That's it, I've decided to become a vegetarian.

[Kamiko]

There's nothing wrong with being a vegetarian. It's cool.
I'm one so I guess I would be biast. :kaohappy:

[Lindy]

Actually not all animals are killed before they're cooked and eaten. Lobsters are cooked whilst still alive. And I did not say that animals were tortured before they were killed. I said they felt pain. And how exactly are you suggesting that these animals are killed pain free? Have you not seen or heard of any of the methods that are used to kill these animals? Electrocution for example? You think thats pain free do you? And there are people who look at an animal and think "lets torture it". Don't believe me? have you ever heard of an organization called the rspca?

Yes, the RSPCA frequently goes to slaughter houses and rescues the animals from "cruelty".

Do you even KNOW how animals are killed?

Lobsters are thrown into boiling water because it is actually the most humane way to kill them, they die instantly in the boiling water, so it's rather a stupid example when you're just pointing out how quickly they ARE killed. They're not cooked whilst alive, they die before they even start to do so.
Most cows go down to a captive bolt gun to the head, kills them instantly, they feel nothing.
Pigs are knocked out via electrocution and then killed, again designed so they feel nothing.

Lets put this simply.

The animals humans eat are bred purely for eating, they exist for no other purpose and if we did not eat meat, they would not exist. It's not as if people are running around and shooting animals they see just to eat them, the animals killed for our food are brought into this world purely for that reason.

I doubt you'd see pigs and cows as they are today if they hadn't been bred that way, so why is it horrible cruelty to kill animals to eat them if the animals we eat exist only for that purpose?

[Anaisa]

Yes, the RSPCA frequently goes to slaughter houses and rescues the animals from "cruelty".

I never said they did.But actually as it happens the RSPCA do visit farms.

Do you even KNOW how animals are killed?

Do I even know how animals are killed? you mean do I even know how they are killed in a slaughter house? the answer to that is quite obviously yes. An answer you would actually know if you read my message before attempting to reply to it.

Lobsters are thrown into boiling water because it is actually the most humane way to kill them, they die instantly in the boiling water, so it's rather a stupid example when you're just pointing out how quickly they ARE killed. They're not cooked whilst alive, they die before they even start to do so.
Most cows go down to a captive bolt gun to the head, kills them instantly, they feel nothing.
Pigs are knocked out via electrocution and then killed, again designed so they feel nothing.

Oh really? so you've asked the animals themselves have you? because thats the only way you could know unless you've actually been through it yourself and have now been reincarnated.

The animals humans eat are bred purely for eating, they exist for no other purpose and if we did not eat meat, they would not exist. It's not as if people are running around and shooting animals they see just to eat them, the animals killed for our food are brought into this world purely for that reason.

Animals were here before human beings human beings did not create them so they would exist without us eating them . So whether now human beings would make the decision to kill them all if they weren't going to be eaten is irrelevant it only goes to show just how selfish most human beings are.And you think they exist for no other purpose but to feed you, but thats certainly not the way the animal feels. No animal is brought into this world to feed human beings thats just the way an immoral human being chooses to look at it.

I doubt you'd see pigs and cows as they are today if they hadn't been bred that way, so why is it horrible cruelty to kill animals to eat them if the animals we eat exist only for that purpose?

They do not exist to feed human beings there were animals before there were humans if they existed only for us to eat that wouldn't have been the case.

[CaZ!]

saying "I'm a vegetarian but I eat fish" is like saying "I'm an atheist but I believe in God."

No its not because its not inhumanley treat the way other meat is and plus if they can't eat fish then there totally restricting themselves of certain things they need in their diet

[Anaisa]

What eestlinc meant by that is that you cannot call yourself a vegetarian and eat fish because its a contradiction just like it would be saying your an atheist but you believe in God. The definition of vegetarian is: "a person who consumes a diet that excludes meat and fish".

[Brian The Pink Shark]

good luck, i recently became a vegetarian myself, its not that hard really, but it requires will power

[Sasquatch]

Not again.

Do I even know how animals are killed? you mean do I even know how they are killed in a slaughter house? the answer to that is quite obviously yes. An answer you would actually know if you read my message before attempting to reply to it.

His (obviously correct) response to you was that animals aren't tortured to death, they are humanely killed with as little pain as possible. The only exception I've seen to this is when meat is Koshered. Which is pretty damn sick, I think, but hey, to each his own.

Oh really? so you've asked the animals themselves have you? because thats the only way you could know unless you've actually been through it yourself and have now been reincarnated.

You don't have to talk to somebody to figure out when they die, do you? They've actually researched this -- to quell arguments from bleeding-hearts such as yourself -- and found that the lobster dies almost immediately from shock, prettymuch. Not to mention, if it's not killed this way, the meat is poisoned.

Animals were here before human beings human beings did not create them so they would exist without us eating them . So whether now human beings would make the decision to kill them all if they weren't going to be eaten is irrelevant it only goes to show just how selfish most human beings are.And you think they exist for no other purpose but to feed you, but thats certainly not the way the animal feels. No animal is brought into this world to feed human beings thats just the way an immoral human being chooses to look at it.

If not for human interference, most of these animals wouldn't exist. You think a cow would survive in the wild? That's one of the problems with Evolutionism, but still -- either way, there's no way a giant chunk of meat with nearly no defense mechanisms would survive without human interference. That's pretty obvious. Leave a hamburger on a mousetrap, set it in front of your dog, and see how long it lasts. As for "the way the animal feels", most people believe that they don't have emotions. Physical nerves and feelings, yes, but not emotional feelings.

But yes, they DO only exist for us to eat. If we didn't eat them, we wouldn't have raised them, which means they would have had to survive on their own, which means they, well, wouldn't be around anymore.

[Lindy]

Oh really? so you've asked the animals themselves have you? because thats the only way you could know unless you've actually been through it yourself and have now been reincarnated.

Read it again. Killed INSTANTLY. Instant meaning, death at a snap, if it's INSTANT then they can't feel anything. Left your reading glasses at home today did we?

Animals were here before human beings human beings did not create them so they would exist without us eating them . So whether now human beings would make the decision to kill them all if they weren't going to be eaten is irrelevant it only goes to show just how selfish most human beings are.And you think they exist for no other purpose but to feed you, but thats certainly not the way the animal feels. No animal is brought into this world to feed human beings thats just the way an immoral human being chooses to look at it

They do not exist to feed human beings there were animals before there were humans if they existed only for us to eat that wouldn't have been the case.

Animals existed before us, yes, farm animals did not. The animals we eat were bred from wild animals purely for the purpose of eating. Again, lost your reading glasses? I'd clearly started that part.

You know, I have no problem with vegetarians and vegans.

I have problems with people like YOU, people who state that eating plants are a better food source than meat, or that anyone who eats meat is immoral and selfish. It's rubbish, I don't rag on your life choice to not eat meat, yet you complain at mine? How exactly is anyone else eating meat affecting you? It shouldn't weigh on your conscience if you're not doing so, why are you so against it?

[Maxico]

If not for human interference, most of these animals wouldn't exist. You think a cow would survive in the wild? That's one of the problems with Evolutionism, but still -- either way, there's no way a giant chunk of meat with nearly no defense mechanisms would survive without human interference. That's pretty obvious. Leave a hamburger on a mousetrap, set it in front of your dog, and see how long it lasts. As for "the way the animal feels", most people believe that they don't have emotions. Physical nerves and feelings, yes, but not emotional feelings.

But yes, they DO only exist for us to eat. If we didn't eat them, we wouldn't have raised them, which means they would have had to survive on their own, which means they, well, wouldn't be around anymore.

They would still around. Farmers have selectivly bred the most docile and largest wildlife to make farming easier and more profitable. Look at other close relatives to cattle like Buffalo and Bison. They seemed to be able to look after themselfs without human intervention (Go irony!).

So say you selectivly bred a breed of Humans that were incapable of looking after themselves. Does that make it right to kill them, seeing as you created them after all?

[Anaisa]

Not again.

His (obviously correct) response to you was that animals aren't tortured to death, they are humanely killed with as little pain as possible. The only exception I've seen to this is when meat is Koshered. Which is pretty damn sick, I think, but hey, to each his own.

Humanely killed? Look up the definition of humane and you'll see how obviously incorrect you are.

You don't have to talk to somebody to figure out when they die, do you?

No but you have to experience pain for yourself before you can say what it feels like.

They've actually researched this -- to quell arguments from bleeding-hearts such as yourself -- and found that the lobster dies almost immediately from shock, prettymuch. Not to mention, if it's not killed this way, the meat is poisoned.

And you consider that to be humane? how do think they die of shock? You will only die of shock after experiencing trauma so it doesn't matter how long it takes them to die the fact is that they've suffered.

If not for human interference, most of these animals wouldn't exist. You think a cow would survive in the wild? That's one of the problems with Evolutionism, but still -- either way, there's no way a giant chunk of meat with nearly no defense mechanisms would survive without human interference. That's pretty obvious.

As I said before animals existed before us they do not need us to survive. If cows were left to live in fields as they are now but were not being killed they would not all die out.

As for "the way the animal feels", most people believe that they don't have emotions. Physical nerves and feelings, yes, but not emotional feelings.

Thats obviously nonsense animals interact with each other if they had no emotions or feelings they would not do this. And there are animals that live in groups that will protect and care for each other and they mourn just like we do if one them is killed.

But yes, they DO only exist for us to eat. If we didn't eat them, we wouldn't have raised them, which means they would have had to survive on their own, which means they, well, wouldn't be around anymore.

Ill say it again. Animals existed without us before and they could quite easily exist without us again.

[Dreddz]

Meat is too tasty to give up, even if I do think eating animals is wrong ....

[Little Miss Awesome]

No its not because its not inhumanley treat the way other meat is and plus if they can't eat fish then there totally restricting themselves of certain things they need in their diet

That's not true at all, they can substitue the protein from meat with nuts and other things of that nature. So a vegetarian or even a vegan diet doesn't mean people have to get rid of things they NEED in their diets!

[Anaisa]

Read it again. Killed INSTANTLY. Instant meaning, death at a snap, if it's INSTANT then they can't feel anything. Left your reading glasses at home today did we?

Im at home, I don't wear glasses, nor do I need to. And it would take more than glasses to make you see clearly. I would suggest you should read it again but I know that you still wouldn't be able to grasp the concept no matter how many times you read it that you cannot say that their deaths are painfree and instant because YOU do not know that it is.

Animals existed before us, yes, farm animals did not. The animals we eat were bred from wild animals purely for the purpose of eating. Again, lost your reading glasses? I'd clearly started that part.

Again don't wear glasses. Whether you take a wild animal and choose to breed from it and then kill it is irrelevent. It is wrong, that animal does not belong to you, or at least it shouldn't. What makes you think human beings should have the right to capture a group of animals and then raise them to slaughter them? If I captured a group of people and kept them in my house and gave them food etc and then killed them and ate them how would that mean that they couldn't survive without me? they'd have been surviving perfectly well without me in the first place and could quite easily do so again.

You know, I have no problem with vegetarians and vegans.

I have problems with people like YOU, people who state that eating plants are a better food source than meat, or that anyone who eats meat is immoral and selfish. It's rubbish, I don't rag on your life choice to not eat meat, yet you complain at mine? How exactly is anyone else eating meat affecting you? It shouldn't weigh on your conscience if you're not doing so, why are you so against it?

Im against it because I care about these animals which you are eating. If I killed somone you cared about and ate them you would complain about it too.

[DK]

Im at home, I don't wear glasses, nor do I need to. And it would take more than glasses to make you see clearly. I would suggest you should read it again but I know that you still wouldn't be able to grasp the concept no matter how many times you read it that you cannot say that their deaths are painfree and instant because YOU do not know that it is.

'kay, so I take it you WERE a lobster in a former life and you WERE boiled and you DO know it hurts right? Because if you weren't, your arguement is exactly the same as Lindy's. Theres no way you can say that it DOES hurt and that it DOESN'T kill instantly, 'cause you don't know.

Im against it because I care about these animals which you are eating. If I killed somone you cared about and ate them you would complain about it too.

'kay so while you're at it why not stop every animal that eats meat on the planet from eating the other animals so we can all live in harmony. Two quid says the first Lion you walk upto and ask to stop eating buffalos rips your face off. This is a natural process. People eat things to survive. Meat and Animals are another form of food. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it right or wrong.

[Anaisa]

'kay, so I take it you WERE a lobster in a former life and you WERE boiled and you DO know it hurts right? Because if you weren't, your arguement is exactly the same as Lindy's. Theres no way you can say that it DOES hurt and that it DOESN'T kill instantly, 'cause you don't know.

No I wasn't a lobster in a former life but I don't need to have been to say that boiling water being poured over you hurts I think everyone would agree with me on that. Where as if I said pouring boiling water over you doesn't hurt somehow I don't think anybody would believe me. Unless I was talking about a lobster in which case the majority would agree. No I don't know whether they are killed instantly but thats not my point whether they are killed instantly or not I still think its wrong.

'kay so while you're at it why not stop every animal that eats meat on the planet from eating the other animals so we can all live in harmony. Two quid says the first Lion you walk upto and ask to stop eating buffalos rips your face off. This is a natural process. People eat things to survive. Meat and Animals are another form of food.

A lion needs to eat meat to survive, we do not.

Just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it right or wrong.

You could say that about everything the murderer or the rapeist could say "just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it right or wrong". If I killed a human being and ate them the majority would think I was wrong. If it was an animal they'd see no problem with it. You cannot have empathy for something or someone until you put yourself in its place and most humans are unable to do that with animals hence them eating them. For showing empathy towards an animal im wrong? I know im not.