Have you watched any good movies lately?

[freebeard]

Very carefully?

Start by collapsing a bee colony for their stingers? You monster.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by All Darc

Who would had imagined 100 years ago that milk would be directed related to righ or left wing (democrats/republicans)???

I don't think advocating against cow milk consumption is political; it's just crazy.

There's no evidence that dairy cows loath (or comprehend) their existence as unwilling milk donors. Of all the problems in the world, in the short period of fame, and with the few seconds of public time, he chooses milk as the Great Cause.

There's a reason he's suited for the role of The Joker, and not a philosophical leader.

I'm still not sure if he's punking us all, or if he really is crazy. Remember that time on David Letterman where he was weird and it was unclear if it was an act?

[freebeard]

Have you worked on a dairy?

Cows get restless if you don't milk them.

It's like that scene in Stranger in a Strange Land where the Martian groks that grass likes to be walked on.

[What's Going On?
Currently Active Users: 900 (3 members and 897 guests)]

[All Darc]

The point is. Have scoundrel people (or former scoundrels) the right to be a sort of John Wayne (hero cowboy) of morality?

Where was his veganisn (since childhood) when he treated people horrobly? After all people are animals too.

Originally Posted by freebeard

Some people are just intolerant of lactose tolerance.

[All Darc]

Most vegans are against eat honey.

If we would include the animal Homo Sapiens in the list of animals to respect, and to avoid consume products that made use of exploitation of such animal, we would consume almost nothing. Especially iphones...

But it's easier to eat soy than buy a phone made without human exploitation...

Originally Posted by Xist

How much gluten, dairy, and peanuts can I put in candy without ruining the flavor? Am I forgetting anything? How do I make candy from beestings?

[All Darc]

It have a ecology thematic behind, since it's direct connected with meat industry. Cows are not well treated, specially in intensive system where they are placed in locked very small areas.

I support veganism to some degree, but I have to admit some aspects of it are due individualism and connected to the fact people got so creep that many others now prefer to trust or like or love a pet than other humans. And I include myself a bit, since for me most people don't worth much thing.
I'm not necessarily saving that people who prefer pets are always victms or better than average society, since many ones are just as crazy or creep.

The "Joker" had a turbulent life, with abuse, crazy freak parents who made orgy and put children on that phylosophy, parents that should be on jail for decades. Maybe that's why he trust or like animals, even when he disliked people.

Other side of radical veganism it's like radical sports or like punks getting in trouble. People feel need to be part of something or get into some kind of war, even ideologic. Human thirst for conflicts...

Originally Posted by redpoint5

I don't think advocating against cow milk consumption is political; it's just crazy.

There's no evidence that dairy cows loath (or comprehend) their existence as unwilling milk donors. Of all the problems in the world, in the short period of fame, and with the few seconds of public time, he chooses milk as the Great Cause.

There's a reason he's suited for the role of The Joker, and not a philosophical leader.

I'm still not sure if he's punking us all, or if he really is crazy. Remember that time on David Letterman where he was weird and it was unclear if it was an act?

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by All Darc

Have scoundrel people (or former scoundrels) the right to be a sort of John Wayne (hero cowboy) of morality?

Where was his veganisn (since childhood) when he treated people horrobly? After all people are animals too.

Morality isn't just a right of humanity, it's an inescapable fact, as real as air and water. Every right carries with it responsibility, because a person cannot expect to be treated morally if they do not practice moral behavior. We're the only creature with that right and responsibility.

Livestock should be treated humanely to avoid undue suffering, but there's zero problem with extracting benefits from them, from using them to produce work, to collecting milk, to slaughter and consumption, so long as it's done in a way that avoids undue suffering.

Animals in the wild wound other animals and let them suffer tremendously, but we're the only ones with the ability to conceive of reducing suffering, which is why we're the only ones to possess morality.

[All Darc]

I refered about Joaquin Phoenix not just in vegamism, but also about other subjects. If he was a scoundrel, he is not in a very good position to give moral lesons about feminism, racism etc...
At least in Oscar he was humble, saying people helped hin to change, that they embrased hin for help hin to change, instead of just try to destroy hin.

But what I mean is that he is not in good position to angry acuse (if this happen or if had happened-Idon't know) other scoundrels, as he was one in past.

If we are moral, and we don't need meat today, and meat production it's not good to environment, we should think twice.
Human moral it's till dubious, given our history record.
I wouldn't be so sure we are the only animals with some morals. Douphins, whales, and sometimes even pet dogs have more moral than many humans.

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Morality isn't just a right of humanity, it's an inescapable fact, as real as air and water. Every right carries with it responsibility, because a person cannot expect to be treated morally if they do not practice moral behavior. We're the only creature with that right and responsibility.

Livestock should be treated humanely to avoid undue suffering, but there's zero problem with extracting benefits from them, from using them to produce work, to collecting milk, to slaughter and consumption, so long as it's done in a way that avoids undue suffering.

Animals in the wild wound other animals and let them suffer tremendously, but we're the only ones with the ability to conceive of reducing suffering, which is why we're the only ones to possess morality.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by All Darc

If we are moral, and we don't need meat today, and meat production it's not good to environment, we should think twice.
Human moral it's till dubious, given our history record.
I wouldn't be so sure we are the only animals with some morals. Douphins, whales, and sometimes even pet dogs have more moral than many humans.

Agree with reducing meat consumption. I even mentioned it in some thread after watching a documentary that presented 3 reasons to reduce meat consumption, with at least 1 of those reasons being valuable to most people.

1. Health reasons
2. Humane reasons
3. Environmental reasons

I'm willing to reduce meat consumption, though I haven't done so yet. I average 2 meals per day, and I pretty much eat meat with all of them. When I'm short on time, lunch (my first meal) will just be ramen noodles. We had very good fish tacos last night. Most of our meals incorporate ground beef... I'd like to get good at ravioli and fettuccine dishes. The holy grail for me would be to make good pad Thai, but the 2 times I've tried they were only 75% as good as a restaurant. Of course, I want chicken pad Thai.

Regarding animals, they have behavior, not morality. Their actions occur automatically, with no ability to consider why an action might be good or bad.

[All Darc]

We can say almost the same about most people...

If a advenced alien would visit us and decided to give us (treat us) the same morals that we give to other species and other people...
We would be in trouble...

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Regarding animals, they have behavior, not morality. Their actions occur automatically, with no ability to consider why an action might be good or bad.