Andre S. Veteran Posted January 6, 2014 Veteran Share Posted January 6, 2014 We should be more sensitive to animal suffering and take measures to promote humane treatment, like for instance buying only free range chicken. Hey there's an actual term for that (I just discovered): ethical omnivorism. That said I think this kind of emotional over-the-top argument hurts the cause of vegetarianism more than it helps, although it may impress the easily impressed. There are much better arguments for vegetarianism, i.e. how it helps preserve natural food resources (esp. fish), better utilize farm land, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, etc. +Mirumir 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richteralan Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 I congratulate Morrissey that he successfully gained a 7-page-and-growing-exposure here at Neowin. mudslag and The Evil Overlord 2 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Overlord Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 I congratulate Morrissey that he successfully gained a 7-page-and-growing-exposure here at Neowin. I was thinking the same thing, commenting, here for or against, is just keeping his comments alive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Original Poster Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 I want him to get eaten by an animal... It would be poetic justice :3 GotBored 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Mirumir Subscriber¹ Posted January 9, 2014 Subscriber¹ Share Posted January 9, 2014 He's not right because paedophilia is in no way comparable to eating meat. Rather the point he should be making is that meat is murder, a point he has made repeatedly in the past (most famously with the Meat Is Murder album by The Smiths). This is nothing more than a sensationalistic rant to generate headlines because he can't get attention legitimately. They are both rape, violence, murder. Basically, Morrissey has committed an association fallacy (guilt by association) ? arguing that because two things share a property (violence) they are the same (meat consumption = paedophilia). I agree that it's a mere attention-seeking PR campaign on his part and that nothing will change. Cannibalism is the eating of another member of the same species and typically refers to humans. The eating of animal flesh can in no way be considered cannibalism. I think you may be confusing cannibalism with carnivorism. Further, the welfare of livestock is a separate issue to the consumption of meat. Yes, I'm guilty of expanding the definition of cannibalism to include all members of the mammalian family because, to me, we are the same specie, born out of the same womb as all mammals living presently had a common ancestor at one point in time. I don't understand why you think that the welfare of livestock is a separate issue. It is the issue. In my previous post, I actually acknowledged that it was a law of nature, the way the human food supply chain worked. We are, after all, an omnivorous specie and our own well-being takes priority over that of other species. It's a pity and the sad devilish aspect of our existence. Zhiv's English is more than good enough to know what it means; he's just being disingenuous with the definition. Probably a veggie.. Let's get him...... a steak! :p I'm not a veggie. I can't be a veggie :) I love milk and its fermented by-products too much (kefir, quark, cheese, etc). It's also quite challenging to survive the winter in the north of the northern hemisphere (Canada and Russia) without consuming some animal or fish fat. I can actually do without consuming any red meat (pork, beef, lamb) at all. There was a period in my life not long ago which lasted for two-three years when I didn't eat any of that at all. But since we are trying to conceive a baby, I've become carnivorous again :) Naturally, I want a son and for this I need loads of testosterone which comes from animal fat. Dotdot 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Mirumir Subscriber¹ Posted January 9, 2014 Subscriber¹ Share Posted January 9, 2014 Why is it that humans keep other mammals (dogs and cats) as pets whom we adore? Why can't we develop the same kind of a strong emotional connection to snakes, reptiles, birds, insects? These are just a couple of rhetorical questions to ask to yourself. And lastly, here's a very good and kind movie to watch. They don't make them like this any more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloatingFatMan Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 I'm not a veggie. I can't be a veggie :) I love milk and its fermented by-products too much (kefir, quark, cheese, etc). You're mixing your terms up again. Veggies consume diary products, it's vegans who don't. Now those people are truly weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloatingFatMan Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Why is it that humans keep other mammals (dogs and cats) as pets whom we adore? Why can't we develop the same kind of a strong emotional connection to snakes, reptiles, birds, insects? These are just a couple of rhetorical questions to ask to yourself. In a not so rhetorical answer... People in many Asian nations eat cats and dogs and keep them as livestock. Many people in western nations keep insects and reptiles as pets. My own brother has 2 pet tarantulas and would be pretty upset if anything happened to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicane-UK Veteran Posted January 9, 2014 Veteran Share Posted January 9, 2014 TIL Morrissey is a more of a pillock than I possibly ever realised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Mirumir Subscriber¹ Posted January 9, 2014 Subscriber¹ Share Posted January 9, 2014 You're mixing your terms up again. Veggies consume diary products, it's vegans who don't. And you are being pedantic again. Strict veggies don't consume diary products. Many people in western nations keep insects and reptiles as pets. My own brother has 2 pet tarantulas and would be pretty upset if anything happened to them. Now those people are truly weird. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seta-san Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 And you are being pedantic again. Strict veggies don't consume diary products. :laugh: another word for "strict vegetarian" is VEGAN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Mirumir Subscriber¹ Posted January 9, 2014 Subscriber¹ Share Posted January 9, 2014 A vegan is a follower of veganism. A strict vegetarian is equal to a diatary vegan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shiranui Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 If what he says is true, then I'm Jimmy Savile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomo Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 I went on safari once and saw some Lions raping some young Zebra's.....oh wait they were eating them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloatingFatMan Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 If what he says is true, then I'm Jimmy Savile. Now then now then now then. Shiranui 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Original Poster Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 You're mixing your terms up again. Veggies consume diary products, it's vegans who don't. Now those people are truly weird. actually veggies are weird no vegans ... atleast vegans make sense... after a number of years as a farmer (i was a farmer before a programmer, weird I know) veggies normally go off meat due to not liking the killing for the reason of consumption and choose not to support it... but what they dont understand is that eating animal products such as eggs, milk and er... other stuff?.......supports the killing of the animals they dont eat... millions of male chickens are killed at birth because they cannot lay eggs...by supporting the egg trade you support the death of those chicks... milk, the young needed to be produced inorder to start that cow lactating, unless female (not including the females born with a male twin as they cannot produce good milk) are sold as beef those cows... the milk trade can only survive with the meat trade... farmers get nothing for milk... so vegans make sense and veggies are stupid in my personal opinion (unless they are veggie because they dont like the taste or texture of meat in which case they are just sick in the head) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomo Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 actually veggies are weird no vegans ... atleast vegans make sense... after a number of years as a farmer (i was a farmer before a programmer, weird I know) veggies normally go off meat due to not liking the killing for the reason of consumption and choose not to support it... but what they dont understand is that eating animal products such as eggs, milk and er... other stuff?.......supports the killing of the animals they dont eat... millions of male chickens are killed at birth because they cannot lay eggs...by supporting the egg trade you support the death of those chicks... milk, the young needed to be produced inorder to start that cow lactating, unless female (not including the females born with a male twin as they cannot produce good milk) are sold as beef those cows... the milk trade can only survive with the meat trade... farmers get nothing for milk... so vegans make sense and veggies are stupid in my personal opinion (unless they are veggie because they dont like the taste or texture of meat in which case they are just sick in the head) In the UK the consumption of veal actually gives male calves a longer life. They would normally be killed soon after birth as they are a drain on resources however as the demand for veal increases these calves get a much longer life before they are killed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MindTrickz Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 "Morrissey: eating meat is the same as paedophilia." How can one believe that they're one and the same? There are no similarities between the two. Well that is not entirely true. Both are against the wills of the victims: the child and animal. Off course animals are not considered victims; because it is social acceptable to eat them, but that doesn't make them any less of victims in the grand scheme of things. Think about what we actually do to them: we cage them up, breed them, use them for labor, products and for consumption. Not too long ago we were keeping other human beings in cages, breeding them, using them for labor and testing experimental products on them. A day might come when we look back at what we're doing to animals now and look at it in the same light as when we look back on slavery. I should note that I am meat-eater and do not necessarily agree with Morrissey. +Mirumir 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Original Poster Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 In the UK the consumption of veal actually gives male calves a longer life. They would normally be killed soon after birth as they are a drain on resources however as the demand for veal increases these calves get a much longer life before they are killed. yea i know lol eating the meat gives everything a longer life cause they would be killed as a drain as you say hence why chicks are killed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McKay Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 They aren't rhetorical questions, different people, different cultures. I have friends who own snakes, birds, Spiders, Praying Mantids, I know 3 people in China, 2 of them who view Dogs etc as food. I would have no problem eating Horse etc yet I know several people who ride them who would be mortified at the idea. People in the Middle East won't get Dogs as pets because they are regarded as Vermin, I used to own Rats, which made some people I knew uncomfortable because they regarded them as vermin. Why is it that humans keep other mammals (dogs and cats) as pets whom we adore? Why can't we develop the same kind of a strong emotional connection to snakes, reptiles, birds, insects? These are just a couple of rhetorical questions to ask to yourself. mudslag 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudslag Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Why is it that humans keep other mammals (dogs and cats) as pets whom we adore? Why can't we develop the same kind of a strong emotional connection to snakes, reptiles, birds, insects? These are just a couple of rhetorical questions to ask to yourself. Some of the best pets Iv had have been rats, smart, loving, funny animals and yet they scared the crap out of a lot of our friends that came by. Some people do have strong bonds to the types of animals you listed and still others view those same animals as good eating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PGHammer Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Why am I not even slightly surprised that everyone in this thread that's never heard of Morrissey, is from the states? There more to music than just Madonna, guys. ;) Still, how would he classify pitcher plants and the Venus flytrap - a pair of insect-eating plants? Would he ever consume either one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloatingFatMan Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Still, how would he classify pitcher plants and the Venus flytrap - a pair of insect-eating plants? Would he ever consume either one? Who knows? It's Morrissey... There's no telling what that loon will actually do or say next. :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudslag Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Well that is not entirely true. Both are against the wills of the victims: the child and animal. Off course animals are not considered victims; because it is social acceptable to eat them, but that doesn't make them any less of victims in the grand scheme of things. Think about what we actually do to them: we cage them up, breed them, use them for labor, products and for consumption. Not too long ago we were keeping other human beings in cages, breeding them, using them for labor and testing experimental products on them. A day might come when we look back at what we're doing to animals now and look at it in the same light as when we look back on slavery. I should note that I am meat-eater and do not necessarily agree with Morrissey. Animals have been eating other animals since life began on this planet. The only real difference between us and other animals is that we have become efficient at it. In doing so we have had issues with victimizing some animals in a sense in terms of being cruel in how we raise some but there are options for those that don't want to have to eat those types, such as free range animals and if that's a issue, you can still go out and hunt your kills. But we are hardly alone in terms of mistreatment of our food sources, there are examples of other animals playing and even to a degree torturing their kills. Such as big cats and whales and dolphins. So if your argument is that both are victims, it's a weak point to use, you might as well also say both child and animals live, breath, drink water and poop for a comparison. There is a benefit to us using animals, we get something out of it, both on a personal and societal level. Where the other serves no one but the abuser and hurts more then just the victim but the family and society as a whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theyarecomingforyou Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Yes, I'm guilty of expanding the definition of cannibalism to include all members of the mammalian family because, to me, we are the same specie, born out of the same womb as all mammals living presently had a common ancestor at one point in time. Arguing that we shouldn't eat meat is one thing; arguing we are all the same species because we're all mammals is another. I don't understand why you think that the welfare of livestock is a separate issue. It is the issue. That would mean that if the welfare of livestock were to be improved that you wouldn't have any problem eating meat, which is different to the impression you have so far given (i.e. the previously quoted statement). Anyway, it's not that I disagree. Modern animal farming techniques are reprehensible, especially what we're seeing in the US - growth hormones, antibiotics, GM feed, etc. The quality of meat and the welfare of animals should not be compromised, especially when consumers are often unaware of what is being done. The reality is that meat prices should be much higher and if that means people have to eat less meat then so be it. But the fact remains that comparing eating meat to paedophilia is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts