What is your excuse for not being vegan?

[own8ge]

I'm just curious. Please no TL;DR.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Vitamin B12

 

[own8ge]

Vitamin B12

Meat is not a source of vitamin B12. They carry it; It would be much more sufficient to take b12 supplements than to eat meat for it.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

The B12 in B12 supplements comes from...? The stuff in supplements (B12 precursors) is also chemically different from that obtained directly from animal products, and thus absorbed differently, etc. I'd also be wary of the potential confounding effects of a supplement, especially if it's a multivitamin.

Reason #2 is that I don't arbitrarily differentiate between the varying sorts of life that I must consume to remain alive.

Reason #3 is that compounds found in plants are also harmful. No unnecessary oxalic acid for me, thanks. I like my kidneys stone-free.

#4 is that there's plenty of good stuff in animal products that isn't found elsewhere, like carnosine.

#5 is that a lot of vegans do a terrible job representing themselves.

#6 is that animals effectively convert inedible material into delicious things like bacon.

Spoiler

 

[own8ge]

The B12 in B12 supplements comes from...? The stuff in supplements (B12 precursors) is also chemically different from that obtained directly from animal products, and thus absorbed differently, etc. I'd also be wary of the potential confounding effects of a supplement, especially if it's a multivitamin.

Reason #2 is that I don't arbitrarily differentiate between the varying sorts of life that I must consume to remain alive.

Reason #3 is that compounds found in plants are also harmful. No unnecessary oxalic acid for me, thanks. I like my kidneys stone-free.

#4 is that there's plenty of good stuff in animal products that isn't found elsewhere, like carnosine.

#5 is that a lot of vegans do a terrible job representing themselves.

#6 is that animals effectively convert inedible material into delicious things like bacon.

Spoiler

"Vitamin B12 is made by bacteria such that it does not need to be obtained from animal products." http://www.veganhealth.org/articles/vitaminb12

Loreen Alma Dinwiddie = 109 years old. Vegan. (So no, you don't NEED to consume animal products to stay alive)

I know about creatine and carnosine. I might be wrong here, but I don't think I need it.

And bacon isn't even healthy.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Listen here boy. I admit defeat. But I say at least I say I'll die a delicious, salty, crunchy, chewy, flavorful death.

 

[principle]

Because it tastes good and it's a part of life =D

 

[EyeSeeCold]

I was raised an omnivore, I didn't know any different. Veganism is interesting, I could probably follow it if it weren't for the mass acceptance of meat eating. Due to that, philosophically I feel it pointless to abstain when animals are still being killed and processed out of my control.

Truthfully I wouldn't enjoy killing animals myself, and would probably abstain if I did have to do it or if non-animal foodstuffs were available. It's not like you still can't eat or make delicious food, there're still potatoes, oranges, strawberries, rice, mangos, yams etc etc.

Does veganism include abstaining from milk or eggs?

 

[nanook]

i agree, ESC, the concept of consumer democracy is a bit of a delusion, since a majority of people will continue consuming animal products, unimpressed by that one vegan they know, who demonstrates a heroic boycott of pretty much everything. it's not an example to other consumers, nor does it have direct effect on the industry, since there are too little people, who would possibly choose veganism out of their own impulse, curiosity, research, introspection, ethical reasoning, etc, uninfluenced by others.

other people might change their minds if they begin to understand things as a result of being influenced. therefore the only logical approach to improving the world, in this regard, is communication of facts, not demonstrating consumer choices.

however you have the power to change your own health. please subscribe to nutritionfacts.org on youtube.

not being able to save the world (including the animals) from the damage caused by the livestock industry is no excuse for killing yourself.

the only excuse for not reducing the consumption of animal products close to zero, apart from starving on a boat, is not knowing the facts.

i don't really consider willful self destruction (such as known from smoking and drinking) an excuse of anything.

veganism is usually considered an ideological standpoint, that does not only include abstaining from milk and eggs and honey, but also abstaining from the consumption of leather products, cosmetic or medical products that involve animal testing and even for example wines that have been filtered using animal products. it's a boycott of animal exploiting industry.

there are a lot of thinkable excuses to not identify intellectually with this ideology of consumer democracy, 100%.

but once your behavior has been vegan for a while, you will loose that urge to differentiate your persona from the bulk of vegans. because life isn't about demonstrating how smart you are. it's more valuable to demonstrate, that a person can be healthy, actually much more healthy without animal protein and toxic shit like that. so you will end up telling people that you are vegan.

 

[Grayman]

When is the last time anyone has seen a wild cow or bull? I would wonder what the full effect would be if we all became vegan. Would the cow become a thing only found at the zoo?

Meat is good for you. Dairy is good also. Vegan is over the top. Vegitarian makes more sense. Moderation makes the most sense. I have but 1/2 a pound of meat every few weeks. Most days I go without.

There is no better reason to eat meat than we we are natural omnivors. That being the case we should eat like omnivors.

If someone can convince a bear to change his diet I will then change mine.

 

[nexion]

Meat is good.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Thanks for the information nanook.

 

[Cavallier]

I like eating meat. Killing animals to eat is fine with me. I have no moral qualms with killing and eating animals.

I have some qualms with the mass production of meat in my country. I think a lot of animal life is wasted, animals are mistreated, a lot of meat is wasted, and the end goal is so that the already overweight can continue to get their burgers as cheaply as possible while others around the world starve not able to even scrape together some grain.

I want a small farm some day. A few goats for milk, sheep for meat, some chickens for eggs and meat, and some bees for honey and pollination. I have spent a fair amount of time on a few farms and I think they are feasable enough for me given the right circumstances. I can't expect everybody to live by my standards and I'm not about to try to force others to conform to my standards. However, I do think the world would be a better place if they did.

 

[crippli]

Doesn't vegetarianism require agriculture? And agriculture demands a high environmental, and also an unknown cost to biological life, diversity and evolution?

Is it worth it, compared to old fashion Indian life( living off the land as it appears)?

I am intrigued by the apparent health benefits. But not sure I have the consciousness to do it, go full time agricultural. It appears an ago trip with no concern to how agriculture impacts the planet.

 

[QuickTwist]

I like eating meat. Killing animals to eat is fine with me. I have no moral qualms with killing and eating animals.

I have some qualms with the mass production of meat in my country. I think a lot of animal life is wasted, animals are mistreated, a lot of meat is wasted, and the end goal is so that the already overweight can continue to get their burgers as cheaply as possible while others around the world starve not able to even scrape together some grain.

^this

 

[Brontosaurie]

cheat is meap

or something like that

igdyrastrigkt tarbuwabnir glosa

 

[Cherry Cola]

I like eating meat. Killing animals to eat is fine with me. I have no moral qualms with killing and eating animals.

I have some qualms with the mass production of meat in my country. I think a lot of animal life is wasted, animals are mistreated, a lot of meat is wasted, and the end goal is so that the already overweight can continue to get their burgers as cheaply as possible while others around the world starve not able to even scrape together some grain.

I want a small farm some day. A few goats for milk, sheep for meat, some chickens for eggs and meat, and some bees for honey and pollination. I have spent a fair amount of time on a few farms and I think they are feasable enough for me given the right circumstances. I can't expect everybody to live by my standards and I'm not about to try to force others to conform to my standards. However, I do think the world would be a better place if they did.

What about the huge toll on the environment?

My excuse is that I am too lazy and that nowadays I eat relatively little meat anyway so I'm still not one of the worst guys. Besides I would support political decisions encouraging veganism, showing that mentally I am already where I need to be.

 

[QuickTwist]

PETA = People Eating Tasty Animals.

Take it anyway you wish.

 

[Cherry Cola]

...hahaaa.. ... .. . . .

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

Health benefit, if true, isn't always a priority for a free person.

What is your excuse for sitting more than 2 hours using the computer? It is clearly unhealthy. So what? Do as you please with yourself.

What is inexcusable is someone acting upon others inflicting on them a healthy lifestyle and forcing them to do some envisioned proper thing, by denying them other possibilities or else.

 

[_whispers_]

Am I supposed to have an excuse?

 

[nexion]

Am I supposed to have an excuse?

Don't mind the rampant projection of the title.

 

[Cavallier]

Don't mind the rampant projection of the title.

Yeah I just sort of side stepped that with an eyeroll.

 

[nanook]

i'm not a fan of the guilt/punishment concept. it's rather unconstructive. psychologically, telling someone that he did something inexcusable sounds like you are giving him the death row, because it's the only sanction that does not end in forgiveness at the end of the sanction, since there is no end to being dead.

if you try to approach the vocabulary rationally, you have to admit that most things are inexcusable, because they have consequences (including telling someone that they did something inexcusable, which will certainly make them hate you) and you can't be like: oh but i didn't mean that to happen. the consequences won't be alleviated by a forgiving force in the sky. socrates (that question asking asshole) would ask for an excuse to make you aware of the fact, that you are in trouble, since you can't possible excuse yourself.

 

[pgibbons]

I have to ask you: What is your excuse for being vegan?

 

[crippli]

What about the huge toll on the environment?

Good question. I think it depends on the overall geography. This is me yesterday, taking "my" parents(in reality- more "mine") cows to the mountains, 7 hour walk. I am on the same page with C. regarding a small farm.

Spoiler

The few fields for agriculture around here are in the per-millage measurement. I've flown over places where agricultural fields are almost all there is as far as the eye can see. Parts of New South Wales comes to mind. Makes me flabbergasted due to the sententious sentiment from a biodiversity point of view that is clear to see.

 

[redbaron]

^ Those cows are cute! do they have names?

I've flown over places where agricultural fields are almost all there is as far as the eye can see. Parts of New South Wales comes to mind. Makes me flabbergasted due to the sententious sentiment from a biodiversity point of view that is clear to see.

Most of the Eastern inland close to the coast in Australia is natural floodplain. It's been dammed up and turned into farms for numerous things. That sentiment towards biodiversity in Australia is unfortunately a view that is very polarized dependent on where you go. A lot of people don't care at all, whereas a lot of people care about it a lot.

It's unfortunate really because there's been a great deal of irreparable damage done as a result of those ridiculously large stretches of farmland that extend from horizon to horizon that you spoke about. The unfortunate reality is that a great many people here in Australia see caring about the environment as, "gay". Generally anywhere that's not the heart of a major city is a complete cesspool of ignorance regarding environmental issues here in Australia.

 

[Cavallier]

It's unfortunate really because there's been a great deal of irreparable damage done as a result of those ridiculously large stretches of farmland that extend from horizon to horizon that you spoke about. The unfortunate reality is that a great many people here in Australia see caring about the environment as, "gay". Generally anywhere that's not the heart of a major city is a complete cesspool of ignorance regarding environmental issues here in Australia.

Gosh, that sounds familiar: Anti-intellectualism and a sense that the world is ours to control and dominate. That's very mid-west Americana where, coincidentally, mono-culture fields grow for hundreds of square miles. Virulent powerhouse forms of wheat grow along the roadside somehow managing to choke out even the hardiest of weeds.

 

[Absurdity]

I don't presume that my consumption patterns have any meaningful influence on the world.

 

[Perfectly Normal Beast]

I don't presume that my consumption patterns have any meaningful influence on the world.

if more people didn't think like that meaningful change would be possible. a point which is relevant to various issues.

would you change your consumption patterns if you believed that doing so would have a meaningful influence on the world?

 

[Absurdity]

if more people didn't think like that meaningful change would be possible. a point which is relevant to various issues.

If humans had wings they might be able to fly.

would you change your consumption patterns if you believed that doing so would have a meaningful influence on the world?

Perhaps. Or perhaps I would just hold the world hostage with the overwhelming influence of my choice of meal.

 

[Perfectly Normal Beast]

If humans had wings they might be able to fly.

irrelevant platitude. unless you're saying that it's not possible for people to believe they can collectively make a difference to anything.

Perhaps. Or perhaps I would just hold the world hostage with the overwhelming influence of my choice of meal.

seems congruous with your persona

 

[Absurdity]

irrelevant platitude. unless you're saying that it's not possible for people to believe they can collectively make a difference to anything.

Actually I think plenty of people already believe that. It is effectively preached from every major university, charity, media outlet, and public intellectual on the planet. It doesn't actually overcome the inertia of convenience to change anything though, it just makes symbolic acts feel more special than they really are.

 

[nanook]

it's not possible for people to agree on something like diet, to accumulate a majority, since more than 70% of the population are pre-rational in their behavior (this includes those who are not researching most topics that are relevant to modern life, doesn't help if they are rational about their favorite topic), therefore you can't even convince them to not kill themselves by giving them the science on how harmful animal products are. it's possible to influence most of them with convention, since most pre-rational individuals are motivated by fitting in, but individuals who are a minority (the rational people who have discovered the science) can't create much of a convention. even if they are scientists, confronted with armies of corrupt scientists.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Indeed, we need political changes but we wont get those unless people gety educated first. Pre-rational wishful thinking still holds primacy.

 

[Perfectly Normal Beast]

Actually I think plenty of people already believe that. It is effectively preached from every major university, charity, media outlet, and public intellectual on the planet. It doesn't actually overcome the inertia of convenience to change anything though, it just makes symbolic acts feel more special than they really are.

although i agree that the inertia of convenience sometimes seems like an insurmountable problem for many humans i think much of that inertia is exacerbated by the feeling that one cannot effect meaningful change by one's actions. so...eh, why bother - i.e. the point you made in your first post.

yes you're right, it is preached () by many, just as the opposite world view is equally as vehemently preached by many. it depends where you look. so perhaps you're overestimating the proportion of people who are even aware of these issues, much less changing their consumption patterns in hope of being part of an improvement/solution, albeit a tiny one.

if more individuals could overcome their helpless/lazy inertia and make a small difference, others might be inspired to change their own behaviours and so on, until the change was significant and meaningful.

tbh i'm playing devil's advocate and am probably just as pessimistic as you seem to be.
would be nice though.

 

[subwayrider]

I abstain from ingesting animal products, but I don't like calling myself a "vegan" for the connotations.

I personally have a problem with temperance, so the only effective strategy if I want to eat in a way that isn't detrimental to my health is to cut out meat, dairy, eggs altogether.

I certainly feel much healthier than I did when I was still eating animal products, but as I don't have nearly all the data it's essentially an experiment. I don't know what the long-term effects will be. That said, I expect it's much healthier than indulging in meat/dairy/eggs on a daily basis, as is the norm in America.

I don't really have a problem with meat-eating in general, but the practices of the meat/dairy/egg industry (aka factory farming) are thoroughly detestable to me, and the conditions the animals live in and in which much of the meat is processed definitely makes me not want to eat it.

As soon as you proclaim you're vegan, people automatically assume you're in line with PETA, that your choice is an extremist, purely sentimental one. I dislike being caricatured in such a way, as truth is one of my most dearly held values in life, and I would never let emotion stand in the way of that. There are plenty of reasons, aside from animal rights, to abstain from animal products.

My subjective physical and mental health are now superb as a result of my diet, so I am certainly not going back to my former ways.

EDIT: Also, it's a great way to stay slim, and it's been known to help people who have skin problems. I'm sexier than I've ever been in my life.

 

[Cognisant]

There are three arguments on the side of being vegan.

1. The ethical one.
Since when did Mother Nature give a fuck about that?
If you want to dispute that I suggest you take a hike, through a jungle, without a gun.
Have fun~

2. The health one.
I fail to see how removing a food group from my diet and replacing it with processed supplements is in any way healthier or more natural.

3. The political/economic one.
Alright if you want to petition the government into taxing people more for meat and using that taxed money to ship food overseas and/or support the development of foreign agriculture I'll sign it, I seriously doubt it'll actually happen but hey it's more likely to work than me changing my diet somehow changing the way other people eat which in turn somehow gets food sent overseas.

 

[nanook]

all of those really bad arguments, so easy to refute. haha.

still, i'm not having fun arguing about the subject.

that constant fear of stupid and violent masses.

#1 excuse for not being a vegan: being a coward.

 

[Cognisant]

Or here's a thought you could be a vegan without trying to impose your beliefs on others.

If someone tells me based on poorly thought out reasoning that something I enjoy doing and have been doing all my life is immoral, unhealthy and selfish you're damn right I'll be confrontational, whereas if someone abstains from eating meat well should I care? More for me

 

[Minuend]

Maybe borderline off-topic; But for those who consider it meaningless for a larger picture state of affairs, do you also abstain from other things with similar implications like voting, garbage sorting or killing jews?

I don't "feel" bad about people eating meat, but I do find myself wondering whether using other animals is something that will be seen as somewhat "primitive" in the future. Like hating gays in the past.

We do posses an ability to reason and survive beyond other animals which is why we set higher standards for behavior amongst ourselves. At least some places, we do not tolerate stealing, physically fighting over territory or mates, murder etc. I imagine there will eventually be a shift in attitude where people actually realize what they eat in a more thought and feels encompassing matter. Growing up in a world where this behavior is entirely normal and for some people being a source of pride (I am a strong and cool person who can eat many animals): understanding to what degree it could be seen as undesirable is tricky.

Also something something lab grown meat

 

[Cavallier]

Maybe borderline off-topic; But for those who consider it meaningless for a larger picture state of affairs, do you also abstain from other things with similar implications like voting, garbage sorting or killing jews?

I don't "feel" bad about people eating meat, but I do find myself wondering whether using other animals is something that will be seen as somewhat "primitive" in the future. Like hating gays in the past.

We do posses an ability to reason and survive beyond other animals which is why we set higher standards for behavior amongst ourselves. At least some places, we do not tolerate stealing, physically fighting over territory or mates, murder etc. I imagine there will eventually be a shift in attitude where people actually realize what they eat in a more thought and feels encompassing matter. Growing up in a world where this behavior is entirely normal and for some people being a source of pride (I am a strong and cool person who can eat many animals): understanding to what degree it could be seen as undesirable is tricky.

Also something something lab grown meat

I agree with Absurdity in that I don't think my dietary choices will change an already established system. However, I also don't want to add to that established system. I don't abstain from the system in order to change the system. I abstain because ethically I don't want to be a part of the system. It's a hairline distinction but an important one to me ethically.

 

[Cognisant]

 

[Cognisant]

Maybe borderline off-topic; But for those who consider it meaningless for a larger picture state of affairs, do you also abstain from other things with similar implications like voting, garbage sorting or killing jews?

I vote and I try to be an informed voter too, I relish informative political debate.

I sort my garbage, I work in retail and I sort more waste packaging a day than the amount garbage most families would create in a week, I'm a goddamn waste sorting planet saving machine!

As for fascism well living in a democracy comprised of short term politicians who pursue personal gain at the expense of the nation with only varying degrees of blatency I actually find authoritarian nationalism quite appealing, y'know because it implies the leaders in question actually see the nation as something more than a proverbial cookie jar, that they might actually believe in it and have ideals for it.

So would I the Cognisant of here and now in the postmodern era kill Jews if I was told to, well I'd have very strong reservations since being an educated child of the internet literally know better, I wouldn't stop with Jews I'd wipe out all religions.

As satisfying as mass slaughter would be I am however aware that education, particularly an education comprised of the number and variety of religious around the world and their histories, would achieve my goal sooner with less difficulty and cost.

Who here has actually read the bible? The unabashed versions

Edit: That's my last word on religion in this thread, if a one so desires it we can continue discussing the topic elsewhere.

 

[nanook]

nazis=practice censorship or destruction of those, who don't share their ideology. that's what many meat eaters would like to do with vegans. it's not what all vegans do, but i have to agree that many vegans are ethnocentric morons, i totally hate my experience with them on facebook, so far and i'm also inclined to not call my self vegan, because i am afraid of being associated with sentimental pre rational people. but this fear is a personal concern. the idealistic perspective is different: one can hardly make a rational argument for truth (animal abuse is not okay and animal products are not healthy) while justifying a personal but rational distance to "veganism" as such, since the definition of veganism is not one of being sentimental and pre rational. rational arguments work with definitions. of course you can put a footnote that says: i hate the other vegans.

to cog

1) nature cares about shit, since it has invented humans, through which it cares about shit.

2) fake animal products are not a supplement and animal products do not have a nutritional value that needs to be 'supplemented'/replaced, they have no vitamins, they have denatured toxic proteins and toxic fats, human beings don't need copious amounts of protein or fat, a plant based diet with it's default profile of 80+ 10- 10- is perfect, we have no need for much omega 3, we just can't handle too much omega 6. animals get their vitamin b12 and omega 3 from plants and from the ground, that's were we get it from, since we are animals. people who eat meat have vitamin b12 deficiency and omega 6 overload.

fake animal products are just fun suff. and the are eaten by vegans who don't care very much about health, they are the sentimental vegans.

fake animal products are also fed to unsuspecting family members or guests of vegans.

to my knowledge nobody ever argued that fake animal products are natural or healthy, but they could easily be more healthy, it depends on the individual product though.

there can be no doubt, for instance, that almond or rice milks are more healthy than animal milk.

but i don't even count them as fake animal products, they are simply liquid plant materials that are named milk, because of appearance.

i have never looked into the quality of meat or cheese lookalikes, because i could not care less.



3) considering the growing population, taxation of meat can't possibly make up for the damage that is done by how wasteful the livestock is with resources. i mean unless the taxation is so high, that it brings the industry to it's knees. but i would certainly agree with a tax, nonetheless. to my knowledge the livestock industry is already subsidized everywhere, otherwise animal products would not be affordable in the amounts most countries consume them. so there is already an indirect hidden taxation for meat involved. so vegans have to pay for it too.



>Or here's a thought you could be a vegan without trying to impose your beliefs on others

hahaha. no. veganism is by definition an idealistic position, not an eating habit. you can not be secretly "vegan". a "vegan" by definition can not hold the view "i don't give a fuck about people being intoxicated and animals being tortured because of ignorance" and vegan arguments are always perceived as badly thought out arguments by ignorant people, so we can't 'abstain' from those either, if you catch my meaning.

a regular but unthinking person could dislike the taste or his digestive/physical experience of animal products and assume those feelings are only his own and shut up about it.

but only a psychopath could realize that it is a general health issue and not care about the health of the rest of the planet. it's not like it's a personal believe, that might be wrong and should be held back for the sake of being humble either. besides, being humble about one's ability to perceive truth is not a reason to shut up, in a context like public discussion, since being wrong would take care of the problem. the truth is like a motherfucker, you don't have to defend it, it will defend it self, if you let it free. i don't care for emotional arguments like screaming "murderer" at unsuspecting passerbyes, but when the topic comes up, arguments and information should be delivered.

 

[nanook]

and what can you do with people who will begin to whine about the damage done by agriculture, when threatened with the idea of veganism. as if they were unaware or too stupid to figure out, that the livestock industry burns through and wastes a huge percentage of agricultural products. much of what those animals eat is converted to their lifetime of suffering, not to edible animal product calories.

yeah, so the enneagramm anxiety types have the compulsion to root for the underdog. but the live stock industry is not the underdog, just because you, as a meat eating individual, have the general sense of being a minority of one, who is threatened by "the rest of the world", which also isn't vegan, btw. fix your perception, why don't you. how about you play devils advocate for the real underdog, veganism, intoxicated children and animals. and it's easier, because this client is innocent.

>I have to ask you: What is your excuse for being vegan?

are you asking for our excuse for not consuming animal products? or for an excuse for why we dare to eat anything at all. that latter question might be remotely interesting (a search for existential self confidence), the former one is pretty lame. so we are not supporting the lifestock industry. how unpatriotic, right? except we put all of our money into agriculture. if you want some of it, grow some plants.

 

[Cognisant]

1) nature cares about shit, since it has invented humans, through which it cares about shit.

Only the pre-rational, sentimental ones.

there can be no doubt, for instance, that almond or rice milks are more healthy than animal milk.

Also drink enough of it and you get BOOBS!

animal products do not have a nutritional value that needs to be 'supplemented'/replaced,

You can, in theory, get every nutrient you need from plants however for some nutrients you would need to eat an awful lot of particular plants in order to meet the recommended intake, in effect you would have to over-eat to meet that recommended intake, hence the supplements.

We're omnivores, we have incisors and intestinal tracts suited for the digestion of meat, we are far more active than any herbivore of comparative size, put simply human beings are clearly not herbivores, we're omnivores, making an omnivore be a herbivore is unnatural.

3) considering the growing population, taxation of meat can't possibly make up for the damage that is done by how wasteful the livestock is with resources. i mean unless the taxation is so high, that it brings the industry to it's knees. but i would certainly agree with a tax, nonetheless. to my knowledge the livestock industry is already subsidized everywhere, otherwise animal products would not be affordable in the amounts most countries consume them. so there is already an indirect hidden taxation for meat involved. so vegans have to pay for it too

Cows are ridiculous creatures, tasty to be sure but I'll happily switch to vat grown meat when it becomes available, as long as my body gets the meat it hungers for it doesn't much matter where it comes from.

but only a psychopath could realize that it is a general health issue and not care about the health of the rest of the planet. it's not like it's a personal believe, that might be wrong and should be held back for the sake of being humble. besides, being humble about one's ability to perceive truth is not a reason to shut up, in a context like public discussion, since being wrong would take care of the problem. the truth is like a motherfucker, you don't have to defend it, it will defend it self, if you let it free. i don't care for emotional arguments like screaming "murderer" at unsuspecting passerbyes, but when the topic comes up, arguments and information should be delivered.

I'm not telling you to shut up, I'll say it outright if I mean it.
The fact is your "truth" is to me your belief because you haven't provided enough credible proof to convince me, to that end you should know that any information provided by a vegan source I deem lacking in credibility since from experience I know these people are not above falsifying evidence if they believe it serves their moral cause.

Link me to some peer reviewed academic journals if you want to convince me.

 

[Cognisant]

yeah, so the enneagramm anxiety types have the compulsion to root for the underdog. but the live stock industry is not the underdog, just because you, as a meat eating individual, have the general sense of being a minority of one, who is threatened by "the rest of the world", which also isn't vegan, btw. fix your perception, why don't you. how about you play devils advocate for the real underdog, veganism, intoxicated children and animals. and it's easier, because this client is innocent.

Defending the innocent, why then I wouldn't be the devil's advocate would I?

Believe me I know quite well that I'm not rooting for the underdog.

 

[nanook]

1) spiral dynamics.

it would be silly to continue on details, since you are disregarding the sources of all arguments i could provide to address the misinformation, that you have received from the animal industry and those who defend it for various reasons.

it is my believe, that you are unwilling to dive in and download the the big picture of all data, that is required to make an informed judgement. you stop at finding confirmation for your bad habits. don't tell me i do the same, i was paleo for years. and i don't maintain links to all the peer reviewed science, which is reviewed on nutritionfacts.org .. you will just have to eat toxic foods until you meet that ISTJ who has the links and enough compassion for you, out of 7 billion humans, to send them to you personally.

 

[nanook]

>Defending the innocent, why then I wouldn't be the devil's advocate would I?

because being the devils advocate is a misnomer (especially when the term is used in the context of enneagram), what the concept really means is defending the black sheep, the perceived devil, because he might be misperceived as such. the advocate assumes the innocence of his client, the other people assume his guilt. the fearful person perceives himself as the black sheep and the reason for his playing advocate is the projection of the principle. "i can automatically identify with anyone who is accused by other more powerful or more mob-like people"