I have to imagine that other species' numbers would grow to enormous proportions and crowd into each other/cause starvation for them/push into human populations.

 

Seeing that most animals that are consumed are cows, pigs and chickens, they would just stop breading them as they currently do. It's not like we find those animals out in the wild.

BTW, I'm stunned that this thread is still in Pale Hose Talk.

Seeing that most animals that are consumed are cows, pigs and chickens, they would just stop breading them as they currently do. It's not like we find those animals out in the wild.

 

Interesting theoretical question. Wouldn't the reprecussion really depend on timing? If it was a gradual stopping, the population could be reduced easily. But imagine for a moment that we suddenly stopped eating meat. What would we do with all those pigs, cows, chickens, pigs, etc? Turn them loose somewhere? We could have free range cows back on the prarie.

There are a lot of people, including myself, that disagree.

I've honestly never even heard this argument before. It's quite wild to me.

BTW, I'm stunned that this thread is still in Pale Hose Talk.

Me too. Back to my question...do you really think that Vick has paid dues and should be forgiven?

I've honestly never even heard this argument before. It's quite wild to me.

I've been reading about animal rights issues quite religiously for 5 years now so it's not new to me. I can see how it could be for someone though.

Seeing that most animals that are consumed are cows, pigs and chickens, they would just stop breading them as they currently do. It's not like we find those animals out in the wild.

 

I have to imagine that there would be many repercussions for something like this. I don't think you or I could even wrap our minds around the possibilities. I certainly don't think it's accurate to say that the world would be a better place if everyone were vegans.

Me too. Back to my question...do you really think that Vick has paid dues and should be forgiven?

 

According to the law, yes. Although I would have preferred a much more severe penalty than the one he was given.

Me too. Back to my question...do you really think that Vick has paid dues and should be forgiven?

 

Legally, yes. Although I, and the vast majority of people, probably will never forgive him.

I certainly don't think it's accurate to say that the world would be a better place if everyone were vegans.

 

And why not? Other than the fact that most people like the taste of animals.

Edited February 10, 201115 yr by BigSqwert

Vegans make me laugh. Do you people live in a house? How many animals were displaced when your house was built? And tell me again what is your house made of? Wood? Trees are habitat to many species of animals. I can't believe you people would take an animals home like that. How could you? Do you wear leather shoes or do you go barefoot all the time. Have you ever played a sport with a ball made of leather? Vegans act so superior, but there just as big of hypocrites as everyone else.

I would've preferred the death penalty.

We are just about the only species on Earth with that option, as we are an apex predator. If there were a species above us on the food chain, you wouldn't have the choice to say "none of the above," and you'd definitely prefer to be taken down cleanly instead of forced to battle another person to the death before eventually being put down by being electrocuted by a car battery, drowned in a bucket of water, or slammed into the concrete repeatedly.

 

Actually I would choose the 2nd option where I had a chance to live opposed to the first option of being killed no matter what. To put it in human terms, I am back in the Roman dies with gladiators. I am a heretic and given two options: A) a clean quick death or B ) to fight other humans to the death and get to live. I choose option B, there is a chance I live.

 

Like Ive said, I dont really get that deep into these arguments because I know my stance is hypocritical. On one hand I dont like animals being killed, on the other I ate a chicken burrito for lunch. I consider myself a hypocrite just for eating already killed meat to survive. How could I not consider some one else a hypocrite who actually goes out and kills animals for fun, and then tries to act like another person who killed animals for fun is so much worse.

 

Its ridiculous and beyond comprehension.

Edited February 10, 201115 yr by Soxbadger

Vegans make me laugh. Do you people live in a house? How many animals were displaced when your house was built? And tell me again what is your house made of? Wood? Trees are habitat to many species of animals. I can't believe you people would take an animals home like that. How could you? Do you wear leather shoes or do you go barefoot all the time. Have you ever played a sport with a ball made of leather? Vegans act so superior, but there just as big of hypocrites as everyone else.

 

This post is ridiculous. No one attacked you yet you're attacking me.

 

You seem to know nothing about a vegan lifestyle. Veganism is about going out of your way to avoid the consumption of animals and animal products.

 

I'm not going to advocate that everyone kill themselves so that we can give the animals their land back.

 

And no I don't wear leather shoes or leather anything for that matter. Same goes for wool or silk.

Edited February 10, 201115 yr by BigSqwert

This post is ridiculous. No one attacked you yet you're attacking me.

 

You seem to know nothing about a vegan lifestyle. Veganism is about going out of your way to avoid the consumption of animals and animal products.

 

I'm not going to advocate that everyone kill themselves so that we can give the animals their land back.

 

And no I don't wear leather shoes or leather anything for that matter. Same goes for wool or silk.

 

If you view that as an attack, I am sorry. That was not necessarily aimed directly at you, but when I get compared to Michael Vick because I hunt, I take offense to that.

According to the law, yes. Although I would have preferred a much more severe penalty than the one he was given.

I agree that according to the law he has paid his dues. I'm not an animal rights activist by any means, so I can't speak for them, but I would have thought he'd never be forgiven.

For instance?

 

 

 

And why not? Other than the fact that most people like the taste of animals.

 

Like I said, there have to be bad repercussions that we cannot even fathom if people just stop eating meat. Humans (and humanoids) have been eating meat throughout their existence. Things just wouldn't go completely well if they stopped. If a predatory animal in the wild did the same thing, it also wouldn't go well.

Actually I would choose the 2nd option where I had a chance to live opposed to the first option of being killed no matter what. To put it in human terms, I am back in the Roman dies with gladiators. I am a heretic and given two options: A) a clean quick death or B ) to fight other humans to the death and get to live. I choose option B, there is a chance I live.

 

Like Ive said, I dont really get that deep into these arguments because I know my stance is hypocritical. On one hand I dont like animals being killed, on the other I ate a chicken burrito for lunch. I consider myself a hypocrite just for eating already killed meat to survive. How could I not consider some one else a hypocrite who actually goes out and kills animals for fun, and then tries to act like another person who killed animals for fun is so much worse.

 

Its ridiculous and beyond comprehension.

 

I guess we're just arguing sematics, but at some point you'd be killed anyway, and you'd have gone through plenty of pain and suffering along that road.

Well unfortunately if you hunt and kill defenseless animals there is really no good argument for why you shouldnt be compared to Michael Vick. Unless of course you are employed as animal conservationist and are killing animals for conservation purposes only, taking no pleasure in the act.

 

As soon as you enjoy the hunt, you are killing for fun.

 

After that it is up to each individual to come up with their own rationalization for why its okay.

 

I dont hunt, probably never will. When I was younger I really wanted to big game hunt. As I grew older I realized that killing a lion or whatever would do nothing but take away something that I truly felt was special. Since that point in time I have tried to be more judicious with how I interact with animals. I eat meat, and I rationalize that as okay because the animal would have been killed whether I bought the food or not.

 

Horrible reasoning, but how else do I rationalize my complete hypocrisy on the issue.

Vegans make me laugh. Do you people live in a house? How many animals were displaced when your house was built? And tell me again what is your house made of? Wood? Trees are habitat to many species of animals. I can't believe you people would take an animals home like that. How could you? Do you wear leather shoes or do you go barefoot all the time. Have you ever played a sport with a ball made of leather? Vegans act so superior, but there just as big of hypocrites as everyone else.

Anyone who takes any moral stance runs the risk hypocrisy. If hypocrisy is the worst crime, then it would be better not to have any morals at all.

 

Of course, whether it's hypocritical or not depends entirely on how the issue is framed. If it's a question of reducing the human-induced suffering of animals, then vegans are no hypocrites.

Edited February 10, 201115 yr by JorgeFabregas

Well unfortunately if you hunt and kill defenseless animals there is really no good argument for why you shouldnt be compared to Michael Vick. Unless of course you are employed as animal conservationist and are killing animals for conservation purposes only, taking no pleasure in the act.

 

As soon as you enjoy the hunt, you are killing for fun.

 

After that it is up to each individual to come up with their own rationalization for why its okay.

 

I dont hunt, probably never will. When I was younger I really wanted to big game hunt. As I grew older I realized that killing a lion or whatever would do nothing but take away something that I truly felt was special. Since that point in time I have tried to be more judicious with how I interact with animals. I eat meat, and I rationalize that as okay because the animal would have been killed whether I bought the food or not.

 

Horrible reasoning, but how else do I rationalize my complete hypocrisy on the issue.

I still don't see how anyone could make this connection. Michael Vick participated in (and organized) the torture of dogs. A person going out into the woods, hunting, and taking the animal home to eat the meat is absolutely nothing like what Vick did. And it's not just because he did it to dogs. The torture of any living creature is wrong. Hunting is not torture.

Anyone who takes any moral stance runs the risk hypocrisy. If hypocrisy is the worst crime, then it would be better not to have any morals at all.

 

Of course, whether it's hypocritical or not depends entirely on how the issue is framed. If it's a question of reducing the human-induced suffering of animals, then vegans are no hypocrites.

 

The point I've been trying to get across, is that if an animal is harvested correctly, there is no "suffering". When an animal is shot through a vital organ, especially the heart/lungs they die instantly. They do not suffer. And that is the problem with what Michael Vick did, and what factory farms do everyday.

 

f*** it, I'm taking it to the next level. Michael Vick is just like Hitler because they both owned dogs at some point and were responsible for the deaths of living things in some way.

Well unfortunately if you hunt and kill defenseless animals there is really no good argument for why you shouldnt be compared to Michael Vick. Unless of course you are employed as animal conservationist and are killing animals for conservation purposes only, taking no pleasure in the act.

As soon as you enjoy the hunt, you are killing for fun.

 

After that it is up to each individual to come up with their own rationalization for why its okay.

 

I dont hunt, probably never will. When I was younger I really wanted to big game hunt. As I grew older I realized that killing a lion or whatever would do nothing but take away something that I truly felt was special. Since that point in time I have tried to be more judicious with how I interact with animals. I eat meat, and I rationalize that as okay because the animal would have been killed whether I bought the food or not.

 

Horrible reasoning, but how else do I rationalize my complete hypocrisy on the issue.

 

 

 

Are these hunters also running illegal gambling rings associated with hunt?