My question was how it’s illogical to you and your answer is “it’s completely illogical”?
Like, how hard is it to write down a simple sentence in which you explain why it’s illogical!?
I can do you a favour and already unfold it: The vegan argument is that unnecessary harm towards animals should be avoided when it’s “possible and practical”, like when you live in a modern society, you don’t need to buy leather clothes or eat meat, there is no necessity to do so because of the incredible amount of alternatives, where no animal needs to be killed nor harmed.
To say thats illogical therefore means that you see no logic in avoiding unnecessary harm towards animals. So please, just start your response like this:
“I don’t see how it’s logical that we should avoid unnecessary harm towards animals, because…”
Well, I made it simple for you and you still totally fail at responding to the point. So you just want to talk about limitations as if the reasons behind it are not relevant? By that logic, why do you limit yourself on eating pets? Why do you limit yourself on eating humans? I assume that the reason of why you don’t eat them are relevant? So why don’t you read once again which reason was giving for the circumstance that vegans don’t consume animal prodcuts
If you fail to adress how the reason behind it is illogical, then I fear you’re not educated enough in terms of discussion and in terms of the topic that is discussed here.
One last time: The reason why vegans stop consuming any animal products and why they don’t support any other kind of animal exploitation is that it’s not necessary, and if you’re against animal abuse, then you should ask yourself why you still pay for it.
As I mentioned before, the whole vegan argument is about logic. I fear that your problem is not that you just can’t understand logic, it’s that you’re ignorant. You showed that very clearly by now
Religions do that. You cannot eat pork/beef etc, depending on the religion. Vegans also do that and it is equally moronic.
It would be hard to make a conclusion that is even more dumb than what you just said. Again, the reason of why vegans refuse to pay for any animal products is because they can easily buy alternatives which don’t involve the exploitation and killing of animals. It’s therefore not necessary to pay for animals to be harmed and killed. If there is no necessity for an animal to be harmed and killed, then paying for exactly that is in fact immoral.
You don’t care about your own immoral actions, which is what many people do, but what makes you extraordinary “special” is how you try to make vegan look bad by preaching that their logic is flawed - while the reason that you state in regard to that are without any logic. The irony.
The sad part is that, people like you are the ones that then claim vegans are bad people while all you do is to spread nonsense about them and leave toxic responses where you fail to discuss the main arguments in a constructive manner.
Sorry but I don’t see what you’re talking about. I explained in detail how you fail to respond to the core argument. Now you try to be a clown and I don’t have time for that. I thought there is a chance that you’d respond to the logic that you call flawed, but I see you won’t do that.
It’s hard to admit that you’re wrong, I know that, but it’s better than refusing to listen to the arguments per se and to not learn anything (therefore continue to be stupid)
If you choose the latter, do so, but don’t go on my nerves with these infantile responses. Don’t bother answering, you’re blocked
I’m not a vegan - but we are omnivores, we can eat plants. There is nothing unnatural about it. Let alone if you compare it to our modern ‘normal’ food, which is chock full of extra sugar, extra fat, extra protein, extra artificial additives like preservatives, sweeteners, and what not. It’s also factual that you can get more energy out of directly consuming plant material than eating an animal that consumed said plant material. If you take the biggest offenders for that, cows. You need 8 kg of feed for them to produce a kg of meat, this is known as it’s feed conversion ratio (source). Other animals (Like chicken and fish) are better, but a ration below 1 is essentially impossible.
I like the taste of meat as much as the next (average) person, but vegans do have a factual basis for their stance. But non-vegans rebuttal to that is realistically just “I don’t want to give up meat because I like it” not “the facts aren’t on your side.” - Lets be honest about that.
but we are omnivores, we can eat plants. There is nothing unnatural about it.
Yup, precisely, there is nothing unnatural about omnivores eating plants and meat. It is an attempt to restrict part of this normal for omnivores diet which is unnatural and this is what religions do. Thus my point.
I’m glad you found a natural computer to post with from inside your natural house. Seeing your dogshit opinions is funny.
Appeals to nature are not compelling because all of human progress and civilisation is built upon using technology to surpass nature. Just about everything we interact with in modern society isn’t natural, why would we think that your idea of humans natural diet would be the ideal?
Veganism is an ethical stance, not religious. There are plenty of ethical stance that place restrictions on human behaviour that I’m sure you are totally on with, like when society tells you not to steal from or murder people. Are you prepared to argue against ethics as a whole?
You can eat shit if you want, it won’t kill you. There’s tribes in Greenland that eat bird poop as a delicacy. So it must be natural!
Or how about snails, grasshoppers, worms, crickets? All edible, even good. All things an omnivore can and do consume at time.
You should stop being so unnatural and cutting all of these things out of your diet.
Oh, you won’t? Guess that makes you a religious believer now.
C’mon man, you must be trying to be dense on purpose.
Shame you’re not willing to see the unreasonableness in yourself. Now you have to go to the shop to buy some crickets to avoid being seen as a hypocrite.
I appreciate the back up, but with the rare sighting of an organism that is able to consume downvotes and irrationality for a living, I don’t think it’s worth your (or anyone’s) time trying to convince them to change to an ‘unnatural’ diet ^^
No, sweetheart. Calling eating meat a “murder” and claiming veganism has nothing to do with religious zealousy in one breath is a rare example of either shouting hypocrisy or sheer stupidity. 🤣
It is completly illogical and it tries to impose unnatural limitations - you know, like religions do.
My question was how it’s illogical to you and your answer is “it’s completely illogical”?
Like, how hard is it to write down a simple sentence in which you explain why it’s illogical!?
I can do you a favour and already unfold it: The vegan argument is that unnecessary harm towards animals should be avoided when it’s “possible and practical”, like when you live in a modern society, you don’t need to buy leather clothes or eat meat, there is no necessity to do so because of the incredible amount of alternatives, where no animal needs to be killed nor harmed.
To say thats illogical therefore means that you see no logic in avoiding unnecessary harm towards animals. So please, just start your response like this:
“I don’t see how it’s logical that we should avoid unnecessary harm towards animals, because…”
It is illogical to impose limitations on what humans can it, apart from perhaps health reasons (allergies etc.).
Religions do that. You cannot eat pork/beef etc, depending on the religion. Vegans also do that and it is equally moronic.
Well, I made it simple for you and you still totally fail at responding to the point. So you just want to talk about limitations as if the reasons behind it are not relevant? By that logic, why do you limit yourself on eating pets? Why do you limit yourself on eating humans? I assume that the reason of why you don’t eat them are relevant? So why don’t you read once again which reason was giving for the circumstance that vegans don’t consume animal prodcuts
If you fail to adress how the reason behind it is illogical, then I fear you’re not educated enough in terms of discussion and in terms of the topic that is discussed here.
One last time: The reason why vegans stop consuming any animal products and why they don’t support any other kind of animal exploitation is that it’s not necessary, and if you’re against animal abuse, then you should ask yourself why you still pay for it.
As I mentioned before, the whole vegan argument is about logic. I fear that your problem is not that you just can’t understand logic, it’s that you’re ignorant. You showed that very clearly by now
It would be hard to make a conclusion that is even more dumb than what you just said. Again, the reason of why vegans refuse to pay for any animal products is because they can easily buy alternatives which don’t involve the exploitation and killing of animals. It’s therefore not necessary to pay for animals to be harmed and killed. If there is no necessity for an animal to be harmed and killed, then paying for exactly that is in fact immoral.
You don’t care about your own immoral actions, which is what many people do, but what makes you extraordinary “special” is how you try to make vegan look bad by preaching that their logic is flawed - while the reason that you state in regard to that are without any logic. The irony.
The sad part is that, people like you are the ones that then claim vegans are bad people while all you do is to spread nonsense about them and leave toxic responses where you fail to discuss the main arguments in a constructive manner.
Now read again. Slowly.
And?
And perhaps you will begin to understand, if you read it slowly. Couple of times.
Sorry but I don’t see what you’re talking about. I explained in detail how you fail to respond to the core argument. Now you try to be a clown and I don’t have time for that. I thought there is a chance that you’d respond to the logic that you call flawed, but I see you won’t do that.
It’s hard to admit that you’re wrong, I know that, but it’s better than refusing to listen to the arguments per se and to not learn anything (therefore continue to be stupid)
If you choose the latter, do so, but don’t go on my nerves with these infantile responses. Don’t bother answering, you’re blocked
Read again. Slowly.
I’m not a vegan - but we are omnivores, we can eat plants. There is nothing unnatural about it. Let alone if you compare it to our modern ‘normal’ food, which is chock full of extra sugar, extra fat, extra protein, extra artificial additives like preservatives, sweeteners, and what not. It’s also factual that you can get more energy out of directly consuming plant material than eating an animal that consumed said plant material. If you take the biggest offenders for that, cows. You need 8 kg of feed for them to produce a kg of meat, this is known as it’s feed conversion ratio (source). Other animals (Like chicken and fish) are better, but a ration below 1 is essentially impossible.
I like the taste of meat as much as the next (average) person, but vegans do have a factual basis for their stance. But non-vegans rebuttal to that is realistically just “I don’t want to give up meat because I like it” not “the facts aren’t on your side.” - Lets be honest about that.
Yup, precisely, there is nothing unnatural about omnivores eating plants and meat. It is an attempt to restrict part of this normal for omnivores diet which is unnatural and this is what religions do. Thus my point.
I’m glad you found a natural computer to post with from inside your natural house. Seeing your dogshit opinions is funny.
Appeals to nature are not compelling because all of human progress and civilisation is built upon using technology to surpass nature. Just about everything we interact with in modern society isn’t natural, why would we think that your idea of humans natural diet would be the ideal?
Veganism is an ethical stance, not religious. There are plenty of ethical stance that place restrictions on human behaviour that I’m sure you are totally on with, like when society tells you not to steal from or murder people. Are you prepared to argue against ethics as a whole?
Are you a little bit slow? Genuine question.
You can eat shit if you want, it won’t kill you. There’s tribes in Greenland that eat bird poop as a delicacy. So it must be natural! Or how about snails, grasshoppers, worms, crickets? All edible, even good. All things an omnivore can and do consume at time. You should stop being so unnatural and cutting all of these things out of your diet.
Oh, you won’t? Guess that makes you a religious believer now. C’mon man, you must be trying to be dense on purpose.
Are you really that dense?
Shame you’re not willing to see the unreasonableness in yourself. Now you have to go to the shop to buy some crickets to avoid being seen as a hypocrite.
More religious zealot talk, carry on, it is highly amusing 🤣
Pointing out hypocrisy using logical arguments is religious zealot talk?
I thought appealing to “common sense” or “nature” is what religious zealot do more often.
I appreciate the back up, but with the rare sighting of an organism that is able to consume downvotes and irrationality for a living, I don’t think it’s worth your (or anyone’s) time trying to convince them to change to an ‘unnatural’ diet ^^
No, sweetheart. Calling eating meat a “murder” and claiming veganism has nothing to do with religious zealousy in one breath is a rare example of either shouting hypocrisy or sheer stupidity. 🤣