Quote:
Originally Posted by localzuk Some of the issues brought up are the same old silly questions that Vegan's hear every time a meat eater finds out they are Vegan.
'But we have incisors'/'we are omnivores' etc...
Well how can you explain the huge explosion of heart disease and other meat related illness in countries that regularly eat meat? Take a look at How humans are not physically created to eat meat for a good analysis of our omnivorous body's.
The simple fact is that if you look at our history as a species, we developed in such a way that the majority of our diet was plant based whilst supplimenting it with animal meat. The other bits, such as milk and egg are just plain odd (who the hell thought of drinking the breast milk of a cow?!).
'Don't force your views on me/us'
I saw what appeared to be one poster getting upset by the comments made by those advocating veganism/vegetarianism. Why? As this is simply a discussion, the only plausable reason for this is guilt. People feel guilty when the overall weight of evidence is against their viewpoint but they don't wish to change.
Now, with that said, the poster who mentioned that those vegans who do the whole 'all or nothing' form of pursuasion is correct. Those who say 'you must go vegan else you are killing X' are simply alienating people from the entire concept. There was a GP on BBC Radio 2 discussing healthy living and heart disease a year or 2 ago and someone asked him 'if going on a vegan diet can help solve many of these problems, why not suggest it to the patient rather than drugs?' his response was that forcing a major change in someone's lifestyle just won't happen for most people. They fight it, because it is what they know.
Someone mentioned why killing animals is a moral thing - it is an obvious one. Animals are alive - they think, they feel pain, they are generally accepted to be sentient. We are moral beings, we make decisions based on what we think is 'right' and 'wrong'. Is killing an animal, which has a family, which feels pain right or wrong? This is simply a moral question. |
The article you linked was so ridiculously biased, and in some areas patently wrong, that it's not even worth addressing.
On top of that, it's based on some rather dubious research that's nearly 40 years old.