Any Veggetarians???

[Anaisa]

That's extremely sad, if I'm not worth more than a cow. That's a really harmful attitude to have. If a child and a cow were both drowning together, who would you save first? I'd want both to be saved, but I'd go for the child first.

I care about animals and am big on animal welfare, but yea.

It's more harmful to think that its ok for humans to slaughter animals, than it is to think animal life should be valued as much as human life. Whole species of animals can become extinct or endangered thanks to that attitude. My attitude isn't responsible for killing or endangering anybody. If a cow an a child were drowning, an I had to save one first, it would be the child. Because the cow is probably going to get murdered an eaten if I save it anyway.

I tend to agree with the Universalist perspective, which says a human is worth more than a cow. Most of the time, at least. Not that I can think of any example where it wouldn't be.

Basically, it's whatever's better for the greater good. If doing testing on three rats will save lives, do it. If eating one person will keep ten more alive, do it.

The greater good for humans that is. Although it's not actually the best thing for humans. Since tests on another human would be far more accurate, an we have prisoners who could actually serve a purpose an be tested on instead of animals. Of course I'm only talking about people in prison for terrible crimes.

Yes, I don't think that Vegetarians are any more morally superior than myself bu I haven't given my oppinion anywhere about canibalism. (you brought it up, I've been trying to tell you it wasn't part of the discussion) Anywhere. I never even stated I felt morally superior to anyone, infact I've been vying for moral equality between Vegetarians and Meat Eaters. Your accusation is thus ridiculous and ignorant.

If we're following the rule of don't bring anything up unless it's part of the discussion, most posts in this thread shouldn't be here, since it's supposed to be about vegetarians an why their a vegetarian. So you saying you don't think vegetarians are more morally superior to you, is not fit for what is supposed to be discussed either. You have given your opinion about cannabilism, because you've said it doesn't belong in this thread, an it can't be compared to humans eating animals. You've made it totally obvious that what I'm accusing you of, is true. If it's not, then you'd say otherwise.

What are (or atleast were you adressing?) Since you don't seem to remember, let me tell you. You were adressing a post of mine. You were adressing the fact that I stated individuals should NOT be considered morally superior to eachother based on consumption habbits (within the context of vegetarianism/meat eating). Thus to bring in a moot point such as canibalism is ... well moot, and ignoring about the issue you initially chose to adress.

No, I'm totally clear on what I'm saying, an that's blatantly obvious. I'm well aware I was addressing your post, hence me quoting it, an responding to it. It's not a moot point. It's a moot point to you, because you think it's acceptable to kill an eat animals, but not humans. Which makes you a hypocrite, which makes your entire stance on the matter moot.

I am totally capable of understaing "how eating a human can be compared to eating animal" but I have delibrately chosen not to discuss this matter under the circumstance that it has nothing to do with the arguement I have been adressing. So yes... yes it is you who is ignorant.

If you could understand how eating a human can be compared to eating an animal, you'd understand why it is part of the argument. An you have chosen to discuss the matter. If you hadn't, I wouldn't be responding to your post about it now would I.

See: Raistlin's post.
See: Leeza's post
See: Yamaneko's post.

The point is that all of us are trying to make you see that canibalism is not suitable or pertinent to the discussion of Vegetarianism and Non-Vegetarianism.

No, you may think it's not pertinent to the discussion. It's not pertinent to what is supposed to be being discussed, but neither are the majority of posts in this thread.

If you are going to adress morality under these circumstances you need to strengthen it with evidence and information within this realm.

The evidence an information is clear. Murdering an eating animals is considered to be fine. Murdering an eating humans is a crime. If you think that is acceptable, you obviously don't have the morals that are required to make a suitable judgement on how animals should be treated.

Human is off the menu.
Why? Because Leeza said so.

Well then if you agree, you shouldn't be making posts about it.

Why? Because human isn't accepted in our culture (where as eating meat is).
Why? Because. It's not legal.

That's the whole point!

Why? Because! Because! Because!

Meat eaters aren't capable of understanding how animal life should be as valued as human life, if they could, they wouldn't be meat eaters.