Frustrated with NTs, need aspie opinion on ethical issue

Post Reply New Topic

Why pick on cats its a well known fact that when there's a lot of cats around there are fewer mice and rats, I'm not sure if its in India or somewhere else that they have cats living around a temple because they keep the rodents away.

I agree with STannis its cruel to feed a pet something its not meant to have, Dogs are supposed to chew on bones.

Yup. I can definitely see how I could make some modifications in my diet. Actually, red meat could be cut out entirely. I don't drink milk but I do consume cheese and half and half (for coffee) .couldn't become completely vegan though. From a biological standpoint complete veganism is unhealthy.
I kind of like the idea of raising my own chickens as well. If I ever get a house.

That is great. Why do you think a vegan diet is unhealthy? I have read in multiple sources that a vegan diet is complete and quite healthy if done properly. It is harder to get all the nutrients but it can be done by anyone. Furthermore it tends to exclude many of the unhealthy substances. I ate much less healthy when I wasn't vegan. I would likely not have embraced a very healthy diet if it wasn't for veganism. I recently read an article about how doctors are recommending veganism to patients with heart disease. Anyhow, I read two vegan nutrition books and they both say it is healthy and complete and give guidance on how to do it. It's great that you want to change your die though.

From your second source "Vegetarian, vegan and raw diets can be healthy ? likely far healthier than the typical American diet."

We need the opinion of professionals on this, and there seems to be consensus that a vegan diet is complete with our technology.

"Well-planned vegan diets appear to offer protection against certain degenerative conditions, including heart disease,[9] and are regarded as appropriate for all stages of the life-cycle by the American Dietetic Association, the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, and Dietitians of Canada."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veganism

Just because we evolved with something does not mean there are no alternatives. It is easy to prove this. Certain cultures have been vegetarian for quite a while. Even though we evolved with meat clearly we can be vegetarian. You might say vegetarians still consume animal products however we evolved with meat, not dairy and eggs.

If a certain nutrient was lacking from a vegan diet we should be able to specify which it is.

Well a dog may prefer the taste of meat but they can be perfectly healthy as vegans. Which one do you think is crueler to not satisfy someone's taste or to kill someone else because their body tastes good? It is cruel if a dog cannot get the best taste, even though they get good healthy nutrition and a good life otherwise. But it isn't cruel to torture someone their whole life and then slit their throat?

Vegetarian dogs pfffft, honestly. Sticking Fido in the oven and having him for dinner would be less cruel.

What people eat is entirely their choice, but if someone found the consumption of meat so repulsive that they denied a canine lifestyle accessory (ie pet) their natural diet, again, I'd like to see their pets confiscated, and the owners discouraged from ever having children.

Yeah, I just elevated the nutritional requirements of a single mutt (that I'll never meet) over the right to life of billions of pigs and chickens, and yeah, I'm perfectly happy with my moral compass.

There are cat breeders. We should no longer adopt new cats. Doing so requires constantly killing other animals to keep them alive. It's like saying I will kill Joe, Jack and Moe in order to adopt Bob. It's morally unacceptable. If you have chosen to keep cats at least give them vasectomies.

When you are stopping sentience by preventing breeding you are there never was a sentience to begin with, whereas when you kill you are ending a sentience that existed and no longer exists because of what you did. They are morally very different. If what you think is the case then you should see no difference between birth control and murder. Existence is a precondition for rights period.

Genocide is something we frown upon today. Julius Caesar killed a million Gauls (I think a quarter of them all) and they gave him a parade for it. This was Rome, what was supposed to be civilization. Ancient Athens at the time of Socrates committed all sorts of atrocities including massacres of men in an island state that would not submit to them. The rest were sold into slavery. In caveman days you will find one clan attacking another over resources, land and women.

These are all parts of nature. They help us survive and propagate our genes (or nations). It is cruel! And we chose to turn our back on it for moral reasons. It still happened even in the 20th century. Probably more than any other.

We don't need animal products, period. Having animal products causes at least death to someone who wants life, and usually torment as well. I say it is moral to choose a slight inconvenience rather than cause someone death and torment. That's it. You can choose convenience over someone's life and well being. I will never agree with you.

Total BS. Apparently a life without the best tastes is not worth living. Maybe we should also throw health food enthusiasts in the oven. Not nutritional requirements, taste!

Hyena - "There are cat breeders. We should no longer adopt new cats. Doing so requires constantly killing other animals to keep them alive. It's like saying I will kill Joe, Jack and Moe in order to adopt Bob. It's morally unacceptable. If you have chosen to keep cats at least give them vasectomies.

When you are stopping sentience by preventing breeding you are there never was a sentience to begin with, whereas when you kill you are ending a sentience that existed and no longer exists because of what you did. They are morally very different. If what you think is the case then you should see no difference between birth control and murder. Existence is a precondition for rights period.

Genocide is something we frown upon today. Julius Caesar killed a million Gauls (I think a quarter of them all) and they gave him a parade for it. This was Rome, what was supposed to be civilization. Ancient Athens at the time of Socrates committed all sorts of atrocities including massacres of men in an island state that would not submit to them. The rest were sold into slavery. In caveman days you will find one clan attacking another over resources, land and women.

These are all parts of nature. They help us survive and propagate our genes (or nations). It is cruel! And we chose to turn our back on it for moral reasons. It still happened even in the 20th century. Probably more than any other.

We don't need animal products, period. Having animal products causes at least death to someone who wants life, and usually torment as well. I say it is moral to choose a slight inconvenience rather than cause someone death and torment. That's it. You can choose convenience over someone's life and well being. I will never agree with you. "




We're afraid the Squid cannot disagree more with this point. Based on the above ideas, every carnivore on this planet should be sterilized and wiped out. That does not seem fair, and neither is the food chain, but it's been around for millions of years. The larger, more ferocious animals will pick on the weaker, unaware animals. It's life. We agree, some of the footage in that video show clear signs of animal cruelty. Slitting an animal's throat to kill them, if done correctly is not horrendous. Sudden loss of blood pressure would simply knock them out, and they would die VERY shortly afterwards. We cannot say too many animals hunted by other animals in the wild get such good treatment. Killing entire carnivorous species because they require other animals to survive is inexcusable.

I don't eat meat either. I also don't eat many dairy products/eggs. I recently accidentally ate bacon and was painfully aware of that it was an animal and that it had suffered.

Carnivores cannot survive on a diet without meat, period.

Causing harm and not helping are very different things. I believe the homeless are offered subsidized housing and money for the basic necessities where I live. But I am not giving my money to the poor of other countries, where people could be starving. When I start working I will give some portion of my money to charities but will keep most of it myself. Yes I want pleasure. But I am not causing these people harm. I simply do not feel responsible for their well being. All it takes to escape poverty is willingness to take work seriously and not to have children when you don't have money. I follow these principles, if others choose not to follow them it is sad that there will be suffering but I am not responsible for it. I did not cause it. It is morally different to cause harm and to not offer help.

I did not take personal offense. But it does frustrate me that people aren't vegan.

The hyena never said that carnivores should be sterilized. The hyena said that carnivores in our care should be sterilized. Carnivores not in our care may do as they please without any human (or hyena) interference. Nature is poor defense for morality. In nature we also observe one adult killing the offspring of rival adults but I take it we don't want to do that.

That is good. If I may ask, where do you get the dairy and egg products you use?