this reason, the true cost of meat is never reflected in the price consumers pay. Animal suffering is given no meaningful consideration except in a few idiosyncratic cases.

Factory farming now accounts for more than 99 percent of all farmed animals raised and slaughtered in the United States *

Source: http://www.farmforward.com/farming-f...actory-farming

---

Farmforward says it took its stats from here http://ciser.cornell.edu/ASPs/browse...p?CATEGORY=100, btw.

As for Fish ..

Quote:

---

The apocalypse has a new date: 2048.

That's when the world's oceans will be empty of fish, predicts an international team of ecologists and economists. The cause: the disappearance of species due to overfishing, pollution, habitat loss, and climate change.

The study by Boris Worm, PhD, of Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, -- with colleagues in the U.K., U.S., Sweden, and Panama -- was an effort to understand what this loss of ocean species might mean to the world.

The researchers analyzed several different kinds of data. Even to these ecology-minded scientists, the results were an unpleasant surprise.

"I was shocked and disturbed by how consistent these trends are -- beyond anything we suspected," Worm says in a news release.

"This isn't predicted to happen. This is happening now," study researcher Nicola Beaumont, PhD, of the Plymouth Marine Laboratory, U.K., says in a news release.

"If biodiversity continues to decline, the marine environment will not be able to sustain our way of life. Indeed, it may not be able to sustain our lives at all," Beaumont adds.

Already, 29% of edible fish and seafood species have declined by 90% -- a drop that means the collapse of these fisheries.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...n2147223.shtml

---

Anfd finaly this ..

Quote:

---

You may or may not agree with me on this, but hopefully this at least gives you the opportunity to see things from a non-vegan view.

---

I think I'm going to be 99.9% safe in saying that I speak for 99.9% of all vegans when I say this:

99.9% of us were not born vegans. 99.9% of us know the non-vegan view first hand as 99.9% of us were non-vegans before we became vegans and thus the non-vegan view was our own view once.

It is not so much that a vegan ever 'disagrees' with the non vegan view. More that they are seeing a view they once held themselves and came to realise was very very wrong.

Quote:

---

Cupid Stunt

It is not so much that a vegan ever 'disagrees' with the non vegan view. More that they are seeing a view they once held themselves and came to realise was very very wrong.

---

Well said. Three years ago, I was saying things like, "Well it tastes good so I'm going to eat it." I supported hunting, used leather without a second thought. I wouldn't have touched veal because I knew they were treated 'cruelly' and insisted on buying free range eggs because they were kinder than battery eggs.

Then I met two vegans in real life, and it started a chain of events. I was curious about why they were vegan, and what being vegan meant. I changed my diet for 2 weeks, intending it to be a short-term experiment, again out of curiosity more than anything else. I had some positive health results and decided to keep going on the new diet for another few months. When my early onset rheumatoid arthritis vanished as though I'd never suffered with it, I decided to make the change permanent. Then, thanks largely to VF, I became aware of the other benefits (for the animals, for the environment) and also became aware of the rest of my lifestyle and started the gradual process of becoming vegan (as opposed to just following a vegan diet).

I am so glad to have made this change, but I still remember how I felt and thought beforehand. It's like a filter has been removed from my vision and I can now see the problems and inconsistencies in my previous thinking. I was blinkered and didn't even realise it. Becoming vegan wasn't an overnight process, but a gradual 'enlightenment' for want of a better word!

false23, the bumper sticker is nothing to do with vegan vs non-vegan. You see examples of confrontational behaviour in all sorts of people from all walks of life. It's just a different mindset to what you or I think is okay. That person could just as easily have been a non-vegan. It's not 'our' bumper sticker and it's not 'our' approach. I'm feeling a bit like you're putting me in a vegan box and labelling us all as having one way of thinking, one approach, one way of behaving. If I saw someone with a bumper sticker saying "tofu eaters suck" I wouldn't be going on a meat eaters forum and saying, "guys please take a different approach" because it's nothing to do with them - it's only the person who stuck it on the car who has the issue... :)

Quote:

---

Est

It's like a filter has been removed from my vision and I can now see the problems and inconsistencies in my previous thinking. I was blinkered and didn't even realise it. Becoming vegan wasn't an overnight process, but a gradual 'enlightenment' for want of a better word!

---

Very well said yourself EST :)

I too had the experience, when I stopped eating meat, that a kind of 'mental blindness', for want of a better word, had been removed.

More slowly, this also happened; Not having to practice 'mental blindness' three times a day in order to be able to eat as I wanted (as opposed to eating as I needed) I found it increasingly easy to spot problems and inconsistencies in many other areas of life too.

Not wanting to sound too condescending in the non-vegan area, but also not caring too much if I do; I actualy have more compassion for any one human victim of meat eating (those caught in it's trap of inconsistencies and self delusion) than I have for all the animals in the world.

What meat eating does to dumb animals may be a humanitarian travesty but that it makes human beings into dumb animals is nothing short of a humanitarian catastrophe.

Me too. I was brought up to a non-vegan view, lived until I was 16 with the same view, and am surrounded by this view all my life and probably always will be-vegans aren't ignorant and stuck in their ways, they have changed from the omni way already.

We don't need to be told to see from that different view. This encompasses every subject broached for veganism, meat/dairy/factory farming/hunting/fur....

Quote:

---

false23

Instead, you should try to support your own cause and demonstrate how much better it is than your opponent's, while possibly refuting their arguments in a professional manner.

---

One problem i see with that is that the medium "bumper sticker" in general is a bit limiting as the number of worse to make your argument is concerned...

Best regards, andy

... That should have been "number of words" in my earlier post.

Oh, how I love that great iPad feature or replacing the perfectly spelled words I type with what it thinks I was wanting to type instead :-(

Was that supposed to say "feature of replacing"? lol

Have you seen this?

*off topic but everyone has done a much better job of responding to the OP than I could*

False23, I'm intrigued by your classification of animals as being more or less worthy of being eaten based on their level of intelligence. Would you apply the same logic to humans, i.e. do you think more intelligent people should be afforded more rights?

Quote:

---

Est

false23, the bumper sticker is nothing to do with vegan vs non-vegan. You see examples of confrontational behaviour in all sorts of people from all walks of life. It's just a different mindset to what you or I think is okay. That person could just as easily have been a non-vegan. It's not 'our' bumper sticker and it's not 'our' approach. I'm feeling a bit like you're putting me in a vegan box and labelling us all as having one way of thinking, one approach, one way of behaving. If I saw someone with a bumper sticker saying "tofu eaters suck" I wouldn't be going on a meat eaters forum and saying, "guys please take a different approach" because it's nothing to do with them - it's only the person who stuck it on the car who has the issue... :)

---

This is what I was getting at. I'm quite offended by the assumption that this bumper sticker must be the work of a vegan.

Not only that but also the suggestion that all vegans make aggressive statements like that, that kind of stereotyping is really not on.

Statistically it was far more likely to be a vegetarian's car than a vegan's!

I think it's kind of funny anyway :p

Quote:

---

Johnstuff

Statistically it was far more likely to be a vegetarian's car than a vegan's!

I think it's kind of funny anyway :p

---

Statistically, it was also more likely to be a US citizen's car, than say a Leeds UK person's.

lv

Quote:

---

fiamma

False23, I'm intrigued by your classification of animals as being more or less worthy of being eaten based on their level of intelligence. Would you apply the same logic to humans, i.e. do you think more intelligent people should be afforded more rights?

---

I do!

Not that more intelligent people/things shoud ever be allowed more right than me obviously. Just that those not as clever as me should definitely have less.

And just to prove how very intelligent I am can I say this: I do know that every single meat eating, Sun 'news'paper reading, knuckle scraping missing link twix human and ape feels exactly the same way :rolleyes:

Just curious Korn:

If you were on a sinking ship with three other crew and 100 animals and insects -- would you make the crew draw lots along with the animals and insects to see who got space in the life raft?

Do you argue that all animal life is equal to all human life?

Quote:

---

Korn

Hi,

I totally agree that one usually gets nowhere by attacking others.

But please read this:

Situation # 1:
Should we always claim that we always respect everything everybody does? If you take a walk with your dog, and someone shoots and kills it instantly with a gun while you're watching it - would you tell the killer that you respect he was doing? Most people wouldn't; they would get very upset.

This leads to situation #2:
What if there's a group of people who empathize with all animals, and not only "their own" animals... either emotionally, 'philosophically' (in lack of a better word), or both? What if they also empathize with cats, sheep etc. which are killed even when they don't actually witness the actual killing of the poor animal?

Combine this with an imaginary situation #3: What if there are meat eaters who don't reflect much over what they're doing and eating? Maybe they never decided to eat meat - but just continue living on the diet they were raised on (raised with? pardon my English...)? Maybe they'll never wake up to the fact that the animals they eat not only have been killed in a more brutal way than the dog in scenario above unless someone provokes them a little...

Some of them *may* reconsider what they're doing if they know that others are so upset by meat eating that they put that bumper on their car. If someone do, the end result of that bumper sticker could be that fewer animals will have to spend most of their lives in some sort of cage, only to be killed in a much more brutal way than that dog in the example above.

So... what 'sucks' the most? Instantly killing a dog - an animal which hopefully have have been treated well - or supporting the killing hundreds of animals - animals which usually never were respected as much as many humans after all treat 'their' dogs and cats? For most people walking their dog, the answer is subjectively killing the dog, as in scenario # 1. But realistically, meat eating causes a lot more suffering - for a lot more sentient beings, and is therefore - objectively, not subjectively - something to be a lot more upset about.

I would neither tell someone who killed a dog on the street or someone who causes the suffering and death for loads of animals that I respect these actions. I do understand that we're all a result of our past, so I somehow respect that they do what they do for a reason. But there's usually no excuse to not change our lifestyle to the better, especially if it involves less suffering for ourselves or others.

That bumper sticker would, BTW, be better off in my book if it said "Meat eating sucks' instead of "Meat eaters suck". Personally - I still wouldn't use one, but I do respect that there are many people out there who are upset about meat eating and all it implies, and I respect their right to express it on a bumper sticker. Do you, false23?

So...
Someone made a bumper sticker, another person puts it on his car, a third person (you) write about it on internet, and a fourth person (me) respond to your post. The thread will be read by hundreds of people. What if only one single person reading this thread decides that she agrees that eating meat causes more harm and death than shooting a random 'pet' on the street, and therefore stops eating meat? If this happens, we could more or less say that that bumper sticker saved the lives of many animals.

I hope these ramblings somehow explain the other perspective; a different view on what essentially is a "I kill lots of animals through my diet, but don't let that upset you - show me that you respect what I do instead" approach.

---

Quote:

---

spartacus

Just curious Korn:

If you were on a sinking ship with three other crew and 100 animals and insects -- would you make the crew draw lots along with the animals and insects to see who got space in the life raft?

Do you argue that all animal life is equal to all human life?

---

The outcome of all discussions involving the word 'equal' depend on how you define 'equal'.
I think what one would do in these sinking-ship/desert-island etc discussions only is relevant for these situations, and whatever I would end up feeling in such situation doesn't have much influence on how I live my life today, which happen to be not on a sinking ship. :)

In any given situation where I cold either save the life of a human friend or a human 'non-friend', I'd probably go for the friend. If I could save the life of a human baby or the a mouse or rabbit's baby, I'm sure I'd intuitively try to save the life of the human baby (or adult).

Veganism isn't about setting up a scale, where all living beings are rated according to their importance, intelligence or value - but a lifestyle that tries to avoid as much harm as practical and possible. We pretty much do our best to try to avoid harming both humans, the environment and animals - and since it's totally possible to live a healthy, rich, enjoyable life without harming animals, that's the part we IMO should focus on - as opposed to pondering over those 'what would you do if'-situations.

Even if I, in an emergency situation would kill both insects wolves and snakes, + eat my neighbor's grandmother and a whole soccer team, I'd still choose a vegan lifestyle in those non-emergency situations we (almost) all live in daily. :-)

Quote:

---

Korn

Even if I, in an emergency situation would kill both insects wolves and snakes, + eat my neighbor's grandmother and a whole soccer team, I'd still choose a vegan lifestyle in those non-emergency situations we (almost) all live in daily. :-)

---

lol............I love it!

Now THAT would make a great 'bumper sticker'.............:)