Why are you a vegetarian or vegan?

Originally Posted by lightworkerAu

I am a vegetarian not just because its right, it also gives someone something to disagree with on forums. I just like helping...

Your tender heart is also your strength lightworker. One time I was discussing like this with somebody on another forum. He thought to embarrass me by calling me a bleeding heart and I was thrilled to accept that label! Absolutely thrilled because it shows that I care about someone else. Same for you.

You know when I was a kid, we had a few farm animals and I loved them. Patty was our pig and we used to run around her yard and play tag with her. And Patty used to play tag with our heifer Sparkle. Made my dad so mad. All that running around would take the 'flesh' off the pig and he used to beat the calf because she was chasing the pig around. I hated that, it was awful having to see your dad doing these things.

And then one day Sparkle was gone. And then Patty was gone too. And those things are part of what has shaped my opinion. And I look at what goes on in the world and I'm reassured that the world needs bleeding hearts to help affect a change for good. And lightworker, you can be an official bleeding heart, along with me. You already have the same mission so you can borrow the label if you like. It's free to all if they chose to take it up.....hint, hint ......

[BlueSky]

In regards to animals eating animals......something I noticed:

What I have noticed in my little world is that when I feed the birds , in particular the BlueJays, they don't seem to attack the Robin eggs in the yard.
They don't need to.
Hunger is a noticable driving force in the animal world.........seemingly 99.9% of the time.
Was it always this way?
I don't know but I can't assume that it was and I can clearly see that I can affect it in ways that change the way nature looks to me.


James

[Chrysaetos]

Originally Posted by DebbyM

Oh pardon me. I assumed that we were talking about adult people who are conscious/awake and not suffering from some form of mental health issues, at the time that they make their decision. Does this mean that you include people who've been lying in a persistently vegetative state as well in your protestations that we are not or don't have to be responsible for our actions? Heck this changes everything. You should have explained how wide open your parameters are.

''I can't believe that you said that our responsibility for our actions is a matter of debate. We are always responsible for our actions.'' Your words in a previous post. I only point out that we cannot be held responsible for our actions in any absolute sense, and in some cases not at all whatsoever.

Originally Posted by DebbyM

As for the rest of your reply, you are still focusing on your question, that I've answered very plainly. But since you apparently missed it, I'll repeat myself. I feel VERY BAD for the animals that are killed by other animals. I feel bad for the terror they experience and for the pain that they must suffer. And I feel horrible also for the terror and pain that farmed animals experience as a result of humanities belief that they don't have to care about the suffering and terror of the animals that they eat. And that lack of concern has been documentated ad nauseum. I am not inconsistent. Can you say the same?

The issue with veg people is that they feel very uneasy about death itself, preferring to keep everything alive. If it weren't for the death of other creatures, we would not be alive. And no, eating plants alone is not going to stop other creatures from dying.

Originally Posted by DebbyM

Your allegation that veg'n people and spiritual people are the ones claiming 'superiority' is so bizarre as to be laughable and demonstrates that there is a failure in your personal 'education' and understanding. We veg'ns believe that animals have the same rights to life and freedom from human caused suffering, that you and I hope for. And as far as spiritual people, well, there are so many shades of 'grey' in that group that to make a blanket statement like you did doesn't make a lot of sense.

So now it's about suffering, Can you define 'suffering'?

When one claims that there is a superior way of doing things, be it religious actions or diet, one is claiming the moral high ground. Let me ask you, do you believe your diet and actions are superior to those who do not follow it?

Originally Posted by DebbyM

As a spiritual person, I believe that the earth and the universe and the animals and the stars and everything in between is a manifestation of the All. That we are all part of the One in the same way that my little toe is different than my spleen or my ear, but they are all part of my body and what hurts my spleen is also detrimental to my toe in a broad sense. I hope that example is clear enough.

What about death? What about the fact that you are alive because of the death of other creatures?

Process, change, evolution, growth..

All of this would be impossible without struggle and death. Harsh but true. This is reality.

Originally Posted by DebbyM

So to cause injury to a creature is the equivelant of causing injury to myself. And yes, I know that you are going to throw carrots or some such thing into the mix and I would submit to you, that the reason that they weren' given brains and brain stems and nerve endings and a means to flee from danger is because they are the basic source of energy for all of us, including predators. So no, I'm not interested in getting into a tedious discussion about carrots feelings and how could I do that to them.

Strawman.

Besides I don't subscribe to ''plants are emotional'' mumbo jumbo.

Originally Posted by DebbyM

The balance that I speak of is what happens in nature. When there are too many of a species, either they are controlled by predation from other species, or they starve, or they die from disease. We struggle against death to the point where we are in the process of over-running a planet with finite capacity. Doctors keep babies alive that should be allowed to pass on, or adults hooked up to machines because their families won't let them go. We spend billions on research to beat every disease despite the fact that our numbers are increasing to the detriment of the planet. Doctors search endlessly for means to keep people alive or to create more, as though there should be no concern for the number of humans that are munching our way through everything that this planet provides. We have overthrown the balance. And instead of living simply with the intentions of just meeting our needs, our greed, which in this era of bankers who've ruined the economy of countries, is especially obvious, propels us to accumulate and hoard even to the point of turning our backs on those who have nothing. That is how we have handled the notion of living in balance with the planet. We've thumbed our nose at it. Humanity in general lives outside the balance of nature. That is the balance that I was referring to.

Yes it is ironic that humans try to safe others from dying while in the end it only costs us more. But it's easy to judge from the corner. What would you do if you were a poor woman from Ghana? You refuse aid? And would you not fight to safe a loved one from dying?

As for our destructive ways, we are most certainly not the only species that can cause destruction, or overpopulation for that matter.

There will always be change, destruction, battle, death, wonder, and beauty in nature. There is nothing happening that is not a part of it. Does that mean everything we do is alright? Well that's a matter of ethics. ;) This ''balance of nature'' isn't some sort of magical thing in which we are the grand watchers. That would be an arrogant position, and one I find all too often among spiritual people.

Enjoy your time on this planet while it lasts.=)

"The issue with veg people is that they feel very uneasy about death itself"

Um no. I personally have no problem with death. I dislike SUFFERING however and wish to not add any more pain to the world. I recognize that the lives of all other beings are equally as valueable as my own. Comparing me to a poor woman Ghana is irrelevant. I am not a poor woman in Ghana and therefore the difficulties she faces do not apply to my life.

It isn't an "issue" and don't go making assumptions about what any of us feel or believe. This was supposed to be a thread about why we chose to be vegetarian/vegan. It was NOT meant to be a platform to argue against it.

You have gotten the better of me thus far because I feel very strongly about the rights of animals, but this is my last reply here because you are obviously just trying to pick a fight.

[Chrysaetos]

How do we define ''suffering''? In the usual use of the word, suffering means being aware of your own pain, be it physical or mental.

Originally Posted by misscelt

Comparing me to a poor woman Ghana is irrelevant. I am not a poor woman in Ghana and therefore the difficulties she faces do not apply to my life.

I am not comparing you nor was I talking to you, I was talking to Debby. You take things out of context.

Originally Posted by misscelt

It isn't an "issue" and don't go making assumptions about what any of us feel or believe. This was supposed to be a thread about why we chose to be vegetarian/vegan. It was NOT meant to be a platform to argue against it.

Threads evolve. Debby, me, and some others have gone beyond that question.
I like to delve into ethical discussions and understand why I hold my opinion and why others have a different opinion. If you see that as ''fight picking'' then I suggest you don't enter discussion topics. If one asks ''WHY are you veg'' then you get answers and the thread evolves further from that point.

Originally Posted by Chrysaetos

''I can't believe that you said that our responsibility for our actions is a matter of debate. We are always responsible for our actions.'' Your words in a previous post. I only point out that we cannot be held responsible for our actions in any absolute sense, and in some cases not at all whatsoever.................this planet while it lasts.=)

You know, making a statement that we aren't responsible for our actions in every instance and than adding additional parameters after I protest that statement is simply being argumentative to make your point. Particularly as I'm pretty sure that you understood what I said and the context.

As far as being uneasy about death (a reference to my belief system perhaps?), you are so far from the truth, you aren't even in the ball park. Of course I can't speak for other people, but as you are talking to me....What about death? Let me say this, I am not so sad because animals 'die'. We all die eventually, which by the way I actually don't worry about at all. Quite the contrary, when the time comes, I will embrace it because there is nothing to fear. And once those animals are dead, they are finally out of our reach. We can't hurt them anymore.

But what I totally reject is the torture and torment that is for the most part, the lot of animals when they come into contact with us humans. Sure there are pets that are well cared for, but there are millions of pets that are killed outright, neglected, abused, food animals that are traumatized and suffer their entire short lives and I'm not even going to get into what is done in labs and for 'entertainment' around the world. That is harsh, that is reality. We are self centred, cruel and abusive as a species. We even do it to each other and to our own children and the children of others. And yet we think so highly of ourselves.

My argument is not with what happens where there is no choice. My argument is with our behavior as a species when we do have choices, and then we consistently chose things and activities that we know will cause suffering of others. And while I cannot divorce myself from the system entirely, I and others who have the same beliefs do make an effort to chose a lifestyle that is a benefit rather than harmful to all other beings. And we make these choices despite knowing that this world for the most part is not geared to that kind of thinking and so it will mean a change and a bit more work for us. But we do it, because we believe that we don't have a right to inflict ourselves on anyone, be they human or animal.

[Chrysaetos]

Originally Posted by DebbyM

You know, making a statement that we aren't responsible for our actions in every instance and than adding additional parameters after I protest that statement is simply being argumentative to make your point. Particularly as I'm pretty sure that you understood what I said and the context.

Not at all. Responsibility is not a black-white issue, as we are influenced by other people, genetics, environment etc. You cannot say you have any absolute responsibility. All you have is a handful of options and choose (through influential factors) what you think is the best choice. You do not live in a vacuum where you come to your insights and beliefs all by yourself.

There is limitation within choice itself.

I have no issues with those who wish not to participate in meat eating, what I do take issues with is disinformation (be it ignorance about evolution, anatomy, or environment), and when they believe they have the moral high ground. Morality is a man made thing and nature is not human-centered. We are only one tiny part of it, not its superior rulers.

Originally Posted by Chrysaetos

Not at all. Responsibility is not a black-white..........not its superior rulers.

We (humans in a non-vegetative state and wide awake with all our faculties intact) are all responsible for the choices that we make. It doesn't matter how we come to them or what causes us to make them, when the rubber hits the road, it is you and you alone who are responsible for what you do. And trying to wiggle out of that by pointing to genetics or environment or whatever is just ignoring the fact that you and you alone are the one who decides if you will put one foot in front of the other. Your choice, your responsibility, your outcome. And out of that awareness, I made the decision as have others, not to be responsible (as much as we are able) for knowingly causing suffering in any other creatures during the time that we reside on this planet.

Would you care to elaborate on the disinformation that you've referred to. As near as I can recall, no one has done that here. No talk of how we've evolved, no talk of what effect your eating habits may or may not have on the environment..... and as to high moral ground, well to choose a lifestyle that impacts other creatures as little as humanly possible in a world that is largely unsympathetic to the other creatures that inhabit it with us, seems to be entirely altruistic. There is no benefit to us and indeed this discussion is evidence that on an individual basis it can be source of some aggravation if one feels strongly enough about the principle of non-violence for all, to willingly discuss and defend it.

I will never say that you are a horrible person, but I have no problem being very clear that your choices in food are hurtful and result in abuse of creatures who feel pain and terrible fear. So if it is your choice to come to these kinds of threads anywhere, then you can expect to hear folks saying that to you. If you don't like hearing someone (me) say, that your lifestyle choices cause unnecessary and horrible pain and suffering, oh well. You are responsible for your choices and your outcome.

You and I Chrysaetos have been on this merry-go-round before and I know that I will never fall into line with you on it, and I suspect the same on your part. So what really is the point of continuing? Time for a truce?

[Chrysaetos]

Originally Posted by DebbyM

We (humans in a non-vegetative state and wide awake with all our faculties intact) are all responsible for the choices that we make. It doesn't matter how we come to them or what causes us to make them, when the rubber hits the road, it is you and you alone who are responsible for what you do. And trying to wiggle out of that by pointing to genetics or environment or whatever is just ignoring the fact that you and you alone are the one who decides if you will put one foot in front of the other. Your choice, your responsibility, your outcome.

You are fighting an avalanche here, Debby. I could provide mountains of evidence that smack this argument deep in to the ground, never allowing it to surface again.

Let me give one small example about the influence of others. You know people on the streets who ask for help, who are injured or are stalked? Most by-passers do not help this person, yet as soon as one person does help others start to help as well. That is one clear case of influence. Oh and those musicians on the streets.. next time you give them a coin, the chances of that person who walks 10 yards behind you will give something as well has just increased exponentially! Yet when we ask that person, he or she will give 'excuses' for his behavior and claim that he or she is 'of good heart' or that the musician was 'playing a nice song'. Yes, the end result may have been your choice, but if you are so influenced by what others do how much responsibility can you still have? It is the same if I blamed the Iraq war on all Bush-voters.

These are examples of influence alone. The same thing can pretty much apply to dietary choices. People in the west usually go veg out of guilt feelings, and if there is no popular media (such as earthlings, PETA, campaigns, green parties, and what's more) than one won't find as much veg people in the west. It is all about influence. Your idea about a self that has complete control and responsibility is fundamentally flawed and every scientific field (be it natural or social) can demonstrate this. For the average citizen in the western world it is often seen as horrid and empty, after all we keep that little lie of an ''autonomous, responsible, indestructible self'' alive, through our own fear of death and attachment to the ego.

Originally Posted by DebbyM

Would you care to elaborate on the disinformation that you've referred to. As near as I can recall, no one has done that here. No talk of how we've evolved, no talk of what effect your eating habits may or may not have on the environment.....

On this board and elsewhere I have seen blatant ignorance about evolution, I have seen such myths as 'humans are herbivore'; I have seen generalizations about meat production and meat eaters such as 'production of meat is always bad for the environment', 'meat eaters don't care about the environment'. I could go on, but that's enough. I'll leave it at that.

Originally Posted by DebbyM

and as to high moral ground, well to choose a lifestyle that impacts other creatures as little as humanly possible in a world that is largely unsympathetic to the other creatures that inhabit it with us, seems to be entirely altruistic.

It is not altruism in the strict sense. Altruism is when you help others without becoming better off with it yourself. If you think going veg is helping 'us' in the long run, how can it still be altruistic? On the contrary, you should be looking for the word reciprocity.

Originally Posted by DebbyM

I will never say that you are a horrible person, but I have no problem being very clear that your choices in food are hurtful and result in abuse of creatures who feel pain and terrible fear.

You do not know what I eat, nor do you know where I buy it, and how it was produced. All you see is ''meat eater over there'' and there is an automatic association made ''damn u bad!''. There seems to be no room for greyness, it is either black or white. When it comes to vegans you continuously say ''well we're trying to do what we can''. What if a meat eater is trying to do what he or she can as well? All you seem to see is 'meat, meat, and more meat'. You allow relativism to flourish when it comes to judging veg people, but not when it comes to non-veg people.

Originally Posted by DebbyM

You and I Chrysaetos have been on this merry-go-round before and I know that I will never fall into line with you on it, and I suspect the same on your part. So what really is the point of continuing? Time for a truce?

I see you as a discussion partner, not an 'enemy' or anything like that. In this thread it may indeed be better to call it a day. In other threads, where ethics are discussed from the start, we could continue.

You tend to focus an awful on which particular word is used and it seems to me that you ignore the spirit of what I say. Oh well, since I don't care to do that with them, I'm not going to defend which word here or there and just leave it...you're not going to change in this lifetime but you've provided an opportunity for me to say my piece and that's good. It's late here and I'm done. So thanks there Chrysaetos and you have a nice evening.