• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Vegans cause animals to go extinct?

My God, I hope not.

I'm a bit hazy about what would happen to all the hill land that's used for beef and lamb production, which isn't suitable for growing crops.

Rolfe.

There are also likely to be similar problems with beef cattle farming in the tropics where the cattle roam over wide areas unsuitable for grain farming.

I wasn't aware of the disease factor, but am now.
 
Well I did ask them if they had ever actually met a meat-eater in their entire lives, so yes I was being extremely rude and condecending.

I don't mean to be condescending. And in case you don't know what that word means, condescending means "talk down to".

;)
 
I don't mean to be condescending. And in case you don't know what that word means, condescending means "talk down to".

;)

You're right, you weren't being condescending. And to answer your initial question, no, I have not met any of you rare and wonderful vegans in my entire life. Is it true that vegans have hair like spun gold? Oh the legends I have heard! Maybe if I could find the courage to leave the cave I'm living in, I can meet a vegan and be enlightened, but alas I am simple folk, and I find new ideas frightening.
 
You're right, you weren't being condescending. And to answer your initial question, no, I have not met any of you rare and wonderful vegans in my entire life. Is it true that vegans have hair like spun gold? Oh the legends I have heard! Maybe if I could find the courage to leave the cave I'm living in, I can meet a vegan and be enlightened, but alas I am simple folk, and I find new ideas frightening.


It's ok, at least now you're making progress.
 
Oh am I? Please keep track of my progress for me as my animal protein-laden brain is not equipped to do so, oh wise and masterful teacher!

Will do.

I will say this, though. Your animal protein-laden brain has made you completely incapable of reading sarcasm. You may want to have that looked at before our next lesson.
 
And if we don't trade in crocodile tears....

The loss of a domesticated breed is about as morally interesting as the loss of the steam engine. It has no direct bearing on anyone's well-being.
 
Vegan perspective here:

I don't know too much about genetic strains used in animal agriculture, but I'm guessing most animals bred for slaughter do not exist in nature. Not breeding the animals would imply those particular strains come to an end, or go extinct, that much is true.

Bizarrely, people use that fact as a criticism of veganism. "Extinct" is an emotionally charged word, however I don't think the objections to hunting animals for extinction carry over to animal agriculture. How exactly do you harm something by not breeding it? Who is harmed, and in what tangible way? I'd say you do not harm anything by not breeding it, because nothing exists to harm in the first place. So not breeding food animals is wholly consistent with animal rights.

Ending up as food for something else is the norm in the animal world where as passing along its genes is all important. The notion that eliminating the animal’s entire genetic heritage is less harmful to the animal then eating it simply doesn’t make sense.
 
Ending up as food for something else is the norm in the animal world where as passing along its genes is all important. The notion that eliminating the animal’s entire genetic heritage is less harmful to the animal then eating it simply doesn’t make sense.
What's your argument that genes are intrinsically valuable, I'd love to hear it.
 
Ending up as food for something else is the norm in the animal world where as passing along its genes is all important. The notion that eliminating the animal’s entire genetic heritage is less harmful to the animal then eating it simply doesn’t make sense.
It might not make sense to people who can't distinguish between statistical genetic "interests" and genuine psychological interests. To the rest of us, who live in the real world, it makes perfect sense.

Cows, as far as we can tell, do not spend their days lamenting the plight of unseen future generations. They don't care about cows on the other side of the world. They just don't care about how many replicas their genes have managed to produce.

The idea that because the gene drives reproduction, the gene is of utmost importance...it's the kind of error only human beings have the luxury of making.
 
Will do.

I will say this, though. Your animal protein-laden brain has made you completely incapable of reading sarcasm. You may want to have that looked at before our next lesson.

It has no problem dispensing sarcasm though. Odd.
 
Ending up as food for something else is the norm in the animal world where as passing along its genes is all important. The notion that eliminating the animal’s entire genetic heritage is less harmful to the animal then eating it simply doesn’t make sense.

To echo what Mumbles said, it comes down to which causes more actual pain, either psychological or physical to the animal. Does a cow feel any pain because future generations may dwindle (I haven't seen any proof of actual extinction)? But who can deny that cows feel pain through their use as food sources? They are forcibly hooked up to machines to give milk, they are fed chemicals to make them grow very fast which causes them pain, they are treated poorly and are not cured when they get sick, then they are killed. That's much more tangible harm than the notion that they may not reproduce over time.
 
All this aside, I have to agree with the vegans on this one. Whoever uses the argument that these animals would go extinct if we stopped eating them doesn't really care if they go extinct because he doesn't care that we're breeding millions of them just to chop them up and eat them.

I mean, honestly. Who eats meat just to keep the animal from going extinct? They're eaten because they are delicious.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom