"Rubystars" > wrote in message
om...
> "rick etter" > wrote in message
>...
> > "Rubystars" > wrote in message
> > om...
> > > (piddock) wrote in message
> > . com>...
> > > > "rick etter" > wrote in message
news:<clWpb.1601
> >
> <snip lots of stuff>
>
> I just want to remind you Rick that I'm not a vegan and I'm not even a
> vegetarian yet, though I eat a lot less meat than I used to. I think
> most of what PETA says is pure BS, but I'm also skeptical of what you
> are saying. I don't think anyone has the complete truth. I do think
> that it's common sense that if you really have a moral objection to
> eating meat you shouldn't do it.
================
Then don't. Nobody has ever said that anyone here *has* to eat meat. The
reverse cannot be said of vegan loons here though. Just don't try to tell
everyone it's because you're 'saving' animals.
>
> Rats and mice are pests, and there's no shortage of them (quite the
> contrary).
==================
Ther's no shortage of cows or chickens either. Is that the only critiria
you have? Or is it just their size makes them less important as far as
animal death and suffering are concerned?
I don't think they should be tortured, but I don't see how
> getting chopped up in a machine (a harvester or a grain processor)
> could possibly be worse than the rat poison, coca cola, and flour
> mixed with concrete they're subjected to when they invade people's
> properties. It's probably a LOT more humane than that.
======================
Why these comparisons? the one you should be comparing them to are the
animals that die in slaughterhouses.
I'd say that those animals die a more humane death than any of the ones you
mentioned.
>
> I think what a lot of vegetarians object to is the fact that animals
> are raised for the express purpose of killing them. I don't really
> have a problem with that, if the animals are treated humanely in life
> and killed with little pain.
====================
As many are. The problem is your crop fields are just the ticket for fast
population explosions of many animals. You can say they are raised
expressly because of your food production. Increases that would not occur
without your crops providing easy food and cover. then, just when the
populations are at their peak, you take away all the food and cover. What
do you think happens to these animals, that they just mosey over to the
next field that's cut down? They are left without food and cover to die
from starvation and predation. they all can't just go into the surrounding
area because those areas will already be at their carrying capacity.
> However I do think that it's sad that people eat as much meat as they
> do.
======================
Do you really know how much? Or are you just guessing with your delusions
from PeTA and their ilk? Even the typical American diet contains far more
plant material than meats. About 200lbs of meat. about 400lbs of veggies,
200lbs of grains and cerials, and 100lbs of fruit. There is also 500+lbs of
dairy, but that's neither meat nor veggie.
It's really not necessary to eat meat 3 or more times a day, and
> it's not healthy either. I may or may not go vegetarian later but I
> don't think that I'm going to be increasing animal suffering if I
> choose to do that. I really don't.
====================
But you refuse to even consider that as a possibility, nor will you even try
to check it out, will you? Why? Afraid of what you'll discover?
That's also part of the point. Vegans won't even try to determine which of
their own foods cause less or more animals death and suffering. They just
assume that it's all nice and cruelty free.
>
> The reason I replied though is that I was surprised at the fanatical
> responses you're getting. I guess I shouldn't be though. I knew if I
> thought someone was saying things to get a rise out of me I'd probably
> ignore them.
========================
Nope. I'm not replying to get a 'rise' out of any body. I just want to
present the truth. Something vegans are ashamed of apparently since all
they spew are lys and delusions.
>
>
> > He can't. His hatred is all he has. He knows his 'ethics' are a sham.
so
> > he has to hate those that remind him of that fact.
>
> I just think that if he wants to put a postive face on vegetarianism
> or veganism that he should treat other people nicely, even those he
> isn't fond of. I know that's not always easy and some flaming back and
> forth is probably permissible (since this is Usenet) but telling
> someone to drop dead from a heart attack goes way too far, IMO. I
> mean, we are talking about food here, it's not THAT darn important.
=====================
But that's part of the point. Vegans will claim that their diet 'saves' all
those animals. They've never checked it out, and can't prove it, but they
make the claims anyway. the fact is, their, and your, and my diets are far
from having the greatest impact on animal death and suffering. There are
far more things in our lifestyles that contribute to animal death and
suffering than just from whatever we eat. case in point, your posts to
usenet are not cruelty free.
>
> -Rubystars