Vegetarianism

Anything Goes

Vegetarianism

Postby Carlito Brigante » Fri Aug 29, 2008 8:23 pm

Seeing that Natalie Portman is a vegetarian, there's something I don't understand about it. On one side, I understand all the health advantages. I'm cool with that. Now my main concern is the idea of feeding entire populations without relying on meat. Even at this point of time, it's proven to be nearly impossible to feed the world's population, if not impossible. What's the common vegetarian stance on the possibility of feeding every people in this planet using solely a vegetarian diet? I don't really think that a kid dying of hunger at some part of the world will really stop to think about animal cruelty. The truth is human beings do rely on meat for their survival. The way I see it, everytime I eat some cold cut, I have to wonder what's more important between an animal sacrificiced for our living or one child at the other side of the planet trying to live.
Carlito Brigante
 
Posts: 1058
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:39 am

Postby Shantih » Fri Aug 29, 2008 8:55 pm

The way I see it, everytime I eat some cold cut, I have to wonder what's more important between an animal sacrificiced for our living or one child at the other side of the planet trying to live.


Why? You're the one eating it, not the starving child. Whenever people tell me this line of reasoning all I can think is it's a pretty crap attempt to justify what they eat, not a genuine concern for what the third world is eating.
User avatar
Shantih
 
Posts: 1458
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 11:28 pm
Location: Bristol, England

Postby Extreme Allah » Fri Aug 29, 2008 9:07 pm

Shantih wrote:
The way I see it, everytime I eat some cold cut, I have to wonder what's more important between an animal sacrificiced for our living or one child at the other side of the planet trying to live.


Why? You're the one eating it, not the starving child. Whenever people tell me this line of reasoning all I can think is it's a pretty crap attempt to justify what they eat, not a genuine concern for what the third world is eating.


Here's why you're a hypocrite, Shantih: you act like this is some kind of moral high ground, yet every time you post about taking your tights off and running around or something, millions of my children are lead to slaughter at the Phnom Penh killing field that is my hand towel. How do you sleep at night? Or more importantly, where?
euphoriac wrote:I have been strikingly attracted to natalie since I saw Leon.
User avatar
Extreme Allah
 
Posts: 8392
Joined: Sun May 20, 2007 9:31 am
Location: Sandals Resort: Somalia

Postby buttsie » Sat Aug 30, 2008 12:33 am

Look at it logically

We grow plants crops...to feed cattle...to make meat
We grow crops...to make bio fuels
We grow crops...to make licit/illicit drugs

You dont need to be einstein to work out

Grow FOOD crops...supply direct to the people...equals more efficient use of natural resources/supply of food...henceforth you can feed more

Meat is one of least efficient,not to mention most destructive ways of putting food on the table.

Some estimates have the figure as low as a 10/15% reduction in consumption of meat worldwide would make up the shortfall that the world needs in food.
buttsie
 
Posts: 7189
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 12:45 pm
Location: Australia

Postby Carlito Brigante » Sat Aug 30, 2008 2:14 am

Shantih wrote:
The way I see it, everytime I eat some cold cut, I have to wonder what's more important between an animal sacrificiced for our living or one child at the other side of the planet trying to live.


Why? You're the one eating it, not the starving child. Whenever people tell me this line of reasoning all I can think is it's a pretty crap attempt to justify what they eat, not a genuine concern for what the third world is eating.


That's part of what I'm getting at. At some point of our lives when you're a kid, we've been told by our parents the classic eat-all-the-food-in-the-table excuse, 'eat all the food on your plate because that's food some hungry child in the world won't be able to eat'. Even the historical resonance of Thanksgiving celebration suggests the fact that the pilgrims were starving and ended up eating turkey. Wether that's historically accurate or not seems to be irrelevant, but not the fact that they sacrificed an animal in order to feed themselves.
Carlito Brigante
 
Posts: 1058
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:39 am


Return to Off-Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: appopyGons, Eladlyweld, ExterceDer, HicVanda, Mantarina, Ordegegell, Vatowepe and 4 guests