Responding to questions and comments from non-vegans

[Mr Pearcore]

I consider it strange to say "personal reasons", that sounds more like "I dont know why I am vegan, so please lets drop this vegan talk now" and although you know this is not the case, the meat eater who asked you will judge you this way as they want to judge you for it (most cases).
Plus, I do not understand why you would not want to take that chance to speak out against animal cruelty (if this is why you do it) when you have been given the oppertunity too. Your response might open the persons eyes if they are open-minded enough to allow themselves to be enlightened.

I usually reply with when asked with why I am vegan: "I do not believe in killing animals for food when I do not have to." or something along the lines.

And I cannot count the times which some non-vegan has offered me meat or usually other products with animal ingredients in it like cheese or dips etc, and they either remember that I am vegan or they learn from me that the food or product has animal ingredients, and they say "Oh, thats right, you CANT eat/use this, can you?" which I usually reply: "I CAN, but choose not too."
One of my friends who recently turned vegan uses that one now due to hearing me say it all them times, and it makes me giggle hearing him say it.

[gothic_ana]

I have given up explaing why i am ..... cos every time i give a honest "this is how i feel, and this is why im doing it" reply it comes back with arguments and fights.
i belive if u know why you are doing this and if they DONT respect you enough to understad that you have ur reasons they aint worth your time cos they only want your time to argue about why you are vegan or vege.
I also belive:
"you are who you and your not who your not!"
why should you have to explain yourself when the "meat eaters" dont have to explain there reason is "cos i like meat" we say i dont like meat and you get bombed with Q's.
I also belive we DONT owe any explanation. If you know they will be great bout it GO FOR IT but otherwise id say save ursef the arguments cos then you get upset or anoyed ad its something eles for them to pick at.

[cedarblue]

and they say "Oh, thats right, you CANT eat/use this, can you?" which I usually reply: "I CAN, but choose not too."
.

yes, yes, YES! this is the one that really bugs me.

but sometimes when i give the very same answer as yours above they get even more confused and unsure and i can see them now thinking 'why on earth would you choose not to?'




welcome mr pearcore, by the way

[Mr Pearcore]

yes, yes, YES! this is the one that really bugs me.

but sometimes when i give the very same answer as yours above they get even more confused and unsure and i can see them now thinking 'why on earth would you choose not to?'




welcome mr pearcore, by the way

Then you reply with "'Cause I like/care for animals" and you will get "I do too!" because they like dogs and cats and other household pets, then you reply with "Then why do you eat/kill them?" this leaves you with a baffled meat-eater who ponders and finds no real answer but responds with the only thing floating around in their mind "...because...".

To me, it is all about making people think. Even if that person leaves thinking "I met a vegan today and they were normal, just like me...why am I not vegan?" then that is good for me, even if I gave them a one sentence response as to why I am vegan. You do not have to argue with them about why you are vegan. If they ask, just state why you are in a caring, polite manner, and if they want to argue about it then just leave the 'conversation' there and do not continue with it. I feel that is better than not getting into the matter at all. Not getting into the matter at all, opens no doors.

And thanks Cedarblue for the welcome

[gothic_ana]

true true, im just sick of arguing with people over what I belive in. they try to make you feel guitly cos they feel guilty themselfs so thats why i just dont go there with some people i know will slam that "door" in my face and hard.

thanx for ur imput its good to hear so may diffrent peoples ways of dealing with things.
it can open ur mind up more

[1984]

I was talking to my older brother about his viewpoint on religion recently and somehow in the mess we got talking about killing animals for food. He basically told me in many words that the earth ends up destroying species all on it's own, so their is no reason to stop eating meat.

His logic was that life on earth is a cycle and that human life can only last for so long; same for all the other life on the planet. It is through destruction of species and the natural environment that will give opportunities for different life to come. SO..we might as well destroy other life (animals, plants, forests, insects) because it is inevitable. BUT the good news he said, was that some life form (bacteria) will be able to survive and life will go on. I'm not too sure if he realized what he was saying, but I did...and I walked away and cried. I knew their were people who thought like this but I had no idea that my brother was one of them.

I didnt know what to say to him...how can I argue with someone who seems to lack compassion for life. It was very scary. And the weird thing is that he says he's anti factory farming and anti - fast food, but he still eats meat from these places.
Have you guys ever run into somebody like this? I love him to death but I cant seem to look at him the same since. It's really bothering me.

[gothic_ana]

YES YES YES.
my partner and his family. BIG TIME!
They farmthe cows for killing i receved a pakage today and i didnt expect to see wht i seen which was as graphic as hell i almost cryed and i was told i looked like i was ganna hurl, and i felt it too. animal pics being hurt omg its so sad and my man gose thats only from the owrst places, and i up ed him so bad cosi was so upse ad he couldnt even hold me or say smething nice he just jumped in and was as cold as ice and said that "its not right but it happends and it wont stop me nor will it efect my meat eati ng"
why dont people care?

[Mr Pearcore]

People just do not care for many different reasons, naivity, selfishness, lack of will-power etc etc.

I was on another messageboard, a bands messageboard, and someone made a thread about the Tsunami distaster. And there were alot of comments in the thread like "it is so sad, why does stuff like this have to happen?" and it was like this disaster was the only thing that had upset them drastically since say 9/11. And I brought up that shit is happening every day in the world, suffering is occurring everyday, suffering that is not "natural" but brought about by humans, such as animal cruelty. And I got ridiculed for it and told that it is not the same thing and that it has nothing to do with the Tsunami Disaster. But my point was that as sad as that natural disaster was and that many many many people died, which is terrible, that many things are dying everyday due to humans, and that it should not take a NATURAL disaster to open peoples eyes. I also brought up how capitalism is ruining the world and we all play a part in it every day, but they just ignored it all. It is easier to do nothing, so alot of people opt for that choice. As sad as that is.

[snaffler]

Nice answer if asked in a nice way - I don't need to take a life to live my life, I also disagree on grounds of abuse that another life should be taken for me to live mine.

Snappy Answer if asked in a rude way - Because I want to outlive meateaters.

[rhinosauraus]

I tend to be sarcastic.

"wow.. so what do you eat?"
"rocks, actually. but none with fossils. and you?"

I can't stand the "what do you eat?" question. it's so banal. :/

[rhinosauraus]

OR!!!!

"wow.. so why do you do that?"
"because I don't want people like you to be able to come to my funeral."

I have never said that, but I plan to some day.

[assilembob]

I tend to be sarcastic.

"wow.. so what do you eat?"
"rocks, actually. but none with fossils. and you?"

I can't stand the "what do you eat?" question. it's so banal. :/

GWARGH! I HATE WHEN PEOPLE ASK THAT!!!!!

I love your answer though. That is the best ever. You are my new hero (for today )

I have found it difficult to talk to people about this because where I live it becomes an issue of people being mean to me about it. I have been attacked in grocery stores (verbally and she almost punched me) yelled at by people for being stupid, told I am going against god's word (cept that if I said sorry I don't believe in god I may get killed down here!) and lastly have had people try to reason me out of being vegan. No matter what I say I am always wrong.
My favorite is "I have the wrong kind of teeth to not eat meat" and I would love to tell them where to shove it...

From this day forward I eat rocks

~Mel

[Geoff]

I tend to be sarcastic.

"wow.. so what do you eat?"
"rocks, actually. but none with fossils. and you?"

I can't stand the "what do you eat?" question. it's so banal. :/

Why do you have to be rude to people who ask what you eat? Why not PROMOTE veganism by giving them a sensible answer instead of giving the impression that vegans are rude and sarcastic.
Someone will have to undo the harm you've done before the person you say things like that to will even be open to learning about veganism.
I, for one would appreciate it if you refrained from telling people that you're vegan.

[assilembob]

Ah. but in my experience these people are being rude...very snide with "if you don't eat meat then what DO you eat?!?" or "well you can't eat anything then but rabbit food"
If someone asks nicely (just as stated at the top of the page by snaffler) my response is quite different however I found rhinosauraus' answer funny not rude...but I enjoy sarcassam and used properly it can begin a conversation...but then again if it's done rudely...I just don't like rude people.

~Mel

[Geoff]

If you REALLY cared about the cruelty to factory farmed animals etc., you would do all you could to explain the vegan philosophy.
There is no way you will get people to understand if you are rude to them. So what if they don't ask the right way. They are asking and it gives you a chance to politely explain.
We all need to be ambassadors even evangelists and 'smart arse' attitudes will not get us anywhere.

[assilembob]

Defense....I have been attacked here before...literally. I was asked if I was a vegetarian, I said yes, I almost got hit. I was being screamed and and slugged at by a huge woman in a grocery store. And I have yet to be rudely asked by someone who was doing anything but attacking me. I was told I needed a f***ing brain transplant. That is why when I am asked rudely I reply rudely. Because I have been conditioned to believe that they do not have the human brain capacity to understand me or why I do what I do.

[Korn]

I tend to be sarcastic.

"wow.. so what do you eat?"
"rocks, actually. but none with fossils. and you?"

I can't stand the "what do you eat?" question. it's so banal. :/

If someone ask what vegans eat, why not just mention that there are at least 2-300,000 plant species, and most of them are eatable (and new species are discovered every year), so there should be no need to worry. I actually think that many people who ask that question don't mean it in a negative way, they just wonder if we eat the same as they do minus the animal products (which for most vegans is not the case - that would have been a very boring diet....).

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I find it a little absurd when people ask me why I DON'T do something. When asked why I didn't eat animal products once, I replied 'Do you wear green shoes on Tuesdays'? The answer was (of course) 'No?'. I asked why he didn't do that, and his reply was (of course) 'Wait a minute, why would I want to do that???'. Which maybe made it a bit easier for him to understand one of the reasons I don't eat animal products: 'Wait a minute, why would I want to do that???'

[tails4wagging]

There has been a link on there regarding chickens and slaughter. Some moron has replied that in denmark where she lives she goes to a nearest butcher and orders a fresh lamb, chicken or whatever and in her words its 'chop' and its hers and she says the meat is so fresh it is still warm.
I replied asking her no to be so graphic as it upsets us non meat eaters.

She replied what is wrong with that a butcher is a butcher so what!

another pleb has then said those famous immortal words 'think of the poor vegetables having been chopped of at their roots'.

Yea Gods I despair!!.
This is a animal rescue website predominately dog rescue.

I suggested they look at the viva peta and compassion in world farming websites.

there has now been a warning about not mentioning
peta as the webmaster worked in anti terrorist movement and does not encourage terrorist activiies on the board!!!!!!!
I have replied i am Ar campaigner and know a thing or two about farming practices more than most.

Anymore suggestions in replying??.

[puffin]

A lady on a non vegan forum started on me once. I think she wanted to get into an argument with me about "if we didnt eat meat then there would be no animals around" how stupid is that I really didnt want to get into the subject with her so i asked her kindly if she would read the animal aid link i put on the forum for her and asked her to tell me what she thought. She never did reply

[kriz]

I always get into trouble when I decide to post about veganism and suffering of animals other than cats and dogs. One time I posted on a dog forum about what's really in the commercial dog food, the major brands, and I added that my dog is on a vegetarian formula. Oh, boy, did I get many angry replies....

Anyhow, tails, since I tend to get really emotional in these types of discussions where I'm attacked, I can't really help you. I'm not really a good debater either, so I leave it for the other good ones from this forum. I usually only post links on non-vegan forums, let people read and make their own call.

[Seaside]

Posted by tails4wagging:

She replied what is wrong with that a butcher is a butcher so what!

Butchering animals is great practice for future serial killers!

I was watching a documentary once on serial killers, and they said that many, if not all, of the most successful serial killers had been butchers. Now, they weren't saying that ALL butchers are serial killers, but that MOST serial killers were butchers. Butchering gives a person lots of skills and knowledge about how to handle dead bodies of any sort, and wanting to be a butcher in the first place implies a huge lack of empathy for any living thing, which is in my view an essential requirement for becoming a murderer of humans. Most people don't mind butchers providing them with meat, but they do object to their human loved ones being murdered.

You might also ask her if she thinks fresh warm meat is so great why doesn't she kill it herself and eat it raw the way a true carnivore would? (Hopefully this will disgust her, but if she thinks it is a great suggestion, she is a lost cause and you should give up!)

Posted by tails4wagging:

another pleb has then said those famous immortal words 'think of the poor vegetables having been chopped of at their roots'.

From the "Why do we get put down ?" thread:

Posted by Kim[ba]:

Quote:
He spent the first part of the conversation trying to convince me that animals don't have feelings, then suddenly switched to "well then you know plants have feelings too!"


Posted by me:
Just say, in a really sarcastic tone of voice, "Ohhhhh, THAT'S why you eat animals, because you think the plants have feelings and the animals don't! NOW I understand! If the plants were ripping out of the ground and running away screaming at harvest time and the animals weren't, I'd be a meat eater too!"

Or make a deal with him, like "If you'll watch a video of what goes on in a slaughter house, I'll watch a video of a strawberry harvest!"

I don't know what to tell you about their attitude towards PETA, though. Seems like it is a dirty word to some people.

[kriz]

I think PETA is great.

[Cal]

I think PETA is great.

So do I! I joined earlier this year.

[tails4wagging]

Thanks, folks, I was going to add about killing they own animals, but have realise they are winding me up and picking on me. So have decided not to react and reply anymore to the thread, that will piss them off!!!

When they started to say about the poor peas and veg,. I realised they are speaking a 'crockload' of human excrement and not worth it!

As for the warning about PETA I will email peta and suggest they do something about it.

[adam antichrist]

There seems to be a worldwide campaign against PETA, which means their methods are working. I have seen many sites taking quotes from Ingrid Newkirk out of context to make her look like a monster when she is just an extremist.

People like these make me wish I knew something about hacking.

[veganful]

I hate to be the stick in the mud since I am new to this site but I tend to dislike Peta. Their notions are great but their vehicles or means of getting their point across I tend to disagree.

peace,
Ileana

[tails4wagging]

Must admit I was a little disappointed last year with them at storming on the stage at Crufts it did not go down well at all. Meanwhile, outside crufts we were helping Uncaged with a peaceful protest against IAMS/EUKANUBA. It was a wonder that crufts allowed Uncaged back this year following that display from PETA last year. It did not do any good towards the cause.

[snivelingchild]

I tend to see alot of people confusinf PETA themselves with PETA activists. Tails, obviously I haven't heard of that event here. Was that actually organized by PETA, or was it someone who was a PETA activist? There is quite a difference in the two, and the stuff PETA organized itself is almost always (everything I've seen at least) peaceful and informative, where their main priority is educating people. Every time an AR activist does something and they happen to be a PETA member, it gets put in the newspaper headlines as a "PETA activist" does something, which makes it seem like the organization did it, which is just not the case most of the time. The only things I've seen them organize is tofu hot dog stands, naked people wrapped in those meat packaging things, and the like.

[veganful]

Well yeah but the most obvious one to me is using the female body to sell the benefits of animals. Isn't the female body objectified enough?

Both vegan and femminist,
Ileana

[snivelingchild]

That is true, but in the case of the Lettuce Ladies, Pam Anderson was one, and it is plausible it was her idea, since she's used to doing things like that. One could argue about things like the celebrities posng nude, since objectifying implies (in my mind) that the naked bodies are being used for thoughts of sex to grab attention, and I find the posters they do not to be sexual at all, though that does not scew the fact that they are doing it as a shock tactic to catch people's attention, which any protest is designed to do. Also, many men do these posters as well, so they are using male and female bodies to grab attention. Maybe most other people see them as sexual, though.

[tails4wagging]

It was organised event by PETA, about five of them with a banner ran onto the arena when the judging was taking place.

[Stu]

On a completely unrelated forum, an argument has broken out about vegetarianism/veganism. It’s interesting because it’s a dumb videogames forum, and some of the kids on there are actually showing an interest and partaking in the discussion.

But this guy (Geobau) has come along and is really stirring things up. He seems to be a staunch meat-eater, and simply will not back down one inch. He is also very clever.

To be frank, I don’t understand some of the terminology he is using, so I can’t respond to some of his points adequately. So therefore, the kids who are showing an interest, are getting swayed by his scientific arguments.

I was wondering if any of you guys are in a better position that me, to answer his points. I’ll posts the ‘tough’ ones below, and if any of you can help, that’d be great!

Thanks in advance.

“I have incisors. I have two eyes in the front of my head. I have the ability to walk erect, and thus am able to spot prey from a farther distance. My body requires the nutrition from meat, unless I pop pills all day. I am the ultimate preditory omnivore that nature has created.”

“Gorillas have 8 lessened incisors that are primarily designed to deal with smaller fare, like bugs, and defense. Homosapiens have incisors that are capable of rending flesh and only posess partial bipedality. Those who claim the human body was NOT meant for an omnivorous life can go ahead and be vegan, but they'd better not pop any supplements around me-- after all, they derive all they need from plant life, right?

The human body requires more energy to operate (more elongated, more heat loss, more weight support), and would logically need a commensurate increase in energy consumption. Gorillas posess partial bipedality, not full. Their pelvic structure is made to support four-legged ambling- part of the reason their babies are born more developed. As a general rule, the more erect the species, the more helpless the babies. They must be born before their heads get too developed to fit through the sleek pelvis of a biped.

The leafy greens consumed by gorillas provide nutrients and the caloric intake they would need, however they also eat all freakin' day. Human being stumbled on a more compact energy source hundreds of thousands of years ago, and have evolved to a more heightened state because of it. We don't need to devolve because we feel guilt.”

“Vegans often argue that the human body doesn't need meat to survive, yet they have to pop supplements. If the body didn't NEED these supplements, then they'd have a counter to the argument, but it does, and they don't. The body needs nutrients and especially amino acids in meat that you WON'T FIND in vegetables, and thus it was more-than-likely designed to work optimally with their inclusion in our diets.

We also must take into account that one could not pick and choose fuits and vegetables from around the globe back when we evolved this way. We didn't cultivate soy. We couldn't get pumpkin seeds for protein. We couldn't down handfulls of flax. We had what was around us, which was admittedly sparse in winters, and we had animals. We got our Omega-3 fatty acids from elk and deer that grazed, not from some wünder-plant that popped up through the snow and sprouted opaque pills.

Our bodies have been dependant on meat to survive for hundreds of thousands of years. You simply cannot deny it if you wish to have any realistic clout. I understand that many people choose to make political/religious statements with their vegatarianism, and that's fine for them. But who am I to deny my design?”

[Korn]

My body requires the nutrition from meat, unless I pop pills all day.

This is wrong, and have been proven wrong many times - by meat eaters! Ask him what nutrients he believes he'll find in meat that he doesn't find in plants!

Homosapiens have incisors that are capable of rending flesh and only posess partial bipedality.

Human teeth are capable of chew and tear apart a lot of things, but that doesn't mean that we're meant to chew, tear apart, let alone eat all we can destroy with our teeth!

We have a post about the anatomy of herbivores vs. omnivores here: http://www.veganforum.com/forums/sho...ight=omnivores

Those who claim the human body was NOT meant for an omnivorous life can go ahead and be vegan, but they'd better not pop any supplements around me-- after all, they derive all they need from plant life, right?

Many health 'experts' now recommended that ALL people eat supplements, not only vegans. People over 50-60 years ahve been recommended to take B12 for a long time, but now it shows up that a lot more meat eaters are nutrient deficient that we used to think - not only elderly, sick or pregnant women. An average vegan might be deficient in thee nutrients, but an average meat eater is deficient in seven, according to a recent study (http://www.veganforum.com/forums/sho...ight=deficient). Does he consider it unnatural to become pregnant? To become more than 55? (I agree with him, I don't think it's natural to eat supplements, and lots of vegans don't and still have no health problems, but we must not forget that we don't live in a 'natural' world any longer).

The difference between a healthy vegan diet and a meat based diet essentially the amount of B12. The way most of us live, including vegans, we expose ourselves to various factors that prohibit intake, reduce availability and also destroy absorbed B12 daily. Since coffee, amalgam, sugar, stress, chlorinated water, vaccines, tobacco, alcohol and many, many other things reduce B12, and plants contain less B12 than people or animals who have been eating plants (since we store B12), vegans (and meat eaters) must make sure they get enough B12. Maybe 70-80% of vegans who do not take supplements are low in B12, compared to 30-40% meat-eaters who are low in B12. Since we don't eat others blood and flesh, our reserves of B12 are of course lower than people who do so, and we are therefore more vulnerable in times like these were B12 levels in soil, plants and water are at risk due to our 'civilized' ways of living. By the way, I've got less money than someone who constantly are robbing banks as well! Does that make it ethical correct or natural to rob banks? Omnis are robbing the B12 reserves of other beings, so they are 'richer' in B12. But not rich enough, so just consuming more B12 (from animals) isn't a good enough solution anyways, even for people who don't mind killing animals.

Many studies indicate that if we would live a healthy, natural life on a planet that didn't kill destroy B12 in food, soil and water, vegans would have more than enough B12 (and need less B12 than people on traditional diet). So the B12 issue isn't an argument against eating vegan food, it's an argument against polluting ourselves and the world we live in.

Now, what if my conclusions after reading everything I've come across about vegan diet and nutrients/B12 for many years are... plain wrong? That's where the difference between nature and culture comes in. Humans are not born with fur. It gets cold at night. Sometimes it rains, sometimes it snows - at least where I live. Does that mean that we are meant to freeze? No. We're probably 'designed' to live closer to Equator, but we're definitely meant to cultivate nature, for example by growing/collecting cotton, make clothes, build houses with roofs and so on. Even in warm climates it gets cold at night.

Theoretically, maybe we're even 'meant to' cultivate vegan B12 (the same way B12 is cultivated on the surface of molasses, in order to make B12 supplements) – and use this cultivated B12 in our food. Some people insist that ie. kefir in itself isn't necessarily an animal product, and that vegan kefir milk, containing lots of B12, can be made by adding kefir to rice or soy milk. There are several ways to produce/cultivate B12 without killing/harming anyone.

What is the main difference between all the strong, healthy animals that survive well on plants, and humans? They are in close touch with nature, they don't expose themselves to all the silly things we do, they get a lot of fresh air and sun, and they (drum roll, please) eat fresh, uncooked, unfrozen, plants that have not been exposed much to chlorinated water from copper tubes.

Does this guy walked naked around in rain or snow? Probably not. He is using the ability human beings are born with, to cultivate tools, create clothes and roofs. What would be wrong with cultivate food as well? I bet he is cooking it? Freezing it? Maybe he even eats food that does naturally grow where he lives, or out-of season-food? That's all examples of cultivating, but cultivating in a way that kills B12. Why is cultivating B12 worse than cultivating B12-killers?

I'd say that he is triple-wrong:
A) Un-destroyed nature contains a lot of B12, so a discussion about what is natural and not can't be based on a planet that is actively killing B12 in dozens of different ways.
B) Humans are able to, and need to 'cultivate'.
C) Now, if A and B would be only nonsense from my side, and this guy really is against 'cultivation' (ask him to send a pic of himself sleeping naked in the snow!) , he could possibly have an argument for eating either eating unfertilized eggs, or drink milk from cows (which are proven to have unhealthy effect on humans). Either way, he would have an argument for killing animals.

His argument that we need meat is also proven wrong many times, for example by the lives of many vegetarians that meat eaters consider both healthy, intelligent and strong.

3) “Vegans often argue that the human body doesn't need meat to survive, yet they have to pop supplements.

Wasn't this the same stuff he mentioned in 1) and 2)?

The body needs nutrients and especially amino acids in meat that you WON'T FIND in vegetables, and thus it was more-than-likely designed to work optimally with their inclusion in our diets.

What nutrients? We don't need amino acids that can't be found in plants. He doesn't know what he is talking about. Ask for documentation about these amino acids!

We also must take into account that one could not pick and choose fuits and vegetables from around the globe back when we evolved this way.

That's totally correct, and we couldn't catch or kill animals before we developed tools do do so either.

We didn't cultivate soy.

We didn't, and we didn't cultivate enough food to keep animal farms alive either - but the point is that we don't need soy to be vegans.

We couldn't get pumpkin seeds for protein.

We don't need pumkin seeds for protein! Pumkin seeds are rich in zinc, but there are other ways to get zink from plants as well (grains, legumes and nuts). Ask him if he ever have read a book about vegan nutrition...!

We couldn't down handfulls of flax.

That's true, and people, including meat eaters - had shorter lives. By finding out more about certain things we can get from certain sources, we probably can prolong our lives compared with how we lived back then. But does this mean that what we do NOW is natural, and what we did then was not natural? No. An average European is ill circa 10 years of his life, most of all he is sick at the end of his life. Is the goal to live as long as possible, regardless our health condition the last years? Not to me. I don't want to become 120 years old, an sick the last 30 years, just because I can. Nevertheless, people who don't eat meat do not live shorter than meat eaters, or are ill more often, so his points aren't actually valid.

Since most research on nutrition has been based on the fact that most people eat meat, there is far too little research on plant based sources. Most plant species (there are probably about 300,000 of them) has never been performed any research on. We can get Omega-3 from pumkin seeds, rapeseed/canola oil, hemp oil, walnuts, flax seeds/linseeds leafy green vegetables like purslana, perilla seed oil (http://www.google.com/search?num=30&...3&btnG=Search), chia seeds and freshwater micro algae, but there are probably hundreds of other sources yet to be discovered.

We had what was around us, which was admittedly sparse in winters, and we had animals.

No. We didn't 'have' animals. We caught and/or killed them. What we 'had' around us were thousands of plant species, which we later cultivated when agriculture developed.

We got our Omega-3 fatty acids from elk and deer that grazed

Did you ask him where he thinks all the animals he eat (probably plant eaters, all of them) gets their nutrition from? Or how often he eats elk and deer? Normally, fatty cold water fish are reported as good Omega-3 sources for non-vegans, but I can't see that finding fish deep down in a cold sea (or having fish farms) is a better solution than finding plants that contain Omega-3 (or grow them).

Our bodies have been dependant on meat to survive for hundreds of thousands of years.

There have been millions, and still are millions, of people that have proven that we don't need meat, by living long, healthy lives as vegetarians. Most cultures have been eating meat, but that doesn't mean that they have been dependent on meat.

You could check this thread, called 'Did humans always eat meat?'.

But who am I to deny my design?

Check his teeth - are they designed for killing animals? See how well he can catch a bird, or a wild animal with four legs in high snow, with his bare hands. He can't fly, but can he kill an animal with his hands/nails? Does he run faster than deer? Is he stronger than a bear? Can he swim under water long enough to catch fish with his hands? Is he fast enough? Does he know of fish that are not slippery when wet? All he does, is to document that in order to live on an animal based diet, we needs tools, traps, weapons, farms: in short, we need to cultivate. Animal traps doesn't grow on trees. Now, what's wrong with cultivating nature to get B12?

Not that I think he would need it, if he would be living back then, where the water we drank, the soil, the surfaces of plants (that would be eaten fresh) all would contain B12. Maybe he couldn't buy flax seeds where he lives back then, but he couldn't buy microwave ovens either, water wasn't transported in copper tubes, he didn't have any amalgam in his teeth, and he wasn't exposed to pollution from cars or mercury from fish. Babies were breastfed often for several years, give them a much stronger nutrition base to start with. Maybe he couldn't even get tea, sugar coffee or tobacco where he lived, and therefore the conditions for nutrients like B12 to survive and be effective would be A LOT better than now.

There are 18,000 different kinds of legumes. Please ask him how many of these he knows the nutrient contents of - or at least, which of them that there has been performed any research on. Maybe he even only knows the names of 10 of them? That's 0.06% of all existing legumes! How can he know what nutrients they contain if he doesn't know their names?

I have spent a little time on sites for kettle farmers, and it's interesting to see how much focus the need for supplements for animals gets. Maybe this guy can explain why it's OK to eat animals that are dependent on supplements (they even often add supplements, like cobalt, to the soil where they grow food for these animals, plus a lot of other nasty things), and not to eat a plant based diet, that according to him makes us dependent on supplements? Why is B12 (or antibiotics!) added to meat / factory farm diet more natural than B12 added to his own diet?

Again, I agree that it's not natural to need a supplement on a diet that is considered to be a natural choice for humans. But he is doing a mistake buy just looking at a part of the whole picture.

B12 is a hot topic: we can get all the other nutrients we need without killing animals (including vitamin D from sunlight), and lots of other animals can get all the nutrients they get from plants. I find it extremely unlikely that humans were created so different from all other plant eating animals, and also that B12 is so different from all other nutrients (in regards to availability). Nature simply doesn't seem to be created that way. The problem is, that we (humans, not animals) have the ability to destroy nature, and are very active doing it

[Kim[ba]]

“I have incisors. I have two eyes in the front of my head. I have the ability to walk erect, and thus am able to spot prey from a farther distance. My body requires the nutrition from meat, unless I pop pills all day. I am the ultimate preditory omnivore that nature has created.”

AHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Ask him to tell that to a TIGER!

Sorry man, but that's just funny. I can't really communicate with video gamers after living with my ex-roommate who was infatuated with video games.

[sophia]

The b12 thing is a pile of rubbish. That bugs me. We don't all need to take b12. I don't, I have spiralina and other algae, so I don't need it, and I have been tested to see if i'm deficient in anything and i'm not. And what was one of the first organisms to live on this planet? blue green algae. Ducks eat tonnes of it from lakes and im sure our ancestors did, so go tell that meat eating t**t where to go!

Phew!!

[Artichoke47]

Uhm, I wouldn't waste my time arguing with this idiot. He doesn't know the first thing about nutrition.

[veganful]

Well Porn Stars consent to having sex on camera or being photographed but does that mean they aren't objectified? For most people, especially those that aren't concerned with stereotypes and such don't think what the difference is. The thing is the naked female body is used what about her brain? Now adays as if that's all we have to get out point across. Our bodies makes a bigger statement than out brains. For guys to pose nude becomes a different matter.

[snaffler]

Originally Posted by Geobau
“I have incisors. I have two eyes in the front of my head. I have the ability to walk erect, and thus am able to spot prey from a farther distance. My body requires the nutrition from meat, unless I pop pills all day. I am the ultimate preditory omnivore that nature has created.”

Hmm ok so he is a preditor so perhaps we should ask how this modern preditor works, he spots his pray from a farther distance, so what he really means is he can see the Kebab shop from his house when it's not foggy.

Or does he mean if he is standing in Isle 4 he can see Isle 1 very clear if he stands on the canned fruit section display which enables him to spot the 3 chickens for a £5.00 in poultry section of Sainsbury.

So he can walk erect sorry Beavis & Butthead must come in now well he sounds like an "A" grade nob he is not wrong their.

"I am the ultimate preditory omnivore that nature has created"

Sadly nature must create one or two defects, but in time this process is corrected as nature through the laws of nature and Karma will punish those who should know better to take anothers life for personal gain and greed.

Nature deals with these attitudes by the onset of disease in most cases, those who only take from nature with a selfish attitude will meet those they abused on their journey through life. Although when they meet the spirits of those who's lives they have devoured this may not be in any obvious shape or form when it comes back for them.

He also says that he is the ultimate creature so why no mention of compasion and care as the ultimate creature will have respect for all life and all things living.

All though the native indians were meat eaters and used animals, in an odd way I doubt most us in our lives will never understand they still had a stong physical and spiritual connection with animals.

I hope that is of some use but I have used it in arguments.

If that fails I am ususaly blunt and offer them a £1.00 for a big mac and say go and F**k up your main vital organs and do us all a favour.

[Evilfluffbunny]

Originally Posted by Geobau
“I have incisors.

So do rabbits you tit! Incisors include all our front teeth as well as the canines, which incidentally are nothing at all compared to the canines of carnivores and most other omnivores - they are not capable of ripping the throat out of an animal or shearing through muscles and tendons. We also don't posses the carnassial teeth of predators which are essential for shearing meat. Our teeth are closer to that of grazing animals as are our jaws which can move side to side to help us grind food.

Humans also have very long intestinal tracts unlike carnivores which have very short ones. This is so the meat (which begins to decay rapidly) is passed out their system before it begins to rot, but if humans eat a lot of meat, it will start rotting before it's passed through the intestine. Meat eaters have 40% higher incidences of getting colon cancer compared to veggies.

Gorillas have 8 lessened incisors that are primarily designed to deal with smaller fare, like bugs, and defense.

Crap. He's obviously never seen a gorillas teeth - they're almost identical to ours with the exception of very large canines, which in the males, look like massive fangs.

The leafy greens consumed by gorillas provide nutrients and the caloric intake they would need, however they also eat all freakin' day. Human being stumbled on a more compact energy source hundreds of thousands of years ago

A totally irrelevant point. Vegans and veggies aren't living on leaves, tree bark and shoots like gorillas are. We don't need to eat more food than omnis to get our nutrients.

Our bodies have been dependant on meat to survive for hundreds of thousands of years. You simply cannot deny it if you wish to have any realistic clout. I understand that many people choose to make political/religious statements with their vegatarianism, and that's fine for them. But who am I to deny my design?”

Our bodies haven't been dependant on it, our lifestyles have (in the past), but we now have access to plant foods containing all the nutrients the body needs. Meat is not a necessity, it's an unnecessary luxury. If it's so natural than why must you cook it before it's safe and digestable? Why are you more likely to get cancer and heart disease if you eat it a lot? Seems a bit of a 'design' flaw to me!


Sorry if all that was a bit disjointed, I'm trying to do two things at once!

[Evilfluffbunny]

Grrr... I'm angry now! I hate these Meatards that try to be all condescending and scientific and make up 'facts' to try and justify their love of dead flesh.

[Shisha Fiend]

I have incisors. I have two eyes in the front of my head. I have the ability to walk erect, and thus am able to spot prey from a farther distance. My body requires the nutrition from meat, unless I pop pills all day. I am the ultimate preditory omnivore that nature has created.

Yeah, basically this is a load of crap, like Korn said has he ever tried to actually hunt without tools?
The ability to walk erect, scientists now think, is linked to our evolution as nomads- it allows us to keep running for long distances. That's why we're bald too, so we can lose heat more easily. How many other predators walk erect? It oesn't help at all, it allows prey to spot you a mile off. The 'ultimate predator' is camouflaged, about the same level as the surrounding vegetation, has enormously powerful senses of sight, hearing, and smell, and able to move silently and quickly, but doesn't have a massive amount of stamina. Humans are designed for stamina- long distance running. We are definitely not the ultimate predators. We do not check out against that list.

Also, as far as the design argument goes does he think people with glasses should not be able to eat meat? After all, left to nature they wouldn't be able to see it.

As for popping pills, that's nonsense. A lot of vegans don't.

Basically if he's going for the 'natural' argument, it's not natural to factory farm. End of. Even if you feel it's okay in principle to kill and eat animals, that's a far cry from what we do today.
And even when we were hunting back in prehistoric times, the main diet was plant based.

His basic argument though is 'we were designed to eat meat, therefore we cannot survive without the nutrients it provides'. So attack the premise and the conclusion:

Did we really evolve as meat eaters? A lot of people say no. Why do we have an appendix, for example? I think it's undeniable that we ate meat, but I don't believe it featured as heavily in our diet as it does today. I also don't see dairy consumption as something we were designed for at all.

Is it possible to survive without the nutrients meat provides? Firstly, does factory farmed meat really provide much nutrition anyway? Secondly, yes easily. Your existence, Stu, proves that.

Gorillas have 8 lessened incisors that are primarily designed to deal with smaller fare, like bugs, and defense. Homosapiens have incisors that are capable of rending flesh and only posess partial bipedality. Those who claim the human body was NOT meant for an omnivorous life can go ahead and be vegan, but they'd better not pop any supplements around me-- after all, they derive all they need from plant life, right?

The human body requires more energy to operate (more elongated, more heat loss, more weight support), and would logically need a commensurate increase in energy consumption. Gorillas posess partial bipedality, not full. Their pelvic structure is made to support four-legged ambling- part of the reason their babies are born more developed. As a general rule, the more erect the species, the more helpless the babies. They must be born before their heads get too developed to fit through the sleek pelvis of a biped.

The leafy greens consumed by gorillas provide nutrients and the caloric intake they would need, however they also eat all freakin' day. Human being stumbled on a more compact energy source hundreds of thousands of years ago, and have evolved to a more heightened state because of it. We don't need to devolve because we feel guilt

That's funny. He seems to think humans are the only animals who eat meat. Plenty of carnivores do it. It's completely false to claim that we have 'evolved to a more heightened state because of eating meat'. It just does't work. The amount of species that eat meat proves we did not evolve because of this.

His argument here is generally that vegetables do not provide as much energy as meat. This just isn't true. He sounds like he knows a bit of biology but anyone who has studied pyramids of biomass will know that the more efficient diet is a vegan one. Especially now with the whole 'feed the world' thing going on.

Vegans often argue that the human body doesn't need meat to survive, yet they have to pop supplements. If the body didn't NEED these supplements, then they'd have a counter to the argument, but it does, and they don't. The body needs nutrients and especially amino acids in meat that you WON'T FIND in vegetables, and thus it was more-than-likely designed to work optimally with their inclusion in our diets.

Plenty of vegans don't take supplements. Plenty of omnis do. Plenty of omnis are also deficient in their nutrient intake. It's more a case of eating a blanaced diet than anythign else.
As for his phobia of supplements, it's ridiculous. For example, it's recommended that every menstruating woman take iron tablets, whether vegan or not. It's not necessarily a sign of ill health or poor diet.

As for his 'eat what your body is designed for' I can only assume he forgoes milk and eggs? After all milk is the most unnatural of all our foods, we were definitely not designed to eat it, and the rate of lactose intolerance, heart attacks, strokes etc proves our bodies can't deal with it.
Never mind dairy leaches calcium from your bones.
And eggs obviously leave him chock full of unwanted cholesterol so he doesn't eat them either- his body was not designed for them.

We also must take into account that one could not pick and choose fuits and vegetables from around the globe back when we evolved this way. We didn't cultivate soy. We couldn't get pumpkin seeds for protein. We couldn't down handfulls of flax. We had what was around us, which was admittedly sparse in winters, and we had animals. We got our Omega-3 fatty acids from elk and deer that grazed, not from some wünder-plant that popped up through the snow and sprouted opaque pills.

So what? What bearing does that have on anything? After all we didn't have computers back in the day either, does that mean we should refrain from computer gaming because, what, it's unnatural?

Our bodies have been dependant on meat to survive for hundreds of thousands of years. You simply cannot deny it if you wish to have any realistic clout. I understand that many people choose to make political/religious statements with their vegatarianism, and that's fine for them. But who am I to deny my design

We were not 'dependent on meat to survive'. I'm sure even this guy would not argue that we were carnivores, we were omnivores which means we survived on a balance of plant and vegetable based nutrition.

However in a way I have to agree here, it is more than likely that we did eat meat and I don't think it's appropriate to deny this because it might not fit in with our current ethics. That just looks stubborn. I suppose the argument here is we now have a choice. After all we have survived without electricity for hundreds of thousands of years too, or lived in caves for hundreds of thousands of years. What does it matter?
Now, in this day and age, we have a choice. The choice is compassion for the animals or certain taste sensations. It seems pretty simple to me. What does it matter what our ancestors did? After all we don't worry about 'denying our design' whenever we get on the bus, take medication, build houses, or sit in front of a screen for hours. Unless he refuses to do these (and he obviously doesn't; he's posting on a gaming forum) his argument doesn't really stand up to scrutiny.

[snivelingchild]

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that consent makes it not objectification. I agree that spreading the image that all that is important about ANYBODY is their body, and some people may get that message from these poster. I was simply stating that I don't find any of them to be sexual, just art. I really don't think it is a different matter for men than women. Both genders have been are are continued to be seen as sex symbols. There is no separation except that you didn't tend to be men in this role as much in the past. There are horrible male stereotypes out there and programs like this . I don't view this issue as being the same as feminism (I am one for serious equal rights myself), but just a new trend in viewing people shallowly as only empty capsules. I see it happen all the time. The media contributes too. I see just as many instances of this regarding men as I do women, and both disgust me, because I hate to see people grow up with this false image of love and get hurt themselves because they didn't look for someone who lvoes and respects them. In any way, in a poster where the purpose is meant to grab attention, I think an artful display of something that catches an eye is displayed alot easier than someone's personaity, though I would be much more pleased if I saw them reach through artists for beautiful pictures that grabed attention and were full of beauty without having to use natural beauty. We need more things like that.

[Seaside]

I think almost every issue has been covered here, but I think you should suggest this scenario to your "friend" the "meatard" (I'm sorry if that seems rude, but I love it! Thanks Evilfluffbunny!).

Ask him to picture himself in Africa where man originated. Lets give him a break and let him have a spear. He sees a herd of wildebeast with those fantastic eyes of his while he is standing upright, but a pack of lionesses see the herd at the same time. He starts to charge the herd at the same time time as the lionesses. Who does he think will get there first? Both the wildebeasts and the lionesses can run faster then he can, and even with a spear he really is no match for a large herd of frightened wildebeast, so who is going to be easier to catch for the lionesses? Even if the lionesses choose a wildebeast over this guy, does he really think he's gonna walk right up and get some away from the lionesses, especially if they have cubs to feed? He isn't even going to be able to get the scraps away from the hyenas who are waiting to scavenge what's left. If he's lucky to get a bit of muscle meat, which is the least nutritious part of any animal, (the organs and stomach contents are the first choice amongst true carnivores) he gonna have to let it hang and rot for a while before he can get those incisors to work on it anyway, and he's gonna have to defend even that from the vultures and wild dogs. Some anthropologists do believe that our ancient, diminutive, four foot tall ancestors could not have acheived our present brain size without animal protein, but they claim it was obtained from scavenging bone marrow after all the real carnivores had gotten all the bests parts from the animals they hunted and killed. Eating meat isn't just about who is biologically suited to digest it, but who is the most successful at competing for it.

The human being is not the ultimate predator, we are the ultimate parasite!

[Robin]

Out of pure interest, what do you guys think of the F*ck for Forest campaing? *WARNING*Adult content and nudity*WARNING*


Personally, this doesn't work with my feminist values, but I'm interest in others opinions because I'm pretty confused.

[veganful]

LOL maybe im just prudish but I am not really enjoying that. I will be the first one to admit I love sex but for some reason that kind of offends me.
ileana

[veganful]

I think I just realized why it offends me. The one that is being f*ckd. Or mostly shown pics of is the woman. I get the sense that the man has the control in these pics. To me its still porn.
ileana

[snaffler]

Out of pure interest, what do you guys think of the F*ck for Forest campaing? *WARNING*Adult content and nudity*WARNING*


Personally, this doesn't work with my feminist values, but I'm interest in others opinions because I'm pretty confused.

Different I suppose but If you look at where they are based I think it is Germany and they are not as prude as the british about porn - I have nothing what so ever against porn as long as both parties involved are 100% consenting, also that the acts they choose to do are also 100% consenting from both or all parties in some cases. I must admit as graphic as the poster is on the site it's a good bit of art work.

I suppose it beats farting in the forest that would not help the o-zone layer.

[veganful]

I was actually kidding bout being prudish. Like I said before I love sex. However sex and objectifying gets tricky. At least for me... Its yet another "trend" to follow cuz lets face it sex is becoming more and more popular. I was born in Romania and now live the good ol' U S of A.

Ileana

[sylkan]

The biological human body is pretty incredible but the question is how much of our current daily lives are actually "what nature intended for us"? I love this discussion; it has been very funny to read. What this guy has to admit is that he likes meat and doesn't want to just come out say it. He would prefer to mask his selfish attitude behind a pack of lies intended to shore up his inadequate argument.

[tails4wagging]

just to let you know I have logged of from that forum, sick of being attacked !!