Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Vegan No More

voraciouseats.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 275 posts

Re: A Vegan No More

#131

Post by dan00 »

dasil003 wrote: post #13

I'm all for radicalism since radicals are the main force questioning conventional wisdom. But the size of the vegan movement is totally out of proportion to its veracity. Take the whole "meat is murder" slogan. It's ridiculous from the outset and completely ignores our existence within the earth's ecosystem. I mean industrialized animal farming is fairly horrific, but the way to stop that is by advocating and paying…

"I'm all for radicalism since radicals are the main force questioning conventional wisdom."

Yes. It's the way of the world. Radicals fight each other, and the compromises between them are perhaps the nearest you can get to the truth.

Re: A Vegan No More

#132

Post by mhartl »

jacquesm wrote: post #10

It's interesting how strong peer pressure is in groups like vegans to continue to press someone in to a lifestyle that clearly is not to their best interest. It reminds me of religious cults, and other 'us or them' styled groups. Very scary.

If you identify 'progressivism', 'environmentalism', etc., as lineal descendants of ecumenical Protestant Christianity—that is, when you see them as essentially religious movements—it is easy to understand the emergence of vegetarianism and especially veganism: they are the exact analogues of religious dietary laws. Hinduism has a prohibition on the consumption of beef and other meats, Judaism has kosher, Islam has halal, and progressivism has vegetarianism/veganism. In all cases, the purpose of dietary laws is the same: they are hard-to-fake demonstrations of piety.

Re: A Vegan No More

#133

Post by pyre »

_3u10 wrote: post #124
pyre wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about 'rules' or 'regulations.' For some it's about morality. If I find it immoral to eat a dead animal, then why would it be 'ok' because it's 'only chicken broth?' I've still supported (with my money) the death of an animal. [ Please don't break down into some 'but animals die all the time in the wild,' argument. It's slightly different when we created the animal just for the purpose of killing it for meat…

I'll be downvoted into oblivion for saying this but there are lots of ways that the average vegetarian or vegan every day supports killing animals for their own personal benefit. Animals are killed every day so that we can live a better life. It's not a big deal. Get over it or get off the grid. I hope you don't drive on roads, or use anything produced by the petrochemical industry. Hell, somewhere between your compu…

  > I hope you don't drive on roads, or use anything produced by the
  > petrochemical industry.
I've yet to hear that humans have successfully produced crude oil from livestock. Do you have a source of this?

  > Also, have you EVER considered how many field animals die to produce
  > vegetables?
1. You're creating a false dichotomy. Either a person eliminates all things in their life that affect animals, or they eliminate none. In the real world there are shades of grey.

2. Who are you to decide whether or not a person should care whether or not gelatin (or chicken broth or whatever) is in their food? You're coming from the opposite side and reacting against the idea that I'm trying to tell you what to do, but your response is just to tell me what to do. Seems a little ironic to me.

3. This entire post comes across as, "Yea! I really stuck it to that vegan guy! I win!"

  > Not eating meat is basically the sorriest excuse for making a
  > difference I've seen, it's basically on par with believing recycling
  > makes a difference. It's a small step to take with the aim of
  > moralizing to everyone else how big of a difference you're making.
  > Also, how many animals had to die because of habitat loss to make
  > that nice house you're living in?P
This is a very defeatist attitude. It borders on the, "I'm only one person. I can't make a difference. Why should I bother to vote," argument.

Secondly, who said anything anywhere about 'making a difference?' I certainly didn't. I've only talked about living according to my own moral code. Is living my own life according to my own moral code a 'small step to take with the aim of moralizing to everyone else?'

Re: A Vegan No More

#134

Post by zatara »

lucasjung wrote: post #96
lambda wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's difficult to find humanely raised meat? I just go to the farmer's market and buy it straight from the farmer who raises grass-fed free range cows. If I would like to verify, I can head to her farm and see how she raises the cows myself. Or I buy fish that are caught in sustainable ways, which have grown in their natural habitat and not subjected to any suffering beyond the catch (which is a necessary part of con…

I believe that the most humane way you can get your meat is, in many places, to hunt for it. Because humans have reduced habitats and/or eliminated other predators in many places, wildlife management agencies have to use human hunting as a tool to keep populations at sustainable levels. Example: if there is enough food in a given area for 100 deer to survive the winter, but there are 200 deer, that doesn't mean that…

If you are into hunting, I think you should make things fair for both sides. Leave the gun at home and try something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=826HMLoiE_o

Re: A Vegan No More

#135

Post by pyre »

thret wrote: post #125
pyre wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please expand on how it's valid. [edit] I'm being open to debate here, but instead of debate, I get down votes? Is that really what HN is about? [/edit]

All animals are in one way or another a food source for other animals. It is in no way evil if an animal suffers unless that suffering is intentionally caused by a human. Our sin is in the mass production and mis-treatment of livestock while they are alive, not in the actual killing or eating. Not eating mass-produced chicken or wearing leather makes sense, refusing free-range eggs or seafood does not. Not that there…

  > free-range eggs or seafood does not
Personally:

1. Eating seafood supports the over-fishing of our water-ways.

2. The 'free-range' label, IIRC, only requires that the animals have 15 minutes of time outside of their cramped cages. It's not a huge improvement.

3. In general, when they are hatching new chickens for egg-laying they sort out all of the male chicks and then kill them. Industry-standard practice is to put them into garbage bags and suffocate them, or to toss them (in garbage bags) into a wood-chipper.

4. Egg-laying hens are only kept alive as long as their production is at a certain level. As soon as it drops below a certain level they are called 'spent hens,' and killed.

Re: A Vegan No More

#136

Post by loca »

Reminded me of a comment by Linus Torvalds [1]:

Meat is kind of important to people. Young kids in particular need a lot of varied nutrients, and a balanced diet - with meat - is likely to be way healthier than the alternatives.

Quite frankly, being vegetarian is like being religious: you should let the kid decide on his/her own when they are grown up and can make that choice on their own. Plus by then they've done most of their development, so your choice won't mess them up for the rest of their lives.

Humans are designed to be omnivores. Don't play games with your kids nutrition.

Eating meat is not at all unnatural. It's generally considered to be one of the main reasons humans could afford to evolve a larger brain - because meat is denser in nutrients than vegetarian diets.

Yes, you can do a healthy vegetarian diet (and even a vegan one, although at that point you really are crazy - there's no substitute for milk), but it is certainly not at all a trivial matter. It's much saner to just say "eating meat is natural".

Once you're fully grown, it's a different matter.

Quite frankly, anybody who tells their kids to "don't eat meat" is kind of crazy. You're much better off telling them to not drink sodas, avoid overly processed foods etc.

And yeah, I care a hell of a lot more about my kids health than I care about cows or even pigs. Deal with it.

[1] http://torvalds-family.blogspot.com/2010/05/pig-lovers-oath....

Re: A Vegan No More

#137

Post by burgerbrain »

autarch wrote: post #81
burgerbrain wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's definitely how she's trying to spin it "officially", but her actual intent is pretty clear. > I have to admit I’m always a little suspicious when an ex-vegan dives headlong into a love affair with meat. I mean come on, what else is that supposed to mean? Is she "suspicious" that the author is simply echoing a new-found respect for meat? That doesn't even make sense.

Sheesh, you really love your conspiracy theories. Ginny's post is primarily about debunking the ridiculous health claims in the original post. She's "suspicious" of the claims because they're ridiculous, and the amount of fervor that Tasha shows suggests that there's something going on besides nutrition.

It's a conspiracy theory to suggest that others are seeing conspiracies where there are none?

Man you people are nuts.

Re: A Vegan No More

#138

Post by pyre »

fleitz wrote: post #130
thret wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All animals are in one way or another a food source for other animals. It is in no way evil if an animal suffers unless that suffering is intentionally caused by a human. Our sin is in the mass production and mis-treatment of livestock while they are alive, not in the actual killing or eating. Not eating mass-produced chicken or wearing leather makes sense, refusing free-range eggs or seafood does not. Not that there…

You're inferring the feelings of an animal to make your judgement. No one actually knows the living preferences of a chicken or a cow. Since you posit that huamn beings can infer the feelings of animals I posit that animals prefer to be factory farmed than spend what existence the animal has being constantly chased by predators. Therefore wearing leather and eating mass-produced chicken makes perfect sense and is in…

  > You're inferring the feelings of an animal to make your judgement.
  > No one actually knows the living preferences of a chicken or a cow.
Does the lack of knowledge of their living preferences somehow bolster the argument that it's ok to factory-farm them though?

Re: A Vegan No More

#139

Post by preek »

pyre wrote: post #99
scythe wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Please don't break down into some 'but animals die all the time in the wild,' argument. Yeah, let's not bring up a totally valid objection!

Please expand on how it's valid. [edit] I'm being open to debate here, but instead of debate, I get down votes? Is that really what HN is about? [/edit]

Pyre,

this morning, I woke up to this submission. Going trough my morning routine and walking to work, I completely felt bad. For the first time, I feel bad to be part of HN due to many illogical and harmful statements.

What I'm going to say is: Thank you for encouraging intelligent conversation in these threads. I'm giving each and every comment an upvote.

Re: A Vegan No More

#140

Post by manish »

tomstuart wrote: post #108
manish wrote: post #94

I simply can't understand why eating meat is wrong, when eating plant is not wrong. I feel they are same.

Is eating a human the same?

This is same question many of my veggie friends ask. I think no, it is not the same for humans. For other carnivores, it does not make any difference.
Post reply on HN