Bitch throws puppies into river

[sandinista]

I think we already have an animal rights thread.

The vegans/vegetarians are just as predictable though once you know all the arguments.

Can't we all just get together for a round of bacon double harvest burgers?

Of course - just make mine grass-fed.

for sure, make mine a human burger with baby bacon, just make sure they are killed "humanly".

[Animavore]

I think we already have an animal rights thread.

The vegans/vegetarians are just as predictable though once you know all the arguments.

Can't we all just get together for a round of bacon double harvest burgers?

Of course - just make mine grass-fed.

for sure, make mine a human burger with baby bacon, just make sure they are killed "humanly".

No problem. You want fries with that?

[sandinista]

I think we already have an animal rights thread.

The vegans/vegetarians are just as predictable though once you know all the arguments.

Can't we all just get together for a round of bacon double harvest burgers?

Of course - just make mine grass-fed.

for sure, make mine a human burger with baby bacon, just make sure they are killed "humanly".

No problem. You want fries with that?

no, wouldn't want to kill the poor potatoes.

[Animavore]

I'll do it humanely. With a masher.

[Warren Dew]

Of course - just make mine grass-fed.

With pastured bacon.

And leave off the bun. Agriculture destroys entire ecosystems. See The Vegetarian Myth, by a vegetarian who realized the moral error of her ways, for details.

[sandinista]

Of course - just make mine grass-fed.

With pastured bacon.

And leave off the bun. Agriculture destroys entire ecosystems. See The Vegetarian Myth, by a vegetarian who realized the moral error of her ways, for details.

I read the first couple chapters of that "book". wow. So full of errors and half truths I couldn't even believe it got published. BTW most of the agriculture which is destroying ecosystems is used for meat production. Seriously, that book is SHIT.

http://skepticalvegan.wordpress.com/201 ... rian-myth/

I feel the need to respond to The Vegetarian Myth by Lierre Keith, a horrendous piece of pseudoscience advocating the abandonment of modern agriculture and apparently modern ethics.

So this book offends me on two fronts, it offends my ethical sensibilities by justifying killing animals unnecessarily and having a flippant attitude toward human starvation.
Secondly it offends my rationality and love for science by cherry picking data and twisting the science to justify an abandonment of modern agriculture without any viable alternative to feed our population or reduce it. The psychology claims she makes are pure bullcrap and are extra offensive by using bad science to question the mental health of all vegans.

[Coito ergo sum]

Of course - just make mine grass-fed.

With pastured bacon.

And leave off the bun. Agriculture destroys entire ecosystems. See The Vegetarian Myth, by a vegetarian who realized the moral error of her ways, for details.

I read the first couple chapters of that "book". wow. So full of errors and half truths I couldn't even believe it got published. BTW most of the agriculture which is destroying ecosystems is used for meat production. Seriously, that book is SHIT.

http://skepticalvegan.wordpress.com/201 ... rian-myth/

What were top three errors and half truths?

[sandinista]

Of course - just make mine grass-fed.

With pastured bacon.

And leave off the bun. Agriculture destroys entire ecosystems. See The Vegetarian Myth, by a vegetarian who realized the moral error of her ways, for details.

I read the first couple chapters of that "book". wow. So full of errors and half truths I couldn't even believe it got published. BTW most of the agriculture which is destroying ecosystems is used for meat production. Seriously, that book is SHIT.

http://skepticalvegan.wordpress.com/201 ... rian-myth/

What were top three errors and half truths?

There's whole sites dedicated to that "book" I don't own it, and if I did it would have been toilet paper by now, so I can't quote it or give you specifics.

http://www.vegetarianmyth.com/node/6

[Tigger]

Tell you what, sometimes vegetarianism pisses me off. My daughter has a nut allergy and ingesting peanuts will kill her. It really hacks me off when there is a tiny little allergy warning that you need a scanning electron microscope to read, then on the inside of the packaging, say on the plastic film covering the product, it says all over the place , "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat". That's pandering to arseholes I think. You don't die if you eat meat.

[maiforpeace]

Tell you what, sometimes vegetarianism pisses me off. My daughter has a nut allergy and ingesting peanuts will kill her. It really hacks me off when there is a tiny little allergy warning that you need a scanning electron microscope to read, then on the inside of the packaging, say on the plastic film covering the product, it says all over the place , "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat". That's pandering to arseholes I think. You don't die if you eat meat.

What are you referring to, specifically? Why would vegan or vegetarian packaging even have that on their labels?

Vegans and vegetarians who demand truth in labeling are arseholes? Also, with veganism and vegetarianism becoming more and more mainstream, why wouldn't someone put that on their label if they want to sell their products to a certain demographic?

[Robert_S]

Tell you what, sometimes vegetarianism pisses me off. My daughter has a nut allergy and ingesting peanuts will kill her. It really hacks me off when there is a tiny little allergy warning that you need a scanning electron microscope to read, then on the inside of the packaging, say on the plastic film covering the product, it says all over the place , "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat". That's pandering to arseholes I think. You don't die if you eat meat.

Wouldn't the arseholes be the ones doing the pandering?

[Tigger]

Tell you what, sometimes vegetarianism pisses me off. My daughter has a nut allergy and ingesting peanuts will kill her. It really hacks me off when there is a tiny little allergy warning that you need a scanning electron microscope to read, then on the inside of the packaging, say on the plastic film covering the product, it says all over the place , "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat". That's pandering to arseholes I think. You don't die if you eat meat.

What are you referring to, specifically? Why would vegan or vegetarian packaging even have that on their labels?

Pandering to arseholes? So vegans and vegetarians who demand truth in labeling are arseholes? Also, with veganism and vegetarianism becoming more and more mainstream, why wouldn't someone put that on their label if they want to sell their products to a certain demographic?

No, but the warnings are over the top in relation to the possible outcome of eating the product. Eat nuts, die. Eat meat, feel morally corrupted. The labelling should have the health warning at least as prominent as the discomfort caveat.

Tell you what, sometimes vegetarianism pisses me off. My daughter has a nut allergy and ingesting peanuts will kill her. It really hacks me off when there is a tiny little allergy warning that you need a scanning electron microscope to read, then on the inside of the packaging, say on the plastic film covering the product, it says all over the place , "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat". That's pandering to arseholes I think. You don't die if you eat meat.

Wouldn't the arseholes be the ones doing the pandering?

Possibly, but I imagine it's the wrath of the righteous that worries them into putting the warnings on.

[maiforpeace]

Tell you what, sometimes vegetarianism pisses me off. My daughter has a nut allergy and ingesting peanuts will kill her. It really hacks me off when there is a tiny little allergy warning that you need a scanning electron microscope to read, then on the inside of the packaging, say on the plastic film covering the product, it says all over the place , "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat". That's pandering to arseholes I think. You don't die if you eat meat.

What are you referring to, specifically? Why would vegan or vegetarian packaging even have that on their labels?

Pandering to arseholes? So vegans and vegetarians who demand truth in labeling are arseholes? Also, with veganism and vegetarianism becoming more and more mainstream, why wouldn't someone put that on their label if they want to sell their products to a certain demographic?

No, but the warnings are over the top in relation to the possible outcome of eating the product. Eat nuts, die. Eat meat, feel morally corrupted. The labelling should have the health warning at least as prominent as the discomfort caveat.

Tell you what, sometimes vegetarianism pisses me off. My daughter has a nut allergy and ingesting peanuts will kill her. It really hacks me off when there is a tiny little allergy warning that you need a scanning electron microscope to read, then on the inside of the packaging, say on the plastic film covering the product, it says all over the place , "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat" "contains meat". That's pandering to arseholes I think. You don't die if you eat meat.

Wouldn't the arseholes be the ones doing the pandering?

Possibly, but I imagine it's the wrath of the righteous that worries them into putting the warnings on.

And, exactly what would that wrath be? I think you are imagining things.

A quick perusal of animal rights, vegetarian and vegan sites shows little, if any indignation over labeling.

Sorry, but you do sound a bit prejudiced towards vegans and vegetarians with those statements.

[Feck]

I think we already have an animal rights thread.

The vegans/vegetarians are just as predictable though once you know all the arguments.

i am a hypocrite enough to eat animals . I'm happy to debate A Linda McCartney style vegetarian on this point but to be honest Excluding Road kill and needful culls I find it hard to see a rational argument for commercial meat production rather than vegan ism .

Of course you have to balance this with the soya milk brigade who are happy to fuck the world as long as Real milk does not pass their lips .

I fucking wish every thing I ate died with a bullet in It's head and a mouthful of fresh clean grass .


But throwing puppies in a river on video Going Weeeeeeee ! and then posting it on Youutube IS WRONG .

We do not debate that casually throwing a cat in a bin is wrong ,do we? but In this case suddenly we have to justify the whole of man's inhumanity to animals before we can say What a heartless bitch .


Great so we can never say that Bullfighting is wrong while we allow the fuckers in the Philippines to treat dogs how they do ?

What a great system that is; as long as somewhere in the world a worse example can be found then nobody should give a shit ?

[Robert_S]

I've been a vegetarian and I still don't eat meat very often.

Some people of that dietary persuasion are assholes, I think more than a few are in it for the self-righteousness of it. Still, that's not the majority of the ones I've encountered.


That said, I've seen meat eating people get very defensive very quick when I, or someone else brings up vegetarianism.

It's not an either/or thing with the visible warnings. It may be pressure from some vegetarian lobby making the "contains meat" labeling big, but it ain't them keeping the "contains peanuts" warning small.