Spiritual Forums

Home


Donate!


Articles


CHAT!


Shop


 
Welcome to Spiritual Forums!.

We created this community for people from all backgrounds to discuss Spiritual, Paranormal, Metaphysical, Philosophical, Supernatural, and Esoteric subjects. From Astral Projection to Zen, all topics are welcome. We hope you enjoy your visits.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to most discussions and articles. By joining our free community you will be able to post messages, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos, and gain access to our Chat Rooms, Registration is fast, simple, and free, so please, join our community today! !

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, check our FAQs before contacting support. Please read our forum rules, since they are enforced by our volunteer staff. This will help you avoid any infractions and issues.

Go Back   Spiritual Forums > Lifestyle > Vegetarian & Vegan

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 18-05-2011, 06:19 PM
Chrysaetos Chrysaetos is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,908
  Chrysaetos's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by earthy
UNESCO tells us that every day, forty thousand children in the world die because of a lack of nutrition, of food. Every day, forty thousand children. And the amount of grain that we grow in the West is mostly used to feed our cattle. Eighty percent of the corn grown in this country is to feed the cattle to make meat. Ninety-five percent of the oats produced in this country is not for us to eat, but for the animals raised for food. According to this recent report that we received of all the agricultural land in the US, eighty-seven percent is used to raise animals for food. That is forty-five percent of the total land mass in the US.
That may be but large areas of our farmland are not suitable for other purposes. Even if we gave all the grains to humans, where do you think it will lead us? It wouldn't erase poverty but it could lead to a bigger population (think about the Green Revolution). What many third world countries need is a stable middle class. This will also create a stable population as middle/upper class people tend to have less children and think more about environmental issues. Giving those people grains alone won't solve it. The carb-diets have caused populations to multiply drastically throughout history.
Quote:
Originally Posted by earthy
A totally vegetarian diet requires 300 gallons of water per day, while a meat-eating diet requires more than 4000 gallons of water per day.
Such a diet is still completely dependant on farmland. And if hundreds of millions of people gave up fish, this would inevitably lead to more deforestation in order to get protein.

''A meat-eating diet'' is a vague term. One may eat local chicken and fish yet be more environmentally friendly than the vegan who drinks tea and eats rice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by earthy
Each vegetarian can save one acre of trees per year. More than 260 million acres of US forests have been cleared to grow crops to feed animals raised for meat. And another acre of trees disappears every eight seconds. The tropical rain forests are also being destroyed to create grazing land for cattle.
These are not your own words.

While forest in South America is cleared (Brazil is stabilizing for now) for cattle grazing and soy (mostly fed to cattle),
in Asia most forests are cleared for vegetarian products. It is situational..
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 18-05-2011, 06:25 PM
tragblack
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrysaetos
That may be but large areas of our farmland are not suitable for other purposes. Even if we gave all the grains to humans, where do you think it will lead us? It wouldn't erase poverty but it could lead to a bigger population (think about the Green Revolution).

Nothing, not even food, could lead to the boom in population that oil brought-- and the loss of population that the loss of a steady oil supply could bring.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 18-05-2011, 07:29 PM
earthy
Posts: n/a
 
Chrysaetos, You are correct, the words that I have written are not all my own. I am quoting facts and statistics, which I do quite often. I could not have come up with those figures off the top of my head. I am just here to help and hopefully inspire others to lead a more healthful, peaceful life. May I ask why are you on this vegan board? Its obvious you are not a vegan or vegetarian.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 18-05-2011, 07:49 PM
Chrysaetos Chrysaetos is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,908
  Chrysaetos's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by earthy
Chrysaetos, You are correct, the words that I have written are not all my own. I am quoting facts and statistics, which I do quite often. I could not have come up with those figures off the top of my head.
Well all of our food (meat and plants) do not always come from the same place. When you say ''meat-eating diet'' for example, it begs the question what type of meat you are talking about, where it came from, what food did the animal eat.

I'd like to add (not specifically to your post, more in general) that there are lies surrounding environmentalism and the green movement. I know farmers who have their cows inside all year, yet their milk gets the 'organic' label. I know that rice, palm oil, and tea cause deforestation in Asia.. but as long as it is produced without pesticides it gets a friendly label. There are so many examples.
Quote:
Originally Posted by earthy
May I ask why are you on this vegan board? Its obvious you are not a vegan or vegetarian.
I was vegetarian for some years so I can understand the different opinions. It would be boring to have only vegs on this board, wouldn't it?
I'm always interested in discussing the ethics surrounding this subject. Why do we make the choices?
Often we choose specifics.. species A or B we wish to save, but species C and D we ignore. This is inevitable (we have to make choices). I'm interested in the why behind our ethics..
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 18-05-2011, 08:33 PM
Time
Posts: n/a
 
Earthy -

Dont get me wrong, I understand how bad meat companies are, and im not "anti - vegan" either. You can believe and do what you want.

" In The World Peace Diet, author Will Tuttle explains how pesticides and pollutants affect our health and our planet"

THis is from agriculture of plants. Fertilizers salt the soil, and also eventualy kill all the soil organisms, due to exhaustion ( the fertilizer makes them do the equivalent of you running non stop til you die basicaly, while getting pumped full of steroids and vitamins).

"and the conditions in which we keep our livestoc"

Its the fact that we keep livestock at all. CHICKEN pox, small pox ( from cows).. the list goes on, and they didnt show up untill domestication of those animals. THE WAY we farm is the problem, we are in a agricultural society, which is doomed to fail. We need to adpot a more HORTICULTURAL society ( basicaly gardeners). A city block can feed all its inhabitants, livestock/pets, and even still have 7 tonns of almonds to sell or barter with ( not to mention veriety). There cant be any unknown cruelty to the animals, becasue they are everyones.


"Many of us don’t ever think about the environmental effect of our steak dinner when we sit down to eat it"

That is too true, but i see a larger number of pepole not thinking of the enviromental damage on the plant world, which is the habitat and food for all those precious animals. So what if they dont have a brain as we see it. They have awareness, and that is enough for me to not think of tem as secondary. Plants are the onlyr eason anyother lief exsists at all. All i see on this post is "animals" 10000 times, but not once have i heard anyone talk about the ramifications on plants for jsut harvesting plants......


75% of the US is crops for food. That was once forest, or prarie land that was home to hundreds of thousands of species. When we go and till the soil every year, we are boosting the soil life for the SHORT term, not the long. Fertilizing the,m only makes this effect stronger. And after 10 years or less of farming, the soil is gone, and there is no topsoil.

Not to mention how sterile farms are. All they do is detur all life except what they are growing. This is more harmful to organisms then just killing a few million cows a year, im talking hudreds of BILLIONS of organisms die in one acre of farmland every year when we farm. THis is insects, birds, small mammals, worms, and billions of soil organisms, tat are the vary reason we arent sky igh in dead things.


"I am a practicing buddhist and practice ahimsa or non-violence towards animals and ourselves"

Isnt buddhism respect LIFE ( plants animals and eberything), not jsut animals?

"Do 40,000 children really die each day of starvation?
Why is that so?"

ITs because governments would rather spend 40 billion dollars on war then send even 10 % of it to african villages, or give tenm the teachings and tools to do tings themselves. Money, greed... all that "fun" stuff. Not tomention people who spend 40 000 bucks on their 10th car, then clean up a rough community, and put in food gardens to help feed poor people.

Now, what about all the chemicals that are used in our food, and that is blown in our air, and falls as rain, which we, and all other life drinks? What about the medications in city water that the plants and life drinks? What about sectioning off forests with grids of roads, cities and vast felds of sterile farmland?

Another question is......

Drs, more namley specialists, are usualy develpoed and practiced becasue theres a specific SPECIAL problem, which requires special attention. Not always, but usualy harm has been caused for the long term. Think of diebetic dieticians, specific cancer drs... they all are there to help a specific serious problem...

then why are there drs specificaly for "recovering vegans/vegetarians"? That woudl incinuate that its a big enough , or common enough problem to require a specialist dr.......


The problem with the enviroment isnt jsut eating meat, or vegans, its BOTH. The way we harvest and aquire ALL our food is the problem.. ITs laces with chemicals, pollutants, steroids, geneticaly encanced... Its diisgusting and disrespecful. We have no regard for hwo nature works, and dont care as long as we get that corn, tat was shipped here from mexico or california, by gasoline and oil ( harmful) to your house.

Its the way we farm flat out, both food, and animals and water. the fact that we can have 14 acres of grass, and not give a damn that that much room can feed 20 people if it was cultivated properly, using NO chemicals, harvesting any and all resources, in a non hrmful way. Inviting all nature into your yard, and eating liek a pig... LOL

Theres room for chickens, cows, goats, who, if you dont eat them ( if you grew the chickens, im sure eating eggs would be fine), they are GREAT tools, and helpers int he garden, not to mention having animals of all sorts is wicked LOL.

The less we rely on the government, or anyone else to help us in these ways, the better. Gass proces would have to go down, becasue the demand would go down if food didnt have to be delivered to every city int he world. We w ould have our own wood to rebuild houses, most of our own food... This also opens up barter systems...

This would change society. The great ting is, this same philisophy, has been taught to tribes in africa, and india int he hopes that they will beable to farm theland properly once more.

I Hightly suggest readin the book " gaias garden". it is a gardening book secondly, and more of a philisophy, and way of life. Think of the money saved when more then half your food is grown yourself? Thos epeople lucky enough to have mild winters can grow MUCh more then people in northern areas, but its been done before.

This would help feed everyone. FOr the vast majority of the human secies, we were either hunter gathereres, or horticulurists. Agriculture is new in society, and wasnt even spread accross the globe untill a few hundred years ago ( although most of it had it). Im not talking about farming in general, just the monocroping farming we practice.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 18-05-2011, 08:33 PM
Time
Posts: n/a
 
double post ... sry
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 18-05-2011, 10:41 PM
DebbyM
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Time
I got a question for you debs..... ..............Whats your opinion on thiis?

Hi Time,
Those are good questions and I can only answer from my perspective so here goes. You are right, I try my darndest to avoid doing anything that will cause suffering to any creature that had a mother, or as you say, anything with a face. So I've learned which companies not only kill animals for food, but do tests on animals to see if the dishwashing soap for example will burn my eyes and I won't go into details on how they discover this. I'm sure that most can figure that out. I don't buy feather or down products, because these are ripped out of living ducks and geese on average, every six weeks until I would assume, they don't grow properly any more at which time they are slaughtered. Grab a handful of hair sometime and pull it out and that will give you an idea what the birds experience repeatedly and over half their bodies.

As for plants, they do not have a brain or a brain stem or nerve endings so their 'experience' of suffering is far different than an animals. I do think that any of the so-called reactions that some would like to point to as being evidence of 'suffering' or 'fear' of plants is more than likely a reaction to vibrations of energy because at our very base level, that is all that matter is, energy that vibrates and pulses. If you swish a pool of water with your hand, it causes ripples that move away from your hand. Is that fear or the result of pain?

Regarding the effect of plant farming on the environment, consider first that production of animals and the food that they eat causes manure, pesticide, herbicide and antibiotic runoff that impacts our environment. 85% of the worlds soy goes to feeding animals and that soy receives regular treatments with Roundup to kill weeds, not to mention pesiticides. It takes more feed (hay and soy products) to feed cattle for instance, than it does to feed humans, because keep in mind that a good percentage of that feed goes to produce energy for movement and manure. It is also necessary to consider that animals are also prodigious users of water and as well, the process of turning them into packaged products also uses vast quantities of water as slaughterhouses and plants are cleaned with what in effect is our drinking water.

And while cattle can be grazed on land that is not good for producing human food, the wildlife (i.e. natural predators) are killed off to protect those cattle. Wolves neared extinction in several of the states but were reintroduced in the 1990's in several areas. But unfortunately, Idaho and Montana have once again declared open season on them. Wild horses are also regularly rounded up by the BLM, taken off the land, and you the taxpayer, pay for the maintenance of those animals in small pens, all so that ranchers can graze their cattle, for free, on federal land. How benign is animal production?

Oil is a product of both plant and animal sources. And we humans had nothing to do with the whole process. The forests and bogs and plants died naturally and yes, we do all benefit from their deaths at this point. But at this point in our history, plastics can now be made of soy, which by the way is not all that healthy to consume for either us or the cattle that it is fed to. The plastics that are made of soy and corn are also biodegradable and so are less damaging to our environment.

Composting or throwing away apple cores and other vegetable products not only enable the spread of more food plants but are simply reptitions of what has transpired across the planet for aeons. It is a natural process that does only good for the earth, unlike the production of food animals. Throwing away or composting vegetable matter does not kill or harm lifes cycle.

I hope this explanation is clear and answers your questions. If anything isn't clear, I'd be happy to try again.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 18-05-2011, 11:18 PM
DebbyM
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Time
.......
- Our bodies cannor break down plant matter, in a strickly vegan diet. Our teeth ( mostly), and our digestive system ( stomach and rectum) arent developed to break down vegitable matter......

Our bodies and digestive systems are designed to adequately break down plant material with a couple of exceptions like grass or tree bark. Our molars are flat to grind up what we eat, much like a horses teeth are. Our front teeth are flat and have a sharp edge in order to cut out 'chunks of apple' or clip off bits of plant material, much like a horses front teeth are. A carnivorous animal on the other hand, has actual canines that are extremely long and their back teeth work with a scissor like action in order to slice off chunks of flesh. Our digestive tract consists of a long intestine which is necessary for the breakdown of plant materials, unlike the carnivore whose stomach takes of the majority of the digestive tract with a resulting short intestine. Our saliva also contains a carbohydrate digesting enzyme which facilitates the digestion of plant foods, while a carnivores doesn't. As well, our stomachs are slightly less acidic than a carnivore who must breakdown meat for the most part in the stomach (as they do not chew their food).

The other interesting difference between us and dogs and cats and other predators is the structure of the jaw. We used to have a longer jaw that provided enough room for all of our molars but as we have evolved, that jaw has shortened and that explains the problems that we invariably have with the wisdom teeth that come in at the back. While we have a shorter jaw, we haven't quit 'growing' those teeth. Our jaws are designed to move from side to side to grind up the plant material that we eat, whereas a dog cannot and as well, the muscles on the side of their jaws are significantly larger to facilitate the ripping and slicing action that is necessary to obtain their food. They can also open their mouths far wider than we can so that they can tear off the large chunks of flesh that go into their oversize stomach. By comparison, we are forced, by design, to eat smaller bites of food and we choke easily unlike dogs.

The spacing of our teeth also indicates the type of food that we are designed to eat. Carnivores have pointy teeth that prevents 'stringy' tissue from getting caught in it. Our teeth on the other hand , if we have normal, healthy oral structure, are very close together which is why humans frequently are forced to use a toothpick to pick that same stringy tissue out of them.

Interestingly, black and grizzy bears which are true omnivores also demonstrate a carnivorous structure which the exception of flattened molars.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 18-05-2011, 11:40 PM
DebbyM
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrysaetos
That may be but large areas of our farmland are not suitable for other purposes. Even if we gave all the grains to humans, where do you think it will lead us? It wouldn't erase poverty but it could lead to a bigger population (think about the Green Revolution). What many third world countries need is a stable middle class. This will also create a stable population as middle/upper class people tend to have less children and think more about environmental issues. Giving those people grains alone won't solve it. The carb-diets have caused populations to multiply drastically throughout history.Such a diet is still completely dependant on farmland. And if hundreds of millions of people gave up fish, this would inevitably lead to more deforestation in order to get protein.

''A meat-eating diet'' is a vague term. One may eat local chicken and fish yet be more environmentally friendly than the vegan who drinks tea and eats rice.These are not your own words.

While forest in South America is cleared (Brazil is stabilizing for now) for cattle grazing and soy (mostly fed to cattle),
in Asia most forests are cleared for vegetarian products. It is situational..

Chrysaetos



Are you suggesting that because people will have children if they are adequately nourished, that this justifies not giving them any of the grain that goes to animal feed? In essence, we should continue starving those people?

Perhaps you aren't aware that all plant food contains the amino acids that form complete proteins that are needed for survival. For example, where do you think elephants get their protein from? It comes from grasses and leaves. Look how big and strong they get on plant 'proteins'.

And to suggest that a diet requiring 4000 gallons per day is less a waste than a diet requiring only 300 gallons is unrealistic and makes no sense. And once again, if you quit feeding grain to animals, cropland could be returned to a degree to forest and plains because animals eat more grains and hay than people do.

And on another point, how do you know that earthy didn't write his/her post? Do you have a link that would prove your point? From anyones perspective, on any subject, it is always great when someone actually takes the time to look up credible information to support their perspective. Personally, I like to look things up and then paraphrase the article, but I make a point of bookmarking my info in case anyone ever needs it.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 18-05-2011, 11:52 PM
DebbyM
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrysaetos
Well all of our food (meat and plants) do not always come from the same place. When you say ''meat-eating diet'' for example, it begs the question what type of meat you are talking about, where it came from, what food did the animal eat.

I'd like to add (not specifically to your post, more in general) that there are lies surrounding environmentalism and the green movement. I know farmers who have their cows inside all year, yet their milk gets the 'organic' label. I know that rice, palm oil, and tea cause deforestation in Asia.. but as long as it is produced without pesticides it gets a friendly label. There are so many examples.I was vegetarian for some years so I can understand the different opinions. It would be boring to have only vegs on this board, wouldn't it?
I'm always interested in discussing the ethics surrounding this subject. Why do we make the choices?
Often we choose specifics.. species A or B we wish to save, but species C and D we ignore. This is inevitable (we have to make choices). I'm interested in the why behind our ethics..

Chrysaetos



You may have been a vegetarian for a few years, but apparently you don't understand a lot of the issues that surround the diet that you have now decided on. The wasting of water, the pesticides and herbicides in food production for animals and their effect on the environment, the poisoning of the environment by the run off from animal operations, the deforestation that is caused to the greatest degree from cattle production in South America, the impact of that destruction on the global environment, the abuse of antibiotics that is affecting the health of our bodies and our ability to fight off disease, the compassionate choice involved in turning over 'grains' to feed the starving masses of third world countries, not to mention the lies involved in the meat industry, i.e. milk is necessary for calcium to prevent osteoporosis and only meat can provide the necessary amount of protein for human health.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:02 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums