General / Off-Topic Let's Have A Debate: To Be, Or Not To Be Vegan? That Is The Question ...

"pets" who serve no purpose make up far and away the vast majority of the species worldwide, and working dogs are only being used in this example to bolster your argument.
A pet is always useful.

That's why they are our companions and that we love them for the eternity.

134814
 
Last edited:
It's weird how obsessed about animals people have gotten to be, seemingly more willing to grant them sort of a defacto personhood status (certainly in the case of dogs!) then infants and fetuses. I call it the "cult of the dog."

Patrick, please try to focus on the point I made about pets & vegans who support a multi-billion dollar industry that just so happens to slaughter animals for food by the million in order to feed said pets...and then go on to preach morality to those who do not share their dietary viewpoint. As such, I was never trying to denigrate dogs or cats, but to use their ownership to illustrate a valid point about consumption.
 
It's weird how obsessed about animals people have gotten to be, seemingly more willing to grant them sort of a defacto personhood status (certainly in the case of dogs!) then infants and fetuses. I call it the "cult of the dog."

Patrick, please try to focus on the point I made about pets & vegans who support a multi-billion dollar industry that just so happens to slaughter animals for food by the million in order to feed said pets...and then go on to preach morality to those who do not share their dietary viewpoint. As such, I was never trying to denigrate dogs or cats, but to use their ownership to illustrate a valid point about consumption.
Yes, I understand that you are denouncing a certain hyprocrisy.

However, the pet food industry mainly uses offal from the human food industry.

I can add incidentally that the simple fact of considering the majority of the domestic animals as useless, is a form of denigration.

The only solution for you now and to be at peace with your conscience, is to adopt 1 dog and 1 cat as early as Monday morning. :)

134816
 
Yes, I understand that you are denouncing a certain hyprocrisy.

However, the pet food industry mainly uses offal from the human food industry.

I can add incidentally that the simple fact of considering the majority of the domestic animals as useless, is a form of denigration.

The only solution for you now and to be at peace with your conscience, is to adopt 1 dog and 1 cat as early as Monday morning. :)

View attachment 134816
My family owns 6 dogs, 4 goats, a bunch of chickens and ducks and God only knows how many inside critters in aquariums and terrariums and bird cages lolol.

Oh crap, and I think we have a horse, too.
 
I picked dogs as an example for a very specific reason: dogs (and cats) are a luxury item that have no purpose in our society beyond human beings simple whim:
You only prove that you are incapable to look beyond your own limited horizon and lack the imagination to see things through the eyes of somebody else. Apart from the "rich" in the world dogs and cats have a very justified place in our society. Dogs always were companians and protectors/assistans...that hasnt changed. Cats provided a very valuable service by hunting and killing pests that were in the past responsible for all kinds of sickness. Maybe you are not aware that not every land has 24/7 fastfood chains on every corner or not everybody is rolling in money. Educating you on the "real" situation on our planet would be too much for this thread. Its a simple fact that disregarding/ignoring such trivial things tells more about you and your character and helps to evaluate your statements in a heartbeat.

Like with everything else the "free world" (which is a tiny minority in todays world and also an illusion) takes established things and perverts it to a degree where your statement holds truth. But if you make the mistake to take LAs or NYs situation and apply it to the rest of the world you only show how little you know.

I am looking forward to picking up a dog once my current companien (cat of 15 years) says goodbye. The cat never provided any working service to me as I m living in good conditions and dont need pest control (tho it tried to "feed" me with killed mice often enough but I never had any in my house...hummm) but maybe you underevaluate the worth of companianship? While our species grew and there are far more people on this planet then ever before many humans feel more alone then ever. Reaching out electronically has created a lot of "digital hermits". Pets today provide a responsibility, a task and teach you something in the process. You seem to lack a lot of empathy or understanding. I d say a pet would do you wonders but then, with your current attitude it would be cruel to the animal.

Back to the dog...I dont need protection and my home is protected electronically. I plan for him to provide company to me on my various activities. The fact that dogs will love you unconditionally and are loyal to death if you treat them right (and even if you dont) is a big plus in my eyes where the random stranger on the street meets your gaze with hostility, mistrust and will rather walk past you when you are in need then extend any kind of help. Things change for my wife. She doesnt have my bulk, doesnt have my presence, shes smaller and physically weaker then I am. The dog is meant to be her protector when shes outside where it acts as a deterrent or last line of defense.

The further I think about your statement the more I recognize how utterly wrong you are about most of the things you state simply because you have a very narrow view on things that completely forget or disregard people outside your own "bubble" of existence.


Sorry for the off-topic

There actually "is" a part in there that can be applied to the thread :) Todays rich society perverting things to a degree where veganism becomes a factor. Veganism itself isnt bad but when you actually can consider animals feelings to affect your own lifestyle like vegans do it only shows that you are so sheltered and provided for that you dont have to worry about tommorows survival. And as I stated before how you eat is your own decision but its when you become "agressive" about it looking down on others you become arrogant to the extreme. Animals are a source of nourishment first...always were and will continue to be so because a plant-only dient is not feasable on this planet (and the typical human is an omnivore which means he also eats meat). Consider that a lot of species only live today because humans utilize them for food. If you take away this critical task you immediately create a waste of effort and resources that add to the list of problems we currently have. So applying veganism to everybody and enforce it would instantly kill off whole species because there is no need for them anymore. I m not sure whats more cruel or "evil" here.

Industrial animal farming has grown in the last decades and investigative articles have unearthed a lot of information and facts that the broader "sheltered" population had no idea of....actually birthing the vegan movement (vegans are vegetarians2.0 in my eyes) but this movement makes the same mistake then a lot of things on our world. Its easy to point and complain but provide no solution. And often enough people do what they do knowing that its not right or doesnt hold anything positive but they dont have an alternative. You know what some mothers and fathers do to provide for their family. They dont do it because they want to but because theres simply no other way and needs to be done.

Farmers and butchers provide the services that humanity grew up on. Its not a job I ever want to do but somebody "has to" same as soldiers. When I was younger I was watching those documentations in horror but that didnt change my diet. It certainly changed the way I view and treat animals tho. When I was a little kid my parents took me on a visit to my grandparents who own and work a farm. We expected a chicken soup for diner so my grangran took me outside and asked me to chose a chicken. I had absolutely no idea what for...I was like 8 at the time. So I picked a chicken that I liked....he grabbed it, carried it over to a tree stump then BASHED its head in and decapicated it after which the torso ran around flapping for 20 second until its blood ran out....needless to say that I didnt eat a single drop of that soup and was pretty subdued for the rest of our stay.

Now you can argue that he was "cruel" to the chicken or that killing a living animal was a "waste" but again.....because you have the luxury and the money to pay for a (IMO) ridiculous diet doesnt make you superior when elsewhere people dont have that option.

Again...I m not saying that being a vegan automatically makes you thickheaded, ignorant or wrong. At its core veganism is a very noble attitude just like being a vegetarian. And if you have the option and capacity to actually live on this then I m glad for you. But the moment you come out and point at other people who dont share your options or opinion and label them "insert negative here" people will push back, mainly because they cannot understand what you are trying to do. Sadly in my experience veganism has been a rich source of antagonism just like religion. Its the reason that I immediately view a self-declared vegan as either ignorant or stupid until I learn about their "why" which often enough....I dont (because strangers....). The difference is that I dont walk out to people ask them about their diet and laugh at them calling them all kinds of things when they admit they eat differently then I do.

Veganism is not superior or better. Its just an alternative that excessive pooling of resources on tiny landmarks created. You being a vegan doesnt affect me at first. You could even provide an example to strive for because in the end...you try to "live on less" and chose the harder route to fulfill your bodies requirements and thats how veganism started out as I think. But so many people blindly followed "the trend" and act like it that vegans have become an annoyance in my life...because they are the agressive party mostly.


A lot of words for this topic :) Cannot be helped if you want to provide context tho.

I stand by my previous words. Be what you want to be. People should enjoy the luxury of free choice when they can (its rare enough these days). Just dont look down on people who dont share your view or try to convert them. Be tolerant and accept the facts and reality of our world and there is no problem. Veganism is not "better" then other diets but it certainly is different.

Different is NOT bad. Humanity made this mistake in all things historic (skin color, world view, religion, sexual orientiation, sexism etc etc...the list is endless). As long as your different doesnt push and affect my life all is good and we can coexist peacefully. As soon as you extend force of any kind I ll push back to defend my believes. Lets not go there...we gotta learn to live together :)
 
My family owns 6 dogs, 4 goats, a bunch of chickens and ducks and God only knows how many inside critters in aquariums and terrariums and bird cages lolol.

Oh crap, and I think we have a horse, too.
You actually made a lot of statements that make me wonder if you are actually truthful in this thread. The fact that a random stranger on the internet can make up all kinds of "facts" to support his side of an argument is not a mystery you know. I m not inclined to take your word for it based on your posts so far. But sure go ahead, laugh at people who disagree with you...I m sure that ll help to stroke your ego and make you the "winner" ^^
 
Essentially all animals allowed to cohabitate with humans originally provided a valuable service (early warning of intruders, pest control, garbage clean up/consolidation and later hunting or hearding), were a food source, or both. There are plenty of people out there for whom dogs are neither pets nor luxuries, but necessary working animals and tools of survival.

There are also plenty of vegans who take the source of whatever it is they feed their dogs into consideration, selecting food that is compatible with both the needs of the animal and their own personal convictions.

Personally, I am in neither of the above groups. My dogs have generally been useless liabilities, foist upon me by my wife, but eventually accepted as members of my family, after which they automatically take priority above anyone and everyone outside that group. I have no particular affinity for any animals, and species, in and of itself, is neither here nor there when it comes to how I treat them (though again, I do tend to make assumptions, lacking contrary information, for simple expediency).

As for what I feed my dogs, they seem quite content to eat what I eat (they are generally hesitant to eat unless I've eaten first and are suspicious of things I won't eat), and as long as they seem healthy and don't have any problems with their blood work, that's what they'll continue to get. No grapes or onions for dogs though, and not too many nuts.
 
You actually made a lot of statements that make me wonder if you are actually truthful in this thread. The fact that a random stranger on the internet can make up all kinds of "facts" to support his side of an argument is not a mystery you know. I m not inclined to take your word for it based on your posts so far. But sure go ahead, laugh at people who disagree with you...I m sure that ll help to stroke your ego and make you the "winner" ^^
You mean you doubt that I own the animals from the quote? Or that I'm married into a family with a lot of vegans and strict vegetarians that come from a social group where that's the norm? Not sure why that's such a stretch, Fritz.
 
You mean you doubt that I own the animals from the quote? Or that I'm married into a family with a lot of vegans and strict vegetarians that come from a social group where that's the norm? Not sure why that's such a stretch, Fritz.
Even if I provided the specific examples that make you sound dubious you have no way to prove what you said so I ll stay with what you provided so far, peace out.
 
Even if I provided the specific examples that make you sound dubious you have no way to prove what you said so I ll stay with what you provided so far, peace out.
No, we're not going to "peace out" my bad mouthing little friend. You just called me a liar with no proof or even specifics, which is pretty funny given the fact that Im one of the few people around here with the balls to use my real name attached to all my comments. Not only that, a simple Google search will get you tons of information on my background.

I'm not even sure what or how lying would come to bear in this discussion. I don't think you do either, you're just triggered and can't think straight.

Put up or shut up, pal.
 
take it to tells if you want to continue, not going to give you a platform for your rambling....
You want to take it to PM's? That's weird given the fact that you are the one who started this little path we're on. A couple pieces of advice: don't start what you lack the metal to finish, and check up on your reading comprehension. You're attacking me based on false premise which stems from the fact that you haven't followed the conversation very well.
 
All that bark....no comprehension. The fact that you avoid PMs which could clear this up only demonstrates that you are more interested in argument then discussion. I doubt you have anything worthwhile to add...keep barking instead :) Lets not take this too far off-topic tho what you say?
 
All that bark....no comprehension. The fact that you avoid PMs which could clear this up only demonstrates that you are more interested in argument then discussion. I doubt you have anything worthwhile to add...keep barking instead :) Lets not take this too far off-topic tho what you say?
Im not avoiding anything. You called me a liar and a few other choice things to start the day. I didn't engage you. If you want to clarify your point then by all means do so. As far as taking the thread off topic...you should have thought of that before calling me out. All I've done so far is ask you what you meant:)
 
An arguments should speak for itself and stand on it's own merits. I don't need to doubt anyone's personal account of a situation, or their beliefs regarding it, to point out problems with an assertion or argument. If the logic in the argument is flawed, the veracity of the facts used to make it is totally irrelevant.

For example, if one is making the spurious claim about some universal property of veganism, it doesn't matter how many vegans one polls, or how common that particular attribute is among them, if there is nothing intrinsic to being a vegan that mandates that attribute.

Even perfect correlation with an enormous sample size does not always imply, nor should ever be confused with, causation. To do so simply leads to unfounded prejudices that are not in any way required to make beneficial use of observed trends; one can exercise caution without falling victim to a fallacy or behaving like a bigot. Certainly, correlation can reveal or confirm causation, but it cannot stand alone; underlying mechanisms must be understood to demonstrate causation. There are few absolutes...mostly because all that's needed to disprove them is a single contrary example and absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
 
Top Bottom