The elephant in the room.

[Altair]

Gem.. you're just looking for arguing over and over again. Loads of vegetarians are on the spiritual path, and let us remember, this is the vegetarian & vegan forum. For many of us this compassion towards other living beings is essential, it does not stop once a creature can't talk the way we do. When you see those chickens and pigs and horses you feel compassion and you do not want them to be slaughtered.

You and Lucky1 spend too much time trying to defend animal slaughter on a vegetarian forum. It is fruitless..

And Baile's posts are very old and he also hasn't been online in months, so I don't know why you respond to them. He's unlikely to give you a response any time soon.

[Gem]

..........

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Altair

Gem.. you're just looking for arguing over and over again. Loads of vegetarians are on the spiritual path, and let us remember, this is the vegetarian & vegan forum.

I didn't say anything against vegetarians, so why problem?

For many of us this compassion towards other living beings is essential, it does not stop once a creature can't talk the way we do. When you see those chickens and pigs and horses you feel compassion and you do not want them to be slaughtered.

That's good, I encourage people to live by their ethical convictions.

You and Lucky1 spend too much time trying to defend animal slaughter on a vegetarian forum. It is fruitless..

I don't think that's accurate, but because was raised in a non-western country populated by tribal villagers in remote jungles, I understand the necessities of living integrally with the natural world in accordance with a given environment, but in the artifice of commerce, with plant monocultures, built up infrastructure, electricity, refrigeration and global transport systems, which enable constant availability of easily accessible food, people are freer to become highly selective about their diet and their ethical stances regarding food. We are fortunate in that regard, but somewhat deluded in our ideas about ecological sustainablity because we are no longer in touch with the environment, and would die if left to natural provisions. Once you understand the way of the jungle, you understand the entire balance of ecology and your 'place' within it, and there are no vegans or vegetarian human beings in the 'natural world'. That is however possible in the modern man made environment, and I support all people living according to their particular ethical principles.

And Baile's posts are very old and he also hasn't been online in months, so I don't know why you respond to them. He's unlikely to give you a response any time soon.

I didn't check the dates, but good.

[Altair]

I understand Gem. So you lived with a tribe and Lucky1 is into hunting in his free time. The majority of people though have lived in civilization and agriculture for thousands of years. Most of us still do, and most people are direct children of civilization. I would never tell jungle tribes or Inuit people to adopt a veg diet while they still live where they do..
However, it's just not solid to argue in favour of such a lifestyle for billions of people. The world has changed, and in civilization we know diets have different impacts on animals. My perspective comes from a position of civilization and agriculture, you and Lucky1 do not. This simply continues to be the issue.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Altair

I understand Gem. So you lived with a tribe and Lucky1 is into hunting in his free time. The majority of people though have lived in civilization and agriculture for thousands of years. Most of us still do, and most people are direct children of civilization. I would never tell jungle tribes or Inuit people to adopt a veg diet while they still live where they do..
However, it's just not solid to argue in favour of such a lifestyle for billions of people. The world has changed, and in civilization we know diets have different impacts on animals. My perspective comes from a position of civilization and agriculture, you and Lucky1 do not. This simply continues to be the issue.

I'm not arguing for a tribal subsistence lifestyle, just saying there is a far broader perspective than the blinkered scope of Western civilisation, but because we do have tons of food available at next to no effort, we have the luxury of ethical standpoints which aren't universal, but a product an economy which is environmentally destructive, and without that larger economy, high ethics would be noble and worthy ideals, but impossible to put into practice, so the idea that veganism makes our way of life egological sustainable is ludicrous - our ecologically destructive economy is what makes veganism possible - and the idea that killing to eat indicates a lack of compassion is ridiculous, because the larger biodiversity was perserved by populations who's lifestyles included hunting and husbandry. We have just gone so far into our own artifice that we lost touch with the real, and in that fantasy we have formed ethical ideals based on sentiment moreso than compassion - but that doesn't mean I don't support the ethical and health choices that vegans and vegetarians make. I support that fully.



The other consideration is how Lucky1 is a hunter, not in the sporting context, but as a caretaker within his environment and as a landowner in the truer sense of that title, whereas veganism is made possible by a highly destructive monstrosity we grew up with and consider normal, and viewed from that perspective, it could be argued that Lucky1 has a far more compassionate lifestyle than any vegan, but these appeals to compassion are merely ego stroking exercises used to virtue signal and bolster moral superiority, so I'm just raising it to point out how the big picture can be viewed in different small parts which are true within each respective incomplete view, and I support people in those views, but the entire scope of it is interwoven with caveat and nuance.

[Pagandell]

Originally Posted by Sapphirez

I do have more curiosity about some facts about alcohol, but overall I think it is almost as senseless as eating dead animals.

I think that's stretching it a bit, taking part in eating animals is causing a hell of a lot of unthinkable cruelty, having a beer is harming no one.

[Altair]

Originally Posted by Gem

The other consideration is how Lucky1 is a hunter, not in the sporting context, but as a caretaker within his environment and as a landowner in the truer sense of that title, whereas veganism is made possible by a highly destructive monstrosity we grew up with and consider normal, and viewed from that perspective, it could be argued that Lucky1 has a far more compassionate lifestyle than any vegan, but these appeals to compassion are merely ego stroking exercises used to virtue signal and bolster moral superiority, so I'm just raising it to point out how the big picture can be viewed in different small parts which are true within each respective incomplete view, and I support people in those views, but the entire scope of it is interwoven with caveat and nuance.

I think it's not correct to imagine modern hunters, living also in luxury and eating the fruits of civilization, are the same as those hunter gatherers of old who had no other choice. It is very different but you don't want to see it, probably because you identify strongly with hunting and killing because of upbringing..

I am very aware of hunting issues and biodiversity here in Europe, and I know hunters aren't ''shepherds'' but more often than not hobbyists that keep populations in check in what I would call, game parks, not actual healthy ecosystems. They are also nearly always opposed to ecosystem revitalization through reintroductions of predator species. There's also a troubling link between hunters and the hunting lobby and conservative politicians who back big animal agri-interests. I've read so much about this and am aware of many cases in Europe so I can imagine you have rose tinted glasses on when you compare a rainforest tribe with that of hunters in the developed, managed world. I know many ecologists and I've talked about it with them. Your rainforest experience isn't the same as that of the developed, managed world..

You equating compassion to ''ego stroking exercises'' and ''virtue signalling'' is your choice, but it does not give any weight to your point.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Altair

I think it's not correct to imagine modern hunters, living also in luxury and eating the fruits of civilization, are the same as those hunter gatherers of old who had no other choice. It is very different but you don't want to see it, probably because you identify strongly with hunting and killing because of upbringing..

Of course I see it, and I don't identify with it.

I am very aware of hunting issues and biodiversity here in Europe, and I know hunters aren't ''shepherds'' but more often than not hobbyists that keep populations in check in what I would call, game parks, not actual healthy ecosystems. They are also nearly always opposed to ecosystem revitalization through reintroductions of predator species. There's also a troubling link between hunters and the hunting lobby and conservative politicians who back big animal agri-interests. I've read so much about this and am aware of many cases in Europe so I can imagine you have rose tinted glasses on when you compare a rainforest tribe with that of hunters in the developed, managed world.

I only compare these two types of hunters to point out the difference between them, and idea of hunting for sport would be inconceivable to the former.

I know many ecologists and I've talked about it with them. Your rainforest experience isn't the same as that of the developed, managed world..

Indeed, it is very different.

You equating compassion to ''ego stroking exercises'' and ''virtue signalling'' is your choice, but it does not give any weight to your point.

You have to understand context, because your post also implies that the ethics we might develop about killing animals for food depend of environmental circumstances - that is, you don't take an ethical stance against remotely located or old world Inuit hunting seal because of their environmental context, and only take an ethical stance within the developed-world context on grounds of cruel practice and ecological destruction. It's not like tribal peoples are inherently more or less compassionate or ethical than vegans. The vegan ethic is valid within the modern context, but the ethical dilemma here is, the destructive system in which those ethics are valid is the same system that makes veganism possible.


On the point of ego stroking, it's not like Lucky1 or I are vegan bashing or elating ourselves with our morals or regard vegans as semi-evolved compared to ourselves or anything like that, we don't imagine ourselves as somehow superior, more advanced, further evolved and divinely right, and in my case at least, I support Lucky1 in his way of life and spiritual expression in the same way I support any vegan in theirs. I understand how Lucky1 conducts himself in accordance with his environment, how vegans conduct themselves within theirs and how tribes people conduct themselves within theirs with more or less equal degrees of integrity. The ego stroking is when people get grand delusions about their comparatively superior compassion, spirituality, morality and indignation.

[Altair]

We live in a situation where we have choice. You are forsaking agency and rely much on relativism and materialist-reductionism.

Humans got out of the wild and have agriculture and civilization. That is the reality. In this world, also with billions of humans, that also means veg diets are better to reduce animal suffering.. that too, is the reality. Harping on about a bygone age, of which only a tiny % of humanity still relies, just isn’t relevant. We can’t use any negative consequence of civilization and hold it against vegetarianism. We exist in civilization.. we participate.. we consume within this setting. That is key, not what may still happen in very remote places or what happened many thousands of years ago..

Talking about compassion being “ego” and “delusional” is just you having issues Gem. The ability to be compassionate is universal and your focus on old contexts of the past are pointless exercises. We have choice and that will have consequences.

[Sapphirez]

Originally Posted by Pagandell

Dear Sapphirez.

Thanks for your feed back/ words, I have no problem with having a drink, I enjoy it
I see nothing wrong with trying out the physical world and its magic plants before we transition on to the spiritual world

Dear somehow you missed my point lol.. the point is that alcohol doesn't solve problems, it only makes more. Alcohol is not one of nature's magic plants, it's a convoluted form of poison that ultimately has many ill effects on the human body and brain, because it is a poison, and not a pretty one. We are born to this Earth to honor it and live harmoniously with it. You are right there are plenty of plants that can help us, but we must take them in their pure states or ways that nature is more supportive of. If you want alcohol the only seemingly acceptable way to take it is in the form of herbal tinctures, though I personally would rather have the herbs in another form.

Following is some of the unfair things that alcohol does, and it may not be 100% accurate, but it is at least 90% accurate, and what alcohol actually does to the body and brain is even worse than what's listed here.


"Liver: Of all the physical harm caused by drinking too much, damage to the liver is the most prevalent and likely. The liver may become inflamed, leading to scarring and eventual cirrhosis. People who drink heavily may also develop alcoholic hepatitis, fatty liver disease, or liver cancer.

Digestive system: Consuming a lot of alcohol can inflame the lining of the stomach; short-term, this can lead to indigestion or nausea, especially as the effects of alcohol wear off. Long-term, inflammation in the stomach increases the risk of ulcers, chronic heart burn, and gastritis. The intestines are less able to digest important nutrients, particularly B12 or thiamine, which can lead to malnutrition, problems with blood production and the immune system, and brain damage. Alcohol especially affects two organs in the digestive system:
Pancreas: Abnormal activation of stomach enzymes can inflame the pancreas; chronic inflammation leads to pancreatitis. Changes to pancreatic enzymes can also affect insulin production, putting a person at greater risk of diabetes.


Liver: This organ pulls toxins out of the body by metabolizing many substances, including alcohol. Long-term, high-volume alcohol consumption changes how the liver metabolizes toxins, making it less effective; this can cause scarring to the liver, add fat to the organ, and trigger chronic inflammation. This leads to all kinds of problems, including cirrhosis, steatosis (fatty liver disease), alcoholic hepatitis, and liver cancer.

Endocrine, pancreas, and sugar levels: Alcohol is not food, but it will trigger a buildup of digestive enzymes in the pancreas, which can lead to inflammation, pancreatitis (acute, then chronic if it is not managed), and high blood sugar (hyperglycemia), which may cause problems with diabetes.

Central nervous system: The brain is deeply affected by alcohol consumption. This intoxicating substance triggers the release of neurotransmitters like serotonin and dopamine, which are associated with the brain’s reward system; this, in turn, can reinforce problem drinking. Thiamine, or B12, deficiency associated with chronic heavy drinking can lead to dementia-like symptoms. Too much alcohol can also lead to memory loss, blacking out, and trouble forming new memories.


Circulatory system: The heart and lungs can be very affected by alcohol consumption, including binge drinking and heavy drinking. Consuming too much alcohol can cause high blood pressure, irregular heartbeat, trouble pumping blood through the body, blood clots, stroke, cardiomyopathy (sagging heart muscle), heart attack, other heart disease, and breathing difficulty. Malnutrition from alcohol consumption can also lead to anemia.


Reproductive health: In the short-term, consuming too much alcohol can lead to reproductive problems, from erectile dysfunction to irregular menstruation. Both men and women are at a greater risk for infertility. Women who drink while pregnant are at risk for premature birth, miscarriage, stillbirth, or having a child with fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS).


Skeleton and muscles: Loss of nutrients increases the risk of osteoporosis and osteoarthritis, which increase the risk of dangerous bone fractures and weak muscles.
Immune system: Consuming any intoxicating substance, including alcohol, lowers the body’s natural defenses in the immune system, increasing the risk of catching a contagious disease, including pneumonia or tuberculosis."