hoofian

Rather than addressing every single point made on here, as I originally planned, I'm just gonna make some main points and brief replies. First of all, the entire purpose of this thread, was to see if anyone shared my interest in a plant-based diet. I stated clearly I had no intentions of starting any arguments, and no arguments or debates here were started by me. I have not tried to convert anyone other than those who expressed interest, and even then I only mentioned my personal experiences with the subject. Any argumentative points was to fight against the unsourced misinformation that people have no problem posting all over this thread. All of these attacks against the way I choose to eat and live my life are completely unwarranted, childish, and pointless. You tore nothing to shreds, you simply stated a bunch of opinions, backed by your own flawed logic of circular reasoning. You are a rather good debater; that is to say you would be if you had reliable sources, and didn't rely so heavily on your own opinion as fact. Your argument is based largely around your idea of how you think people should think. While quite egocentric, you do sometimes raise good points. I agree with you that unions need to regain power (though this is unlikely to happen, thanks to Ronald Reagan and companies like WalMart), that we need amnesty for immigrants (so they can get livable wages and pay taxes, as well as benefits they are due. Like you said they are already valuable to our economy), and that we should stop grainfeeding animals (or paying farmers to overproduce grain in the first place). All of those points, will significantly raise the price of meat (and food in general). Those methods are in place because they are cheap. That is how McDonalds can sell a double cheesebuger for $1 (the slices of cheese are worth more than the meat). I am all for raising the price of meat. It means people will eat less of it, because as it stands meat is significantly more expensive than vegetables. You are lumping all moral vegetarians into one group... When have you ever known one umbrella term to cover everyone? Did I ever make this point regarding omnivores? Absolutely not. It would make no sense. My lifestyle has been deemed logically inconsistent by you... Yet you don't know me or how I live my life. I cannot possibly fight every injustice, but fighting the battles I can is better than fighting none, which seems to be your solution. You never said you boycotted WalMart, or that you refused to buy any coffee that is not fair trade. What do you do for these people? Sitting behind a computer talking about the problems of the world does nothing, if you take no further steps. "The best thing someone can do is the right thing, the second best is the wrong thing, and the worst thing someone can do is nothing" -Abraham Lincoln. Are you saying there is no problem with overpopulation of animals? I am all for reducing the populations of domesticated animals, that is why my cat is neutered. If fewer people ate animals, or eventually if no one did (a long way down the road), we would have no reason to have such a population. Actually, if we stopped grain feeding them, they couldn't all survive anyway. It takes an acre of grazing land to support one cow, in addition to providing hay and silage (for a cow that is not being force fed corn on a feed lot). I learned this when my family raised cattle. There is no chance of those animals becoming extinct; there is a huge problem with overpopulation though. Why would someone NOT want the population of animals to be reduced? It doesn't mean one has to kill them, but just keep subsequent generations from happening. Obviously domesticated animals have no trouble thriving on their own, or we wouldn't have an out of control dog and cat population. It would be in these animals best interest, as natural selection could again take over. Commercial pigs have such sensitive immune systems from inbreeding and the like, that they have to be artificially inseminated or the boar and sow could infect one another. There is a huge difference between letting nature sort out nature and killing these animals ourselves. More in this topic later, as I reply to Raptor_a22. Since you say that abstaining from things solves nothing... Well... Then what do you do to solve these problems? As I mentioned, the unions you (and I) support advocate boycotting. It is the most essential backbone of unions, along with striking. Saying boycotting solves nothing is a huge cop-out. You are trying to separate yourself from the principles you claim to have, and the actions you practice. And what makes you think I am silent about issues like pollution? Talking about factories and cars here would be irrelevant (since it is about meat), but it doesn't mean I am always silent on the issue. I carpool whenever possible, I consolidate the trips I make in automobiles so I have the least amount of gasoline, I drive a vehicle that is as fuel efficient as I could afford, I recycle whatever I possible can, I reuse containers to keep them out of landfills, buy everything I possibly can second hand to keep them from going to the dump, I plant trees, I use energy efficient appliances, I grow as much of my own food as possible, and organically at that. But that is all unrelated to the topic behind this thread. This video makes interesting points! I agree, it seems out of PETA's place, if for no other reason than their social image, to perform euthanasia on animals. However, most of the quotes this guy used were taken slightly out of context (Saying the animals would be better off had we never domesticated them, if not the same thing as saying we should eliminate their existence. He also ignored the first part of the first quote he used, that said the people at PETA also enjoy their animal companions). Also, killing animals for fur is different than euthanasia. For one thing, the animals for fur are brutally slaughtered, not painlessly put to sleep. For another, the animals are bread to die and treated cruelly throughout their life. The problem with domesticated animals is they pretty much rely on people, and though they can survive in the wild, they are not as well adapted for it. Nor is the wild. The purpose of killing these animals through painless euthanasia is to prevent suffering, not to cause it (as is the case with the fur trade, as well as the meat industry). I am not saying this is ideal. Ideally, the animals wouldn't be overpopulated in the first place. I am also not supporting everything PETA does, but equating the fur trade with euthanasia is fallacy. I was also unaware PETA engaged in acts of euthanasia. Though I don't disdain this practice, it is good to know, and does slightly alter my perception of PETA. However; as I already stated, I am not a member of PETA and I am not saying or under the impression that they never go too far or do anything wrong. They are also not as extremist as they have a reputation for, and I think they generally have a good view of things, but their shock tactics sometimes go too far. I also agree, that is is odd for someone who is a vegan to take insulin which is derived from pigs (not because it was tested on dogs in the past, but because it is taken from animals now). I have often considered what I would do if faced with such a dillema, and I still don't know. However; I think it is odd for someone who's life revolves around not using animal products would use insulin. I do not think comparing chicken farming with the holocaust is anti-semitic. In fact, it would be foolish of them to be anti-semitic since PETA has many Jewish members. From the standpoint of an organization that euquates (or at least claims to) all life as being equal (human and animal), this is not anymore anti-semitic than comparing the holocaust to Darfur, or the USSR under Stalin (who actually killed MORE people, more viciously than Hitler... And they were his own people!). *Phew* Also, I am openly admitting I was wrong about PETA euthanising animals. Thank you for bringing that to my attention, but like I said i do not see this as logical fallacy since the death is to prevent suffering. My conflict over being on this forum is still something I am debating about. While I don't mind debating and conversing calmly and respectfully, someone lumping me into a group, outright attacking my personal beleifs and questioning my morals is not debating: it is senseless arguing. I am fully aware I am going to convert none of you, and as I also stated that was not my intention. I never made any personal attacks or anything offensive, I was merely defending my morals. Seeing that that has become very time consuming aspect of my time when I am busy enough with work and college. I originally came here to wind down and talk about MLP with people, and maybe make some personal connections over similar interests. This forum has become anything but a place to wind down for me.

Thanks for the input! [brohoof]

That is amazing! I like that a lot! I was vegan for 4 months, and have not written off the idea of returning to the diet, it is just slightly more difficult to maintain than is a lacto-ovo diet. Not so much eating at home, but it is difficult to find truly vegan options while eating out or at other people's houses.

I have heard this before, about PETA killing animals, and it is complete bullshit. If you actually look up PETA's opinion on the matter, they state that while animals would be better off if never domesticated at all, the harm is done and they enjoy animal companions (source: http://www.peta.org/about/why-peta/pets.aspx ). They discuss the issue of overpopulation of pets which is a serious problem! But no where do they advocate killing animals. I don't get behind everything PETA does, particularly some of their stuff that is rather demeaning towards women (no more so than the average magazine advertisement, but it doesn't make it right anyway). I am not saying PETA does no wrong, but that rumor is bullocks. Once again, do you have a reliable source for the information you posted? You seem to be a well educated person, why do you not cite sources when making such important radical claims?

My apologies, I didn't cover these two in my last response to you and I just realized this. The part about the animals seems to have been added when making my reply, and I just forgot about the medical advancements part. You are right, those animals wouldn't be able to survive. If left alone natural selection would have taken care of this and most of them wouldn't exist. As it is, there are a few options to take care of this problem: Sterilization, to prevent them from breeding and the last generation of these animals can live their life, and die. Alternately, as people consume less and less meat, as is the current trend, we will produce fewer and fewer animals of this sort. Since most of these are bread through artificial means anyway, there is no risk. Last, these breeds will likely not die out completely, as many people would still have an interest in dairy, and show animals. Offering those 3 solutions to the problem, lets look at your issue. We apparently would let these animals go (which no one I have known of would advocate, as it would be pointless and dumb. Even PETA as radical as they are have no qualms with having animal companions) and they die of natural causes, either illness or predators. That fate is no worse than what they have now. Once again, I don't follow your logic. Like most people, I enjoy many of the modern advancements of modern medicine. Thankfully, being relatively young and healthy, I don't have as much of a need for it as most people. However; to say I should not enjoy these advancements because they use animals is once again ignoring your human rights argument. What about all the poor people exploited to test drugs? Many of them develop problems and are used similarly to lab rats and monkeys but you, I assume, also use modern medicine, right? Anyone can sign up to test medicines but it is usually poor people, needing money. And what about medical and other advancements found through unethical means? Believe it or not, there were advancements found through the Holocaust which saved lives. One of which was the discovery that a life vest that keeps your neck out of the water causes you to freeze less slowly than the older styles of life-vests. This was found by sticking Jews into freezing water at various depths and seeing how long it took them to die. A horrendous, terrible, awful experiment by a hate-filled regime! However; I'm not going to refuse a life vest if I am in a sinking ship in the middle of the Atlantic, and I bet you aren't either (source: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/naziexp.html ) I forgot about the Vitamin A. I wasn't advocating eating a liver rich diet anyway, but you bring up a good point. I am not a chemist, so please forgive my ignorance. When you say long protein strand, you are talking about a complete protein, right? If that is the case, why would I have to? As a lacto-ovo vegetarian I can get this from eggs, but, even if I were/when I was a vegan, there is no reason to. Because of our digestive systems, we are capable of making these from various amino acids, just like our herbivore brethren (and sister-en).

What supplements are you talking about? Do you have a source? I have a difficult time believing that, knowing from observation how devastating factory farms are to the environment. Also, are you talking about the farms here in the US, or the farms you have in Australia, as they are completely different (which you mentioned as well). I still find it nearly impossible to believe, but it would make more sense if you are talking about a more sustainable type of farm. As far as the iron thing goes, liver is the best meat-related source of iron. Essentially, the part most people throw away. There are plenty of vegetarian ways to get iron though, like Flaxseed, Edemame (soy, not good for you though I suppose), canned beans, and cooked spinach among others (see http://www.fitsugar.com/8-Vegetarian-Sources-Iron-3751173?slide=0 ). As I mentioned earlier another good source is by cooking with cast-iron cookware, as it leaches iron into the food being cooked (don't use it for highly acidic foods like tomatoes though, as it can do a lot of damage to the cookware). Just because most people get iron through red meat doesn't make it the best or only way. Remember, if a nutrient is in an animal, the animal got it from plants. You are what you eat, everything in meat can be found in plants. Sorry about the soy allergy. I went a long time without ever touching soy, though. I only found out I like tofu in the past 3 months. My primary source of protein comes from beans and other legumes, like peanuts. You are absolutely right. Thanks to the Nixon administration, and every subsequent one for not changing it, we have an overproduction of corn that finds its way into everything we eat and use (there is even corn in aluminum and tires). I mentioned this in a previous post in this thread. Eating grass fed cattle is much more responsible and better for the person and the cow. I still would not eat meat for various other reasons, but I have less issues with people doing it in a more responsible way, as you mentioned. Also, from previous experience as an almost-carnivore, as a professional cook and culinary arts student, grass fed beef tastes a lot better. As in... it has taste. I still find it gross now, but at the time, I remember it being much much better. And healthier.

First of all you are generalizing, and probably not on anyone you actually know. I as well as almost all the vegetarians I know care as much or more about human rights, as well. You logic, is fallacy. It makes no sense. You are also ignoring the problems in first world countries. Vegetarianism is a human rights issue. One of the most dangerous jobs currently, is working in a slaughterhouse. Since the unions were weakened, almost none of them have unions anymore, and hire illegal immigrants to work under minimum wage. These workers are discouraged from reporting accidents, and quite often suffer crippling injuries as a result. These overworked underpaid exploited people are also people getting screwed by the meat industry, just like the animals (See http://motherjones.com/politics/2001/07/dangerous-meatpacking-jobs-eric-schlosser ) Next, let's talk about the exploited farmers. Are you aware that companies like Purdue get farmers to raise chickens, by loaning them money for chicken houses. Sounds good, until you realize that a farmer goes into debt half a million USD for 2 chicken houses, which will raise them less than $20,000 USD for profit. Sure sounds like a human rights issue to me! (source: The film Food Inc., not a pro vegetarian movie, just a pro-knowing-your-food-movie). Last, let's talk about the environment (a human rights issue, since we live here. I want clean air and potable water avaliable for my infant nephew). Ever seen a factory farm? They are all around me. They are horrible. The conditions for the animals are bad, and they produce so much greenhouse gasses (from the cows, the trucks that haul cattle, the trucks that haul grain all hours of the night), they produce a lot of run-off in the creeks and rivers which is bad for fish and the people who drink that water. Cows are also not meant to eat corn. That is another problem with factory farming. Wonder why we have so many issues with E. Coli? The stomach acid of cows are messed up from the corn they eat, since they are supposed to eat grass (corn is mass produced for other horrible reasons, but is really cheap and allows farmers to cram cows into small places without grass, which means more money). The result is e. coli grows in their stomachs, spreading to people, and the runoff of manure even gets in our produce which is why we have spinach and other veggies that gets contaminated with e. coli. Cows that eat grass, like they are supposed to, don't support the virus. (source: films King Corn and Food Inc., as well as basic biology). Meat is very much a human rights issue. You are right, buying third world garbage is not good either, and most people (no matter their diet) don't pay attention to it. But to deny that meat is a human rights issue, is just ignorant of the facts.

I'm still missing the point of how what someone does with their body is bothersome to anyone else? A nose piercing may be all you want, that is fine for you. It doesn't give you the right to judge other people for doing what they like. At some point, it was only the people who were obsessed with flaunting their "uniqueness" who got nose piercings in our culture. Now, it just happens to be commonplace. Hell, I know a few women in their late 50's-early 60's who have got their noses pierced. Its not much different than having ones earlobes pierced now. But at some point, it was only for the super weirdo crowd. Whatever happened to the message of loving and tolerating everyone?

That is not common, and your friend is probably anemic. Another possibility is a vitamin b deficiency which affects some vegetarians. This is easily remedied though, as most cheeses have b vitamins (real cheese, not anything followed by "product". Cheddar, provalone, bleau = cheese. American, Velveta, Cheezewiz = cheese (flavored) product.). Alternately, the anemia situation can be cured by taking iron supplements or even something as simple as cooking with cast iron cookware (which is a very good way to cook anyway, as it heats evenly and is non-stick). Someone who eats fish but no other types of meat is called a pescetarian. I have a friend who is one, as well. It is much healthier than eating red and white meat, but you still have to be careful because fish carries its own sets of risks like histamine, mercury, parasites and several other things. The problem with most viruses and such carried by fish, is that they cannot be killed by heat and are odorless and tasteless... I had to take a food sanitation course when I was in culinary school and it frightened me of fish hehe. I used to think I did, I went to culinary school, and was almost a carnivore. I have always felt conflicted about eating meat though, and as I got older, I decided it wasn't for me. Now, I can't even stand the smell of it. It smells like death to me, just like roadkill and is just as appetizing (it is also the exact same thing: a dead animal). Most vegetarians I talk to (I know several) all sort of agree that after a few months, we all realized we didn't ever really like meat at all... We just thought we did. The texture, the smell the taste... Its all really gross when one things about it. Its also incredibly unhealthy, since people's biology is not like that of carnivores (cats) or omnivores (like dogs). We have a long twisty digestive tract meant to be very efficient at pulling out nutrients. When we eat a lot of meat, it gets stuck in the nooks and crannies of our colon and eventually becomes cancer. Cats and dogs have digestive tracts which are smooth and short, because meat is a cheap source of nutrients so not much time or work needs to be spent digesting it. We also have flat teeth, not meant for tearing and ripping food. I would suggest at least giving it a shot. I feel way better than I ever did eating meat, and its really not difficult.

People laugh... But cash-related-nipple-loss is a serious epidemic, and it can affect anypony!

I looked for a thread about this, but couldn't find one. I was just wondering if anypony else is a vegetarian? Or vegan or pescetarian? If so, why? I am a vegetarian, and have been for about a year and a half now. I do it for health (I lost about 60 pounds just by not eating meat), ethical & spiritual reasons environmental reasons. I'm not starting this thread to be preachy, just to see if anypony else shares my dietary habits, or any close to them? But of course, if anypony has any legitimate curiosities or questions, I would be happy to discuss them.

I'm not a furry, but I can dig some of the art and fics and such. I respect the culture, and all that, I just am not heavy into it. I can see the point of MLP being slightly anthropomorphic and such. I am not offended hen people compare bronies to furries, why should I be? Both fandoms are misunderstood, neither are harmful to anyone else. I know not all furries are the ones who get off on furry art, or like to have sex in fur suits. Doesn't mean there is anything wrong with those who do, though. It can be a fetish, just like anything else, but those people aren't hurting anyone. They aren't even hurting themselves. I don't understand why some furries are so quick to say "but I'm not THAT kind of furry!" instead of saying something more tolerant like "some people are into that, I'm personally not, but its whatever floats your boat". Why do people, in general, feel the need to ostracize others, just because they are slightly different? In fact, we tend to argue more over our slight differences than the real differences. People who have a problem with furverts or whatever you call them, aren't going to care if you aren't "that kind of furry" anyway, they will hate you because you are different. Just ignore their hatred, and love and tolerate everyone, regardless of fandom or fetish.

Yes, it is called stretching, and it takes years of gradually increasing the size of the jewelry to get to that size. Cultures have been doing it for years. King tut had stretched ears, as did the Buddha, some Native American tribes, many African tribes, it is also believed by some cultures that stretching ears can be a symbol of wealth, spiritual enlightenment, status in the tribe/culture, and some even believe that by stretching the lobes one can increase their psychic abilities. Of course, some people simply think it looks cool. My reasons for stretching are mainly because I like it, though I do not overlook the cultural and spiritual significance of the act. Mine are only at 10mm, his are probably in the 2 inch range... I have no intentions of going that large, or probably any larger than I am now. One can see clearly through my lobes, I can effortlessly fit pencils and probably AA batteries through them, but to go any larger would just not be a fit for me personally. I don't understand the problem, though? How are his stretched ears affecting you? Obviously it is something he likes, and it fits his lifestyle as a musician. He is not requesting you also do something like this. I have no problem with guys who have short hair, even though i think it looks rather silly to shave ones hair. My problems only begin when they think I should also have short hair. I give them the freedom to wear their hair/ears/shoes/clothes/feet in whatever way pleases them, I would appreciate the same sentiment in return. I have a friend who got both nipples and his tongue pierced in the same night (he was rather drunk, as the story goes). Still has them all, and said they didn't hurt incredibly bad, and healed nicely. Then there is my cousin, who got one pierced, and it hurt so badly he had a seizure and passed out. Not a mod I have given much thought to, mostly because of that story, hehe.

I get criticized and such for having piercings. I don't do it for attention. Why do some people like to wear yellow shirts? Its a bright color, but chances are, even though it stands out, they just do it because they like it. I don't really care if I stand out, most of the time. In fact, when I am within my element, around the people I prefer to be around, I am not criticized or looked at weirdly for having stretched ears, or my septum pierced, or for long hair, clothes I wear, etc. Its just something I like. I have noticed a few things: The people who criticize or judge me for any reason (be it my piercings, tattoo, clothing, being barefoot, wearing glasses, having long hair, having blue eyes, or whatever else people want to judge me on), are not the people I want in my life anyway. They are also not the people who are bold enough to say anything to my face about any of it. The people who do make comments to me, are almost always positive or just inquisitive ("did that hurt?" kind of stuff). When you respond kindly to them, and let them know you are approachable, it reflects better on all modded people. I didn't watch the whole video, what exactly made this guy an idiot? Did he say something stupid? From what I watched he seemed like a pretty nice fellow, though I don't particularly care for his brand of music (it's tolerable in short amounts I suppose, and I see the merit of it. Just not my cup of tea).