To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 6270
6269  |  6271
Subject: 
Re: Are humans animals? Are humans MORE than animals?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Sat, 5 Aug 2000 19:40:16 GMT
Viewed: 
209 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tom Stangl writes:

I'd have to agree with the majority - it's arrogant as hell to call meat • eaters
evil just because you think we don't have to do it.

It's not think...it's know.  And I can live with that.

I assert we DO have to,

I think that is foolish and unrealistic.

our bodies work better metabolically with meat in the diet.

Our, who?  Not mine.  I lost weight, gained muscle, seemed to improve my
immunodefense and became generally more healthy.  I would be quite keen to see
research supporting that.  I do admit that most of the stuff supporting my side
of the health issue is suspect because of the funding sources, but there are
some genuinely fair sources too.

And I DO have to eat meat in order to enjoy myself in life.

Geez.  I know you weren't looking for sympathy, but you have mine.  I'm glad
that my happiness isn't rooted to any one thing so strongly.  Especially
something so minor.  But I guess we are all different.

You go ahead and shovel tasteless grass into your mouth all your life,

No thank you.  I don't like anything tasteless.  But I do occasionally eat
popcorn with salt...that's about as boring as it gets.

I think you're evil for classifying "us meateaters" as evil.

Really?  That's neat.  What is the key ingredient in your "evil" that makes me
evil without hurting anyone?  I think this (various definitions of evil) could
be the interesting discussion to come out of this whole thread.  My definition
is firmly rooted in victimization, but I accept that this may not be shared by
all as the crux of the definition.

Chris


By the way, it seems that you in particular -- but a few others at least
potentially -- have taken this as some kind of personal attack.  Through this
entire thread, I have simply responded.  I never went out of my way to advocate
in any way.  You may note that I didn't start the thread(s).  I have strong
views, but I'm not pushy and I genuinely do get along with people who are
diametrically opposite in stance.  I'm sorry if that doesn't cut it for you.



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Are humans animals? Are humans MORE than animals?
 
(...) I personally think our bodies NEED many trace elements and proteins in meat that just aren't in soy and other beans. I would rather risk cancer from seared meat than risk a lifetime of depletion of trace elements that MAY affect my memory (and (...) (24 years ago, 5-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Are humans animals? Are humans MORE than animals?
 
(...) I'd have to agree with the majority - it's arrogant as hell to call meat eaters evil just because you think we don't have to do it. I assert we DO have to, our bodies work better metabolically with meat in the diet. And I DO have to eat meat (...) (24 years ago, 5-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

10 Messages in This Thread:



Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR